New HEDS Paper - Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements

Health Information and
 Libraries Journal

HEDS colleagues, Anthea Sutton, Mark Clowes, Dr Louise Preston and Dr Andrew Booth have published a new review of search approaches for different types of review. Clowes said of the work: "The ever-expanding list of review types can be confusing for information specialists - how should we search for evidence? What sources do we need to include? In this article we categorise the major types of review into "families" with common features, and draw together the current available guidance in one place".

You can access the paper here: 

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/hir.12276

Volume36, Issue3
September 2019
Pages 202-222

Abstract

Background and objectives

The last decade has witnessed increased recognition of the value of literature reviews for advancing understanding and decision making. This has been accompanied by an expansion in the range of methodological approaches and types of review. However, there remains uncertainty over definitions and search requirements beyond those for the ‘traditional’ systematic review. This study aims to characterise health related reviews by type and to provide recommendations on appropriate methods of information retrieval based on the available guidance.

Methods

A list of review types was generated from published typologies and categorised into ‘families’ based on their common features. Guidance on information retrieval for each review type was identified by searching pubmed, medline and Google Scholar, supplemented by scrutinising websites of review producing organisations.

Results

Forty‐eight review types were identified and categorised into seven families. Published guidance reveals increasing specification of methods for information retrieval; however, much of it remains generic with many review types lacking explicit requirements for the identification of evidence.

Conclusions

Defining review types and utilising appropriate search methods remain challenging. By familiarising themselves with a range of review methodologies and associated search methods, information specialists will be better equipped to select suitable approaches for future projects.

Health Services & Delivery Research Programme Evidence Synthesis Centre

ScHARR - Regent Court

Earlier in 2017 HEDS, in collaboration with ScHARR’s Public Health Section, successfully won a £500,000 three-year competitive tender from the National Institute for Health Research to renew its Health Services & Delivery Research Programme Evidence Synthesis Centre (ESC). 

The Sheffield ESC is one of three, formerly two, centres (the others being in Exeter and York) that offer a rapid response reviews service on Programme priorities to inform policy and research. Typically, a small team, comprised of reviewers and information specialists, works within a rapid review timetable proposing an appropriate methodology and review type for each question. Currently, our team is conducting a mapping and realist review looking at implementation of successful interventions to reduce preventable hospital admissions.

HEDS-based ESC core staff include Anna Cantrell and Dr Louise Preston with Dr Andrew Booth, who is co-Director of the centre with Professor Elizabeth Goyder of the Public Health Section. Meanwhile the team’s report distilling methodological and organisational lessons learned from the first three years of the Sheffield and York ESCs is now available:  
Chambers, D., Booth, A., Rodgers, M. et al. (2017) NIHR HS&DR evidence synthesis centres: achievements and learning from the first three year programme, 2014–2017. Report. NIHR Journals Library, Southampton. http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/120637/3/HS%26DR%2013.05.12%20%2813.182.12%29%20Web%20Report-1-White%20Rose.pdf

Meanwhile Andrew Booth, as senior review methodologist, joined a School of Nursing-led team to successfully secure a five year contract to form a Royal College of Nursing/University of Sheffield strategic alliance for research.