Increasing number of databases searched in systematic reviews and meta-analyses between 1994 and 2014

Lam, Michael; McDiarmid, Mary

doi:10.3163/1536-5050.104.4.006

Cited by 33 publications

(27 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Evidence-based practice is underpinned by research and guided by principles of safety, effectiveness, person-centered care, timeliness, efficiency, and equity (1) alongside clinical expertise, and the values of people who seek health care (2). There has also been an exponential growth in the number of systematic review findings which places demands on clinicians for analysis and comprehension of healthcare evidence (3,4). However, finite resources mean that allied health managers must make explicit or implicit choices about how to prioritise interventions, funds and staff time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translating evidence into practice: A longitudinal qualitative exploration of allied health decision making.

White

Grant

Sarkies

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundHealth policy and management decisions rarely reflect research evidence. In response, it is important to determine how to improve evidence-informed decision-making. As part of a broader study exploring implementation science strategies we examined how allied health managers respond to two distinct recommendations and the evidence that supports them. MethodsAllied health managers across Australia and New Zealand who were responsible for weekend allied health resource allocation decisions towards the provision of inpatient service to acute general medical and surgical wards, and sub-acute rehabilitation wards were eligible for inclusion. Consenting participants were randomised to: (1) control group or; (2) Implementation Group 1: received an evidence-based policy recommendation document guiding weekend allied health resource allocation decisions, or (3) Implementation Group 2: received the same policy recommendation document guiding weekend allied health resource allocation decisions with support from a knowledge broker. Serial focus groups were conducted with a sample of over 80 allied health managers recruited to Implementation Group 2 only. Out of 6 waves of recruitment, up to four focus groups were conducted with each wave during the 12 months study period. In total 17 health services participated in serial focus groups according to their allocated wave, over a 12-month study period. Data were analysed using an inductive thematic approach with constant comparison. Thematic saturation was achieved.ResultsResults provide insights into resource allocation and decision-making, including the interplay between barriers and facilitators concerning implementation of recommendations outlined in evidence-based policy recommendation document. Five key themes emerged: (1) Local data trumps, or is more influential; (2) How good is the evidence and does it apply to us; (3) It is difficult to change things; (4) Historically that’s how we have done things; and (5) What if we get complaints?ConclusionsThis study explored implementation of strategies to bridge gaps in evidence-informed decision-making. Results provide insight into barriers, which prevent the implementation of evidence base practice from fully, and successfully occurring such as attitudes towards evidence, limited skills in critical appraisal, and lack of authority to promote change. In addition, strategies are needed to manage the risk of confirmation biases in decision-making processes.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Translating evidence into practice: A longitudinal qualitative exploration of allied health decision making.

White

Grant

Sarkies

et al. 2020

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…One disturbing finding was that 79% of respondents reported not having access to all the databases and resources they needed to conduct research. Modern day library research on health sciences topics often requires searching of multiple databases [13]. Lack of access to databases or online resources may have a negative effect on the quality of research support librarians provide.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Librarian Support for Researchers in Ontario Hospitals

McDiarmid

Lam

2018

J Can Health Libr Assoc

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction This study investigates the extent to which Ontario hospital librarians and library resources support researchers and describe the librarians' participation in research capacity building within their institutions. Methods A 16-question SurveyMonkey™ web-based survey questionnaire was disseminated via email to 53 potential participants consisted of library directors, managers and solo librarians. Results The response rate was 60%. The number of researchers supported by librarians ranged from 10 or less to 76 or more researchers in the past 10 months. Librarians supported a variety of scholarly research outputs, assisting researchers with journal articles being the most frequently supported activity. The top three library resources used to support researchers were licensed electronic journals, print collections and expert librarian searches. One of the reported ways librarians received training to better assist researchers was via online continuing education.Discussion As others have reported, there was a predominance of support for literature studies including literature reviews and systematic reviews. Surprisingly, some librarians reported that they had all the databases or resources they needed to support research, while an alarming 79 per cent of respondents reported not having access to all the databases and resources they needed. Lack of access to databases or online resources may have a negative effect on the quality of research the librarians provided. Raising the awareness of the role of the librarian in supporting researchers in the hospital setting can inform the health sciences librarians' professional practices and provide evidence of the library's participation in the research capacity building of the organization.

show abstract

“…The methods used are based on guidance for the assessment of the performance of methodological search filters by Lefebvre et al 7 and Bak et al 8 As MEDLINE is the most frequently used bibliographic database in medicine, 9 our search filter was restricted to this source. The search filter was developed and originally tested in PubMed, as the calculation of filters in the McMaster Clinical Hedges Database is based on the PubMed syntax.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Development and validation of study filters for identifying controlled non‐randomized studies in PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE

Waffenschmidt

Navarro

Hobson

et al. 2020

Research Synthesis Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A retrospective analysis published by the German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) in 2018 concluded that no filter for non‐randomized studies (NRS) achieved sufficient sensitivity (≥92%), a precondition for comprehensive information retrieval. New NRS filters are therefore required, taking into account the challenges related to this study type. Our evaluation focused on the development of study filters for NRS with a control group (“controlled NRS”), as this study type allows the calculation of an effect size. In addition, we assumed that due to the more explicit search syntax, controlled NRS are easier to identify than non‐controlled ones, potentially resulting in better performance measures of study filters for controlled NRS. Our aim was to develop study filters for identifying controlled NRS in PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE. We developed two new search filters that can assist clinicians and researchers in identifying controlled NRS in PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE. The reference set was based on 2110 publications in Medline extracted from 271 Cochrane reviews and on 4333 irrelevant references. The first filter maximizes sensitivity (92.42%; specificity 79.67%, precision 68.49%) and should be used when a comprehensive search is needed. The second filter maximizes specificity (92.06%; precision 82.98%, sensitivity 80.94%) and should be used when a more focused search is sufficient.

show abstract

Increasing number of databases searched in systematic reviews and meta-analyses between 1994 and 2014

Cited by 33 publications

References 6 publications

Translating evidence into practice: A longitudinal qualitative exploration of allied health decision making.

Translating evidence into practice: A longitudinal qualitative exploration of allied health decision making.

Librarian Support for Researchers in Ontario Hospitals

Development and validation of study filters for identifying controlled non‐randomized studies in PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About