Systematically retrieving research in the digital age: Case study on the topic of social networking sites and young people’s mental health

Online information seeking has become normative practice among both academics and the general population. This study appraised the performance of eight databases to retrieve research pertaining to the influence of social networking sites on the mental health of young people. A total of 43 empirical studies on young people’s use of social networking sites and the mental health implications were retrieved. Scopus and SSCI had the highest sensitivity with PsycINFO having the highest precision. Effective searching requires large generic databases, supplemented by subject-specific catalogues. The methodology developed here may provide inexperienced searchers, such as undergraduate students, with a framework to define a realistic scale of searching to undertake for a particular literature review or similar project.

[1]  D. W. Lawrence.  What is lost when searching only one literature database for articles relevant to injury prevention and safety promotion? , 2008, Injury Prevention.

[2]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[3]  D. Lawlor,et al.  Searching multiple databases for systematic reviews: added value or diminishing returns? , 2004, Complementary therapies in medicine.

[4]  Troy C. Messina,et al.  A student's guide to searching the literature using online databases , 2009, ArXiv.

[5]  Lisl Zach,et al.  When is “enough” enough? Modeling the information-seeking and stopping behavior of senior arts administrators: Research Articles , 2005 .

[6]  Anne Brice,et al.  The number needed to read-a new measure of journal value. , 2005, Health information and libraries journal.

[7]  R. Haynes,et al.  Optimal search strategies for retrieving systematic reviews from Medline: analytical survey , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[8]  Brian J. Taylor,et al.  Hidden Gems: Systematically Searching Electronic Databases for Research Publications for Social Work and Social Care , 2003 .

[9]  G. Gigerenzer.  Risk Savvy: How to Make Good Decisions , 2014 .

[10]  R. Hertwig,et al.  Heuristics: The Foundations of Adaptive Behavior , 2015 .

[11]  Su Golder,et al.  Systematic searches for the effectiveness of respite care. , 2008, Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA.

[12]  T. Greenhalgh,et al.  Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: audit of primary sources , 2005, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[13]  Brian J Taylor,et al.  Professional Decision Making on Elder Abuse: Systematic Narrative Review , 2009, Journal of elder abuse & neglect.

[14]  Donald H. Kraft,et al.  Stopping rules and their effect on expected search length , 1979, Inf. Process. Manag..

[15]  Jennifer E. Rowley,et al.  Understanding trust formation in digital information sources: The case of Wikipedia , 2013, J. Inf. Sci..

[16]  Yan Zhang.  The influence of mental models on undergraduate students' searching behavior on the Web , 2008, Inf. Process. Manag..

[17]  Lucas M. Bachmann,et al.  Research Paper: Identifying Diagnostic Studies in MEDLINE: Reducing the Number Needed to Read , 2002, J. Am. Medical Informatics Assoc..

[18]  Denise E. Agosto.  A model of young people's decision-making in using the Web , 2002 .

[19]  Jennifer M. Berryman,et al.  Judgements during information seeking: a naturalistic approach to understanding the assessment of enough information , 2008, J. Inf. Sci..

[20]  Gilad Ravid,et al.  Information overload and the message dynamics of online interaction spaces: a theoretical model and empirical exploration , 2004, IEEE Engineering Management Review.

[21]  Anne C. Campbell,et al.  Systematically Identifying Relevant Research , 2012 .

[22]  P. Richardson,et al.  Accessing the literature on outcome studies in group psychotherapy: the sensitivity and precision of Medline and PsycINFO bibliographic database searching. , 1999, The British journal of medical psychology.

[23]  H. Simon,et al.  Rational choice and the structure of the environment. , 1956, Psychological review.

[24]  Aron Shlonsky,et al.  Using Methodological Search Filters to Facilitate Evidence-Based Social Work Practice , 2011 .

[25]  Qing Tian,et al.  Social Anxiety, Motivation, Self-Disclosure, and Computer-Mediated Friendship , 2013, Commun. Res..

[26]  J. Higgins,et al.  Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration , 2013 .

[27]  Carol Tenopir,et al.  How Electronic Journals Are Changing Patterns of Use , 2004 .

[28]  Lynn Silipigni Connaway,et al.  What is enough? Satisficing information needs , 2007, J. Documentation.

[29]  Dong Wang,et al.  Order effect in relevance judgment , 2008 .

[30]  Dania Bilal,et al.  Ranking, relevance judgment, and precision of information retrieval on children's queries: Evaluation of Google, Yahoo!, Bing, Yahoo! Kids, and ask Kids , 2012, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[31]  M. Clarke,et al.  A comparison of handsearching versus MEDLINE searching to identify reports of randomized controlled trials , 2002, Statistics in medicine.

[32]  Michael Donnelly,et al.  Systematically Retrieving Research: A Case Study Evaluating Seven Databases , 2007 .

[33]  Yong Jin Park,et al.  Digital Literacy and Privacy Behavior Online , 2013, Commun. Res..

[34]  Robin Snowball,et al.  Using the clinical question to teach search strategy: fostering transferable conceptual skills in user education by active learning , 1997 .

[35]  Gary Marchionini,et al.  Information Seeking in Electronic Environments , 1995 .

[36]  Lisl Zach,et al.  When is enough enough? Modeling the information-seeking and stopping behavior of senior arts administrators , 2005, J. Assoc. Inf. Sci. Technol..

[37]  David Bade.  Relevance ranking is not relevance ranking or, when the user is not the user, the search results are not search results , 2007, Online Inf. Rev..

[38]  Elaine Lasda Bergman,et al.  Finding Citations to Social Work Literature: The Relative Benefits of Using Web of Science, Scopus, or Google Scholar , 2012 .

[39]  Claire Creaser,et al.  An assessment of potential efficiency gains through online content use , 2006, Program.

[40]  Donald W. King,et al.  After Migration to an Electronic Journal Collection: Impact on Faculty and Doctoral Students , 2002, D Lib Mag..

[41]  D. Grant Campbell,et al.  "I still like Google": University student perceptions of searching OPACs and the web , 2005, ASIST.

[42]  A. Strauss,et al.  Basics of qualitative research: Grounded theory procedures and techniques. , 1993 .

[43]  M. Radford,et al.  “If it is too inconvenient I'm not going after it:” Convenience as a critical factor in information-seeking behaviors , 2011 .

[44]  Brian K. Thorn,et al.  Predecisional information acquisition: Effects of task variables on suboptimal search strategies , 1987 .