Information sources for obesity prevention policy research: a review of systematic reviews

Abstract

BackgroundSystematic identification of evidence in health policy can be time-consuming and challenging. This study examines three questions pertaining to systematic reviews on obesity prevention policy, in order to identify the most efficient search methods: (1) What percentage of the primary studies selected for inclusion in the reviews originated in scholarly as opposed to gray literature? (2) How much of the primary scholarly literature in this topic area is indexed in PubMed/MEDLINE? (3) Which databases index the greatest number of primary studies not indexed in PubMed, and are these databases searched consistently across systematic reviews?MethodsWe identified systematic reviews on obesity prevention policy and explored their search methods and citations. We determined the percentage of scholarly vs. gray literature cited, the most frequently cited journals, and whether each primary study was indexed in PubMed. We searched 21 databases for all primary study articles not indexed in PubMed to determine which database(s) indexed the highest number of these relevant articles.ResultsIn total, 21 systematic reviews were identified. Ten of the 21 systematic reviews reported searching gray literature, and 12 reviews ultimately included gray literature in their analyses. Scholarly articles accounted for 577 of the 649 total primary study papers. Of these, 495 (76%) were indexed in PubMed. Google Scholar retrieved the highest number of the remaining 82 non-PubMed scholarly articles, followed by Scopus and EconLit. The Journal of the American Dietetic Association was the most-cited journal.ConclusionsResearchers can maximize search efficiency by searching a small yet targeted selection of both scholarly and gray literature resources. A highly sensitive search of PubMed and those databases that index the greatest number of relevant articles not indexed in PubMed, namely multidisciplinary and economics databases, could save considerable time and effort. When combined with a gray literature search and additional search methods, including cited reference searching and consulting with experts, this approach could help maintain broad retrieval of relevant studies while improving search efficiency. Findings also have implications for designing specialized databases for public health research.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13643-017-0543-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Literature searching methods or guidance and their application to public health topics: A narrative review

“…Even the titles can be misleading (Godin et al, 2015 ). Hanneke and Young ( 2017 ) comment on the lack of detailed information often given about grey literature in search histories. Some reviews will state that grey literature has been searched without providing detail of which database, website or search engine has been used, which means it is difficult to judge how systematic they have been or to reproduce their searches.…”

“…The multidisciplinary nature of public health means that all relevant evidence may not be found in one location or type of source. The search is more likely to return a higher volume of results, as it will need to be run in multiple databases (Hanneke & Young, 2017 ). Hanneke and Young ( 2017 ) examined information sources for obesity prevention policy and recommend searching pubmed , multidisciplinary and economics databases and grey literature plus citation reference searching and handsearching.…”

“…The search is more likely to return a higher volume of results, as it will need to be run in multiple databases (Hanneke & Young, 2017 ). Hanneke and Young ( 2017 ) examined information sources for obesity prevention policy and recommend searching pubmed , multidisciplinary and economics databases and grey literature plus citation reference searching and handsearching. This illustrates that there is a need to tailor search resources to the topic.…”

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

“…PubMed/ Medline Adding Embase as a supplement Orthopedic meta-analyses (7) 90 91 Health policy literature (33) 86 87 Rapid health technology assessments (34) 88 90 58 published systematic reviews across various areas (35) 79 93 120 systematic reviews across various areas (36) 92 98 Clinical trials of pharmaceuticals and physical modalities (37) 90 94 Randomized controlled trials of physical therapy interventions (38) 89 96 Diagnostic test accuracy (39) 91 95 151 renal systematic reviews (40) 96 99 Table 1. Overview of coverage in percent in studies examining the coverage of Embase as a supplement to PubMed or Medline The existing case studies show that Medline coverage varies from 79% to 96% and adding Embase increases coverage to a range of 87% and 99%.…”

Identifying evidence for five realist reviews in primary health care: A comparison of search methods

“…For example, guidance related to realist reviews recommends the use of techniques such as citation tracking, handsearching and contacting authors and subject experts, in addition to database searching 22–24 . Similar recommendations are made for subject areas where it is anticipated that evidence will be more diverse or difficult to locate 25–33 …”