Critical Assessment of Search Strategies in Systematic Reviews in Endodontics


Yaylali I. E. , ALAÇAM T.

JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS, vol.42, no.6, pp.854-860, 2016 (Journal Indexed in SCI) identifier identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Review
  • Volume: 42 Issue: 6
  • Publication Date: 2016
  • Doi Number: 10.1016/j.joen.2016.02.018
  • Title of Journal : JOURNAL OF ENDODONTICS
  • Page Numbers: pp.854-860
  • Keywords: Endodontics, search strategies, systematic review, ROOT-CANAL TREATMENT, BEAM COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY, ELECTRONIC APEX LOCATORS, POST-RETAINED RESTORATIONS, OF-THE-LITERATURE, APICAL FILE SIZE, CALCIUM HYDROXIDE, PART 1, FRACTURE-RESISTANCE, DIAGNOSTIC EFFICACY

Abstract

Introduction: The aim of this study was to perform an overview of literature search strategies in systematic reviews (SRs) published in 2 endodontic journals, Journal of Endodontics and International Endodontic Journal. Methods: A search was done by using the MEDLINE (PubMed interface) database to retrieve the articles published between January 1, 2000 and December 31, 2015. The last search was on January 10, 2016. All the SRs published in the 2 journals were retrieved and screened. Eligible SRs were assessed by using 11 questions about search strategies in the SRs that were adapted from 2 guidelines (ie, AMSTAR checklist and the Cochrane Handbook). Results: A total of 83 SRs were retrieved by electronic search. Of these, 55 were from the Journal of Endodontics, and 28 were from the International Endodontic Journal. After screening, 2 SRs were excluded, and 81 SRs were included in the study. Some issues, such as search of grey literature and contact with study authors, were not fully reported (30% and 25%, respectively). On the other hand, some issues, such as the use of index terms and key words and search in at least 2 databases, were reported in most of the SRs (97% and 95%, respectively). The overall quality of the search strategy in both journals was 61%. No significant difference was found between the 2 journals in terms of evaluation criteria (P > .05). Conclusions: There exist areas for improving the quality of reporting of search strategies in SRs; for example, grey literature should be searched for unpublished studies, no language limitation should be applied to databases, and authors should make an attempt to contact the authors of included studies to obtain further relevant information.