Searchsmart.org: Guiding researchers to the best databases and search systems for systematic reviews and beyond.

IF 5 2区 生物学 Q1 MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY Research Synthesis Methods Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-11 DOI:10.1002/jrsm.1746
Michael Gusenbauer
{"title":"Searchsmart.org: Guiding researchers to the best databases and search systems for systematic reviews and beyond.","authors":"Michael Gusenbauer","doi":"10.1002/jrsm.1746","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>When searching for scholarly documents, researchers often stick with the same familiar handful of databases. Yet, just beyond these limited horizons lie dozens of alternatives with which they could search more effectively, whether for quick lookups or thorough searches in systematic reviews or meta-analyses. Searchsmart.org is a free website that guides researchers to particularly suitable search options for their particular disciplines, offering a wide array of resources, including search engines, aggregators, journal platforms, repositories, clinical trials databases, bibliographic databases, and digital libraries. Search Smart currently evaluates the coverage and functionality of more than a hundred leading scholarly databases, including most major multidisciplinary databases and many that are discipline-specific. Search Smart's primary use cases involve database-selection decisions as part of systematic reviews, meta-analyses, or bibliometric analyses. Researchers can use up to 583 criteria to filter and sort recommendations of databases and the interfaces through which they can be accessed for user-friendliness, search rigor, or relevance. With specific pre-defined filter settings, researchers can quickly identify particularly suitable databases for Boolean keyword searching and forward or backward citation searching. Overall, Search Smart's recommendations help researchers to discover knowledge more effectively and efficiently by selecting the more suitable databases for their tasks.</p>","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Synthesis Methods","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1746","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

When searching for scholarly documents, researchers often stick with the same familiar handful of databases. Yet, just beyond these limited horizons lie dozens of alternatives with which they could search more effectively, whether for quick lookups or thorough searches in systematic reviews or meta-analyses. Searchsmart.org is a free website that guides researchers to particularly suitable search options for their particular disciplines, offering a wide array of resources, including search engines, aggregators, journal platforms, repositories, clinical trials databases, bibliographic databases, and digital libraries. Search Smart currently evaluates the coverage and functionality of more than a hundred leading scholarly databases, including most major multidisciplinary databases and many that are discipline-specific. Search Smart's primary use cases involve database-selection decisions as part of systematic reviews, meta-analyses, or bibliometric analyses. Researchers can use up to 583 criteria to filter and sort recommendations of databases and the interfaces through which they can be accessed for user-friendliness, search rigor, or relevance. With specific pre-defined filter settings, researchers can quickly identify particularly suitable databases for Boolean keyword searching and forward or backward citation searching. Overall, Search Smart's recommendations help researchers to discover knowledge more effectively and efficiently by selecting the more suitable databases for their tasks.

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
Searchsmart.org:指导研究人员使用最佳数据库和检索系统进行系统性综述及其他研究。
在搜索学术文献时,研究人员通常会选择同样熟悉的几个数据库。然而,就在这些有限的范围之外,还有几十种选择,无论是快速查找还是在系统综述或荟萃分析中进行彻底搜索,他们都可以利用这些选择进行更有效的搜索。Searchsmart.org 是一个免费网站,它为研究人员提供了大量资源,包括搜索引擎、聚合器、期刊平台、资料库、临床试验数据库、书目数据库和数字图书馆,指导他们选择适合自己特定学科的检索方式。Search Smart 目前对一百多个主要学术数据库的覆盖范围和功能进行了评估,其中包括大多数主要的多学科数据库和许多特定学科数据库。Search Smart 的主要用例涉及作为系统综述、荟萃分析或文献计量分析一部分的数据库选择决策。研究人员可以使用多达 583 项标准来筛选和排序数据库推荐,并根据用户友好性、搜索严谨性或相关性对数据库访问界面进行筛选和排序。通过特定的预定义过滤设置,研究人员可以快速确定特别适合进行布尔关键词搜索和正向或反向引文搜索的数据库。总之,Search Smart 的建议可以帮助研究人员选择更适合其任务的数据库,从而更有效、更高效地发现知识。
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
Research Synthesis Methods
Research Synthesis Methods MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGYMULTID-MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES
CiteScore
16.90
自引率
3.10%
发文量
75
期刊介绍: Research Synthesis Methods is a reputable, peer-reviewed journal that focuses on the development and dissemination of methods for conducting systematic research synthesis. Our aim is to advance the knowledge and application of research synthesis methods across various disciplines. Our journal provides a platform for the exchange of ideas and knowledge related to designing, conducting, analyzing, interpreting, reporting, and applying research synthesis. While research synthesis is commonly practiced in the health and social sciences, our journal also welcomes contributions from other fields to enrich the methodologies employed in research synthesis across scientific disciplines. By bridging different disciplines, we aim to foster collaboration and cross-fertilization of ideas, ultimately enhancing the quality and effectiveness of research synthesis methods. Whether you are a researcher, practitioner, or stakeholder involved in research synthesis, our journal strives to offer valuable insights and practical guidance for your work.
期刊最新文献
Automation tools to support undertaking scoping reviews. Reduce, reuse, recycle: Introducing MetaPipeX, a framework for analyses of multi-lab data. A comparison of two models for detecting inconsistency in network meta-analysis. Calculating the power of a planned individual participant data meta-analysis to examine prognostic factor effects for a binary outcome. Considerations for conducting systematic reviews: A follow-up study to evaluate the performance of various automated methods for reference de-duplication.
×
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