Citation searches are more sensitive than keyword searches to identify studies using specific measurement instruments.

OBJECTIVES To compare the effectiveness of two search methods in identifying studies that used the Control Preferences Scale (CPS), a health care decision-making instrument commonly used in clinical settings. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING We searched the literature using two methods: (1) keyword searching using variations of "Control Preferences Scale" and (2) cited reference searching using two seminal CPS publications. We searched three bibliographic databases [PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science (WOS)] and one full-text database (Google Scholar). We report precision and sensitivity as measures of effectiveness. RESULTS Keyword searches in bibliographic databases yielded high average precision (90%) but low average sensitivity (16%). PubMed was the most precise, followed closely by Scopus and WOS. The Google Scholar keyword search had low precision (54%) but provided the highest sensitivity (70%). Cited reference searches in all databases yielded moderate sensitivity (45-54%), but precision ranged from 35% to 75% with Scopus being the most precise. CONCLUSION Cited reference searches were more sensitive than keyword searches, making it a more comprehensive strategy to identify all studies that use a particular instrument. Keyword searches provide a quick way of finding some but not all relevant articles. Goals, time, and resources should dictate the combination of which methods and databases are used.

[1]  Matthew E Falagas,et al.  Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses , 2007, FASEB journal : official publication of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology.

[2]  Jane Nixon,et al.  Evaluation of five search strategies in retrieving qualitative patient-reported electronic data on the impact of pressure ulcers on quality of life. , 2010, Journal of advanced nursing.

[3]  Joseph D Tariman,et al.  Preferred and actual participation roles during health care decision making in persons with cancer: a systematic review. , 2010, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[4]  Jesse A Berlin,et al.  Searching one or two databases was insufficient for meta-analysis of observational studies. , 2005, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[5]  Dean Giustini,et al.  The comparative recall of Google Scholar versus PubMed in identical searches for biomedical systematic reviews: a review of searches used in systematic reviews , 2013, Systematic Reviews.

[6]  A. Booth,et al.  Literature searching for social science systematic reviews: consideration of a range of search techniques. , 2009, Health information and libraries journal.

[7]  Julie Glanville,et al.  Methodological developments in searching for studies for systematic reviews: past, present and future? , 2013, Systematic Reviews.

[8]  J. Higgins Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration , 2011 .

[9]  R Brian Haynes,et al.  Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. 1996. , 2007, Clinical orthopaedics and related research.

[10]  J. Gray,et al.  Evidence-Based Healthcare: How to Make Health Policy and Management Decisions , 2001 .

[11]  K. A. McKibbon,et al.  Search filters can find some but not all knowledge translation articles in MEDLINE: an analytic survey. , 2012, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[12]  Judith A Floyd,et al.  Comparison of Medical Subject Headings and text-word searches in MEDLINE to retrieve studies on sleep in healthy individuals. , 2004, Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA.

[13]  M. Clark,et al.  Preferred roles in treatment decision making among patients with cancer: a pooled analysis of studies using the Control Preferences Scale. , 2010, The American journal of managed care.

[14]  J A Sloan,et al.  The Control Preferences Scale. , 1997, The Canadian journal of nursing research = Revue canadienne de recherche en sciences infirmieres.

[15]  Martin Boeker,et al.  Google Scholar as replacement for systematic literature searches: good relative recall and precision are not enough , 2013, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[16]  Tina Miller,et al.  Finding qualitative research: an evaluation of search strategies , 2004, BMC medical research methodology.

[17]  Geoffrey Mitchell,et al.  Information giving and decision-making in patients with advanced cancer: a systematic review. , 2005, Social science & medicine.

[18]  Gill Hubbard,et al.  Preferences for involvement in treatment decision making of patients with cancer: a review of the literature. , 2008, European journal of oncology nursing : the official journal of European Oncology Nursing Society.

[19]  J. Sloan,et al.  Decision making during serious illness: what role do patients really want to play? , 1992, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[20]  Matt Egan,et al.  Comparing the effectiveness of using generic and specific search terms in electronic databases to identify health outcomes for a systematic review: a prospective comparative study of literature search methods , 2012, BMJ Open.

[21]  R. Thomson,et al.  Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. , 2003, The Cochrane database of systematic reviews.

[22]  Dean Giustini,et al.  Google Scholar is not enough to be used alone for systematic reviews , 2013, Online journal of public health informatics.

[23]  Su Golder,et al.  Citation searching: a systematic review case study of multiple risk behaviour interventions , 2014, BMC Medical Research Methodology.

[24]  Joan M Reitz,et al.  Dictionary for library and information science , 2004 .

[25]  J. Sterne,et al.  Systematic reviews of test accuracy should search a range of databases to identify primary studies. , 2008, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[26]  C. Terwee,et al.  Development of a methodological PubMed search filter for finding studies on measurement properties of measurement instruments , 2009, Quality of Life Research.

[27]  Stéfan Jacques Darmoni,et al.  Is the coverage of google scholar enough to be used alone for systematic reviews , 2013, BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making.

[28]  D. Sackett,et al.  Cochrane Collaboration , 1994, BMJ.

[29]  D. Sackett,et al.  Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't , 1996, BMJ.

[30]  Paul Levay,et al.  A population search filter for hard-to-reach populations increased search efficiency for a systematic review. , 2014, Journal of clinical epidemiology.

[31]  D. Kiesler,et al.  Optimal matches of patient preferences for information, decision-making and interpersonal behavior: evidence, models and interventions. , 2006, Patient education and counseling.

[32]  Gregory Makoul,et al.  Patient preferences for shared decisions: a systematic review. , 2012, Patient education and counseling.