Reporting of systematic searches.

Documenting systematic searches promotes transparency, reproducibility, and integrity in research. In recent years, various reporting guidelines have gained widespread recognition and adoption, and some journals and funders require researchers to provide a detailed account of their search strategies. Documentation of systematic searches vary depending on the search strategies and types of reviews. This review provides an overview of principles of reporting search strategies for key review types and search strategies, and furthermore an overview of existing reporting guidelines.

Supplementary strategies identified additional eligible studies in qualitative systematic reviews.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is an increasing number of qualitative systematic reviews being produced. Searching for qualitative literature to include in these systematic reviews is, however, more challenging and may result in less than favorable recall. Database searches relying solely on key elements of the research question may not retrieve all relevant qualitative studies for synthesis, and supplementary searches may be pertinent to complement the searches. This study aimed to determine, if a) supplementary search strategies (citation searches and alternative search strategies) were able to identify relevant publications for qualitative systematic reviews that were nonretrievable, when conducting traditional database searches based on key elements; and b) to investigate the total number of identified publications when combining traditional database searches with these supplementary search strategies. METHODS: From a previous study, a gold standard of 12 qualitative reviews including 101 PubMed-indexed publications was used. One of the reviews had only one included publication and in one review, the two included studies were identifiable in PubMed. In the remaining 10 reviews, 61 publications were retrievable through traditional database searches, and 37 were nonidentifiable. The 61 publications were used as basis for possible identification of the 37 publications by using the supplementary search strategies: citations searches (review of reference lists, PubMed "Cited by" function; Scopus "Cited by" function, Citationchaser, CoCites plugin for PubMed) and alternative search strategies (PubMed "similar articles" function; Scopus "Related documents based on references"). RESULTS: Traditional database searches retrieved 62.4% of the 101 publications. Citations searches in Scopus, Citationchaser and CoCites identified 21 (56.8%) of the 37 remaining publications. The PubMed "Cited by" function did not identify any of the 37 publications. The alternative search strategies, the PubMed "Similar articles" together with Scopus "Related documents based on references"-function) identified 15 (40.5%) of the 37 publications. Together, these supplementary search strategies identified 25 (67.6%) of the 37 publications, resulting in an overall retrieval of 87.1%, when combining traditional database searches and supplementary search strategies. CONCLUSION: The results of this study indicate that supplementary search strategies (citation searches and alternative search strategies) increase the retrieval potential, when searching for qualitative publications and should be included, when identifying literature for qualitative reviews.

Avoiding searching for outcomes called for additional search strategies: a study of Cochrane review searches.

OBJECTIVES: A search strategy for a systematic review that uses the Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome framework should include the population, the intervention(s), and the type(s) of study design. According to existing guidelines, outcome should generally be excluded from the search strategy unless the search is multistranded. However, a recent study found that approximately 10% (51) of recent Cochrane reviews on interventions included outcomes in their literature search strategies. This study aims to analyze the alternatives to including outcomes in a search strategy by analyzing these recent Cochrane reviews. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: This study analyzes the 51 Cochrane reviews that included outcomes in their literature search strategies and analyzes the results of alternative search strategies that follow current recommendations. RESULTS: Despite a small study sample of 51 reviews the results show that many of the reviews excluded some of the recommended elements due to very broadly defined elements (e.g., all interventions or all people). Furthermore, excluding outcomes from the search strategy is followed by an enormous increase in the number of retrieved records making it unmanageable to screen, if using a single-stranded search strategy. CONCLUSION: Recommendations for search strategies in difficult cases are called for.

The effectiveness of improving healthcare teams' human factor skills using simulation-based training: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Simulation-based training used to train healthcare teams' skills and improve clinical practice has evolved in recent decades. While it is evident that technical skills training is beneficial, the potential of human factor training has not been described to the same extent. Research on human factor training has been limited to marginal and acute care scenarios and often to validate instruments. This systematic review aimed to investigate the effectiveness of simulation-based training in improving in-hospital qualified healthcare teams' human factor skills. METHOD: A review protocol outlining the study was registered in PROSPERO. Using the PRISMA guidelines, the systematic search was conducted on September 28th, 2021, in eight major scientific databases. Three independent reviewers assessed title and abstract screening; full texts were evaluated by one reviewer. Content analysis was used to evaluate the evidence from the included studies. RESULTS: The search yielded 19,767 studies, of which 72 were included. The included studies were published between 2004 and 2021 and covered research from seven different in-hospital medical specialisms. Studies applied a wide range of assessment tools, which made it challenging to compare the effectiveness of human factor skills training across studies. The content analysis identified evidence for the effectiveness. Four recurring themes were identified: (1) Training human factor skills in qualified healthcare teams; (2) assessment of human factor skills; (3) combined teaching methods, and (4) retention and transfer of human factor skills. Unfortunately, the human factor skills assessments are variable in the literature, affecting the power of the result. CONCLUSION: Simulation-based training is a successful learning tool to improve qualified healthcare teams' human factor skills. Human factor skills are not innate and appear to be trainable similar to technical skills, based on the findings of this review. Moreover, research on retention and transfer is insufficient. Further, research on the retention and transfer of human factor skills from simulation-based training to clinical practice is essential to gain knowledge of the effect on patient safety.

[The use of search filtersin systematic searches].

In this review, we provide an overview of search filters, which are pre-formulated search strategies developed to help identify articles within a given topic or with a particular study design. We present the rationale behind search filters and how they are used. Using a search filter may however, result in missing relevant publications and they should be used with care. Therefore, we describe how these search filters are developed and evaluated. Finally, we provide guidance on how the use of a search filter is reported in a systematic search.

Performance of conceptual framework elements for the retrieval of qualitative health literature: a case study.

OBJECTIVE: A growing volume of studies address methods for performing systematic reviews of qualitative studies. One such methodological aspect is the conceptual framework used to structure the review question and plan the search strategy for locating relevant studies. The purpose of this case study was to evaluate the retrieval potential of each element of conceptual frameworks in qualitative systematic reviews in the health sciences. METHODS: The presence of elements from conceptual frameworks in publication titles, abstracts, and controlled vocabulary in CINAHL and PubMed was analyzed using a set of qualitative reviews and their included studies as a gold standard. Using a sample of 101 publications, we determined whether particular publications could be retrieved if a specific element from the conceptual framework was used in the search strategy. RESULTS: We found that the relative recall of conceptual framework elements varied considerably, with higher recall for patient/population (99%) and research type (97%) and lower recall for intervention/phenomenon of interest (74%), outcome (79%), and context (61%). CONCLUSION: The use of patient/population and research type elements had high relative recall for qualitative studies. However, other elements should be used with great care due to lower relative recall.

Relapse prevention in ambulant mental health care tailored to patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ON THE SUBJECT?: Understanding the need for psychoeducation and management strategies in relapse prevention, for individuals with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Interventions for individuals with severe mental illness, especially schizophrenia, often requires support from family or social network to successfully improve mental stability in the life of the mentally ill. WHAT THE PAPER ADDS TO EXISTING KNOWLEDGE?: To our knowledge, no previous review has provided an overview of state of the art intervention elements currently used in ambulant mental health care interventions and how these elements are combined in interventions tailored to individuals with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Moreover, this systematic review indicates the effect of the different intervention elements. This review reveals an apparent gab in knowledge regarding patient perceptions of and need for individualized relapse prevention interventions. WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE?: The review is a relevant tool for stakeholders and practitioners in community mental health service when planning future interventions. Considering the specific needs for intervention complexity of the target group is likely to improve not only treatment outcome, but also patient satisfaction and treatment adherence. ABSTRACT: Introduction In recent years, there has been a development in ambulant mental health care towards a more preventive approach, resulting in relapse prevention interventions. Interventions may be patient tailored, to a greater or lesser extent, in relation to the treatment elements included. Aim To create an overview of non-pharmacological intervention elements described in relapse prevention interventions for patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder based on a systematic review. Method Six scientific databases were systematically searched. The search strategy, identification and selection of literature complied with the PRISMA statement. Results Of 7.429 studies screened, 25 were included for analysis. Six treatment elements were identified: Pharmacological treatment, personalized action plan, patient education, patient skills, treatment adherence and family involvement. Discussion The varying degree of complexity of the interventions indicates that patients with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia have, respectively, different treatment needs. Patients with schizophrenia seem to benefit more from interventions that include support from social network or family than patients with bipolar disorder. More qualitative studies clarifying the patient's perspective on tailored relapse prevention are indicated. Implications for practice Optimally tailoring relapse prevention for patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder will improve treatment outcome, and probably also treatment satisfaction and adherence.

Using Embase as a supplement to PubMed in Cochrane reviews differed across fields.

OBJECTIVE: Medline/PubMed is often first choice for health science researchers when doing literature searches. However, Medline/PubMed does not cover the health science research literature equally well across specialties. Embase is often considered an important supplement to Medline/PubMed in health sciences. The present study analyzes the coverage of Embase as a supplement to PubMed, and the aim of the study is to investigate if searching Embase can compensate for low PubMed retrieval. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The population in this study is all the included studies in all Cochrane reviews from 2012 to 2016 across the 53 Cochrane groups. The analyses were performed using two units of analysis (study and publication). We are examining the coverage in Embase of publications and studies not covered by PubMed (25,119 publications and 9,420 studies). RESULTS: The results showed that using Embase as a supplement to PubMed resulted in a coverage of 66,994 publications out of 86,167 and a coverage rate of 77.7, 95% CI [75.05, 80.45] of all the included publications. Embase combined with PubMed covered 48,326 out of 54,901 studies and thus had a coverage rate of 88.0%, 95% CI [86.2, 89.9] of studies. The results also showed that supplementing PubMed with Embase increased coverage of included publications by 6.8 percentage points, and the coverage of studies increased by 5.5 percentage points. Substantial differences were found across and within review groups over time. CONCLUSION: The included publications and studies in some groups are covered considerably better by supplementing with Embase, whereas in other groups, the difference in coverage is negligible. However, due to the variation over time, one should be careful predicting the benefit from supplementing PubMed with Embase to retrieve relevant publications to include in a review.

Using the full PICO model as a search tool for systematic reviews resulted in lower recall for some PICO elements.

OBJECTIVES: The use of the four-part PICO model to facilitate search strategy development for a precise answer is recommended for structuring searches for systematic reviews. Existing guidelines generally recommend that a search strategy should include the population, intervention(s), and types of study design. Consequently, comparison and outcome are not recommended as a part of the search strategy. There is evidence that comparison and particularly outcome is not represented in enough detail, but this needs to be confirmed. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The present study examines the presence of PICO elements in the records in two commonly used databases for health sciences research: Embase and PubMed. We examine the field of upper GI and pancreatic diseases as well as the field of pregnancy and childbirth by extracting the included studies as well as the related PICO elements from a random selection of Cochrane reviews within these two areas. RESULTS: We find that the PICO elements C and O had a lower retrieval potential across the two Cochrane groups and databases also when combining text words and subject headings. In particular, we find a lower retrieval when searching for both primary and secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: Our results support the existing recommendation not to search for outcomes.

[Planning the searches for a systematic review].

The planning of a systematic search is of great importance to the results. The systematic searches are planned as part of a protocol, which is developed to minimise bias. The development of the search strategy uses elements from a conceptualisation model. The information sources are selected based on the review question and should include more than one bibliographic database and possibly grey literature. Search terms are defined, and the thesauri of the databases should be used if possible. Any alternative search strategies may be considered. Finally, the searches must be reported in detail. Those points are discussed in this review.

Searching for qualitative health research required several databases and alternative search strategies: a study of coverage in bibliographic databases.

OBJECTIVE: Retrieving the qualitative literature can be challenging, but the number and specific choice of databases are key factors. The aim of the present study is to provide guidance for the choice of databases for retrieving qualitative health research. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Seventy-one qualitative systematic reviews, from the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and JBI database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, including 927 qualitative studies, were used to analyze the coverage of the qualitative literature in nine bibliographic databases. RESULTS: The results show that 94.4% of the qualitative studies are indexed in at least one database, with a lower coverage for publication types other than journal articles. Maximum recall with two databases is 89.1%, with three databases recall increases to 92% and maximum recall with four databases is 93.1%. The remaining 6.9% of the publications consists of 1.3% scattered across five databases and 5.6% that are not indexed in any of the nine databases used in this study. CONCLUSION: Retrieval in one or a few-although well selected-databases does not provide all the relevant qualitative studies. The remaining studies needs to be located using several other databases and alternative search strategies.

PubMed coverage varied across specialties and over time: a large-scale study of included studies in Cochrane reviews.

OBJECTIVE: PubMed is one of the most commonly used search tools in biomedical and life sciences. Existing studies of database coverage generally conclude that searching PubMed may not be sufficient although some find that the contributions from other databases are modest at best. However, generalizability of the studies of the coverage of PubMed is typically restricted. The objective of this study is to analyze the coverage of PubMed across specialties and over time. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: We use the more than 50,000 included studies in all Cochrane reviews published from 2012 to 2016 as our population and examine if the studies and resulting publications can be identified in PubMed. RESULTS: The results show that PubMed has a coverage of 70.9, 95% confidence interval (CI) (68.40, 73.30) of all the included publications and 82.8%, 95% CI (80.9, 84.7) of the included studies. There are huge differences in coverage across and within specialties. In addition, coverage varies within groups over time. CONCLUSION: Databases used for searching topics within the groups with highly varying or low coverage should be chosen with care as PubMed may have a relatively low coverage.

[Questionable journals and how to avoid them].

The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of tools, which health-science researchers can use when assessing, whether a journal is legitimate or questionable. Researchers are regularly contacted by journals encouraging them to submit manuscripts. Many of these contacts are phishing e-mails sent by questionable journals, who offer the publication of manuscripts for a fee but without performing peer review or carrying out other processes normally associated with a scientific journal. Determining whether a journal is questionable or legitimate can be challenging.

Breast animation deformity.

Breast animation deformity (BAD) has been reported to occur after submuscular implant placement following breast augmentation and immediate breast reconstruction. Despite its apparent impact on patients' quality of life, BAD has only recently become a topic of general concern. Its incidence and etiology have yet to be established. The aim of this systematic review was to identify papers that clearly defined and classified BAD and described how the degree of animation was assessed. We performed a search in PubMed and Embase. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria that described BAD after implant-based breast augmentation or immediate breast reconstruction were included. After screening 866 publications, four studies were included: three describing BAD after breast augmentation and one describing BAD after immediate breast reconstruction. The median percentage of patients with some degree of BAD was 58%. The highest percentages were found in patients operated on using the Regnault technique or the dual-plane technique (73%-78%). The lowest percentages were found following the dual-plane muscle-splitting technique (30%) and the triple-plane technique (33%). We found no studies meeting the inclusion criteria that analyzed BAD after prepectoral implant placement. This review of the current literature suggests that the degree of BAD is proportional to the degree of muscle involvement. Evidence is scarce, and the phenomenon seems to be underreported. Future comparative studies are warranted.

The impact of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) as a search strategy tool on literature search quality: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: This review aimed to determine if the use of the patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) model as a search strategy tool affects the quality of a literature search. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA), Scopus, and the National Library of Medicine (NLM) catalog up until January 9, 2017. Reference lists were scrutinized, and citation searches were performed on the included studies. The primary outcome was the quality of literature searches and the secondary outcome was time spent on the literature search when the PICO model was used as a search strategy tool, compared to the use of another conceptualizing tool or unguided searching. RESULTS: A total of 2,163 records were identified, and after removal of duplicates and initial screening, 22 full-text articles were assessed. Of these, 19 studies were excluded and 3 studies were included, data were extracted, risk of bias was assessed, and a qualitative analysis was conducted. The included studies compared PICO to the PIC truncation or links to related articles in PubMed, PICOS, and sample, phenomenon of interest, design, evaluation, research type (SPIDER). One study compared PICO to unguided searching. Due to differences in intervention, no quantitative analysis was performed. CONCLUSIONS: Only few studies exist that assess the effect of the PICO model vis-a-vis other available models or even vis-a-vis the use of no model. Before implications for current practice can be drawn, well-designed studies are needed to evaluate the role of the tool used to devise a search strategy.

Efficacy of embedded nurse-led versus conventional physician-led follow-up in rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of embedded nurse-led versus conventional physician-led follow-up on disease activity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHODS: In a systematic literature search, we identified randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reporting on the efficacy of nurse-led follow-up on disease control in patients with RA compared with physician-led follow-up. Primary outcome was disease activity indicated by Disease Activity Score (DAS)-28. Secondary outcomes were: patient satisfaction, physical disability, fatigue, self-efficacy and quality of life. Outcomes were assessed after 1-year and 2 year follow-ups. RESULTS: Seven studies representing five RCTs, including a total of 723 participants, were included. All but one study included stable patients in low disease activity or remission at baseline. No difference in DAS-28 was found after 1 year (mean difference (MD) -0.07 (95% CI -0.23 to 0.09)). After 2 years, a statistically significant difference was seen in favour of nurse-led follow-up (MD -0.28 (95% CI -0.53 to -0.04)). However, the difference did not reach a clinically relevant level. No difference was found in patient satisfaction after 1 year (standard mean difference (SMD) -0.17 (95 % CI -1.0 to 0.67), whereas a statistical significant difference in favour of nurse-led follow-up was seen after 2 years (SMD: 0.6 (95% CI -0.00 to 1.20)). CONCLUSION: After 1 year no difference in disease activity, indicated by DAS-28, were found between embedded nurse-led follow-up compared with conventional physician-led follow-up, in RA patients with low disease activity or remission.

[Systematic search for qualitative literature can be reinforced].

Finding qualitative literature is challenging and time consuming which may pose problems, as the qualitative research constitutes a significant contribution to the understanding of different aspects of health and disease. The purpose of this article was to describe the challenges of locating qualitative studies and present strategies to overcome these challenges. The cost of retrieving all the relevant literature can be a considerable amount of irrelevant hits, and the searcher must decide at which point the results are satisfying.

[Embase is a central resource for literature search in health science].

PubMed is often first choice for searching health sciences literature. However, even though Embase tends to be overlooked it is an important supplement to PubMed. The present paper provides an overview of the literature dealing with the significance of using Embase for systematic reviews and metaanalyses. Furthermore, the differences in the coverage of the two databases are described and the search process in Embase is presented using examples.

[A guide to obtain validity and reproducibility in systematic reviews].

Validity and reproducibility are key concepts in the execution and reporting of the literature searches underlying a systematic review as it enables the reader to assess the quality of the performed searches. However, often the reporting of searches is lacking crucial information. This article provides guidelines for the process from development of a search protocol to quality assessment of the retrieved literature in order to obtain validity and reproducibility. The concepts of recall and precision are introduced to enable quality assessment of the literature searches.