The CLAHRC WM Director is provoked by the ever increasing – indeed, exponentially increasing – number of articles returned by standard literature searches. At this rate, screening all the articles identified by a typical search will be all but impossible within two decades. Some form of systematisation is necessary.
A start has been made in clinical research through the creation of the McMaster Premium LiteratUre Service (PLUS) database of pre-appraised clinical studies. PLUS is generated by manually reviewing 120 clinical journals for high-quality articles using a reproducible selection process. A paper comparing PLUS with 89 recent Cochrane reviews,[1] found that while PLUS contained fewer articles, restricting searches to PLUS did not change the conclusions of any of the Cochrane reviews included in the sample.
The PLUS database is a start, but:
- it still relies on manual review;
- it is confined to clinical research.
A method is urgently required to:
- improve coding of topic and study type;
- automate compilation of bibliographies;
- cover health and social care as a whole.
Literature retrieval processes will be radically different in two decades – they will have to be.
— Richard Lilford, CLAHRC WM Director
- Hemens BJ, Haynes RB. McMaster Premium LiteratUre Service (PLUS) performed well for identifying new studies for updated Cochrane reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2012; 65(1): 62-72.
One thought on “Calling All Systematic Reviewers”