Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements

Abstract

Background and objectives The last decade has witnessed increased recognition of the value of literature reviews for advancing understanding and decision making. This has been accompanied by an expansion in the range of methodological approaches and types of review. However, there remains uncertainty over definitions and search requirements beyond those for the ‘traditional’ systematic review. This study aims to characterise health related reviews by type and to provide recommendations on appropriate methods of information retrieval based on the available guidance. Methods A list of review types was generated from published typologies and categorised into ‘families’ based on their common features. Guidance on information retrieval for each review type was identified by searching pubmed, medline and Google Scholar, supplemented by scrutinising websites of review producing organisations. Results Forty‐eight review types were identified and categorised into seven families. Published guidance reveals increasing specification of methods for information retrieval; however, much of it remains generic with many review types lacking explicit requirements for the identification of evidence. Conclusions Defining review types and utilising appropriate search methods remain challenging. By familiarising themselves with a range of review methodologies and associated search methods, information specialists will be better equipped to select suitable approaches for future projects.

Implementation of robotic devices in nursing care. Barriers and facilitators: an integrative review

“…While this review focuses on studies translating research into practice, the review method enables the inclusion of reports on ongoing or prospective research. [13][14][15] Search strategy We carried out a systematic search in November 2017 and an update in July 2019. We searched four databases: Medline (via PubMed), CINAHL, Community Research and Development Information Services (CORDIS) and Technische Informationsbibliothek (TIB).…”

Clinical research nurses’ expectations and realities of their role: A qualitative evidence synthesis

“…The terms "systematic review of qualitative research studies" and "qualitative evidence synthesis" belong to the "qualitative review family" (Sutton, Clowes, Preston, & Booth, 2019); however, qualitative evidence synthesis is the term promoted by the Cochrane Collaboration's Qualitative Research Methods Group (Grant & Booth, 2009).…”

Critically Appraised Topics (CATs) in Veterinary Medicine: Applying Evidence in Clinical Practice

“…Without these standards, the review may not cover the topic inclusively and the conclusions may support a specific agenda or view. Evidence syntheses [also known as "research syntheses" or "knowledge syntheses" (5)] collectively describe a range of approaches for more objectively summarizing the literature (6). Methodological differences between types of evidence syntheses include the processes and standards for identifying, selecting, and analyzing the sources reviewed and included (7).…”

“…Publications describe the different types of evidence synthesis methods that have been used in research in health related (6,7), and agri-food public health areas (14). These studies interestingly do not include CATs as a type of review, which may be an oversight, or indicative of why and how they are used.…”