1 / 11

Cochrane Public Health Review Group: Study Searching

The following slides were presented at a meeting of potential editors and methods advisors for the proposed Cochrane review group in February 2008. The slides were designed to promote discussion rather than represent the views and directions of this group.

axl
Download Presentation

Cochrane Public Health Review Group: Study Searching

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. The following slides were presented at a meeting of potential editors and methods advisors for the proposed Cochrane review group in February 2008. The slides were designed to promote discussion rather than represent the views and directions of this group.

  2. Cochrane Public Health Review Group:Study Searching Dr Alison Weightman Director, Support Unit for Research Evidence (SURE), Cardiff University, UK and Co-Convenor Cochrane Information Methods Retrieval Group & Dr Angela Harden Associate Director, EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London, UK and Co-Director Cochrane Health Promotion and Public Health Field

  3. This talk • Cochrane requirements for a Specialised Study Register • Proposals for the specialised register • Proposals for advice and support to reviewers on additional searching for review topics • Complexity – databases – grey literature • Key questions from editorial and reviewer perspectives

  4. Cochrane specific core function 6 “For the editorial bases to develop and maintain a Specialized Register, containing all relevant studies in their area of interest, and submit this to CENTRAL on a quarterly basis”

  5. The task

  6. Proposals for the specialised register: • A new Register, established with relevant studies contained in the EPPI Centre database TRoPHI and other in-house databases available to the Group. • Study designs: RCTs, non randomised controlled trials, controlled before & after and interrupted time series only in first phase. • Databases: Medline, ASSIA, CENTRAL, Embase, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, ERIC, Transport and SportDiscus; plus one or more databases of relevance to low and middle income countries [extent depends on funding] • Establish and support an international group of handsearchers to expand the register with hard to reach studies. • Further development of search filters to help improve efficiency of searching to populate the Register [extent depends on funding]

  7. Supplementary searching for individual review topics: Proposals • Guidance to reviewers based on the Group’s Systematic Review Guidelines in keeping with the Cochrane Handbook searching chapter • Encourage reviewers to seek advice from the Trials Search Coordinator (TSC, based at SURE, Cardiff University) who will provide guidance on searching for all types of study and will search the Specialised Register for relevant intervention studies. Good practice guidance for additional searching by reviewers: • Choose information sources that cover the full range of disciplines and relevant study types for the review topic, including grey lit • Use combination of text words/synonyms and indexing terms • Supplement with hand-searching most relevant journals to bring bang up to date • Increase sensitivity with snowballing techniques (reference list follow up, expert contacts etc.)

  8. Key questions from editorial group and reviewer perspectives: Register: • Major effort will be to populate the Register with intervention studies initially to ensure best possible coverage. Studies looking at barriers and enablers to success (eg qualitative studies) will not be searched for the Register though individual reviews may often include these types of study and TSC will guide. Any views? • How many databases is enough? Any views on the proposed initial set of databases to be covered for the Register – additions/deletions? Additional searching by reviewers: • Should we be encouraging reviewers to adopt standard ‘Cochrane’ strategies or should we also support realist review/theory driven approaches? • Worldwide and grey literature searching will be encouraged. Any other advice on standards to protect against publication and language bias?

  9. Proposals for the specialised register: • A new Register, established with relevant studies contained in the EPPI Centre database TRoPHI and other in-house databases available to the Group. • Study designs: RCTs, non randomised controlled trials, controlled before & after and interrupted time series only in first phase. • Databases: Medline, ASSIA, CENTRAL, Embase, PsycINFO, ASSIA, Sociological Abstracts, ERIC, Transport and SportDiscus; plus one or more databases of relevance to low and middle income countries [extent depends on funding] • Establish and support an international group of handsearchers to expand the register with hard to reach studies. • Further development of search filters to help improve efficiency of searching to populate the Register [extent depends on funding]

  10. Contacts: WeightmanAL@cf.ac.uk A.Harden@ioe.ac.uk

More Related