Search

Background: By defining search strategies and related database exports as code/scripts and data, librarians and information professionals can expand the mandate of research data management (RDM) infrastructure to include this work. This new initiative aimed to create a space in McGill University's institutional data repository for our librarians to deposit and share their search strategies for knowledge syntheses (KS). Case Presentation: The authors, a health sciences librarian and an RDM specialist, created a repository collection of librarian-authored knowledge synthesis (KS) searches in McGill University's Borealis Dataverse collection. We developed and hosted a half-day "Dataverse-a-thon" where we worked with a team of health sciences librarians to develop a standardized KS data management plan (DMP), search reporting documentation, Dataverse software training, and howto guidance for the repository. Conclusion: In addition to better documentation and tracking of KS searches at our institution, the KS Dataverse collection enables sharing of searches among colleagues with discoverable metadata fields for searching within deposited searches. While the initial creation of the DMP and documentation took about six hours, the subsequent deposit of search strategies into the institutional data repository requires minimal effort (e.g., 5-10 minutes on average per deposit). The Dataverse collection also empowers librarians to retain intellectual ownership over search strategies as valuable stand-alone research outputs and raise the visibility of their labor. Overall, institutional data repositories provide specific benefits in facilitating compliance both with PRISMA-S guidance and with RDM best practices. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: There is a need for additional comprehensive and validated filters to find relevant references more efficiently in the growing body of research on immigrant populations. Our goal was to create reliable search filters that direct librarians and researchers to pertinent studies indexed in PubMed about health topics specific to immigrant populations. Methods: We applied a systematic and multi-step process that combined information from expert input, authoritative sources, automation, and manual review of sources. We established a focused scope and eligibility criteria, which we used to create the development and validation sets. We formed a term ranking system that resulted in the creation of two filters: an immigrant-specific and an immigrant-sensitive search filter. Results: When tested against the validation set, the specific filter sensitivity was 88.09%, specificity 97.26%, precision 97.88%, and the NNR 1.02. The sensitive filter sensitivity was 97.76%when tested against the development set. The sensitive filter had a sensitivity of 97.14%, specificity of 82.05%, precision of 88.59%, accuracy of 90.94%, and NNR [See Table 1] of 1.13 when tested against the validation set. Conclusion: We accomplished our goal of developing PubMed search filters to help researchers retrieve studies about immigrants. The specific and sensitive PubMed search filters give information professionals and researchers options to maximize the specificity and precision or increase the sensitivity of their search for relevant studies in PubMed. Both search filters generated strong performance measurements and can be used as-is, to capture a subset of immigrantrelated literature, or adapted and revised to fit the unique research needs of specific project teams (e.g. remove UScentric language, add location-specific terminology, or expand the search strategy to include terms for the topic/s being investigated in the immigrant population identified by the filter). There is also a potential for teams to employ the search filter development process described here for their own topics and use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Locating systematic reviews is essential for clinicians and researchers when creating or updating reviews and for decision-making in health care. This study aimed to develop a search filter for retrieving systematic reviews that improves upon the performance of the PubMed systematic review search filter. Methods: Search terms were identified from abstracts of reviews published in Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the titles of articles indexed as systematic reviews in PubMed. Both the precision of the candidate terms and the number of systematic reviews retrieved from PubMed were evaluated after excluding the subset of articles retrieved by the PubMed systematic review filter. Terms that achieved a precision greater than 70% and relevant publication types indexed with MeSH terms were included in the filter search strategy. Results: The search strategy used in our filter added specific terms not included in PubMed's systematic review filter and achieved a 61.3% increase in the number of retrieved articles that are potential systematic reviews. Moreover, it achieved an average precision that is likely greater than 80%. Conclusions: The developed search filter will enable users to identify more systematic reviews from PubMed than the PubMed systematic review filter with high precision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]