Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: audit of primary sources
被引:1292
作者:
Greenhalgh, T
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:UCL, Sch Med, Dept Primary Care & Populat Sci, London N19 5LW, England
Greenhalgh, T
Peacock, R
论文数: 0引用数: 0
h-index: 0
机构:UCL, Sch Med, Dept Primary Care & Populat Sci, London N19 5LW, England
Peacock, R
机构:
[1] UCL, Sch Med, Dept Primary Care & Populat Sci, London N19 5LW, England
[2] Archway Healthcare Lib, London, England
来源:
BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL
|
2005年
/
331卷
/
7524期
关键词:
D O I:
10.1136/bmj.38636.593461.68
中图分类号:
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号:
1002 ;
100201 ;
摘要:
Objective To describe where papers come from in a systematic review of complex evidence. Method Audit of how the 495 primary sources for the review were originally identified. Results Only 30% of sources were obtained from the protocol defined at the outset of the study (that is, from the database and hand searches). Fifty one per cent were identified by "snowballing" (such as pursuing references of references), and 24% by personal knowledge or personal contacts. Conclusion Systematic reviews of complex evidence cannot rely solely on protocol-driven search strategies.
引用
收藏
页码:1064 / 1065
页数:2
相关论文
共 4 条
[1]
[Anonymous], 2005, MILBANK Q
[2]
Dixon-Woods Mary, 2005, J Health Serv Res Policy, V10, P45, DOI 10.1258/1355819052801804