Database choices in endocrine systematic reviews

Matt Vassar, Branden Carr, Melissa Kash-Holley, Elizabeth DeWitt, Chelsea Koller, Joshua Day, Kimberly Day, David Herrmann, Matt Holzmann

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: The choice of bibliographic database during the systematic review search process has been an ongoing conversation among information specialists. With newer information sources, such as Google Scholar and clinical trials registries, we were interested in which databases were utilized by information specialists and systematic review researchers. Method: We retrieved 144 systematic reviews and meta-analyses from 4 clinical endocrinology journals and extracted all information sources used during the search processes. Results: Findings indicate that traditional bibliographic databases are most often used, followed by regional databases, clinical trials registries, and gray literature databases. Conclusions: This study informs information specialists about additional resources that may be considered during the search process.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)189-191
Number of pages3
JournalJournal of the Medical Library Association
Volume103
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Oct 2015

Fingerprint

Information Services
Bibliographic Databases
Databases
Registries
Clinical Trials
Endocrinology
Meta-Analysis
gray literature
Research Personnel
search engine
conversation
resources

Keywords

  • Databases, bibliographic
  • Information services
  • MEDLINE
  • Meta-analysis
  • PubMed
  • Review

Cite this

Vassar, M., Carr, B., Kash-Holley, M., DeWitt, E., Koller, C., Day, J., ... Holzmann, M. (2015). Database choices in endocrine systematic reviews. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 103(4), 189-191. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.4.005
Vassar, Matt ; Carr, Branden ; Kash-Holley, Melissa ; DeWitt, Elizabeth ; Koller, Chelsea ; Day, Joshua ; Day, Kimberly ; Herrmann, David ; Holzmann, Matt. / Database choices in endocrine systematic reviews. In: Journal of the Medical Library Association. 2015 ; Vol. 103, No. 4. pp. 189-191.
@article{db8fd2445a7b48cf8af06f785f620e45,
title = "Database choices in endocrine systematic reviews",
abstract = "Objective: The choice of bibliographic database during the systematic review search process has been an ongoing conversation among information specialists. With newer information sources, such as Google Scholar and clinical trials registries, we were interested in which databases were utilized by information specialists and systematic review researchers. Method: We retrieved 144 systematic reviews and meta-analyses from 4 clinical endocrinology journals and extracted all information sources used during the search processes. Results: Findings indicate that traditional bibliographic databases are most often used, followed by regional databases, clinical trials registries, and gray literature databases. Conclusions: This study informs information specialists about additional resources that may be considered during the search process.",
keywords = "Databases, bibliographic, Information services, MEDLINE, Meta-analysis, PubMed, Review",
author = "Matt Vassar and Branden Carr and Melissa Kash-Holley and Elizabeth DeWitt and Chelsea Koller and Joshua Day and Kimberly Day and David Herrmann and Matt Holzmann",
year = "2015",
month = "10",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3163/1536-5050.103.4.005",
language = "English",
volume = "103",
pages = "189--191",
journal = "Journal of the Medical Library Association",
issn = "1536-5050",
publisher = "Medical Library Association",
number = "4",

}

Vassar, M, Carr, B, Kash-Holley, M, DeWitt, E, Koller, C, Day, J, Day, K, Herrmann, D & Holzmann, M 2015, 'Database choices in endocrine systematic reviews', Journal of the Medical Library Association, vol. 103, no. 4, pp. 189-191. https://doi.org/10.3163/1536-5050.103.4.005

Database choices in endocrine systematic reviews. / Vassar, Matt; Carr, Branden; Kash-Holley, Melissa; DeWitt, Elizabeth; Koller, Chelsea; Day, Joshua; Day, Kimberly; Herrmann, David; Holzmann, Matt.

In: Journal of the Medical Library Association, Vol. 103, No. 4, 01.10.2015, p. 189-191.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Database choices in endocrine systematic reviews

AU - Vassar, Matt

AU - Carr, Branden

AU - Kash-Holley, Melissa

AU - DeWitt, Elizabeth

AU - Koller, Chelsea

AU - Day, Joshua

AU - Day, Kimberly

AU - Herrmann, David

AU - Holzmann, Matt

PY - 2015/10/1

Y1 - 2015/10/1

N2 - Objective: The choice of bibliographic database during the systematic review search process has been an ongoing conversation among information specialists. With newer information sources, such as Google Scholar and clinical trials registries, we were interested in which databases were utilized by information specialists and systematic review researchers. Method: We retrieved 144 systematic reviews and meta-analyses from 4 clinical endocrinology journals and extracted all information sources used during the search processes. Results: Findings indicate that traditional bibliographic databases are most often used, followed by regional databases, clinical trials registries, and gray literature databases. Conclusions: This study informs information specialists about additional resources that may be considered during the search process.

AB - Objective: The choice of bibliographic database during the systematic review search process has been an ongoing conversation among information specialists. With newer information sources, such as Google Scholar and clinical trials registries, we were interested in which databases were utilized by information specialists and systematic review researchers. Method: We retrieved 144 systematic reviews and meta-analyses from 4 clinical endocrinology journals and extracted all information sources used during the search processes. Results: Findings indicate that traditional bibliographic databases are most often used, followed by regional databases, clinical trials registries, and gray literature databases. Conclusions: This study informs information specialists about additional resources that may be considered during the search process.

KW - Databases, bibliographic

KW - Information services

KW - MEDLINE

KW - Meta-analysis

KW - PubMed

KW - Review

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84945970968&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3163/1536-5050.103.4.005

DO - 10.3163/1536-5050.103.4.005

M3 - Article

C2 - 26512217

AN - SCOPUS:84945970968

VL - 103

SP - 189

EP - 191

JO - Journal of the Medical Library Association

JF - Journal of the Medical Library Association

SN - 1536-5050

IS - 4

ER -