Reproducibility of Search Strategies Is Poor in Systematic Reviews Published in High-Impact Pediatrics, Cardiology and Surgery Journals: A Cross-Sectional Study

نویسندگان

  • Jonathan B Koffel
  • Melissa L Rethlefsen
چکیده

BACKGROUND A high-quality search strategy is considered an essential component of systematic reviews but many do not contain reproducible search strategies. It is unclear if low reproducibility spans medical disciplines, is affected by librarian/search specialist involvement or has improved with increased awareness of reporting guidelines. OBJECTIVES To examine the reporting of search strategies in systematic reviews published in Pediatrics, Surgery or Cardiology journals in 2012 and determine rates and predictors of including a reproducible search strategy. METHODS We identified all systematic reviews published in 2012 in the ten highest impact factor journals in Pediatrics, Surgery and Cardiology. Each search strategy was coded to indicate what elements were reported and whether the overall search was reproducible. Reporting and reproducibility rates were compared across disciplines and we measured the influence of librarian/search specialist involvement, discipline or endorsement of a reporting guideline on search reproducibility. RESULTS 272 articles from 25 journals were included. Reporting of search elements ranged widely from 91% of articles naming search terms to 33% providing a full search strategy and 22% indicating the date the search was executed. Only 22% of articles provided at least one reproducible search strategy and 13% provided a reproducible strategy for all databases searched in the article. Librarians or search specialists were reported as involved in 17% of articles. There were strong disciplinary differences on the reporting of search elements. In the multivariable analysis, only discipline (Pediatrics) was a significant predictor of the inclusion of a reproducible search strategy. CONCLUSIONS Despite recommendations to report full, reproducible search strategies, many articles still do not. In addition, authors often report a single strategy as covering all databases searched, further decreasing reproducibility. Further research is needed to determine how disciplinary culture may encourage reproducibility and the role that journal editors and peer reviewers could play.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Exposure to Air Pollution and Pregnancy Outcomes in the East Mediterranean Region: a Systematic Review

The East Mediterranean region suffers from high levels of air pollution which has a negative impact on pregnancy outcomes. This work systematically reviews the epidemiological evidence on maternal exposure to air pollution and adverse pregnancy outcomes in the region. Relevant papers and reports published between 2000 and 2014 were searched. Combinations of search terms including countries, exp...

متن کامل

Assessment of the Possibility of Vertical Transmission of COVID-19: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocol

Background: The novel coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak has put a great burden on global health and healthcare systems. There is controversy regarding the possibility of vertical transmission of COVID-19. The proposed systematic review aims  to assess the possibility of vertical transmission of COVID-19 based on currently published literature. Methods: This study will be conducted on all pu...

متن کامل

The level of evidence of published articles on orthodontics in PubMed journals from Iran during 2000-2015

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Evidence-based dentistry (EBD), including orthodontics, needs the availability and use of the high-quality studies. The aim of this study was to identify the level of evidence (LOE) of Iranian articles on orthodontics published in PubMed.METHODS: All the articles on orthodontics published from 2000 to 2015 in PubMed with Iran affiliations were extracted by typing orthodontic...

متن کامل

Reporting of Financial and Non-financial Conflicts of Interest in Systematic Reviews on Health Policy and Systems Research: A Cross Sectional Survey

Background Systematic reviews are increasingly used to inform health policy-making. The conflicts of interest (COI) of the authors of systematic reviews may bias their results and influence their conclusions. This may in turn lead to misguided public policies and systems level decisions. In order to mitigate the adverse impact of COI, scientific journals require authors to disclose their COIs. ...

متن کامل

A PRISMA assessment of reporting the quality of published dental systematic reviews in Iran, up to 2017

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Proper scientific reporting is necessary to ensure correct interpretation of study results by readers. Systematic reviews (SRs) are of critical importance in evidence-based dentistry. This study assessed the reporting quality of published dental SRs in Iran.METHODS: The PubMed and ISI electronic databases were searched to collect published Iranian dental SRs up to the end of...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره 11  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2016