Systematic Review Search Strategy Development Tools: A Practical Guide for Expert Searchers
Paynter, R. A.; Adam, G. P.; Hedden-Gross, A.; Twose, C.; Voisin, C.
Show abstract
ObjectivesTo provide the expert searcher community with reliable reviews on systematic review search strategy development tools (SSDT). We conducted a descriptive comparative analysis of the free SSDT listed on the Systematic Review Toolbox1-2 (SR Toolbox) website. Study Design and SettingOur search expert panel is composed of five biomedical librarians currently active in the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) Effective Health Care Program Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPC). Two panel members reviewed each included SSDT that met inclusion criteria with any assessment disagreements resolved via consensus. We created a table of included SSDT, categorized them by search development step, rated their performance across our key domains and added narrative reviews outlining how to use them. ResultsOf the 102 total search tools listed on the SR Toolbox search software webpage (initial search September 2021 N=78; update search February 2023 N=24 new tools), we determined 21 were search strategy development tools and eligible for review. We found the preponderance of the 21 included SSDT are designed for the initial strategy development steps (i.e., scoping, keyword/phrase and subject term discovery), though there are tools in most steps meeting minimum performance criteria, with the notable exception of strategy logic evaluation. Our reviews include a graphical table covering key performance summary ratings and a narrative section providing more detailed information. ConclusionWe created a quick and intuitive SSDT guide for expert searchers that is organized by search strategy development phase, evaluates key features, and provides advice on how to use the tool effectively.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Catchii: empowering literature review screening in healthcare 97%
- Fast and frugal decision tree for the rapid critical appraisal of systematic reviews 96%
- Evaluation of the sensitivity, accuracy and currency of the Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register for supporting rapid evidence synthesis production 96%
Similar papers in this journal
- Protocol for the development of a tool (INSPECT-SR) to identify problematic randomised controlled trials in systematic reviews of health interventions 97%
- Agreeability testing of AMSTAR-PF, a tool for quality appraisal of systematic reviews of prognostic factor studies 96%
- GPT for RCTs?: Using AI to measure adherence to reporting guidelines 95%
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Clinical code sets and the problem of redundancy in code set repositories 93%
- COVID-19-related research data availability and quality according to the FAIR principles: A meta-research study 93%
- Exploring scalable assessment methods for terminated trials in ClinicalTrials.gov: A cohort analysis of German and Californian trials 93%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.