Optimizing literature search in systematic reviews - are MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL enough for identifying effect studies within the area of musculoskeletal disorders?

Ref ID 434
First Author T. Aagaard
Year Of Publishing 2016
URL https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5120411/pdf/12874_2016_Article_264.pdf
Keywords Cochrane
Problem(s) Lack of supplementary searches beyond databases
Number of systematic reviews included 23
Summary of Findings Cumulative median recall for combined searching in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL was 88.9% of relevant references, which increased to 90.9% when adding 10 additional databases. It is possible that searching databases is not sufficient to identify all relevant references, and that reviewers must rely upon additional sources in their literature search.
Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? Not Applicable
Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? Yes