Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2016 Oct;104(4):302-304.
doi: 10.3163/1536-5050.104.4.009.

Manual search approaches used by systematic reviewers in dermatology

Matt Vassar, Paul Atakpo, Melissa J Kash

Manual search approaches used by systematic reviewers in dermatology

Matt Vassar et al. J Med Libr Assoc. 2016 Oct.

Abstract

Objective: Manual searches are supplemental approaches to database searches to identify additional primary studies for systematic reviews. The authors argue that these manual approaches, in particular hand-searching and perusing reference lists, are often considered the same yet lead to different outcomes.

Methods: We conducted a PubMed search for systematic reviews in the top 10 dermatology journals (January 2006-January 2016). After screening, the final sample comprised 292 reviews. Statements related to manual searches were extracted from each review and categorized by the primary and secondary authors. Each statement was categorized as either "Search of Reference List," "Hand Search," "Both," or "Unclear."

Results: Of the 292 systematic reviews included in our sample, 143 reviews (48.97%) did not report a hand-search or scan of reference lists. One-hundred thirty-six reviews (46.58%) reported searches of reference lists, while 4 reviews (1.37%) reported systematic hand-searches. Three reviews (1.03%) reported use of both hand-searches and scanning reference lists. Six reviews (2.05%) were classified as unclear due to vague wording.

Conclusions: Authors of systematic reviews published in dermatology journals in our study sample scanned reference lists more frequently than they conducted hand-searches, possibly contributing to biased search outcomes. We encourage systematic reviewers to routinely practice hand-searching in order to minimize bias.

Keywords: Bias (Epidemiology); Bibliographic; Bibliometrics; Clinical Studies as Topic; Data Collection; Databases; Information Storage and Retrieval; Periodicals as Topic; Publishing; Review Literature as Topic.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. McGowan J, Sampson M. Systematic reviews need systematic searchers. J Med Libr Assoc. 2005 Jan;93(1):74–80. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Counsell C. Formulating questions and locating primary studies for inclusion in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997 Sep 1;127(5):380–7. - PubMed
    1. Montori VM, Wilczynski NL, Morgan D, Haynes RB. Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical survey. BMJ. 2005 Jan 6;330(7482):68. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bibens ME, Chong AB, Vassar M. Utilization of clinical trials registries in obstetrics and gynecology systematic reviews. Obstet Gynecol. Feb. 127(2):248–53. - PubMed
    1. Miller IM, Ellervik C, Yazdanyar S, Jemec GB. Meta-analysis of psoriasis, cardiovascular disease, and associated risk factors. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013 Dec 31;69(6):1014–24. - PubMed

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources