Locating qualitative studies in dementia on MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO: A comparison of search strategies

Abstract

Qualitative search strategies using 3 broad terms were more sensitive than long complex searches. The controlled vocabulary for qualitative research in CINAHL was particularly effective. Furthermore, results indicate that MEDLINE and EMBASE offer little benefit for locating qualitative dementia research if CINAHL and PSYCINFO are also searched.

State of the art, state of the science?

“…Collaborations span institutions and the academic‐commercial divide . Academic review organizations (eg, ScHARR, PenTag, and YHEC) and health technology agencies (eg, CADTH) and networks (such as Cochrane , and the Medical Library Association collaboration) continue to play a critical part. Interest in sources and in indexing for retrieval persists through the decades.…”

“…Academic review organizations (eg, ScHARR, PenTag, and YHEC) and health technology agencies (eg, CADTH) and networks (such as Cochrane , and the Medical Library Association collaboration) continue to play a critical part. Interest in sources and in indexing for retrieval persists through the decades. Although, understandably, a preoccupation with trial reports continues to drive the agenda, presaged by the 1994 BMJ article, this Special Issue reflects wider interests in trial protocols, unpublished data, and qualitative studies .…”

“…Interest in sources and in indexing for retrieval persists through the decades. Although, understandably, a preoccupation with trial reports continues to drive the agenda, presaged by the 1994 BMJ article, this Special Issue reflects wider interests in trial protocols, unpublished data, and qualitative studies . The latter addition is particularly welcomed by me, as a Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group coconvenor, given that qualitative research remains a poor relation in terms of research outputs and research funding.…”

Innovation in information retrieval methods for evidence synthesis studies

“…The paper by Sutton et al focuses on clinical trial protocols, comparing and evaluating different search approaches for identifying this specific form of unpublished evidence. Returning to bibliographic databases but moving beyond clinical trials to other research traditions, Rogers et al compare different keyword search strategies in four databases for the identification of qualitative evidence, focusing on the topic of dementia …”

“…Returning to bibliographic databases but moving beyond clinical trials to other research traditions, Rogers et al compare different keyword search strategies in four databases for the identification of qualitative evidence, focusing on the topic of dementia. 22 Continuing the theme of different study types, two papers adopt novel, automated techniques and compare these to the more traditional approach of methodological keyword search filters for the identification of specific study designs. Langlois et al evaluate text classification algorithms for the identification of mixed studies while Marshall et al compare machine learning models with traditional search filters for the identification of randomized controlled trials.…”