Cookies on this website
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Continue' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

Objective To describe where papers come from in a systematic review of complex evidence. Method Audit of how the 495 primary sources for the review were originally identified. Results Only 30% of sources were obtained from the protocol denned at the outset of the study (that is, from the database and hand searches). Fifty one per cent were identified by "snowballing" (such as pursuing references of references), and 24% by personal knowledge or personal contacts. Conclusion Systematic reviews of complex evidence cannot rely solely on protocol-driven search strategies.

Original publication

DOI

10.1136/bmj.38636.593461.68

Type

Journal article

Journal

British Medical Journal

Publication Date

05/11/2005

Volume

331

Pages

1064 - 1065