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 language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 189-191 |
| Number of pages | 3 |
| Journal | Journal of the Medical Library Association |
| Volume | 103 |
| Issue number | 4 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - 1 Oct 2015 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- Databases, bibliographic
- Information services
- MEDLINE
- Meta-analysis
- PubMed
- Review
Cite this
}
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 journal › Article
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 -