What’s beyond the core? Database coverage in qualitative information retrieval
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2025.1591Keywords:
Information retrieval, Qualitative research, Evidence synthesis, Database selectionAbstract
Objective: This study investigates the effectiveness of bibliographic databases to retrieve qualitative studies for use in systematic and rapid reviews in Health Technology Assessment (HTA) research. Qualitative research is becoming more prevalent in reviews and health technology assessment, but standardized search methodologies—particularly regarding database selection—are still in development.
Methods: To determine how commonly used databases (MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science) perform, a comprehensive list of relevant journal titles was compiled using InCites Journal Citation Reports and validated by qualitative researchers at Canada’s Drug Agency (formerly CADTH). This list was used to evaluate the qualitative holdings of each database, by calculating the percentage of total titles held in each database, as well as the number of unique titles per database.
Results: While publications on qualitative search methodology generally recommend subject-specific health databases including MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO, this study found that multidisciplinary citation indexes Scopus and Web of Science Core Collection not only had the highest percentages of total titles held, but also a higher number of unique titles.
Conclusions: These indexes have potential utility in qualitative search strategies, if only for supplementing other database searches with unique records. This potential was investigated via tests on qualitative rapid review search strategies translated to Scopus to determine how the index may contribute relevant literature.
References
Flemming K, Booth A, Garside R, Tunçalp Ö, Noyes J. Qualitative evidence synthesis for complex interventions and guideline development: clarification of the purpose, designs and relevant methods. BMJ Global Health. 2019 4(Suppl 1):e000882. http://gh.bmj.com/content/4/Suppl_1/e000882.abstract.
Booth A. Searching for qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: a structured methodological review. Systematic Reviews. 2016 2016/05/04;5(1):74. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0249-x.
Booth A. Harnessing Energies, Resolving Tensions: Acknowledging a Dual Heritage for Qualitative Evidence Synthesis. Qualitative Health Research. 2018 2019/01/01;29(1):18-31. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732318808247.
Kelly SE, Moher D, Clifford TJ. DEFINING RAPID REVIEWS: A MODIFIED DELPHI CONSENSUS APPROACH. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2016 Jan;32(4):265-75. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/27724987/.
Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal. 2009 2009/06/01;26(2):91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x.
Campbell F, Weeks L, Booth A, Kaunelis D, Smith A. A Scoping Review Found Increasing Examples of Rapid Qualitative Evidence Syntheses and no Methodological Guidance. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019 Jun 20. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31229582/.
Frandsen TF, Gildberg FA, Tingleff EB. Searching for qualitative health research required several databases and alternative search strategies: a study of coverage in bibliographic databases. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2019 114:118-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2019.06.013.
Booth A, Cooper C, Dracup N. Qualitative Research. HTAi vortal. 2018. http://vortal.htai.org/index.php?q=node/1235.
Booth A. Qualitative Evidence Synthesis. In: Karen M. Facey, Helle Ploug Hansen, and Ann N. V. Single, editors. Patient Involvement in Health Technology Assessment. Singapore: Springer Singapore; 2017. p. 187-99.
Selva A, Solà I, Zhang Y, Pardo-Hernandez H, Haynes RB, Martínez García L, Navarro T, Schünemann H, Alonso-Coello P. Development and use of a content search strategy for retrieving studies on patients' views and preferences. Health and Quality of Life Outcomes. 2017 2017/08/30;15(1):126. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0698-5.
DeJean D, Giacomini M, Simeonov D, Smith A. Finding Qualitative Research Evidence for Health Technology Assessment. Qualitative Health Research. 2016 26(10):1307-17. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1049732316644429.
Pearson M, Moxham T, Ashton K. Effectiveness of Search Strategies for Qualitative Research About Barriers and Facilitators of Program Delivery. Evaluation & the Health Professions. 2011 2011/09/01;34(3):297-308. https://doi.org/10.1177/0163278710388029.
Wagner M, Rosumeck S, Küffmeier C, Döring K, Euler U. A validation study revealed differences in design and performance of MEDLINE search filters for qualitative research. J Clin Epidemiol. 2020 Apr;120:17-24. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31862229/.
Cooper C, Booth A, Varley-Campbell J, Britten N, Garside R. Defining the process to literature searching in systematic reviews: a literature review of guidance and supporting studies. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2018 2018/08/14;18(1):85. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0545-3.
Hartling L, Featherstone R, Nuspl M, Shave K, Dryden DM, Vandermeer B. The contribution of databases to the results of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2016 2016/09/26;16(1):127. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-016-0232-1.
Lockwood CP, Munn Z, Rittenmeyer L, Salmond S, Bjerrum M, Loveday H, Carrier J, Stannard D. Chapter 2: Systematic reviews of qualitative evidence. 2017. In: Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer's Manual [Internet]. Adelaide (Australia): Joanna Briggs Institute. Available from: https://jbi-global-wiki.refined.site/space/MANUAL/4688637/Chapter+2%3A+Systematic+reviews+of+qualitative+evidence.
Lefebvre C, Glanville J, Briscoe S, Featherstone R, Littlewood A, Marshall C, Metzendorf M-I, Noel-Storr A, Paynter R, Rader T, Thomas J, Wieland LS. Chapter 4: Searching for and selecting studies. 2019. In: Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions [Internet]. London (UK): Cochrane. Available from: https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current/chapter-04.
Systematic Reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. York (UK): Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York; 2009. Available from: https://www.york.ac.uk/media/crd/Systematic_Reviews.pdf.
Brunton G, Stansfield C, Caird J, Thomas J. Finding Relevant Studies. In: Gough DO and Thomas J, editors. An Introduction to Systematic Reviews. London (UK): SAGE; 2012. p. 107-34.
Peace J, Brennan PF. MetaMapping the nursing procedure manual. AMIA Annu Symp Proc. 2006 2006:1060. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17238679/.
Fell DW, Burnham JF, Buchanan MJ, Horchen HA, Scherr JA. Mapping the core journals of the physical therapy literature. J Med Libr Assoc. 2011 99(3):202-7. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21753912.
Mayr P, Walter A-K. Studying Journal Coverage in Google Scholar. Journal of Library Administration. 2008 2008/09/30;47(1-2):81-99. https://doi.org/10.1080/01930820802110894.
Salisbury L. Web of Science and Scopus: A comparative review of content and searching capabilities. The Charleston Advisor. 2009 July:5-18. https://charleston.publisher.ingentaconnect.com/content/charleston/chadv/2009/00000011/00000001/art00005#.
Mongeon P, Paul-Hus A. The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics. 2016 January 01;106(1):213-28. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5.
Allen MP, Jacobs SK, Levy JR. Mapping the literature of nursing: 1996-2000. J Med Libr Assoc. 2006 94(2):206-20. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/16636714.
Engaging with History Taking for Adverse Childhood Experiences in Care: A Rapid Qualitative Review. Ottawa (ON): CADTH; 2018. Available from: https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/rr/2019/RC1045%20History%20Taking%20ACE%20Final.pdf.
Prescription Drug Monitoring Programs: A Rapid Qualitative Review. Ottawa (ON): CADTH; 2019. Available from: https://cadth.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/htis/2019/RC1097%20Prescription%20Drug%20Monitoring%20Programs%20Final.pdf.
Gene Expression Profiling Tests for Breast Cancer: A Rapid Qualitative Review. Ottawa (ON): CADTH; 2019. Available from: https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/rr/2019/RC1099%20Gene%20Profiling%20BrCa%20Final.pdf.
Rural Breast Cancer Surgery Programs: A Rapid Qualitative Review Ottawa (ON): CADTH; 2019. Available from: https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/rr/2019/RC1104%20Rural%20Breast%20Cancer%20Surgery%20Final.pdf.
Prostatectomy for People with Prostate Cancer: A Rapid Qualitative Review. Ottawa (ON): CADTH; 2019. Available from: https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/htis/2019/RC1209_prostatectomy%20Final.pdf.
Biopsy for Adults with Suspected Skin Cancer: A Rapid Qualitative Review Ottawa (ON): CADTH; 2019. Available from: https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/htis/2019/RC1215%20Perspectives%20on%20Biposy%20Final.pdf.
Screening and Diagnostic Services for People at Risk for Breast Cancer: A Rapid Qualitative Review. Ottawa (ON): CADTH; 2019. Available from: https://www.cadth.ca/sites/default/files/pdf/htis/2019/RC1208%20Breast%20Cancer%20Screening%20Final.pdf.
Experiences with and Expectations of Robotic Surgical Systems: A Rapid Qualitative Review. Ottawa (ON): CADTH; 2020. Available from: https://www.cadth.ca/experiences-and-expectations-robotic-surgical-systems-rapid-qualitative-review.
Point-of-Care Testing of International Normalized Ratios for People on Oral Anticoagulants: A Rapid Qualitative Review. Ottawa (ON): CADTH; 2021. Available from: https://www.cadth.ca/point-care-testing-international-normalized-ratios-people-oral-anticoagulants-rapid-qualitative.
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
Versions
- 2025-01-16 (2)
- 2025-01-14 (1)
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Jennifer Horton, David Kaunelis, Danielle Rabb, Andrea Smith
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
