Cargando…

Evaluation of a new method for librarian‐mediated literature searches for systematic reviews

To evaluate and validate the time of completion and results of a new method of searching for systematic reviews, the exhaustive search method (ESM), using a pragmatic comparison. METHODS: Single‐line search strategies were prepared in a text document. Term completeness was ensured with a novel optim...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bramer, Wichor M., Rethlefsen, Melissa L., Mast, Frans, Kleijnen, Jos
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5920798/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29073718
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1279
_version_ 1783317881586450432
author Bramer, Wichor M.
Rethlefsen, Melissa L.
Mast, Frans
Kleijnen, Jos
author_facet Bramer, Wichor M.
Rethlefsen, Melissa L.
Mast, Frans
Kleijnen, Jos
author_sort Bramer, Wichor M.
collection PubMed
description To evaluate and validate the time of completion and results of a new method of searching for systematic reviews, the exhaustive search method (ESM), using a pragmatic comparison. METHODS: Single‐line search strategies were prepared in a text document. Term completeness was ensured with a novel optimization technique. Macros in MS Word converted the syntaxes between databases and interfaces almost automatically. We compared search characteristics, such as number of search terms and databases, and outcomes, such as number of included and retrieved references and precision, from ESM searches and other Dutch academic hospitals identified by searching PubMed for systematic reviews published between 2014 and 2016. We compared time to perform the ESM with a secondary comparator of recorded search times from published literature and contact with authors to acquire unpublished data. RESULTS: We identified 73 published Erasmus MC systematic reviews and 258 published by other Dutch academic hospitals meeting our criteria. We pooled search time data from 204 other systematic reviews. The ESM searches differed by using 2 times more databases, retrieving 44% more references, including 20% more studies in the final systematic review, but the time needed for the search was 8% of that of the control group. Similarities between methods include precision and the number of search terms. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluated similarities and differences suggest that the ESM is a highly efficient way to locate more references meeting the specified selection criteria in systematic reviews than traditional search methods. Further prospective research is required.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5920798
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2017
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-59207982019-10-18 Evaluation of a new method for librarian‐mediated literature searches for systematic reviews Bramer, Wichor M. Rethlefsen, Melissa L. Mast, Frans Kleijnen, Jos Res Synth Methods Special Issue Papers To evaluate and validate the time of completion and results of a new method of searching for systematic reviews, the exhaustive search method (ESM), using a pragmatic comparison. METHODS: Single‐line search strategies were prepared in a text document. Term completeness was ensured with a novel optimization technique. Macros in MS Word converted the syntaxes between databases and interfaces almost automatically. We compared search characteristics, such as number of search terms and databases, and outcomes, such as number of included and retrieved references and precision, from ESM searches and other Dutch academic hospitals identified by searching PubMed for systematic reviews published between 2014 and 2016. We compared time to perform the ESM with a secondary comparator of recorded search times from published literature and contact with authors to acquire unpublished data. RESULTS: We identified 73 published Erasmus MC systematic reviews and 258 published by other Dutch academic hospitals meeting our criteria. We pooled search time data from 204 other systematic reviews. The ESM searches differed by using 2 times more databases, retrieving 44% more references, including 20% more studies in the final systematic review, but the time needed for the search was 8% of that of the control group. Similarities between methods include precision and the number of search terms. CONCLUSIONS: The evaluated similarities and differences suggest that the ESM is a highly efficient way to locate more references meeting the specified selection criteria in systematic reviews than traditional search methods. Further prospective research is required. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2017-11-28 2018-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5920798/ /pubmed/29073718 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1279 Text en © 2017 The Authors. Research Synthesis Methods Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Special Issue Papers
Bramer, Wichor M.
Rethlefsen, Melissa L.
Mast, Frans
Kleijnen, Jos
Evaluation of a new method for librarian‐mediated literature searches for systematic reviews
title Evaluation of a new method for librarian‐mediated literature searches for systematic reviews
title_full Evaluation of a new method for librarian‐mediated literature searches for systematic reviews
title_fullStr Evaluation of a new method for librarian‐mediated literature searches for systematic reviews
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of a new method for librarian‐mediated literature searches for systematic reviews
title_short Evaluation of a new method for librarian‐mediated literature searches for systematic reviews
title_sort evaluation of a new method for librarian‐mediated literature searches for systematic reviews
topic Special Issue Papers
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5920798/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29073718
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1279
work_keys_str_mv AT bramerwichorm evaluationofanewmethodforlibrarianmediatedliteraturesearchesforsystematicreviews
AT rethlefsenmelissal evaluationofanewmethodforlibrarianmediatedliteraturesearchesforsystematicreviews
AT mastfrans evaluationofanewmethodforlibrarianmediatedliteraturesearchesforsystematicreviews
AT kleijnenjos evaluationofanewmethodforlibrarianmediatedliteraturesearchesforsystematicreviews