Scoping review search practices in the social sciences: A scoping review.

IF 5 2区生物学 Q1 MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY

Research Synthesis Methods Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-12 DOI:10.1002/jrsm.1742

Judith Logan, Jenaya Webb, Nalini K Singh, Nailisa Tanner, Kathryn Barrett, Margaret Wall, Benjamin Walsh, Ana Patricia Ayala

{"title":"Scoping review search practices in the social sciences: A scoping review.","authors":"Judith Logan, Jenaya Webb, Nalini K Singh, Nailisa Tanner, Kathryn Barrett, Margaret Wall, Benjamin Walsh, Ana Patricia Ayala","doi":"10.1002/jrsm.1742","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A thorough literature search is a key feature of scoping reviews. We investigated the search practices used by social science researchers as reported in their scoping reviews. We collected scoping reviews published between 2015 and 2021 from Social Science Citation Index. In the 2484 included studies, we observed a 58% average annual increase in published reviews, primarily from clinical and applied social science disciplines. Bibliographic databases comprised most of the information sources in the primary search strategy (n = 9565, 75%), although reporting practices varied. Most scoping reviews (n = 1805, 73%) included at least one supplementary search strategy. A minority of studies (n = 713, 29%) acknowledged an LIS professional and few listed one as a co-author (n = 194, 8%). We conclude that to improve reporting and strengthen the impact of the scoping review method in the social sciences, researchers should consider (1) adhering to PRISMA-S reporting guidelines, (2) employing more supplementary search strategies, and (3) collaborating with LIS professionals.</p>","PeriodicalId":226,"journal":{"name":"Research Synthesis Methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Synthesis Methods","FirstCategoryId":"99","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1742","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"生物学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

A thorough literature search is a key feature of scoping reviews. We investigated the search practices used by social science researchers as reported in their scoping reviews. We collected scoping reviews published between 2015 and 2021 from Social Science Citation Index. In the 2484 included studies, we observed a 58% average annual increase in published reviews, primarily from clinical and applied social science disciplines. Bibliographic databases comprised most of the information sources in the primary search strategy (n = 9565, 75%), although reporting practices varied. Most scoping reviews (n = 1805, 73%) included at least one supplementary search strategy. A minority of studies (n = 713, 29%) acknowledged an LIS professional and few listed one as a co-author (n = 194, 8%). We conclude that to improve reporting and strengthen the impact of the scoping review method in the social sciences, researchers should consider (1) adhering to PRISMA-S reporting guidelines, (2) employing more supplementary search strategies, and (3) collaborating with LIS professionals.

查看原文本刊更多论文

社会科学范围审查检索实践：范围审查。

全面的文献检索是范围界定审查的一个关键特征。我们调查了社会科学研究人员在其范围界定综述中使用的检索方法。我们从《社会科学引文索引》中收集了 2015 年至 2021 年间发表的范围界定综述。在收录的 2484 项研究中，我们发现发表的综述平均每年增加 58%，主要来自临床和应用社会科学学科。文献数据库是主要检索策略中的大部分信息来源（n = 9565，75%），但报告方式各不相同。大多数范围界定综述（n = 1805，73%）至少包含一种补充检索策略。少数研究（n = 713，29%）承认有一名 LIS 专业人员，很少有研究将其列为合著者（n = 194，8%）。我们的结论是，为了改进报告并加强范围综述方法在社会科学领域的影响，研究人员应考虑：（1）遵守 PRISMA-S 报告指南；（2）采用更多补充检索策略；（3）与 LIS 专业人员合作。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Research Synthesis Methods MATHEMATICAL & COMPUTATIONAL BIOLOGYMULTID-MULTIDISCIPLINARY SCIENCES

CiteScore

16.90

自引率

3.10%

发文量

期刊介绍： Research Synthesis Methods is a reputable, peer-reviewed journal that focuses on the development and dissemination of methods for conducting systematic research synthesis. Our aim is to advance the knowledge and application of research synthesis methods across various disciplines. Our journal provides a platform for the exchange of ideas and knowledge related to designing, conducting, analyzing, interpreting, reporting, and applying research synthesis. While research synthesis is commonly practiced in the health and social sciences, our journal also welcomes contributions from other fields to enrich the methodologies employed in research synthesis across scientific disciplines. By bridging different disciplines, we aim to foster collaboration and cross-fertilization of ideas, ultimately enhancing the quality and effectiveness of research synthesis methods. Whether you are a researcher, practitioner, or stakeholder involved in research synthesis, our journal strives to offer valuable insights and practical guidance for your work.