Tag: cinahl

Navigating the vast ocean of databases for a systematic review can be, and is, daunting. The key to conquering this challenge lies in selecting the best scientific databases and sources to search in. To ensure proper coverage of databases, it is not recommend to use a single database. It is recommended to use between two to four databases. This guide will equip you with the knowledge to make informed choices and ensure your review covers all relevant literature comprehensively. Table of Contents Understanding Systematic Reviews A systematic review is a rigorous method of synthesizing research evidence. It aims to identify, evaluate, and summarize the findings of all relevant individual studies on a particular topic, providing a high level of evidence on the effectiveness of interventions. The thoroughness of your literature search directly impacts the quality and reliability of your systematic review. Missing key studies can lead to biased conclusions, making the initial step of selecting the right databases crucial. Key Considerations When Choosing a Database for a Systematic Review Scope and Subject Matter First, align your literature database for a systematic review selection with the primary subject area of your review. Different library databases specialize in various fields:PubMed: Essential for biomedical and life sciences. It offers an extensive collection of medical and biological literature.PsycINFO: Perfect for psychology and psychiatry, covering a wide range of psychological topics.Web of Science: Multidisciplinary, with strengths in sciences, social sciences, arts, and humanities, making it a versatile choice for comprehensive reviews. Types of Material Indexed Consider the types of materials your review requires:Journal Articles: The backbone of most systematic reviews.Conference Papers: Offer insights into the latest research developments.Books and Patents: Provide broader perspectives and innovation insights.Grey Literature: Essential for a comprehensive review, capturing reports, theses, and non-peer-reviewed materials.Different databases cater to various material types, ensuring diverse and exhaustive coverage. Bibliographic Database Coverage Evaluate how comprehensive each database is:Embase: Notable for its extensive coverage of European journals and conference abstracts.Scopus: Known for its wide range of peer-reviewed literature, conference proceedings, and patents.Google Scholar: While broad, it excels in capturing grey literature, though it may lack the precision of more specialized databases.Database overlap: consider how much overlap there is between databases e.g. between Scopus and Web of Science for example Recommended Databases for a Systematic Review Literature Searching PubMed/MEDLINE PubMed/MEDLINE is indispensable for medicine, nursing, and allied health:Key Features: Vast collection of biomedical literature, freely accessible.Benefits: Comprehensive coverage, advanced search capabilities, and user-friendly interface make it a top choice for systematic reviews in the biomedical field. Embase Embase specializes in biomedical literature with a focus on drugs and pharmacology:Key Features: Extensive indexing of European journals and conference abstracts.Benefits: Complements PubMed by covering additional journals and abstracts, crucial for drug-related research. Web of Science Web of Science offers multidisciplinary coverage:Key Features: Strong citation tracking and analysis tools.Benefits: Ideal for tracking research impact and interdisciplinary studies, providing robust tools for citation analysis Scopus Scopus is another multidisciplinary database:Key Features: Extensive peer-reviewed literature, conference proceedings, and patents.Benefits: Comprehensive search capabilities, useful for a broad range of subjects. Google Scholar Google Scholar captures grey literature and broad searches:Key Features: Extensive coverage of academic papers, theses, books, and reports.Limitations: Lacks the precision and advanced search features of more specialized databases, but useful for capturing non-traditional literature. CINAHL CINAHL focuses on nursing and allied health:Key Features: Specialized coverage of nursing, allied health, and related fields.Benefits: Essential for reviews in these areas, providing access to relevant journals and resources. PsycINFO PsycINFO specializes in psychology and related fields:Key Features: Comprehensive coverage of psychological literature.Benefits: Crucial for psychiatry and mental health research, offering in-depth resources on psychological topics. CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) CENTRAL is vital for identifying randomized controlled trials:Key Features: Focus on controlled trials.Benefits: Essential for reviews that require rigorous evidence from randomized trials, providing access to high-quality studies. Optimal Combination of Databases for a Systematic Review For a comprehensive literature search, using multiple databases is crucial. Commonly recommended combinations for health-related reviews include MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science. Adding Google Scholar can help capture grey literature and additional references not indexed in other databases. Number of Databases to Use Minimum and Optimal Number The minimum recommended is at least two databases, but for optimal coverage, using three to five databases strikes a balance between comprehensiveness and manageability. This approach ensures you capture a broad spectrum of relevant literature without being overwhelmed by the volume of data. Database Selection Process - full text or no-full text Define Your Research Question Start by clearly defining your research question using frameworks like PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome). This clarity will guide your database selection and search strategy. Identify Relevant Databases Based on your subject area and the types of studies needed, select databases for a systematic review that are known for comprehensive coverage in these areas. This alignment ensures you capture all relevant literature. Test Search Strategies Conduct preliminary searches in selected databases to evaluate the relevance and volume of results. This step helps refine your search strategy and ensures the databases chosen are appropriate for your review. Document Your Choices Transparency is key in systematic reviews. Document the databases selected and the rationale behind each choice. This documentation enhances the reproducibility of your review, a critical aspect of systematic research. Why PubMed (Medline) is a Good Choice PubMed stands out for several reasons:Accessibility: Freely accessible to anyone with an internet connection.Comprehensive Coverage: Includes a vast array of biomedical literature, ensuring thorough coverage.Advanced Search Capabilities: Offers sophisticated search tools and filters to refine results effectively, making it a powerful resource for systematic reviews.Focus on Public Health: Public Health produces the most systematic literature reviews out of any scientific field Why Science Direct is a Bad Choice ScienceDirect is not ideal as a primary database for systematic reviews due to its limited scope, focusing mainly on Elsevier journals and books, which represent only a fraction of available scientific literature. There is significant overlap with other comprehensive Elsevier databases like Embase and Scopus, leading to redundant search results without adding unique content. Embase offers a broader range of biomedical literature, including European journals and conference abstracts, while Scopus covers multiple disciplines from over 7,000 publishers globally and provides advanced search capabilities and citation metrics. ScienceDirect's search limitations and lack of unique features further hinder comprehensive searches. Relying solely on ScienceDirect risks missing relevant studies from non-Elsevier journals, conference proceedings, and grey literature. Therefore, more comprehensive databases like PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, or Web of Science are recommended for systematic reviews, with ScienceDirect serving only as a supplementary source. Conclusion Choosing the right databases for a systematic review is essential for thorough and reliable research. By considering the scope, subject matter, types of materials, and coverage of various databases, and using a combination of specialized and multidisciplinary resources, you can ensure comprehensive literature coverage. Equip yourself with the right tools, and you'll be well on your way to conquering the ocean of literature.By following these guidelines, you'll be well-prepared to navigate the complexities of systematic reviews, ensuring your research is both thorough and reliable. Chech out our Database Searching Course

Tag: cinahl

Selecting Databases for a Comprehensive Systematic Review (Literature Searching)

Fundamentals of Database Searching For Your Systematic Review: Literature Search Strategy