No consensus exists on search reporting methods for systematic reviews.

J Clin Epidemiol

Department of Information Studies, University of Wales, Aberystwyth, Wales, UK.

Published: August 2008

Objectives: The reporting of the search methods used in systematic reviews has implications for how systematic reviews are critically appraised, their reproducibility and how easily they may be updated. The objective of this paper was to identify validated or evaluated search reporting instruments used in reporting systematic review searches and to compare reported and recommended searching practices.

Study Design And Setting: This cohort study was a systematic review. The search strategy to identify instruments addressing the reporting of search strategies was developed first in the Library & Information Science Abstracts (LISAs) database and then adapted for MEDLINE and five additional databases. Additional instruments were identified through experts. Current reporting practice data were analyzed from a cohort of 297 recent systematic reviews.

Results: Of the 11 instruments examined, 7 cited supporting evidence but only 4 were validated. Eighteen different reporting items were identified but only one item, "databases used," appeared in all instruments. There was a trend toward including more items in more recent instruments (r=0.41). Current search reporting practices ranged from a high of 98.7% for databases used to a low of 11.4% for qualifications of the searcher.

Conclusions: There is no clear consensus regarding optimum reporting of systematic review search methods and commonly recommended items show suboptimal reporting.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.10.009DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

search reporting
12
systematic reviews
12
systematic review
12
reporting
10
methods systematic
8
reporting search
8
search methods
8
reporting systematic
8
review search
8
search
7

Similar Publications

Introduction In the realm of Carotid Artery Stenting (CAS), various access methods such as Transfemoral access (TFA), Transradial Artery access (TRA), and Transbrachial access (TBA) have been employed. While TFA is widely established, TRA and TBA offer alternative options. TBA lacks comprehensive studies, and there is a notable lack of comprehensive evidence systematically evaluating its outcomes.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Labial adhesion (LA) is a total or partial labial fusion mostly seen in pre-pubertal children and is rare in premenopausal and postmenopausal periods. This review aimed to evaluate risk factors for labial fusion and the recurrence rate following surgical intervention in postmenopausal women.

Methods: According to PRISMA guidelines, international databases including Embase, World Cat, Web of Science, Scopus, Dimension, Open Grey, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and also PubMed gateway for PMC and MEDLINE were searched.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: Aortic stenosis (AS) remains a prevalent and serious global health concern, exacerbated by an aging population worldwide. This valvular disease, when symptomatic and without appropriate intervention, severe AS can drastically reduce life expectancy. In our systematic review and -analysis, we aim to synthesize available evidence to guide clinical decision-making by comparing the performance of TAVR and SAVR, specifically in patients with severe AS and a small aortic annulus.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background The accurate diagnosis of intraductal carcinoma of the prostate (IDC-P) is occasionally challenging due to the similarity in pathological morphology between IDC-P and high-grade prostatic intraepithelial neoplasia (HGPIN). In this report, we reviewed the pathology of cases previously diagnosed as HGPIN to search for IDC-P cases effectively. In addition, we examined whether those cases had genetic abnormalities.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Background: The debate continues on whether combining core decompression (CD) with regenerative therapy provides a more effective treatment for early femoral head necrosis than CD alone. This systematic review and meta-analysis endeavored to assess its efficacy.

Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library through July 2024 for RCTs and cohort studies evaluating the impact of core decompression (CD) with regenerative therapy versus CD alone in early-stage osteonecrosis (ARCO I, II or IIIa or Ficat I or II) of the femoral head (ONFH).

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!