skip to main content
Idioma:

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

Greenhalgh, Trisha ; Peacock, Richard

BMJ, 2005-11, Vol.331 (7524), p.1064-1065 [Periódico revisado por pares]

London: British Medical Journal Publishing Group

Texto completo disponível

Citações Citado por
  • Título:
    Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: audit of primary sources
  • Autor: Greenhalgh, Trisha ; Peacock, Richard
  • Assuntos: Biological and medical sciences ; Citation indexes ; Data Collection - methods ; Data Collection - standards ; Efficiency ; General aspects ; Information in Practice ; Information management ; Information Storage and Retrieval - methods ; Information Storage and Retrieval - standards ; Medical research ; Medical sciences ; Methods ; Review Literature as Topic ; Science ; Serendipity ; Studies
  • É parte de: BMJ, 2005-11, Vol.331 (7524), p.1064-1065
  • Notas: ark:/67375/NVC-Z9BM11W7-T
    ArticleID:bmj.38636.593461.68
    PMID:16230312
    istex:551F133DA6591ECE281A79FE997CD13A53473377
    href:bmj-331-1064.pdf
    Correspondence to: T Greenhalgh
    local:bmj;331/7524/1064
    SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
    ObjectType-Feature-4
    ObjectType-Undefined-1
    content type line 23
    ObjectType-Review-2
    ObjectType-Article-3
    Correspondence to: T Greenhalgh p.greenhalgh@pcps.ucl.ac.uk
    This article was posted on bmj.com on 17 October 2005: http://bmj.com/cgi/doi/10.1136/bmj.38636.593461.68
    This study builds on extensive secondary research by all the authors on the systematic review (see reference list), whose input we gratefully acknowledge. We also thank Jeanette Buckingham for comments on a previous draft of this paper.
    Competing interests: None declared.
  • Descrição: 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 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.
  • Editor: London: British Medical Journal Publishing Group
  • Idioma: Inglês
Links
Voltar para lista de resultados

  • Realização: ABCD-USP USP   Logos de Redes Sociais: Freepik

Buscando em bases de dados remotas. Favor aguardar.