Cargando…

Bubble effect: including internet search engines in systematic reviews introduces selection bias and impedes scientific reproducibility

BACKGROUND: Using internet search engines (such as Google search) in systematic literature reviews is increasingly becoming a ubiquitous part of search methodology. In order to integrate the vast quantity of available knowledge, literature mostly focuses on systematic reviews, considered to be princ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ćurković, Marko, Košec, Andro
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6234590/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30424741
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0599-2
_version_ 1783370725495668736
author Ćurković, Marko
Košec, Andro
author_facet Ćurković, Marko
Košec, Andro
author_sort Ćurković, Marko
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Using internet search engines (such as Google search) in systematic literature reviews is increasingly becoming a ubiquitous part of search methodology. In order to integrate the vast quantity of available knowledge, literature mostly focuses on systematic reviews, considered to be principal sources of scientific evidence at all practical levels. Any possible individual methodological flaws present in these systematic reviews have the potential to become systemic. MAIN TEXT: This particular bias, that could be referred to as (re)search bubble effect, is introduced because of inherent, personalized nature of internet search engines that tailors results according to derived user preferences based on unreproducible criteria. In other words, internet search engines adjust their user’s beliefs and attitudes, leading to the creation of a personalized (re)search bubble, including entries that have not been subjected to rigorous peer review process. The internet search engine algorithms are in a state of constant flux, producing differing results at any given moment, even if the query remains identical. There are many more subtle ways of introducing unwanted variations and synonyms of search queries that are used autonomously, detached from user insight and intent. Even the most well-known and respected systematic literature reviews do not seem immune to the negative implications of the search bubble effect, affecting reproducibility. CONCLUSION: Although immensely useful and justified by the need for encompassing the entirety of knowledge, the practice of including internet search engines in systematic literature reviews is fundamentally irreconcilable with recent emphasis on scientific reproducibility and rigor, having a profound impact on the discussion of the limits of scientific epistemology. Scientific research that is not reproducible, may still be called science, but represents one that should be avoided. Our recommendation is to use internet search engines as an additional literature source, primarily in order to validate initial search strategies centered on bibliographic databases.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6234590
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62345902018-11-23 Bubble effect: including internet search engines in systematic reviews introduces selection bias and impedes scientific reproducibility Ćurković, Marko Košec, Andro BMC Med Res Methodol Debate BACKGROUND: Using internet search engines (such as Google search) in systematic literature reviews is increasingly becoming a ubiquitous part of search methodology. In order to integrate the vast quantity of available knowledge, literature mostly focuses on systematic reviews, considered to be principal sources of scientific evidence at all practical levels. Any possible individual methodological flaws present in these systematic reviews have the potential to become systemic. MAIN TEXT: This particular bias, that could be referred to as (re)search bubble effect, is introduced because of inherent, personalized nature of internet search engines that tailors results according to derived user preferences based on unreproducible criteria. In other words, internet search engines adjust their user’s beliefs and attitudes, leading to the creation of a personalized (re)search bubble, including entries that have not been subjected to rigorous peer review process. The internet search engine algorithms are in a state of constant flux, producing differing results at any given moment, even if the query remains identical. There are many more subtle ways of introducing unwanted variations and synonyms of search queries that are used autonomously, detached from user insight and intent. Even the most well-known and respected systematic literature reviews do not seem immune to the negative implications of the search bubble effect, affecting reproducibility. CONCLUSION: Although immensely useful and justified by the need for encompassing the entirety of knowledge, the practice of including internet search engines in systematic literature reviews is fundamentally irreconcilable with recent emphasis on scientific reproducibility and rigor, having a profound impact on the discussion of the limits of scientific epistemology. Scientific research that is not reproducible, may still be called science, but represents one that should be avoided. Our recommendation is to use internet search engines as an additional literature source, primarily in order to validate initial search strategies centered on bibliographic databases. BioMed Central 2018-11-13 /pmc/articles/PMC6234590/ /pubmed/30424741 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0599-2 Text en © The Author(s). 2018 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Debate
Ćurković, Marko
Košec, Andro
Bubble effect: including internet search engines in systematic reviews introduces selection bias and impedes scientific reproducibility
title Bubble effect: including internet search engines in systematic reviews introduces selection bias and impedes scientific reproducibility
title_full Bubble effect: including internet search engines in systematic reviews introduces selection bias and impedes scientific reproducibility
title_fullStr Bubble effect: including internet search engines in systematic reviews introduces selection bias and impedes scientific reproducibility
title_full_unstemmed Bubble effect: including internet search engines in systematic reviews introduces selection bias and impedes scientific reproducibility
title_short Bubble effect: including internet search engines in systematic reviews introduces selection bias and impedes scientific reproducibility
title_sort bubble effect: including internet search engines in systematic reviews introduces selection bias and impedes scientific reproducibility
topic Debate
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6234590/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30424741
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0599-2
work_keys_str_mv AT curkovicmarko bubbleeffectincludinginternetsearchenginesinsystematicreviewsintroducesselectionbiasandimpedesscientificreproducibility
AT kosecandro bubbleeffectincludinginternetsearchenginesinsystematicreviewsintroducesselectionbiasandimpedesscientificreproducibility