Search

Background: Systematic reviews require detailed planning of complex processes which can present logistical challenges. Understanding these logistical challenges can help with planning and execution of tasks Objectives: To describe the perspectives of expert searchers on the main logistical challenges when carrying out supplementary searches for systematic reviews, in particular, forward citation searching and web searching. Methods: Qualitative interviews were undertaken with 15 experts on searching for studies for systematic reviews (e.g. information specialists) working in health and social care research settings. Interviews were undertaken by video‐call between September 2020 and June 2021. Data analysis used thematic network analysis. Results: We identified three logistical challenges of using forward citation searching and web searching which were organised under the global theme of 'tension': time, team and technology. Several subthemes were identified which supported the organising themes, including allocating time, justifying time and keeping to time; reviewer expectations and contact with review teams; and access to resources and reference management. Conclusion: Forward citation searching and web searching are logistically challenging search methods for a systematic review. An understanding of these challenges should encourage expert searchers and review teams to maintain open channels of communication, which should also facilitate improved working relationships. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Artificial intelligence (AI) offers a promising solution to expedite various phases of the systematic review process such as screening. Objective: We aimed to assess the accuracy of an AI tool in identifying eligible references for a systematic review compared to identification by human assessors. Methods: For the case study (a systematic review of knowledge translation interventions), we used a diagnostic accuracy design and independently assessed for eligibility a set of articles (n = 300) using human raters and the AI system DistillerAI (Evidence Partners, Ottawa, Canada). We analysed a series of 64 possible confidence levels for the AI's decisions and calculated several standard parameters of diagnostic accuracy for each. Results: When set to a lower AI confidence threshold of 0.1 or greater and an upper threshold of 0.9 or lower, DistillerAI made article selection decisions very similarly to human assessors. Within this range, DistillerAI made a decision on the majority of articles (93–100%), with a sensitivity of 1.0 and specificity ranging from 0.9 to 1.0. Conclusion: DistillerAI appears to be accurate in its assessment of articles in a case study of 300 articles. Further experimentation with DistillerAI will establish its performance among other subject areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: A challenge when using Google Search to identify studies for a systematic review is managing the high number of results, which can number in the hundreds of thousands or even more. Studies and guidance on web searching suggest limiting the screening process, e.g. to the first 100 results. Objectives: Our objective in this case study is to demonstrate an alternative approach to screening the results retrieved by Google Search which is based on our experience that the viewable number of results is often far fewer than the estimated number calculated by the search engine. Methods: We screened the results of three searches of Google Search using our approach, which involves increasing the number of results displayed per page from 10 to the maximum of 100. We then calculated the viewable number of results and compared this with the estimated number. Results: The mean of the estimated number of results for the three searches was 569,454,000. The mean of the viewable number results was 463 (0.00008% of the mean of the estimated number of results). Conclusion: Our findings challenge the commonly reported view that the number of results retrieved when using Google Search is too high to screen in full. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Traditional and complementary medicine (T&CM) is highly utilised and draws on traditional knowledge (TK) as evidence, raising a need to explore how TK is currently used. Objectives: Examine criteria used to select, evaluate and apply TK in contemporary health contexts. Methods: Systematic search utilising academic databases (AMED, CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SSCI, ProQuest Dissertations Theses Global), Trip clinical database and Google search engine. Citations and reference lists of included articles were searched. Reported use of TK in contemporary settings was mapped against a modified 'Exploration‐Preparation‐Implementation‐Sustainment' (EPIS) implementation framework. Results: From the 54 included articles, EPIS mapping found TK is primarily used in the Exploration phase of implementation (n = 54), with little reporting on Preparation (n = 16), Implementation process (n = 6) or Sustainment (n = 4) of TK implementation. Criteria used in selection, evaluation and application of TK commonly involved validation with other scientific/traditional evidence sources, or assessment of factors influencing knowledge translation. Discussion: One of the difficulties in validation of TK (as a co‐opted treatment) against other evidence sources is comparing like with like as TK often takes a holistic approach. This complicates further planning and evaluation of implementation. Conclusion: This review identifies important criteria for evaluating current and potential contemporary use of TK, identifying gaps in research and practice for finding, appraising and applying relevant TK studies for clinical care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The importance of high‐quality health information for patient safety has been established in the literature, yet the impact of the professionals who are the custodians of health information is absent. Objectives: This article presents the results of a systematic literature review examining the impact of the Health Information Management (HIM) profession on patient safety. Methods: A PRISMA approach was adopted for the review of selected databases and specific journals. Titles identified as relating to HIM and patient quality were screened using Covidence ® by title and abstract, followed by full text. The quality of selected articles was assessed and thematically analysed. Results: Analysis of the 8 included articles found that the key themes from the non‐empirical research were data quality, information governance, corporate governance, skills and knowledge required for HIM professionals. Discussion: Most publications focussed on HIM professional involvement in maintaining standards for data quality and health records, but not the professional qualifications themselves. Conclusions: There are links between patient safety and health records, and between health records and HIM professional work. More empirical research is needed to demonstrate how qualified HIM professionals contribute to patient safety. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In the first of two special collections of COVID‐19‐related manuscripts, this issue focuses on how colleges and universities libraries and their users responded to the need for health information during the pandemic. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Searching for health information is a core activity for health library and knowledge workers, whether seeking to support health care workers in overcoming barriers to accessing drug information, exploring the potential of text mining in developing search filters, translating search filters for use on alternative databases, or the importance of updating search filters to ensure their ongoing utility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Librarians in Sweden are facing huge challenges in meeting the demands of their organisations and users. This article looks at four key areas: coping with open science/open access initiatives; increasing demands from researchers for support doing systematic reviews; understanding user experiences in Swedish health science libraries; and the consequences of expanding roles for recruitment and continuing professional development. With regard to changing roles, there is an increasing shift from the generalist towards the expert role. The authors raise the issue as to how to prepare those new to the profession to the changing environment of health science libraries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: This article briefly describes the services provided by Chinese health science libraries and the factors which influence service provision. Driven by new technologies and national initiatives, the key service s delivered by Chinese health libraries in the last 10 years have been research support services (such as research impact assessment, support for data management), evidence‐based medicine, systematic reviews, the promotion of health information literacy, and the development of institutional repositories. J.M. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Background: Search filter development for adverse effects has tended to focus on retrieving studies of drug interventions. However, a different approach is required for surgical interventions. Objective: To develop and validate search filters for medline and Embase for the adverse effects of surgical interventions. Methods: Systematic reviews of surgical interventions where the primary focus was to evaluate adverse effect(s) were sought. The included studies within these reviews were divided randomly into a development set, evaluation set and validation set. Using word frequency analysis we constructed a sensitivity maximising search strategy and this was tested in the evaluation and validation set. Results: Three hundred and fifty eight papers were included from 19 surgical intervention reviews. Three hundred and fifty two papers were available on medline and 348 were available on Embase. Generic adverse effects search strategies in medline and Embase could achieve approximately 90% relative recall. Recall could be further improved with the addition of specific adverse effects terms to the search strategies. Conclusion: We have derived and validated a novel search filter that has reasonable performance for identifying adverse effects of surgical interventions in medline and Embase. However, we appreciate the limitations of our methods, and recommend further research on larger sample sizes and prospective systematic reviews. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective The purpose of this review is to evaluate the tools used to measure the financial value of libraries in a clinical setting. Methods Searches were carried out on ten databases for the years 2003-2013, with a final search before completion to identify any recent papers. Results Eleven papers met the final inclusion criteria. There was no evidence of a single 'best practice', and many metrics used to measure financial impact of clinical libraries were developed on an ad hoc basis locally. The most common measures of financial impact were value of time saved, value of resource collection against cost of alternative sources, cost avoidance and revenue generated through assistance on grant submissions. Few papers provided an insight into the longer term impact on the library service resulting from submitting return on investment ( ROI) or other financial impact statements. Conclusions There are limited examples of metrics which clinical libraries can use to measure explicit financial impact. The methods highlighted in this literature review are generally implicit in the measures used and lack robustness. There is a need for future research to develop standardised, validated tools that clinical libraries can use to demonstrate their financial impact. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives The use of stakeholders in systematic reviews is increasingly valued, but their influence on the systematicity of the review is often unclear. The aim of this study was to describe some of the processes of involvement of stakeholders and to demonstrate a Tool for Recording and Accounting for Stakeholder Involvement ( TRASI). Methods We demonstrate the TRASI in two worked examples. In one project, the reviewers collaborated with the end-user and an expert during the literature search. In the other project, experts were consulted to generate keywords before searching the literature. Results In the first project, disagreements about keywords to identify studies for the research topic were solved by informal discussion. In the second project, difficulties arose in reaching agreement between experts and reviewers about the core construct and the meaningful keywords associated with it. Discussion The TRASI aids researchers to systematically and transparently account for the decisions taken. The TRASI supports information specialists and librarians to shape the search strategy to match the objectives of the review. Conclusions We propose the TRASI as a first step in resolving the challenges of detecting and reconstructing stakeholder influences. Potential new applications of the TRASI are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Research indicates that the methods used to identify data for systematic reviews of adverse effects may need to differ from other systematic reviews. Objectives To compare search methods in systematic reviews of adverse effects with other reviews. Methods The search methodologies in 849 systematic reviews of adverse effects were compared with other reviews. Results Poor reporting of search strategies is apparent in both systematic reviews of adverse effects and other types of systematic reviews. Systematic reviews of adverse effects are less likely to restrict their searches to MEDLINE or include only randomised controlled trials ( RCTs). The use of other databases is largely dependent on the topic area and the year the review was conducted, with more databases searched in more recent reviews. Adverse effects search terms are used by 72% of reviews and despite recommendations only two reviews report using floating subheadings. Conclusions The poor reporting of search strategies in systematic reviews is universal, as is the dominance of searching MEDLINE. However, reviews of adverse effects are more likely to include a range of study designs (not just RCTs) and search beyond MEDLINE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Systematic reviews require literature searches that are precise, sensitive and often complex. Database-hosting platforms need to facilitate this type of searching in order to minimise errors and the risk of bias in the results. Objectives The main objective of the study was to create a generic checklist of criteria to assess the ability of host platforms to cope with complex searching, for example, for systematic reviews, and to test the checklist against three host platforms ( EBSCOhost, Ovid SP and ProQuest). Method The checklist was developed as usual review work was carried out and through discussion between the two authors. Attributes on the checklist were designated as 'desirable' or 'essential'. The authors tested the checklist independently against three host platforms and graded their performance from 1 (insufficient) to 3 (performs well). Results Fifty-five desirable or essential attributes were identified for the checklist. None of the platforms performed well for all of the attributes on the checklist. Conclusions Not all database-hosting platforms are designed for complex searching. Librarians and other decision-makers who work in health research settings need to be aware of the different limitations of host platforms for complex searching when they are making purchasing decisions or training others. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background A turbulent financial and political climate requires health libraries to be more accountable than ever. Quality improvement systems are widely considered a 'good thing to do', but do they produce useful outcomes that can demonstrate value? Objectives To undertake a systematic review to identify which aspects of health libraries are being measured for quality, what tools are being used and what outcomes are reported following utilisation of quality improvement systems. Results Many health libraries utilise quality improvement systems without translating the data into service improvements. Included studies demonstrate that quality improvement systems produce valuable outcomes including a positive impact on strategic planning, promotion, new and improved services and staff development. No impact of quality improvement systems on library users or patients is reported in the literature. Conclusions The literature in this area is sparse and requires updating. We recommend further primary research is conducted in health libraries focusing upon the outcomes of utilising quality improvement systems. An exploration of quality improvement systems in other library sectors may also provide valuable insight for health libraries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]