Search Methods for Prognostic Factor Systematic Reviews: a Methodologic Investigation

Overview

Journal J Med Libr Assoc

Date 2021 Jan 11

PMID 33424461

Citations 7

Authors

Leah Boulos

Rachel Ogilvie

Jill A Hayden

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: This study retroactively investigated the search used in a 2019 review by Hayden et al., one of the first systematic reviews of prognostic factors that was published in the Cochrane Library. The review was designed to address recognized weaknesses in reviews of prognosis by using multiple supplementary search methods in addition to traditional electronic database searching.

Methods: The authors used four approaches to comprehensively assess aspects of systematic review literature searching for prognostic factor studies: (1) comparison of search recall of broad versus focused electronic search strategies, (2) linking of search methods of origin for eligible studies, (3) analysis of impact of supplementary search methods on meta-analysis conclusions, and (4) analysis of prognosis filter performance.

Results: The review's focused electronic search strategy resulted in a 91% reduction in recall, compared to a broader version. Had the team relied on the focused search strategy without using supplementary search methods, they would have missed 23 of 58 eligible studies that were indexed in MEDLINE; additionally, the number of included studies in 2 of the review's primary outcome meta-analyses would have changed. Using a broader strategy without supplementary searches would still have missed 5 studies. The prognosis filter used in the review demonstrated the highest sensitivity of any of the filters tested.

Conclusions: Our study results support recommendations for supplementary search methods made by prominent systematic review methodologists. Leaving out any supplemental search methods would have resulted in missed studies, and these omissions would not have been prevented by using a broader search strategy or any of the other prognosis filters tested.

Citing Articles

Molecular biomarkers for predicting complete response to preoperative chemoradiation in people with locally advanced rectal cancer.

De Lacavalerie P, Lord S, Morgan M, Caldon C, Kohonen-Corish M Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2024; 11():CD014718.

PMID: 39611427 PMC: 11605794. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014718.

Determinants of Non-Adherence to Exercise or Physical Activity in People with Metabolic Syndrome: A Mixed Methods Review.

El Haddad L, Peiris C, Taylor N, McLean S Patient Prefer Adherence. 2023; 17:311-329.

PMID: 36760232 PMC: 9904214. DOI: 10.2147/PPA.S383482.

Long-Term Survivorship of Cervical Spine Procedures; A Survivorship Meta-Analysis and Meta-Regression.

Sarraj M, Hache P, Foroutan F, Oitment C, Marion T, Guha D Global Spine J. 2022; 13(3):840-854.

PMID: 36069054 PMC: 10240585. DOI: 10.1177/21925682221125766.

Development and evaluation of a search filter to identify prognostic factor studies in Ovid MEDLINE.

Stallings E, Gaetano-Gil A, Alvarez-Diaz N, Sola I, Lopez-Alcalde J, Molano D BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022; 22(1):107.

PMID: 35399050 PMC: 8996648. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-022-01595-9.

Literature searching methods or guidance and their application to public health topics: A narrative review.

Heath A, Levay P, Tuvey D Health Info Libr J. 2021; 39(1):6-21.

PMID: 34850535 PMC: 9300102. DOI: 10.1111/hir.12414.

References

Wilczynski N, Haynes R . Developing optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound prognostic studies in MEDLINE: an analytic survey. BMC Med. 2004; 2:23. PMC: 441418. DOI: 10.1186/1741-7015-2-23. View

Riley R, Hayden J, Steyerberg E, Moons K, Abrams K, Kyzas P . Prognosis Research Strategy (PROGRESS) 2: prognostic factor research. PLoS Med. 2013; 10(2):e1001380. PMC: 3564757. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001380. View

Wong S, Wilczynski N, Haynes R, Ramkissoonsingh R . Developing optimal search strategies for detecting sound clinical prediction studies in MEDLINE. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2004; :728-32. PMC: 1479983. View

Linder S, Kamath G, Pratt G, Saraykar S, Volk R . Citation searches are more sensitive than keyword searches to identify studies using specific measurement instruments. J Clin Epidemiol. 2015; 68(4):412-7. PMC: 4593621. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.10.008. View

Chatterley T, Dennett L . Utilisation of search filters in systematic reviews of prognosis questions. Health Info Libr J. 2012; 29(4):309-22. DOI: 10.1111/hir.12004. View

Iles R, Davidson M, Taylor N . Psychosocial predictors of failure to return to work in non-chronic non-specific low back pain: a systematic review. Occup Environ Med. 2008; 65(8):507-17. DOI: 10.1136/oem.2007.036046. View

Walker-Dilks C, Wilczynski N, Haynes R . Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature search strategies for identifying methodologically sound causation and prognosis studies. Appl Nurs Res. 2008; 21(2):98-103. DOI: 10.1016/j.apnr.2006.04.004. View

Hopewell S, Clarke M, Lefebvre C, Scherer R . Handsearching versus electronic searching to identify reports of randomized trials. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007; (2):MR000001. PMC: 7437388. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.MR000001.pub2. View

Wilczynski N, Haynes R . Optimal search strategies for detecting clinically sound prognostic studies in EMBASE: an analytic survey. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2005; 12(4):481-5. PMC: 1174893. DOI: 10.1197/jamia.M1752. View

10.

Hayden J, Wilson M, Riley R, Iles R, Pincus T, Ogilvie R . Individual recovery expectations and prognosis of outcomes in non-specific low back pain: prognostic factor review. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019; 2019(11). PMC: 6877336. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011284.pub2. View

11.

Keogh C, Wallace E, OBrien K, Murphy P, Teljeur C, McGrath B . Optimized retrieval of primary care clinical prediction rules from MEDLINE to establish a Web-based register. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011; 64(8):848-60. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.11.011. View

12.

Booth A . Unpacking your literature search toolbox: on search styles and tactics. Health Info Libr J. 2008; 25(4):313-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2008.00825.x. View

13.

Holland J, Wilczynski N, Haynes R . Optimal search strategies for identifying sound clinical prediction studies in EMBASE. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2005; 5:11. PMC: 1097733. DOI: 10.1186/1472-6947-5-11. View

14.

Armstrong R, Jackson N, Doyle J, Waters E, Howes F . It's in your hands: the value of handsearching in conducting systematic reviews of public health interventions. J Public Health (Oxf). 2005; 27(4):388-91. DOI: 10.1093/pubmed/fdi056. View

15.

Fadyl J, McPherson K . Return to work after injury: a review of evidence regarding expectations and injury perceptions, and their influence on outcome. J Occup Rehabil. 2008; 18(4):362-74. DOI: 10.1007/s10926-008-9153-0. View

16.

Steyerberg E, Moons K, van der Windt D, Hayden J, Perel P, Schroter S . Prognosis Research Strategy (PROGRESS) 3: prognostic model research. PLoS Med. 2013; 10(2):e1001381. PMC: 3564751. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001381. View

17.

Riley R, Moons K, Snell K, Ensor J, Hooft L, Altman D . A guide to systematic review and meta-analysis of prognostic factor studies. BMJ. 2019; 364:k4597. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.k4597. View

18.

Hallegraeff J, Krijnen W, van der Schans C, de Greef M . Expectations about recovery from acute non-specific low back pain predict absence from usual work due to chronic low back pain: a systematic review. J Physiother. 2012; 58(3):165-72. DOI: 10.1016/S1836-9553(12)70107-8. View

19.

Kok R, Verbeek J, Faber B, van Dijk F, Hoving J . A search strategy to identify studies on the prognosis of work disability: a diagnostic test framework. BMJ Open. 2015; 5(5):e006315. PMC: 4442145. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2014-006315. View

20.

Corp N, Jordan J, Hayden J, Irvin E, Parker R, Smith A . Protocol: a systematic review of studies developing and/or evaluating search strategies to identify prognosis studies. Syst Rev. 2017; 6(1):88. PMC: 5399431. DOI: 10.1186/s13643-017-0482-y. View