MEDIATED SEARCHING:
A Code of Practice
A Code of Practice
March
2019
Prepared
by:
2014-2019
Canadian Search Standards Working Group:
Susan Baer
Ashley Farrell
Pat Lee
Jacqueline MacDonald
Danielle Rabb
Brooke Ballantyne Scott
Marcus Vaska
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs
CC BY-NC-ND
CC BY-NC-ND
Others may download and share The Code
with others, with appropriate attribution.
Commercial use or alterations are not permitted.
Revisions by the Working Group:
May 2018
March 2019
Cite as:
Baer
S, Farrell A, Lee P, MacDonald J, Rabb D, Scott B, Vaska M. The 2014-2019
Canadian Search Standards Working Group; Mediated
Searching: A Code of Practice. 2019. Available from:
Preface
The Standards Working Group is an adhoc
committee of librarians across Canada interested in developing a standard for
literature searching in the health sciences.
The inaugural meeting, where ideas were discussed along with the need to
formulate a plan, occurred in June 2014. The term “standards” was used at the
time, however after four years of reading and research, the concept has evolved
into a Code of Practice.
A wealth of literature exists with regards
to searching to support systematic reviews; in fact, several medical and
related organizations provide guidance on how to participate in systematic
review searching. However, in
comparison, there is very little written about standards for literature
searching. Opinions varied about whether
it would be possible to create a standard, given that each request and search
is different and unique. When requesting
searches, clinicians apply what is stated in the literature, along with their
own knowledge, to develop guidelines that focus on the patient’s needs to
determine the best approach to be taken.
A Code of Practice for literature searching can be a tool librarians can
use for evidence-based practice in librarianship.
Our intent was to research and document what
was described in the literature as well as applying our own examples and
experience to the information uncovered.
Once we gathered the required information, our research process included
sorting and ordering search methods within the Deming Cycle which evolved into
the steps and stages that the team analyzed.
A Delphi study was used to validate the work in 2015. The Research Ethics Board (REB) application
in 2016 contained two phases to continue to elicit feedback and validate the
work: a jurisdictional review and an
environmental scan of elite searchers.
While consultation with elite searchers has been conducted and evaluated
by the team, the jurisdictional review has not yet been completed due to time constraints.
During the research process, it was apparent
that a standard lexicon did not exist.
While there are glossaries contained in specific searching textbooks,
articles, or institutional reports, there was not one readily available for the
profession. The Glossary developed
includes the source and a link where applicable. The more current definitions researched have
been used unless an earlier definition provided a better illustration. The
Glossary should thus be considered a living document, which will grow and
undergo updates as needed.
A Code of Practice for literature searching
for librarians aligns our professional organizations with those of our
clinicians. The Code provides assurance
for our clientele that the profession’s approach to supporting clinicians’ work
uses the same standard of care and best practice that they must apply in their
own practice. It emphasizes the value placed on the library services and
librarian-mediated searching within the health care system. The Code provides a
basis for quality indicators or improvement, which can be used in literature
search instruction within library schools.
It may lead to the development of other ‘best practices’ or standards
for librarianship.
Writing the Code is simply the first step in
providing some guiding documents for the profession. It is our hope that continued investment in
the Code is undertaken to better identify issues that may be missing or include
future practice as it evolves.
Acknowledgments
Each member of the Working Group is grateful
for the support from our parent institutions, past and present, for the
opportunity to work on this project.
Lori Leger was an instrumental member in the early stages of work. Her contributions are evident in the steps
and stages. Lori was unable to continue
with the project. Special recognition is
needed to Amy Weisgarber from Regina Qu’Appelle Health Region (now the
Saskatchewan Health Authority) who used her talents to graphically represent stages
of our project in the posters created.
We would also like to thank the Dalhousie SIM search class, the Regina
Qu’Appelle Research Ethics Board, and all of the researchers and librarians who
took the time to provide us with feedback and new insights.
1
Proposed Code of Practice for Mediated Searching
This Code of
Practice is a first step at bringing together and sorting the mediated search
literature by:
·
type of search, labelled “search level” in this Code,
and by
·
search method, labelled “search step” in this Code.
1.1
Introduction to the Code
This Code identifies and defines each unique search method,
labelled generally as a search step,
groups these in general order within seven search
stages, then considers whether the step is required in each of five search levels.
The colours on each step contain meaning:
the step is not necessary
|
The step may be considered
|
The step should be considered
|
The step must be considered
|
The step is mandatory
|
1.1.1 Search Steps
The code identifies
eighty-six unique search steps.
Subsequent work may
include determining the degree to which each step is required for each search
level, i.e. “must”, “should” or
“may”, and classifying steps by
·
Type of method, whether search
strategies, search tactics, search operations or search moves;
·
Purpose of method, whether taken to
support individual search requests or to support aspects of the search service
more generally including such areas as inter-searcher communication, service
handover, information referral, client awareness development, resource
allocation and use, database selection, performance monitoring and service
evaluation.
1.1.2 Search
Types
The code identifies five search types characterized by
increasing rigour and attention to detail.
SEARCH LEVEL
|
DEFINITION
|
EXAMPLE
|
SOURCE
|
LEVEL I
|
To bridge an information
gap with a needed fact
|
What is the current best
practice for Newborn Blood Spot Screening?
|
Working definition as of
2017-03, Canadian Search Standards Working Group
|
|
|
|
|
LEVEL
II
|
To increase an individual's
own understanding of an issue
|
What are the leading cancer
research organizations, including their structure and their success?
|
Working definition as of
2017-03, Canadian Search Standards Working Group.
|
|
|
|
|
LEVEL
III
|
To gather content for
education such as lectures, workshops, presentation
|
I need help getting
information for a lesson on breast cancer screening, including breast density
legislation.
|
Working definition as of
2017-03, Canadian Search Standards Working Group.
|
|
To find information to
apply immediately for an individual patient's care
|
What is the correct
position of restraints or belts for brain-injured patients?
|
|
|
To support a decision to
purchase a product or resource
|
Are mailed FIT tests an
effective means to increase awareness of colorectal cancer screening?
|
|
|
To inform a student
assignment such as a term-paper or an essay
|
What are the Current
Smoking Cessation Strategies among Aboriginal Youth?
|
|
|
To write an internal report
or other internal document or policy
|
Identify and implement a
new clinical information system such as a continuing care portfolio
|
|
|
To inform non clinical
organizational planning
|
Developing a facilitator
competency framework to lead healthcare change
|
|
|
To help inform the creation
of patient education
|
Enhancing patient engagement
in chronic disease self-management
|
|
|
|
|
|
LEVEL
IV
|
To inform knowledge synthesis
|
Combined open and
endovascular treatment of thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysms
|
Working definition as of
2017-03, Canadian Search Standards Working Group
|
|
To inform research
proposals
|
CIHR grant application
(user provides topic)
|
|
|
|
|
|
LEVEL V
|
To inform research To
support a systematic review, meta-analysis or HTA etc.
|
What are the benefits of
exercise for prostate cancer survivors?
|
Working definition as of
2017-03, Canadian Search Standards Working Group
|
|
To develop clinical
guidelines
|
For diagnosis, staging,
treatment, and follow-up of cancer
|
Definition based on other 4
search level definitions & Watanabe AS, McCart G, Shimomura S, Kayser S.
Systematic approach to drug information requests. American journal of
hospital pharmacy. 1975;32(12):1282-5 and Cruz JE, Fahim G, Moore K. Practice
guideline development, grading, and assessment. 2015;40(12):854-857.
|
1.1.3
Search Stages
The code identifies seven stages of mediated searching.
STAGE
|
HEADING
|
#
STEPS
|
PURPOSE
|
Search Stage 1
|
Client Engagement
|
20
|
Capturing the client’s information need
|
Search Stage 2
|
Initial Planning
|
19
|
Studying how to best meet the client’s information need by
outlining or sketching out one or more “fit for purpose” approaches
|
Search Stage 3
|
Scoping Search
|
10
|
Testing one or more approaches to establish the best
course of action
|
Search Stage 4
|
Resource-Specific Search Planning
|
11
|
Selecting and planning the best approach for each source
to be searched
|
Search Stage 5
|
The Search
|
1
|
Executing the search in each resource selected
|
Search Stage 6
|
Evaluation
|
5
|
Evaluating how well the search worked in each resource
|
Search Stage 7
|
Reporting
|
20
|
Recording the completed work to meet needs for service,
record keeping and client information needs and uses
|
1.2 Recommended
Steps by Search Stage and Search Level
1.2.1 Search
Stage 1 – Client Engagement (20 Steps)
|
1.1 Determine purpose
of request, e. how search results will be used
|
|||||
|
1.2 Establish turnaround
time, i.e. when client needs the search completed
|
|||||
|
1.3 Confirm scope and
breadth of search needed
|
|||||
|
1.4 Collect background
information including client’s scope and breadth of subject knowledge
|
|||||
|
1.5 Secure the type of
publications or sources of information needed, e.g., abstracts or full-text,
review articles, conference proceedings, reports, guidelines, internal
documents, data sets, benchmarks, trends, health technology assessments,
economic evaluations, etc.
|
|||||
|
1.6 Secure the extent
of information needed
|
|||||
|
1.7 Frame search request as
one or more answerable questions and confirm with client
|
|||||
|
1.8 Identify criteria for
database selection or other information sources to be searched
|
|||||
|
1.9 Select relevant
databases and/or other information sources to be searched
|
|||||
|
1.10 Work with client to
identify criteria for what is to be included and what is not to be included (using
the NOT command)
|
|||||
|
1.11 Identify what may
constitute scope creep
|
|||||
|
1.12 Secure from client, key
terms, concepts, any popular synonyms, acronyms and spelling variations
|
|||||
|
1.13 Secure from client, any
key articles or information sources related to the request
|
|||||
|
1.14 For searches for
research purposes, secure from client the research methods used in studies of
interest (e.g. RCTs, interview study, etc.)
|
|||||
|
1.15 For searches for
research purposes, secure from client criteria for length of study and participant follow-up
|
|||||
|
1.16 Confirm with client
preferred format of search results, or reference management software
|
|||||
|
1.17 Secure client contact
info and demographics (for
organizational purposes), e.g. profession, department, etc.
|
|||||
|
1.18 Assign search level to search request,
if the institution records search levels.
|
|||||
|
1.19 Log and
assign/refer each search request
|
|||||
|
1.20 Advise client of
assigned searcher, any related costs and expected date of completion
|
1.2.2
Search Stage 2 - Initial
Planning (19 Steps)
|
2.1 Check for
systematic reviews on the subject
|
|||||
|
2.2 Check for validated
search strategies in systematic reviews on similar or related topics
|
|||||
|
2.3 Search for
existing bibliographies on the subject
|
|||||
|
||||||
|
2.5 Identify key journals for the topic & browse their table of
contents and/or conduct a hand search
|
|||||
|
2.6 Develop a plan to
search the grey literature/websites
|
|||||
|
2.7 Map the concepts, e.g. reduce
the research question into major concepts
|
|||||
|
2.8 Identify a term or
phrase to represent each concept
|
|||||
|
2.9 Select the most
specific term(s) for the most relevant concept(s)
|
|||||
|
2.10 For each concept,
identify synonyms, acronyms, spelling variations, broader and narrower terms
|
|||||
|
2.11 Develop concepts
using suffix truncation to capture word variations
|
|||||
|
2.12 Develop concepts
using a wildcard to capture word variations
|
|||||
|
2.13 Develop concepts
using adjacency searching
|
|||||
|
2.14 Develop concepts
using proximity searching
|
|||||
|
2.15 For each concept,
link each term with OR to form a concept string
|
|||||
|
2.16 Formulate initial search
query by linking each concept string using AND using a step-by-step approach
|
|||||
|
2.17 Prepare document
template/system to record search strategy and history
|
|||||
|
2.18 Identify which reference
management software to use for search results, if applicable
|
|||||
|
2.19 Plan search by ranking
selected information sources in order, with expected best sources first
|
1.2.3 Search
Stage 3 - Scoping Search (10 Steps)
|
3.1 Execute initial search
query to determine the size of the body of literature
|
|||||
|
3.2 Identify the most
relevant publications and conduct citation search
|
|||||
|
3.3 Identify the most
relevant publications and review their references
|
|||||
|
3.4 Use pearl growing
|
|||||
|
||||||
|
3.6 Review and discuss results to date with client to
clarify search request, and bridge gaps arising from initial search, noting
any changes in search log.
|
|||||
|
3.7 Match client’s
information needs and preferences with information gathering approaches and
information sources
|
|||||
|
3.8 Confirm information
sources to be searched, including databases and websites
|
|||||
|
3.9 Apply a text analysis
tool to initial results to identify additional search terms
|
|||||
|
3.10 Create a reference
set of key articles
|
1.2.4 Search Stage 4 – Resource-Specific Search Planning (11
Steps)
|
4.1 Check subject
headings/index terms for most relevant results (perform for Levels I-II as
needed)
|
|||||
|
4.2 For each database, use
the thesaurus to identify subject headings, broader and narrower terms, cross
references and subheadings for each concept (perform for Levels I-II as
needed)
|
|||||
|
4.3 For each
database/website, check search tips
|
|||||
|
4.4 For each
database/website, consider whether to use limits and which limits to use
|
|||||
|
4.5 For each
database/website, consider whether/where to use methodological filters to
identify particular types of research studies
|
|||||
|
4.6 For each database,
consider whether/where to build/adapt and use subject hedge(s) to represent complex
concepts
|
|||||
|
4.7 For each
database/website, review the translated search query for spelling and syntax
|
|||||
|
4.8 For each database,
disable or optimize search functions, e.g. Embase’s “search broadly as
possible” and Pubmed’s “auto term”
|
|||||
|
4.9 Optimize the output
(test the draft search strategy against reference set of key articles and
make iterative modifications until the search is optimized)
|
|||||
|
4.10 For each database,
identify end point (theoretical saturation)
|
|||||
|
4.11 Select format for
results
|
1.2.5 Search Stage 5 – The Search (1 Step)
|
5. Execute the search
systematically in each resource
|
1.2.6 Search Stage 6 - Evaluation (5 Steps)
|
6.1 Evaluate searcher
satisfaction
|
|||||
|
6.2 If needed, revise
search query and execute search again
|
|||||
|
6.3 Review and
re-evaluate search results
|
|||||
|
6.4 Subject search
query to peer review, and modify search if needed
|
|||||
|
6.5 Evaluate client
satisfaction
|
1.2.7 Search Stage 7 - Reporting (20 Steps)
|
7.1 Format and export
results in client's preferred format, and/or to reference management software
|
|||||
|
7.2 Synthesize results by
selecting and highlighting references that appear to best meet the client's
need
|
|||||
|
7.3 Record database/website
selection criteria and database(s)/website(s) used
|
|||||
|
7.4 Record
database(s)/website(s) used
|
|||||
|
7.5 For each database
searched, specify title of database and name of database provider
|
|||||
|
7.6 For each website
searched, specify name, web address (URL) and publisher
|
|||||
|
7.7 For each
database/website, record date searched
|
|||||
|
7.8 For each
database/website, record publication years searched
|
|||||
|
7.9 Describe any
limitations or biases
|
|||||
|
7.10 Include exclusion
criteria in search records
|
|||||
|
7.11 Include inclusion
criteria in search records
|
|||||
|
7.12 Include limiters
in search records
|
|||||
|
7.13 Include study
type(s) searched in search records
|
|||||
|
7.14 Document any rationale for deviation from recommended approach
|
|||||
|
7.15 For each database
searched, copy and record search
history
|
|||||
|
7.16 For each website,
document search methods and processes
|
|||||
|
7.17 For each search,
use the PRISMA Flow Diagram generator
|
|||||
|
7.18 Summarize search
results in search report and log
|
|||||
|
7.19 Update search log
entries, e.g. search question, search type, time spent
|
|||||
|
7.20 Evaluate client
satisfaction
|
No comments:
Post a Comment