Systematic Bibliographic Database Searching for Literature Reviews: Case Study on Child Protection Decision-Making

Abstract

Skills of the ‘information age’ need to be applied to social work. Conceptual and practical aspects of using online bibliographic databases to identify research were explored using multi-professional decision-making in child protection as a case study. Five databases (Social Science Citation Index, Scopus, Medline, Social Work Abstracts and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) were searched for relevant studies, retrieving 6,934 records of which fifty-eight studies were identified as relevant. The usefulness of specific search terms and the process of learning from the terminology of previous searches are illustrated, as well as the value of software to manage retrieved studies. Scopus had the highest sensitivity (retrieving the highest number of relevant articles) and retrieved the most articles not retrieved by any other database (exclusiveness). All databases had low precision on this topic, despite extensive efforts in selecting search terms. Cumulative knowledge about search strategies and empirical comparison of database utility helps to increase the efficiency of systematic literature searching. Such endeavours encourage and support professionals to use the best available evidence to inform practice and policy.

Informatic tools for diagnosis in dentistry. A compilation review

“…PubMed, which is renowned for its extensive coverage of the biomedical literature, is crucial for health-related systematic reviews. The use of these databases ensures a thorough search process, as highlighted in the work of Alfandaria and Taylor (56) , who found that replicability varied from platform to platform.…”

Processes of Multiprofessional Child Protection Decision Making in Hospital Settings: Systematic Narrative Review

“…Principally, questions about the effectiveness of distinct interventions or services are at the heart of rigorous systematic reviews incorporating statistical meta-analysis of experimental results, such as those taken within the Cochrane Collaboration and Campbell Collaboration (Higgins et al, 2020; Kugley et al, 2017). The methodology used here has more general applicability and may also accommodate questions about views and experiences of those receiving or providing services, as well as prevalence and correlates of social problems (Alfandari & Taylor, 2021).…”

“…The research topic was converted into four distinct concept groups:<decision making> AND <multiprofessional> AND <child protection> AND <children and youth>. Then, search terms for each concept were combined into the initial search formula, with index terms assigned according to the facilities of the database (for the detailed search formula, see Alfandari & Taylor, 2021).…”

“…Next, duplications were removed and 125 full-text articles were independently assessed for eligibility by the authors. Any disagreements were discussed between authors until a consensus was reached (for a detailed account on this process, see Alfandari & Taylor, 2021). Considerable time and labor were invested in a meticulous inspection of participants’ professional background which became essential, given that the term “interdisciplinary” in health care research generally refers to different specialists within the medical occupation (Abramson & Mizrahi, 1996).…”

“…Five electronic bibliographic databases were included in the search: Scopus, Social Sciences Citation Index, Medline, Social Work Abstracts, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. These databases were selected based on their quality appraisal published in prior reviews, relevance to social sciences and health care research topics, and accessibility within the first author's university library (Alfandari & Taylor, 2021). The search was restricted to a 10 year, from January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019, and was limited to publications in the English language.…”