Literature search in systematic reviews: How much is good enough?

Ref ID 1039
First Author M.J. Mathew
Journal CLINICAL EPIDEMIOLOGY & GLOBAL HEALTH
Year Of Publishing 2024
URL https://www-sciencedirect-com.sheffield.idm.oclc.org/science/article/pii/S2213398423002725
Keywords • Paediatrics
• Searching
• General medical
Problem(s) • Errors in study inclusion or omission of relevant studies
• Insufficient literature searches
• Grey literature excluded
• Redundant / overlapping / duplicated review question; leads to research waste
Article Type Empirical
Article Subtype Small analytical study
First Author Country India
Aim To identify the potential impact of searching a limited number of databases in systematic reviews (SRs) using two reviews published in 2023 on the same topic as examples.
Level of Investigation Descriptive
Summary of Findings From two systematic reviews published in 2023 on the same topic. The two reviews of overlapping topics published in 2023, included 16 and 11 studies. Among these, only 4 studies were included in both reviews, suggesting that both reviews missed multiple eligible studies. Both reviews only searched 2 databases and neither reported grey literature searching. One review retrieved 11,695 citations and included 7 studies, the other 1,058 citations and included 12 studies. An assessment using AMSTAR 2 showed that neither of the reviews explained their selection of the study designs for inclusion, used a comprehensive literature search strategy, or provided a satisfactory explanation for any heterogeneity observed in the results.
Number of systematic reviews included 2
Number of eligible systematic reviews assessed 2
Treatment impacted Not Applicable
Treatment impacted description
Interpretation impacted Not Applicable
Interpretation impacted description