Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: Audit of primary sources

1.6kCitations
Citations of this article
2.0kReaders
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

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 denned 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.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Greenhalgh, T., & Peacock, R. (2005, November 5). Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: Audit of primary sources. British Medical Journal. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38636.593461.68

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free