PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement
Pourquoi ce travail est-il dans la base ?
Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.
Résumé
OBJECTIVE: To develop an evidence-based guideline for Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS) for systematic reviews (SRs), health technology assessments, and other evidence syntheses. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: An SR, Web-based survey of experts, and consensus development forum were undertaken to identify checklists that evaluated or validated electronic literature search strategies and to determine which of their elements related to search quality or errors. RESULTS: Systematic review: No new search elements were identified for addition to the existing (2008-2010) PRESS 2015 Evidence-Based Checklist, and there was no evidence refuting any of its elements. Results suggested that structured PRESS could identify search errors and improve the selection of search terms. Web-based survey of experts: Most respondents felt that peer review should be undertaken after the MEDLINE search had been prepared but before it had been translated to other databases. Consensus development forum: Of the seven original PRESS elements, six were retained: translation of the research question; Boolean and proximity operators; subject headings; text word search; spelling, syntax and line numbers; and limits and filters. The seventh (skilled translation of the search strategy to additional databases) was removed, as there was consensus that this should be left to the discretion of searchers. An updated PRESS 2015 Guideline Statement was developed, which includes the following four documents: PRESS 2015 Evidence-Based Checklist, PRESS 2015 Recommendations for Librarian Practice, PRESS 2015 Implementation Strategies, and PRESS 2015 Guideline Assessment Form. CONCLUSION: The PRESS 2015 Guideline Statement should help to guide and improve the peer review of electronic literature search strategies.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
La notice
- Revue
- Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
- Thématique
- Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Domaine
- Decision Sciences
- Établissements canadiens
- Children's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
- Organismes subventionnaires
- —
- Mots-clés
- ChecklistGuidelineMEDLINEEvidence-based medicineComputer scienceInformation retrievalPeer reviewSystematic reviewWorld Wide WebMedicinePsychologyPolitical science
- Résumé présent dans OpenAlex
- oui