Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorRogers, M
dc.contributor.authorSutton, A
dc.contributor.authorCampbell, F
dc.contributor.authorWhear, R
dc.contributor.authorBethel, A
dc.contributor.authorCoon, JT
dc.date.accessioned2024-06-18T09:53:39Z
dc.date.issued2024-01-07
dc.date.updated2024-06-17T10:54:04Z
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: Evidence and Gap Maps (EGMs) should be regularly updated. Running update searches to find new studies for EGMs can be a time-consuming process. Search Summary Tables (SSTs) can help streamline searches by identifying which resources were most lucrative for identifying relevant articles, and which were redundant. The aim of this study was to use an SST to streamline search methods for an EGM of studies about intergenerational activities. METHODS: To produce the EGM, 15 databases were searched. 8638 records were screened and 500 studies were included in the final EGM. Using an SST, we determined which databases and search methods were the most efficient in terms of sensitivity and specificity for finding the included studies. We also investigated whether any database performed particularly well for returning particular study types. For the best performing databases we analysed the search terms used to streamline the strategies. RESULTS: No single database returned all of the studies included in the EGM. Out of 500 studies PsycINFO returned 40% (n = 202), CINAHL 39% (n = 194), Ageline 25% (n = 174), MEDLINE 23% (n = 117), ERIC 20% (n = 100) and Embase 19% (n = 98). HMIC database and Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science via Web of Science returned no studies that were included in the EGM. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (PQDT) returned the highest number of unique studies (n = 42), followed by ERIC (n = 33) and Ageline (n = 29). Ageline returned the most randomised controlled trials (42%) followed by CINAHL (34%), MEDLINE (29%) and CENTRAL (29%). CINAHL, Ageline, MEDLINE and PsycINFO performed the best for locating systematic reviews. (62%, 46% and 42% respectively). CINAHL, PsycINFO and Ageline performed best for qualitative studies (41%, 40% and 34%). The Journal of Intergenerational Relationships returned more included studies than any other journal (16%). No combinations of search terms were found to be better in terms of balancing specificity and sensitivity than the original search strategies. However, strategies could be reduced considerably in terms of length without losing key, unique studies. CONCLUSION: Using SSTs we have developed a method for streamlining update searches for an EGM about intergenerational activities. For future updates we recommend that MEDLINE, PsycINFO, ERIC, Ageline, CINAHL and PQDT are searched. These searches should be supplemented by hand-searching the Journal of Intergenerational Relationships and carrying out backwards citation chasing on new systematic reviews. Using SSTs to analyse database efficiency could be a useful method to help streamline search updates for other EGMs.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipNational Institute for Health Researchen_GB
dc.format.extente1380-
dc.format.mediumElectronic-eCollection
dc.identifier.citationVol. 20, No. 1, article e1380en_GB
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1380
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/136310
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0002-6039-238X (Rogers, Morwenna)
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0002-8379-8198 (Whear, Rebecca)
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0002-0963-9201 (Bethel, Alison)
dc.identifierORCID: 0000-0002-5161-0234 (Coon, Jo Thompson)
dc.identifierScopusID: 35565208700 | 56608826500 (Coon, Jo Thompson)
dc.identifierResearcherID: C-7923-2017 (Coon, Jo Thompson)
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherWileyen_GB
dc.relation.urlhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38188228en_GB
dc.rights© 2024 The Authors. Campbell Systematic Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Campbell Collaboration.en_GB
dc.subjectdatabasesen_GB
dc.subjectevidence and gap mapsen_GB
dc.subjectsearch methodsen_GB
dc.subjectsearch summary tablesen_GB
dc.subjectupdate searchingen_GB
dc.titleStreamlining search methods to update evidence and gap maps: A case study using intergenerational interventions.en_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2024-06-18T09:53:39Z
exeter.article-numberARTN e1380
exeter.place-of-publicationUnited States
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available from Wiley via the DOI in this record. en_GB
dc.descriptionDATA AVAILABILITY STATEMENT: The data that supports the findings of this study are available in the supplementary material of this article.en_GB
dc.identifier.eissn1891-1803
dc.identifier.journalCampbell Systematic Reviewsen_GB
dc.relation.ispartofCampbell Syst Rev, 20(1)
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2023-12-14
dc.rights.licenseCC BY
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2024-01-07
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2024-06-18T09:50:05Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.dateFOA2024-06-18T09:54:16Z
refterms.panelAen_GB
refterms.dateFirstOnline2024-01-07


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2024 The Authors. Campbell Systematic Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Campbell Collaboration.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © 2024 The Authors. Campbell Systematic Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Campbell Collaboration.