Alison C Bethel, Naomi Shaw, Rebecca Abbot, Morwenna Rogers, Anna Price, Rob Anderson, Sian de Bell, Jo Thompson Coon
{"title":"从证据和差距图的搜索汇总表中获得的见解:同伴支持干预的案例研究。","authors":"Alison C Bethel, Naomi Shaw, Rebecca Abbot, Morwenna Rogers, Anna Price, Rob Anderson, Sian de Bell, Jo Thompson Coon","doi":"10.5195/jmla.2025.1831","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Evidence and Gap Maps (EGMs) are a visual representation of the available evidence relevant to a specific research question or topic area. They are produced using similar methods to systematic reviews, however, there is little guidance on which databases to search and how many. Information Specialists need to make decisions on which resources to search, often for a range of study designs within a broad topic area to ensure comprehensiveness.</p><p><strong>Case presentation: </strong>This case study presents two search summary tables (SSTs) from an evidence and gap map on peer support interventions. The first search summary table presents the findings of the search for systematic reviews and the second for randomised controlled trials. Different databases and different searches were undertaken for the two different study types.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The two SSTs indicated that MEDLINE and PsycINFO were key databases required for the identification of both systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials of peer support interventions, with the addition of CINAHL for systematic reviews, and CENTRAL for randomised controlled trials. For both study types, forward citation searching found additional included studies although it was more lucrative for identifying additional randomised controlled trials. Search summary tables are a simple way to share the effectiveness of the search methods chosen for a specific evidence synthesis project. The more SSTs we have, the more data we will have to inform evidence-based decisions on our search methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":47690,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","volume":"113 2","pages":"177-183"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12058345/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Insights from search summary tables for evidence and gap maps: a case study on peer support interventions.\",\"authors\":\"Alison C Bethel, Naomi Shaw, Rebecca Abbot, Morwenna Rogers, Anna Price, Rob Anderson, Sian de Bell, Jo Thompson Coon\",\"doi\":\"10.5195/jmla.2025.1831\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Evidence and Gap Maps (EGMs) are a visual representation of the available evidence relevant to a specific research question or topic area. They are produced using similar methods to systematic reviews, however, there is little guidance on which databases to search and how many. Information Specialists need to make decisions on which resources to search, often for a range of study designs within a broad topic area to ensure comprehensiveness.</p><p><strong>Case presentation: </strong>This case study presents two search summary tables (SSTs) from an evidence and gap map on peer support interventions. The first search summary table presents the findings of the search for systematic reviews and the second for randomised controlled trials. Different databases and different searches were undertaken for the two different study types.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The two SSTs indicated that MEDLINE and PsycINFO were key databases required for the identification of both systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials of peer support interventions, with the addition of CINAHL for systematic reviews, and CENTRAL for randomised controlled trials. For both study types, forward citation searching found additional included studies although it was more lucrative for identifying additional randomised controlled trials. Search summary tables are a simple way to share the effectiveness of the search methods chosen for a specific evidence synthesis project. The more SSTs we have, the more data we will have to inform evidence-based decisions on our search methods.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47690,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of the Medical Library Association\",\"volume\":\"113 2\",\"pages\":\"177-183\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12058345/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of the Medical Library Association\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"91\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2025.1831\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the Medical Library Association","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2025.1831","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Insights from search summary tables for evidence and gap maps: a case study on peer support interventions.
Background: Evidence and Gap Maps (EGMs) are a visual representation of the available evidence relevant to a specific research question or topic area. They are produced using similar methods to systematic reviews, however, there is little guidance on which databases to search and how many. Information Specialists need to make decisions on which resources to search, often for a range of study designs within a broad topic area to ensure comprehensiveness.
Case presentation: This case study presents two search summary tables (SSTs) from an evidence and gap map on peer support interventions. The first search summary table presents the findings of the search for systematic reviews and the second for randomised controlled trials. Different databases and different searches were undertaken for the two different study types.
Conclusion: The two SSTs indicated that MEDLINE and PsycINFO were key databases required for the identification of both systematic reviews and randomised controlled trials of peer support interventions, with the addition of CINAHL for systematic reviews, and CENTRAL for randomised controlled trials. For both study types, forward citation searching found additional included studies although it was more lucrative for identifying additional randomised controlled trials. Search summary tables are a simple way to share the effectiveness of the search methods chosen for a specific evidence synthesis project. The more SSTs we have, the more data we will have to inform evidence-based decisions on our search methods.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA) is an international, peer-reviewed journal published quarterly that aims to advance the practice and research knowledgebase of health sciences librarianship. The most current impact factor for the JMLA (from the 2007 edition of Journal Citation Reports) is 1.392.