Streamlining search methods to update evidence and gap maps: A case study using intergenerational interventions

IF 4 Q1 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY Campbell Systematic Reviews Pub Date : 2024-01-07 DOI:10.1002/cl2.1380
Morwenna Rogers, Anthea Sutton, Fiona Campbell, Rebecca Whear, Alison Bethel, Jo Thompson Coon
{"title":"Streamlining search methods to update evidence and gap maps: A case study using intergenerational interventions","authors":"Morwenna Rogers,&nbsp;Anthea Sutton,&nbsp;Fiona Campbell,&nbsp;Rebecca Whear,&nbsp;Alison Bethel,&nbsp;Jo Thompson Coon","doi":"10.1002/cl2.1380","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Evidence and Gap Maps (EGMs) should be regularly updated. Running update searches to find new studies for EGMs can be a time-consuming process. Search Summary Tables (SSTs) can help streamline searches by identifying which resources were most lucrative for identifying relevant articles, and which were redundant. The aim of this study was to use an SST to streamline search methods for an EGM of studies about intergenerational activities.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>To produce the EGM, 15 databases were searched. 8638 records were screened and 500 studies were included in the final EGM. Using an SST, we determined which databases and search methods were the most efficient in terms of sensitivity and specificity for finding the included studies. We also investigated whether any database performed particularly well for returning particular study types. For the best performing databases we analysed the search terms used to streamline the strategies.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>No single database returned all of the studies included in the EGM. Out of 500 studies PsycINFO returned 40% (<i>n</i> = 202), CINAHL 39% (<i>n</i> = 194), Ageline 25% (<i>n</i> = 174), MEDLINE 23% (<i>n</i> = 117), ERIC 20% (<i>n</i> = 100) and Embase 19% (<i>n</i> = 98). HMIC database and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science via Web of Science returned no studies that were included in the EGM. ProQuest Dissertations &amp; Theses (PQDT) returned the highest number of unique studies (<i>n</i> = 42), followed by ERIC (<i>n</i> = 33) and Ageline (<i>n</i> = 29). Ageline returned the most randomised controlled trials (42%) followed by CINAHL (34%), MEDLINE (29%) and CENTRAL (29%). CINAHL, Ageline, MEDLINE and PsycINFO performed the best for locating systematic reviews. (62%, 46% and 42% respectively). CINAHL, PsycINFO and Ageline performed best for qualitative studies (41%, 40% and 34%). The Journal of Intergenerational Relationships returned more included studies than any other journal (16%). No combinations of search terms were found to be better in terms of balancing specificity and sensitivity than the original search strategies. However, strategies could be reduced considerably in terms of length without losing key, unique studies.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Using SSTs we have developed a method for streamlining update searches for an EGM about intergenerational activities. For future updates we recommend that MEDLINE, PsycINFO, ERIC, Ageline, CINAHL and PQDT are searched. These searches should be supplemented by hand-searching the Journal of Intergenerational Relationships and carrying out backwards citation chasing on new systematic reviews. Using SSTs to analyse database efficiency could be a useful method to help streamline search updates for other EGMs.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":36698,"journal":{"name":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","volume":"20 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/cl2.1380","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Campbell Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/cl2.1380","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Evidence and Gap Maps (EGMs) should be regularly updated. Running update searches to find new studies for EGMs can be a time-consuming process. Search Summary Tables (SSTs) can help streamline searches by identifying which resources were most lucrative for identifying relevant articles, and which were redundant. The aim of this study was to use an SST to streamline search methods for an EGM of studies about intergenerational activities.

Methods

To produce the EGM, 15 databases were searched. 8638 records were screened and 500 studies were included in the final EGM. Using an SST, we determined which databases and search methods were the most efficient in terms of sensitivity and specificity for finding the included studies. We also investigated whether any database performed particularly well for returning particular study types. For the best performing databases we analysed the search terms used to streamline the strategies.

Results

No single database returned all of the studies included in the EGM. Out of 500 studies PsycINFO returned 40% (n = 202), CINAHL 39% (n = 194), Ageline 25% (n = 174), MEDLINE 23% (n = 117), ERIC 20% (n = 100) and Embase 19% (n = 98). HMIC database and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science via Web of Science returned no studies that were included in the EGM. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) returned the highest number of unique studies (n = 42), followed by ERIC (n = 33) and Ageline (n = 29). Ageline returned the most randomised controlled trials (42%) followed by CINAHL (34%), MEDLINE (29%) and CENTRAL (29%). CINAHL, Ageline, MEDLINE and PsycINFO performed the best for locating systematic reviews. (62%, 46% and 42% respectively). CINAHL, PsycINFO and Ageline performed best for qualitative studies (41%, 40% and 34%). The Journal of Intergenerational Relationships returned more included studies than any other journal (16%). No combinations of search terms were found to be better in terms of balancing specificity and sensitivity than the original search strategies. However, strategies could be reduced considerably in terms of length without losing key, unique studies.

Conclusion

Using SSTs we have developed a method for streamlining update searches for an EGM about intergenerational activities. For future updates we recommend that MEDLINE, PsycINFO, ERIC, Ageline, CINAHL and PQDT are searched. These searches should be supplemented by hand-searching the Journal of Intergenerational Relationships and carrying out backwards citation chasing on new systematic reviews. Using SSTs to analyse database efficiency could be a useful method to help streamline search updates for other EGMs.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
简化搜索方法,更新证据和差距图:代际干预案例研究
背景证据和差距图(EGM)应定期更新。为 EGMs 寻找新研究而进行更新检索是一个耗时的过程。检索汇总表(SST)可以帮助简化检索,确定哪些资源对确定相关文章最有利,哪些是多余的。本研究旨在使用 SST 来简化代际活动研究 EGM 的检索方法。 方法 为了制作 EGM,我们搜索了 15 个数据库。共筛选出 8638 条记录,最终有 500 项研究被纳入 EGM。通过 SST,我们确定了哪些数据库和检索方法在查找纳入研究的灵敏度和特异性方面最为有效。我们还调查了是否有数据库在检索特定研究类型时表现尤为突出。对于表现最好的数据库,我们分析了用于简化检索策略的检索词。 结果 没有一个数据库能检索到 EGM 中的所有研究。在 500 项研究中,PsycINFO 检索到 40%(n = 202),CINAHL 检索到 39%(n = 194),Ageline 检索到 25%(n = 174),MEDLINE 检索到 23%(n = 117),ERIC 检索到 20%(n = 100),Embase 检索到 19%(n = 98)。HMIC 数据库和 Web of Science 的 Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science 没有检索到纳入 EGM 的研究。ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) 返回的独特研究数量最多(n = 42),其次是 ERIC(n = 33)和 Ageline(n = 29)。Ageline检索到的随机对照试验最多(42%),其次是CINAHL(34%)、MEDLINE(29%)和CENTRAL(29%)。CINAHL、Ageline、MEDLINE 和 PsycINFO 在查找系统综述方面表现最佳。(分别为 62%、46% 和 42%)。CINAHL、PsycINFO 和 Ageline 在定性研究方面表现最佳(分别为 41%、40% 和 34%)。代际关系期刊》检索到的收录研究多于其他期刊(16%)。在兼顾特异性和敏感性方面,没有发现任何检索词组合优于最初的检索策略。不过,在不丢失关键、独特研究的前提下,可以大大缩短检索策略的长度。 结论 通过使用 SST,我们开发出了一种简化代际活动 EGM 更新检索的方法。对于未来的更新,我们建议检索 MEDLINE、PsycINFO、ERIC、Ageline、CINAHL 和 PQDT。在进行这些检索的同时,还应对《代际关系期刊》进行手工检索,并对新的系统性综述进行反向引文追溯。使用 SST 分析数据库效率可能是一种有用的方法,有助于简化其他 EGM 的检索更新。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Campbell Systematic Reviews
Campbell Systematic Reviews Social Sciences-Social Sciences (all)
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
21.90%
发文量
80
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Critical appraisal of methodological quality and completeness of reporting in Chinese social science systematic reviews with meta-analysis: A systematic review. The effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for reducing problematic substance use, mental ill health, and housing instability in people experiencing homelessness in high income countries: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Exposure to hate in online and traditional media: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of this exposure on individuals and communities. PROTOCOL: Non-criminal justice interventions for countering cognitive and behavioural radicalisation amongst children and adolescents: A systematic review of effectiveness and implementation. Protocol: The impact of integrated thematic instruction model on primary and secondary school students compared to standard teaching: A protocol of systematic review.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1