Database selection in systematic reviews: an insight through clinical neurology.

Background Failure to perform a comprehensive search when designing a systematic review ( SR) can lead to bias, reducing the validity of review's conclusions. Objective We examined the frequency and choice of databases used by reviewers in clinical neurology. Methods Ninety-five SRs and/or meta-anal...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Health Information & Libraries Journal Vol. 34; no. 2; pp. 156 - 165
Autores principales: Vassar, Matt, Yerokhin, Vadim, Sinnett, Philip Marcus, Weiher, Matthew, Muckelrath, Halie, Carr, Branden, Varney, Laura, Cook, Gregory
Formato: research tables/charts Journal Article
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell Jun2017
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=122960965&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: ccm
    uiTerm: 122960965
    longDbName: CINAHL Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    dissinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        14711834
        EVZ
      jtl: Health Information & Libraries Journal
      issn: 14711834
      maglogo: Y
    pubinfo:
      dt: Jun2017
      vid: 34
      iid: 2
      pid: 480
      pub: Wiley-Blackwell
      place: Malden, Massachusetts
    artinfo:
      ui:
        122960965
        122960965
        122960965
        10.1111/hir.12176
        122960965
      ppf: 156
      ppct: 9
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: Database selection in systematic reviews: an insight through clinical neurology.
      aug:
        au:
          Vassar, Matt
          Yerokhin, Vadim
          Sinnett, Philip Marcus
          Weiher, Matthew
          Muckelrath, Halie
          Carr, Branden
          Varney, Laura
          Cook, Gregory
        affil: Oklahoma State University Center for Health Sciences, Tulsa OK, USA
      sug:
        subj:
          Computerized Literature Searching
          Reference Databases, Health
          Nervous System Diseases
          Systematic Review
          Human
          PubMed
          Embase
          Health Sciences Librarians
          Medline
      ab: Background Failure to perform a comprehensive search when designing a systematic review ( SR) can lead to bias, reducing the validity of review's conclusions. Objective We examined the frequency and choice of databases used by reviewers in clinical neurology. Methods Ninety-five SRs and/or meta-analyses were located across five prominent neurology journals between 2008 and 2014. Methods sections were reviewed, and all bibliographic databases were coded. Results On average, 2.59 databases were used in SR searches. Seven reviews included an information specialist, and these reviews reported a greater number of information sources used during the search process. Thirty-nine databases were reported across studies. PubMed/ MEDLINE® and EMBASE were cited most frequently. Discussion Searching too few databases may reduce the validity and generalisability of SR results. We found that the majority of systematic reviewers in clinical neurology do not search an adequate number of databases, which may yield a biased sample of primary studies and, thus, may influence the accuracy of summary effects. Conclusions Systematic reviewers should aim to search a sufficient number of databases to minimise selection bias. Additionally, systematic reviewers should include information specialists in designing SR methodology, as this may improve systematic review quality.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype:
        research
        tables/charts
        Journal Article
      ougenre: Article
    language: English
    refInfo:
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N