Recomendados
Recomendados
Mais conteúdo relacionado
Mais procurados
Mais procurados (18)
Semelhante a MSc SES literature searching and reviews Nov 2019
Semelhante a MSc SES literature searching and reviews Nov 2019 (20)
Mais de EISLibrarian
Mais de EISLibrarian (20)
Último
Último (20)
MSc SES literature searching and reviews Nov 2019
- 1. MSc Strength and Conditioning MSc Sports Rehabilitation Nov 2019 Literature Searching and Reviews https://unihub.mdx.ac.uk/study/library
- 2. In this workshop we will look at... • Types of literature review • Search strategies • Searching • Citation searching • Evaluating • References
- 3. What is a literature review? Sets the scene • An overview • Surveys the current state of knowledge on a topic • Describe, compare and synthesise the existing research Critical, not just descriptive • Identify strengths and weaknesses • Note areas of consensus and disagreement • Highlight gaps in the existing research • Suggest and justify future research
- 4. • Broader research topic • May or may not include comprehensive searching and quality assessment • Usually summarises research findings in a narrative fashion e.g. chronological, thematic etc • May be more subjective in how studies were chosen (selection bias) • Clearly defined research question • Aims for comprehensive, exhaustive searching with transparent methods and pre-specified eligibility criteria • May include a meta-analysis – statistical analysis of the combined results of quantitative studies • Seeks to systematically search for, appraise and synthesise research evidence, often adhering to guidelines on how to conduct a review (e.g. PRISMA) Grant & Booth (2009), ‘A Typology of Reviews’
- 7. Example: Systematic Review and Meta Analysis
- 8. Cochrane Library myUniHub > MyStudy > MyLibrary > Databases > C
- 9. Main steps in a systematic review 1. Framing the question 2. Identifying and selecting relevant literature 3. Assessing the quality of studies 4. Summarising the evidence 5. Interpreting the findings (Khan et al. 2003)
- 11. PRISMA steps 6-9 6. Eligibility Criteria 7. Information sources 8. Search 9. Study selection http://www.prisma-statement.org/PRISMAStatement/Checklist
- 13. Keywords • Summarise • Concepts • Keywords • And/OR • PICO http://libguides.mdx.ac.uk/SES/SearchStrategy
- 14. Plyometric training • Plyometric* • Training • Intervention • Programme • Program • Unilateral / bilateral Jump height • Jump* • Vertical jump Sprint performance • Sprint* • Running (broader) • Perform* • Speed, velocity • Acceleration etc. What are the effects of plyometric training on jump height and sprint performance? Specific exercises •Specific groups •Age •Gender •Level – elite etc
- 15. Databases for Sports Literature myUniHub > My Study > My Library > Databases http://libguides.mdx.ac.uk/SES/JournalDatabases • Sports Discus • Medline/PubMed • Science Direct • Science Citation Index • TRIP
- 16. Search for ‘Keywords’ one at a time. Individual keywords are displayed and can now be combined using AND/OR. Journal database searching tips http://bit.ly/Combining
- 17. Refine your search Refine your search further e.g. ‘peer reviewed’, ‘publication’, ‘publication date’, ‘subject’ and location. If you have too many search results, use the drop-down menu to restrict search to ‘Abstract’ rather than ‘All text’.
- 18. Zetoc Alerts myUniHub > My Study > My Library > Databases
- 19. It’s not in the Library! • myUniHub > MyStudy > MyLibrary > Library Search • http://scholar.google.co.uk/ • Google it.: • Open access research papers: • BASE https://www.base-search.net/ • CORE https://core.ac.uk/ • Researchers networks e.g. Research Gate, Academia.edu • Authors’ and institutions’ websites • Unpaywall/Open Access Button https://kopernio.com/ • myUniHub > MyStudy > MyLibrary > Inter Library Loans • Sconul Access http://www.sconul.ac.uk/sconul-access
- 20. Google Scholar http://scholar.google.co.uk/ You may be able to access the full-text here. Refine your search results here. Create an alert for your search, so you can keep up-to-date with new publications. Link to MDX resources: > Settings > Library Links > Search for MDX and save.
- 21. Google Scholar: Useful features Full text available from Middlesex Uni and/or other sources. Click on author’s name (if underlined) to view profile and check for other research by the author on the same topic. Click on ‘Cited by’ to see other articles that have cited this article. ‘All versions’: The same article on other websites – sometimes useful for getting full text if not available from MDX. Create a Harvard reference.
- 22. Citation searching • Which articles have cited an earlier article • Find articles on similar/related subject • How many times an article has been cited • Best journals in your field
- 23. Web of Science MyUniHub > MyStudy > MyLibrary > Databases > W > Web of Science Check ‘WebBridge’ to see if full text article is available See how many times article has been cited. Click on title for more information Click number of times cited to see list of citing articles http://libguides.mdx.ac.uk/SES/wos
- 24. Citation/impact info on Google Scholar: Citation/impact info on Library Search:
- 25. Citation/impact info on EBSCO Databases: https://plumanalytics.com/learn/about-metrics/
- 26. Citation/impact information: Altmetrics Mentions on social media, blogs, news sources etc. https://www.altmetric.com/
- 29. Completed PRISMA flowchart Example from Warren et al. (2017)
- 30. Cite Them Right Online myUniHub > My Study > My Library > Databases > C http://libguides.mdx.ac.uk/plagiarismreferencing
- 31. Managing references: RefWorks http://libguides.mdx.ac.uk/plagiarismreferencing/NewRW MyUniHub > My Study > MyLibrary > Databases > R > RefWorks (New)
- 32. Set up a RefWorks account • myUniHub > My Study > My Library > Databases > R > New RefWorks • Use your ‘live.mdx.ac.uk’ email and any password ‘RefWorks for Researchers’ guide available at: https://libguides.mdx.ac.uk/SES/Skills
- 33. Saving references from EBSCO databases to RefWorks e.g. Sport Discus Click on the article title, then ‘Export’ and finally select ‘Direct Export to RefWorks’ and ‘Save’. The reference will be exported to your ‘Last downloaded’ folder in RefWorks.
- 34. RefWorks: Finding duplicate references . In order to check for duplicate references, change View to ‘Table View’, click on ‘Tools’ and then ‘Find duplicates’. Delete references not required.
- 35. Find out more MyUniHub > MyStudy > MyLibrary > MySubject Library Guides > Sport and Exercise Science http://libguides.mdx.ac.uk/SES
- 36. Need further help? Your Librarian is: Vanessa Hill v.hill@mdx.ac.uk http://libguides.mdx.ac.uk/SES/Help
- 37. References • Black, G.M., Gabbett, T.J., Cole, M.H. & Naughton, G. (2016) ‘Monitoring workload in throwing-dominant sports: a systematic review’, Sports Medicine, 46(10), pp.1503-1516. • The Cochrane Library: http://www.cochranelibrary.com/ • Grant, M.J. & Booth, A. (2009) ‘A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies’, Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26(2), pp.91-108. • Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA Group (2009). ‘Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement’. PLoS Medicine, 6(7). • Suchomel, T.J., Nimphius, S. & Stone, M.H. (2016) ‘The importance of muscular strength in athletic performance’, Sports Medicine, 46(10), pp.1419- 1449. • Warren, G.L., Call, J.A., Farthing, A.K. & Baadom, B.P. (2017) ‘Minimal Evidence for a Secondary Loss of Strength After an Acute Muscle Injury: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis’ Sports Medicine, 47(1), pp.41-59.
Notas do Editor
- Types of literature review Search strategies Searching for papers using databases including Boolean operators Citation searching and getting hold of full text Evaluating the articles that you find. Keeping track: managing your references and next steps 10-11 lecture 11-11.25 Break 11.30-12.30 lecture/hands on
- **Ask student what they think the point of a literature review is?** Sets the scene An overview Surveys the current state of knowledge on a topic i.e. what is already known about a topic Opportunity for you to describe, compare and synthesise the existing research Critical, not just descriptive……..being critical is particularly important for a systematic review. Identify strengths and weaknesses Note areas of consensus and disagreement Highlight gaps in the existing research i.e. what we know and what we don’t know. Suggest and justify future research
- There are two main types of review: Narrative and systematic. What’s the difference? Narrative: Research topic may be quite broad…..don’t need to be so specific May or may not include comprehensive searching May or may not include quality assessment Usually summarises research findings in a narrative fashion – analysis may be chronological, conceptual, thematic etc. May be more subjective in how studies were chosen (selection bias) i.e. different experts can come to different conclusions - arguably less objective in assessing the literature and evidence. You are unlikely to carry out a narrative review unless there is just not enough literature to carry out a SR or because it is a really novel topic. Systematic: SRs are used in evidence based medicine to ensure that practitioners have the best available evidence in order to decide how to treat patients. SRs are now applied to other disciplines. Within the health discipline there may be lots of research being carried out, but not necessarily a summary of what has been done. There is a need to bring the research together to see if there is consensus of evidence from trials. Therefore a systematic approach is used to ensure that all research is found and evaluated. Clearly defined research question Aims for comprehensive, exhaustive searching Transparent methods – SR are explicit about how the search has been carried out i.e. transparent about method i.e. same filters, terms etc so that search can be replicated. e.g. only looks at research that looks at experimental trials in England etc. Pre-specified eligibility criteria to determine what’s included May include a meta-analysis – statistical analysis of the combined results of quantitative studies i.e. pool all the data from different studies to get an overall answer. Seeks to systematically search for, appraise and synthesise research evidence, often adhering to guidelines on how to conduct a review (e.g. PRISMA) Aim for “systematized review” – include elements of SR process (maybe not all). Inclusion of Meta Analysis – depends on what they find. Include a summary table to synthesise. Include analysis- what is known, uncertainty around findings, limitations of methodology.
- Here are some examples of different types of review starting with a narrative review. References for these reviews are available at the end of the presentation. These examples are from a journal called Sports Medicine which publishes lots of SRs and no SRs. When an article is labelled as a ‘Review Article’ that means it is a Narrative Review. Structured by theme and is a summary of the existing literature i.e. this is what we know.
- This is a systematic review. The abstract is much longer and divided up like the article itself e.g. Background, Objective, methods, results, Conclusion. Objectives are much more specific. There is stricter criteria for the information search and methods are more rigorous. A SR will tell us how many studies met the criteria and will tell us what these results demonstrate. The methods are more detailed and explicit about what has been used and not used e.g. “Studies included in this review were published prior to June 2015 and were identified through a systematic search of four electronic databases including….” and also “7334 results were removed as they were either duplicates, review articles, non-peer reviewed articles, conference abstracts….” and “Reference lists of selected articles were then scanned to identify other potential articles”.
- This is a systematic review including meta-analysis. Meta-analysis is the statistical procedure for combining and synthesizing data from multiple studies. Narrative reviews have been used for this purpose, but the narrative review is largely subjective - different experts can come to different conclusions - and becomes difficult when there are more than a few studies involved. When the treatment effect (or effect size) is consistent from one study to the next, meta-analysis can be used to identify this common effect. When the effect varies from one study to the next, meta-analysis may be used to identify the reason for the variation. Meta-analysis, by contrast, applies objective formulas (much as one would apply statistics to data within a single study), and can be used with any number of studies. (ES = effect size) Effect size is a simple way of quantifying the difference between two groups that has many advantages over the use of tests of statistical significance alone. Effect size emphasises the size of the difference rather than confounding this with sample size. This review indicates what we don’t know i.e. “but there is debate whether the……”. There will be a lot more detail about the data and the whole thing is more original. There is a conclusion which in this case finds no strong evidence.
- Cochrane Library is a good place to look for examples of Systematic Reviews. However Cochrane have teams of people who work for years on this which is unrealistic in the real world. However Cochrane will give you an idea of what they are about.
- Framing the question: Decide on a question and be specific. Identifying and selecting relevant literature by searching systematically. Assessing the quality of studies: evaluate using checklist such as CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) Summarising the evidence i.e. what does the evidence say? This might include statistical analysis. Interpreting the findings i.e. what does this mean for real life and future research? PRISMA checklist (next slide) can be used to guide the whole Systematic Review, but other checklists are available to help with elements of the SR such as assessing the quality of the information found such as CASP. More later.
- PRISMA stands for Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews. PRISMA is an evidence-based minimum set of items to help authors improve the reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. PRISMA focuses on the reporting of reviews evaluating randomized trials, but can also be used as a basis for reporting systematic reviews of other types of research, particularly evaluations of interventions. It is the gold standard for carrying out a SR although not all the steps may be relevant e.g. Step 5: Protocol and registration (Review protocols are intended to help you plan your review in a systematic way. These can be registered to help others carrying out reviews and to avoid duplicating work already undertaken. or Step 27 Funding: Describe sources of funding for the systematic review and other support (e.g., supply of data); role of funders for the systematic review. (ENTREQ statement is an alternative for qualitative research: https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2288-12-181) Ignore as this is for AE’s students.
- Steps 6-9 are the library bits i.e: Eligibility criteria: specify study characteristics (e.g. PICOs, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g. years considered, language, publication status), used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale. Information sources: Describe all information (e.g. databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify additional studies) in the search and date last searched. Search: Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it can be repeated. Study selection: State the process for selecting studies (i.e. screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, included in the meta-analysis). Also step 15: Risk of bias across studies : Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence e.g: Publication bias…..things that didn’t work may not be published. Selective reporting within studies Identifying if studies used small number of participants or didn’t factor in other variables other than what they are testing.
- ******************Hand out search strategies*********************** Have a look at the two search strategies in pairs and discuss what you liked, observed etc. Both strategies are good. Search strategy A Keywords are less organised than in SSB which uses a table. Under ‘Additional search methods” mentions screening the reference lists of the articles already found. More specific and clearer about inclusion/exclusion criteria than SSB. Some of the criteria can be applied when searching databases i.e. language but other criteria can only be determined by screening the abstracts. Search strategy B Includes Library Search and Google Scholar in databases searched, but its hard to replicate the same search in journal databases and vice versa. Keywords are very organised.
- The keywords that you use are important and make all the difference when searching for information. This is what you need to do: Briefly summarise your topic (doesn’t have to be detailed) Sum up your topic in a small number of concepts. Searching only one word for each concept will not necessarily bring you all the results. And sometimes none. Therefore need to think of different ways of describing the topic, alternative spellings, synonyms etc. Remember not everyone uses the same terminology for the same idea. You can use Boolean operators (AND/OR) to combine terms. More on this later. Using PICO might help you think about your topic and the main concepts. Patient/Population and/or Problem, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome might help. Health based, but relevant. Example: Population: Netball players Intervention: Taping their ankles Comparison: Doing something different (training or treating) or not doing anything Outcome: Whatever measuring e.g. fewer injuries or quicker recovery etc. PEO is an alternative: Population, Exposure, Outcome. **Hand out worksheet. Fill out as much as you can and discuss with your neighbour – suggest terms they might not have thought of.** The worksheet will help you organise how to combine the terms with ‘AND’ or ‘OR’). Worksheet including a completed example are available at the URL on screen.
- Here’s an example. Breaking down concepts into similar terms, narrower terms etc. The narrower terms come in useful if you are inundated with results. Sometimes when journal database searches bring up loads of results you can use the filters to refine your search such as limiting by date, publication or searching for keywords in the journal abstract only rather than in the full text.
- Students can also search individual databases. SportsDiscus: The most comprehensive bibliographic database covering all aspects of sport, fitness, exercise science and medicine. It includes over 1.7 million records covering journal and magazine articles, books, book chapters, conference proceedings and dissertations. Medline: Good for finding articles from the whole range of medical literature and covers more than 4800 journals. PubMed: References to articles from biomedical journals – this covers the same content as medline, plus some additional life science journals and articles which have not yet been included in medline, books and documents. Science Direct: A full-text scientific journal database providing access to journal articles from more than 2,500 peer-reviewed journals. Science Citation Index: Provides access to bibliographic information and cited information from over 6,500 leading scholarly science and technical journals including medicine, pharmacology etc. TRIP: A medical journal database designed to help identify the best available research evidence to answer clinical questions.
- ****************Have a go……hand out ‘Combining keywords worksheet’…..can also be found at the link on the screen******************* The words you use are important – identify keywords (search terms) from things you read, as well as thinking about similar words (synonyms) e.g. exercise, physical activity or physical fitness. Also consider different spellings, international variations, and professional/common terminology etc. On EBSCO databases - SPORTDiscus, Medline, PsycInfo and Education Research Complete – keywords can be combined using Boolean operators such as AND/OR. Combining keywords enables you to take more control of your search. You can see more clearly what search terms work and don’t work…….this would not be obvious if all terms searched for in one go. Use OR to combine similar terms (synonyms). The example here is football* OR soccer. Combining them together using OR increases the number of results because a broader range of keywords is searched. Use AND to combine keywords. This will make your search more specific by narrowing down your search.
- Emphasize how search can be refined e.g. by publication, date etc.
- We are one of the world’s most comprehensive research databases, giving you access to over 30,000 journals and more than 52 million article citations and conference papers through the British Library’s electronic table of contents. Keeping pace with your peers, staying up to date with new research, and expanding your field of knowledge has never been so simple. We make it easy for you to set-up personalised email Zetoc Alerts or RSS feeds to track the latest articles or journal titles related to your interests. In most cases, you can access abstracts or the full text of articles, depending on your institution’s subscription arrangements
- If you can’t access the full text of an item and its not available in the library, log in to MyUniHub, go to MyStudy and then MyLibrary, then try: Library Search: Double check - copy and paste title into Library Search. Do the same on Google Scholar Google it…..just to make sure. Open access research papers available from: BASE: Search engine especially for academic web resources. It provides more than 150 million documents from more than 7,000 sources. About 60% available in full text. Operated by a German University. CORE: The world’s largest collection of open access research papers. Researchers Networks such as Research Gate: Access 130+ million publications and connect with 15+ million researchers. Join for free. Authors’ and institutions’ websites Unpaywall/Open Access Button browser extension such as Kopernio - Access research papers in one click. Save time accessing full-text PDFs with the free Kopernio browser plugin. Saves you having to navigate paywalls, logins and redirects. Kopernio helps you get to your full-text PDF faster. Trusted by researchers Part of Web of Science group. Inter Library Loan service: request copies of books and journals not held by MDX. £3 charge. Register as DL first. More info on our website. SCONUL Access http://www.access.sconul.ac.uk/ The SCONUL Access Scheme provides reciprocal access and borrowing rights for staff and students to approximately 170 member institutions in the UK. Apply online.
- Find journal articles, theses, books, and more, from academic publishers, professional societies, online repositories, universities and other web sites. Search across many disciplines Locate the full-text document through your library or on the web: Change settings etc to link to MDX resources. You only need to do this once on your own laptop/device, but need to be logged on to MyUniHub. Keep up with recent developments in any area of research Save items in a personal library
- Google Scholar is good, but limited ability to combine different keywords. Older articles can appear first in results, so use the date limits on the left hand side of the screen.
- Which articles have cited an earlier article ie. Way of looking forward in the literature-if have found excellent article, can use a citation index to see which articles have subsequently cited it Find articles on similar/related subjects: Citation implies subject relationship, so can find papers on a similar topic without using any keywords or subject terms Find out how many times a paper has been cited ie. gauge the usefulness/quality. esteem of a paper Determine which are the best journals in your field: citation data used to rank journals within particular subject areas…..useful way of seeing how journals perform in relation to others in the same subject area
- Citation data and journal citation reports available from Web of Knowledge. The world’s leading scholarly literature in the sciences, social sciences, arts, and humanities and proceedings of international conferences, symposia, seminars, colloquia, workshops, and conventions Web of Science comprises of a number of journal databases including: Science Citation Index Expanded (1970-present) Social Sciences Citation Index (1970-present) Arts & Humanities Citation Index (1975-present) Conference Proceedings Citation Index- Science (1990-present) Conference Proceedings Citation Index- Social Science & Humanities (1990-present) Emerging Sources Citation Index (2015-present)
- Google Scholar also has a ‘Cited by’ feature. Also in Library Search – the ‘pointing up’ arrows allow you to ‘Find sources citing this’. The ‘Pointing down’ arrows also allow you to ‘Find sources cited in this’.
- Link on screen for more information about Plum Analytics. Available on EBSCO databases such as Sport Discus. PlumX Metrics PlumX Metrics provide insights into the ways people interact with individual pieces of research output (articles, conference proceedings, book chapters, and many more) in the online environment. Examples include, when research is mentioned in the news or is tweeted about. Collectively known as PlumX Metrics, these metrics are divided into five categories to help make sense of the huge amounts of data involved and to enable analysis by comparing like with like. PlumX gathers and brings together appropriate research metrics for all types of scholarly research output. We categorize metrics into 5 separate categories: Citations, Usage, Captures, Mentions, and Social Media. The Five Categories: Citations – This is a category that contains both traditional citation indexes such as Scopus, as well as citations that help indicate societal impact such as Clinical or Policy Citations. Examples: citation indexes, patent citations, clinical citations, policy citations Learn more Usage – A way to signal if anyone is reading the articles or otherwise using the research. Usage is the number one statistic researchers want to know after citations. Examples: clicks, downloads, views, library holdings, video plays Learn more Captures – Indicates that someone wants to come back to the work. Captures can be an leading indicator of future citations. Examples: bookmarks, code forks, favorites, readers, watchers Learn more Mentions – Measurement of activities such as news articles or blog posts about research. Mentions is a way to tell that people are truly engaging with the research. Examples: blog posts, comments, reviews, Wikipedia references, news media Learn more Social media -This category includes the tweets, Facebook likes, etc. that reference the research. Social Media can help measure “buzz” and attention. Social media can also be a good measure of how well a particular piece of research has been promoted. Examples: shares, likes, comments, tweets
- Useful to see impact of something on social media and other less scholarly sources of information. A single research output may live online in multiple websites and can be talked about across dozens of different platforms. At Altmetric, we work behind the scenes, collecting and collating all of this disparate information to provide you with a single visually engaging and informative view of the online activity surrounding your scholarly content.
- Once articles have been identified they need to be evaluated and using a checklist can be useful such as CASP. CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) produced by Oxford Uni is a checklist – a set of questions- for evaluating information in a consistent and systematic way once it has been selected. i.e. to make a judgement on its quality, write a summary of it etc. Critical appraisal skills enable you to systematically assess the trustworthiness, relevance and results of published papers. The Critical Appraisals Skills Programme (CASP) has over 25 years of significant and unrivalled expertise in the delivery of training to healthcare professionals. There are eight critical appraisal tools available, designed to be used when reading research, these include tools for Systematic Reviews, Randomised Controlled Trials, Cohort Studies, Case Control Studies, Economic Evaluations, Diagnostic Studies, Qualitative studies and Clinical Prediction Rule. These are free to download and can be used by anyone under the Creative Commons License. The checklists comprise of a series of questions which in the case of the CASP checklist for SR is divided into 3 sections: Are the results of the study valid? B. What are the results? Will the results help locally? The questions are designed to help you think about these issues. Questions include: 1. Did the review address a clearly focused question? 2. Did the authors look for the right type of papers? 3. Do you think all the important, relevant studies were included? 4. Did the review’s authors do enough to assess quality of the included studies? 5. If the results of the review have been combined, was it reasonable to do so? 6. What are the overall results of the review? 7. How precise are the results? 8. Can the results be applied to the local population? 9. Were all important outcomes considered? 10. Are the benefits worth the harms and costs? Several checklists are available as an alternative to CASP. Need to chose the appropriate one for your topic: ‘Understanding Health Research’ (link on screen): Understanding Health Research is a tool designed to help people understand and review published health research to decide how dependable and relevant a piece of research is. The tool guides users through a series of questions to ask about specific types of health research, and helps users to understand what the answers to those questions say about the quality of the research they are reading.
- A flowchart should be included in your final SR and PRISMA guidelines recommend that this should be included. Therefore it is important to keep good records of your searching as you go along so that a cumulative representation of your search results can be created. A flowchart can be found on the PRISMA website…..see URL on the screen. The flowchart is divided into four sections: Identification: The number of records identified through database searching and through other sources. Screening: Based on the abstract and title. Including number of records after duplicated removed (RefWorks will do this for you) and the total number of excluded records. EBSCO databases searched together will also remove duplicates. Eligibility: Having read the article -Number of articles assessed for eligibility and number excluded including reasons why. Included: Total number of articles included in your qualitative synthesis (i.e. drawing the findings from different studies together) as well as number included in meta-analysis if used. This number would probably be lower.
- Example of a completed flowchart.
- They use Harvard.
- RefWorks also useful because contains hundreds of referencing styles including the referencing styles of specialist journals including Journal of Sports Sciences, Journal of Strength and Conditioning. Store and annotate PDFs and share with others.
- Need to remove duplicates as part of Systematic Review.
- More information about the range of resources available on the Library Subject Guide plus lots of useful online guides e.g. how to search for information for your project.