Evaluation of five search strategies in retrieving qualitative patient-reported electronic data on the impact of pressure ulcers on quality of life.

AIM This paper is a report of a study conducted to compare the effectiveness of qualitative methodology search strategies with subject-specific (health-related quality of life) search strategies in the retrieval of qualitative patient-reported data of the impact of pressure ulcers on health-related quality of life. BACKGROUND Methods to locate qualitative patient-reported health-related quality of life research data electronically have undergone little replication and validation. A major problem in searching for this type of data is that it is reported in accounts of both primary qualitative research as well as mixed methods research. DATA SOURCES We combined five search strategies with terms for pressure ulcer and searched seven electronic databases from inception to October 2007. METHODS The sensitivity, specificity, precision and accuracy for each search strategy were assessed. RESULTS A subject-specific (health-related quality of life) search strategy, developed by us, had a high yield (100% sensitivity), but low specificity (<50%). The research methodology-based strategies had lower yields (sensitivity 72-83%) but high specificity (79-83%). Importantly, subject-specific search strategies identified all studies reporting qualitative patient-reported health-related quality of life data, whereas, research methodology-based strategies did not identify qualitative data reported in mixed method studies, making subject-based strategies more effective in retrieving qualitative patient-reported health-related quality of life research. CONCLUSION An important consideration in the health-related quality of life field is that qualitative data are reported in both qualitative and mixed methodology research and searching for this type data involves trade-offs between yield, sensitivity and specificity. Accurate indexing of subject-specific outcomes and methodology used in electronic databases and publications is also needed.

[1]  Michele Tarsilla Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , 2010, Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation.

[2]  Jane Nixon,et al.  Impact of Pressure Ulcers on Quality of Life in Older Patients: A Systematic Review , 2009, Journal of the American Geriatrics Society.

[3]  P. Glasziou,et al.  A systematic review of the routine monitoring of growth in children of primary school age to identify growth-related conditions. , 2007, Health technology assessment.

[4]  R. Haynes,et al.  Search Strategies for Identifying Qualitative Studies in CINAHL , 2007, Qualitative health research.

[5]  J Raftery,et al.  A systematic review and economic evaluation of epoetin alpha, epoetin beta and darbepoetin alpha in anaemia associated with cancer, especially that attributable to cancer treatment. , 2007, Health technology assessment.

[6]  Kate Flemming,et al.  Electronic searching to locate qualitative research: evaluation of three strategies. , 2007, Journal of advanced nursing.

[7]  D. Brookes Why nurses do not disseminate academic coursework , 2007 .

[8]  D. Brookes Understanding the value of qualitative research in nursing , 2007 .

[9]  U. S. Department of Health and Human Services FDA Cen Research,et al.  Guidance for industry: patient-reported outcome measures: use in medical product development to support labeling claims: draft guidance , 2006, Health and quality of life outcomes.

[10]  E. Gordon,et al.  Introduction: gift horse or Trojan horse? Social science perspectives on evidence-based health care. , 2006, Social science & medicine.

[11]  Leslie A. Walters,et al.  Developing Optimal Search Strategies for Retrieving Clinically Relevant Qualitative Studies in EMBASE , 2006, Qualitative health research.

[12]  David R. Jones,et al.  Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: A review of possible methods , 2005 .

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

[14]  M. Grant How does your searching grow? A survey of search preferences and the use of optimal search strategies in the identification of qualitative research. , 2004, Health information and libraries journal.

[15]  R. Brian Haynes,et al.  Developing Optimal Search Strategies for Detecting Clinically Relevant Qualitative Studies in MEDLINE , 2004, MedInfo.

[16]  David Evans,et al.  Database searches for qualitative research. , 2002, Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA.

[17]  R. Fitzpatrick,et al.  Quality of life measurement: bibliographic study of patient assessed health outcome measures , 2002, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[18]  M. Dixon-Woods,et al.  Including qualitative research in systematic reviews: opportunities and problems. , 2001, Journal of evaluation in clinical practice.

[19]  J. Ploeg Identifying the best research design to fit the question. Part 2: qualitative designs , 1999 .

[20]  A F Long,et al.  Searching for information on outcomes: do you need to be comprehensive? , 1998, Quality in health care : QHC.

[21]  A. Carr,et al.  Primary total hip replacement surgery: a systematic review of outcomes and modelling of cost-effectiveness associated with different prostheses. , 1998, Health technology assessment.

[22]  M J Buxton,et al.  Evaluating patient-based outcome measures for use in clinical trials. , 1998, Health technology assessment.

[23]  Cindy Farquhar,et al.  3 The Cochrane Library , 1996 .

[24]  D. Simonson,et al.  Assessment of quality-of-life outcomes. , 1996, The New England journal of medicine.

[25]  K. Dickersin,et al.  Systematic Reviews: Identifying relevant studies for systematic reviews , 1994 .