Adoption of peer review of literature search strategies in knowledge synthesis from 2009 to 2018: An overview

Abstract

Background Knowledge synthesis (KS) reviews rely on good quality literature searches to capture a complete set of relevant studies, and peer review of the search strategy is one quality control mechanism that contributes to better quality reviews. Guidelines for peer review of electronic search strategies (PRESS) have been available since 2008. Objectives This overview provides a snapshot of KS indexed in Scopus, published between 2009 and 2018, that reported peer review of the literature search strategy. Methods Articles were identified through citation chasing for PRESS guidance documents and supplementary keyword searches. The characteristics of individual articles and the journals that published them were documented, and descriptive statistics were compiled. Results 415 articles from 169 journals met inclusion criteria. Approximately half were published in 14 journal titles. Most reviews reported the involvement of an information professional, but PRESS reviewers were rarely acknowledged. An overwhelming majority of review teams were based in Canada. Discussion Reported use of PRESS was low during the period examined, but under‐reporting may be a factor. Investigation of the barriers and facilitators of PRESS adoption is needed. Conclusion Despite its value, adoption of PRESS appears low. Advocacy for, and education about, PRESS may be required.

Why do researchers co‐author evidence syntheses with librarians? A mixed‐methods study

“…In responding to the Institute of Medicine's Standards for Systematic Reviews, Evidence Practice Centres (EPC) disagreed with the recommendation to have an independent librarian peer review the search strategy citing a lack of empirical evidence that such a contribution would change the results of the review, feasibility, and burden 28 . Peer review during ES conduct remains low 29 . However, an upcoming randomized‐controlled trial will examine the impact of late‐stage peer review on systematic review searches 30 .…”

10,000 steps a day? Activity trackers, health information literacy and the potential role of Information Science & Health Libraries

“…But we begin with an overview of literature search strategy peer review (Neilson, 2021). Guidelines for peer review of electronic search strategies (PRESS) have been available since 2008.…”

“…Guidelines for peer review of electronic search strategies (PRESS) have been available since 2008. Examining reviews published since 2009, Neilson (2021) notes that although most of the reviews reported involving an information professional, PRESS reviewers were rarely acknowledged. Despite the potential of PRESS to contribute to the quality assurance of reviews and knowledge synthesis, the adoption of PRESS appears very low.…”

The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence information specialist development pathway: Developing the skills, knowledge and confidence to quality assure search strategies

“…4.4.8). Unfortunately, adoption of PRESS has been relatively low, particularly outside the library and information community (Neilson, 2021). Searches containing errors risk introducing bias into a review (Salvador-Oliv an et al, 2019).…”