UCL Discovery
UCL home » Library Services » Electronic resources » UCL Discovery

Supplementary search methods were more effective and offered better value than bibliographic database searching: A case study from public health and environmental enhancement

Cooper, C; Lovell, R; Husk, K; Booth, A; Garside, R; (2018) Supplementary search methods were more effective and offered better value than bibliographic database searching: A case study from public health and environmental enhancement. Research Synthesis Methods , 9 (2) pp. 195-223. 10.1002/jrsm.1286. Green open access

[img]
Preview
Text
Cooper_et al supplementary versus databases- a case study.pdf - Accepted version

Download (513kB) | Preview

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We undertook a systematic review to evaluate the health benefits of environmental enhancement and conservation activities. We were concerned that a conventional process of study identification, focusing on exhaustive searches of bibliographic databases as the primary search method, would be ineffective, offering limited value. The focus of this study is comparing study identification methods. We compare (1) an approach led by searches of bibliographic databases with (2) an approach led by supplementary search methods. We retrospectively assessed the effectiveness and value of both approaches. METHODS: Effectiveness was determined by comparing (1) the total number of studies identified and screened and (2) the number of includable studies uniquely identified by each approach. Value was determined by comparing included study quality and by using qualitative sensitivity analysis to explore the contribution of studies to the synthesis. RESULTS: The bibliographic databases approach identified 21 409 studies to screen and 2 included qualitative studies were uniquely identified. Study quality was moderate, and contribution to the synthesis was minimal. The supplementary search approach identified 453 studies to screen and 9 included studies were uniquely identified. Four quantitative studies were poor quality but made a substantive contribution to the synthesis; 5 studies were qualitative: 3 studies were good quality, one was moderate quality, and 1 study was excluded from the synthesis due to poor quality. All 4 included qualitative studies made significant contributions to the synthesis. CONCLUSIONS: This case study found value in aligning primary methods of study identification to maximise location of relevant evidence.

Type: Article
Title: Supplementary search methods were more effective and offered better value than bibliographic database searching: A case study from public health and environmental enhancement
Open access status: An open access version is available from UCL Discovery
DOI: 10.1002/jrsm.1286
Publisher version: https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1286
Language: English
Additional information: This version is the author accepted manuscript. For information on re-use, please refer to the publisher’s terms and conditions.
Keywords: Cochrane systematic reviews, information science, literature searching, public health, sensitivity analysis
UCL classification: UCL
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Brain Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Brain Sciences > Div of Psychology and Lang Sciences
UCL > Provost and Vice Provost Offices > School of Life and Medical Sciences > Faculty of Brain Sciences > Div of Psychology and Lang Sciences > Clinical, Edu and Hlth Psychology
URI: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/10062051
Downloads since deposit
54Downloads
Download activity - last month
Download activity - last 12 months
Downloads by country - last 12 months

Archive Staff Only

View Item View Item