SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Supplementary databases increased literature search coverage beyond PubMed and Embase
16 references·0 citing·50 second hop
Supplementary databases increased literature search coverage beyond PubMed and Embase (2025)Supplementary databases increased literat…Beyond Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science: An evaluation of the backward and forward citation coverage of 59 databases' citation indices (2024)Beyond Google Scholar, Scopus…Using Embase as a supplement to PubMed in Cochrane reviews differed across fields (2021)Using Embase as a supplement …The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis (2021)The journal coverage of Web o…Using the full PICO model as a search tool for systematic reviews resulted in lower recall for some PICO elements (2020)Using the full PICO model as …Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta‐analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources (2019)Which academic search systems…Searching for qualitative health research required several databases and alternative search strategies: a study of coverage in bibliographic databases (2019)Searching for qualitative hea…Exploring PubMed as a reliable resource for scholarly communications services (2019)Exploring PubMed as a reliabl…Defining the process to literature searching in systematic reviews: a literature review of guidance and supporting studies (2018)Defining the process to liter…Systematic review finds that study data not published in full text articles have unclear impact on meta-analyses results in medical research (2017)Systematic review finds that …Supplementary search methods were more effective and offered better value than bibliographic database searching: A case study from public health and environmental enhancement (2017)Supplementary search methods …Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study (2017)Optimal database combinations…The contribution of databases to the results of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study (2016)The contribution of databases…Optimizing literature search in systematic reviews – are MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL enough for identifying effect studies within the area of musculoskeletal disorders? (2016)Optimizing literature search …Comparing the coverage, recall, and precision of searches for 120 systematic reviews in Embase, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar: a prospective study (2016)Comparing the coverage, recal…The Role of Google Scholar in Evidence Reviews and Its Applicability to Grey Literature Searching (2015)The Role of Google Scholar in…Systematic Differences between Cochrane and Non-Cochrane Meta-Analyses on the Same Topic: A Matched Pair Analysis (2015)Systematic Differences betwee…Comparison of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar: strengths and weaknesses (2007)Open access: The true cost of science publishing (2013)Teachers’ perception of STEM integration and education: a systematic literature review (2019)The ABC of systematic literature review: the basic methodological guidance for beginners (2020)Google Scholar as replacement for systematic literature searches: good relative recall and precision are not enough (2013)Is the coverage of google scholar enough to be used alone for systematic reviews (2013)How to carry out a literature search for a systematic review: a practical guide (2018)Roles for librarians in systematic reviews: a scoping review (2018)Searching two or more databases decreased the risk of missing relevant studies: a metaresearch study (2022)How important are comprehensive literature searches and the assessment of trial quality in systematic reviews? Empirical study (2003)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1. The Cochrane Collaboration (2008)Recommendations for examining and interpreting funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials (2011)Catalogue of bias: publication bias (2018)Social media use for nutrition outcomes in young adults: a mixed-methods systematic review (2018)A systematic review and meta-analysis of the Test of Memory Malingering in adults: Two decades of deception detection (2019)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (2009)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA statement for reporting literature searches in systematic reviews (2021)The Science of Literature Reviews: Searching, Identifying, Selecting, and Synthesising (2023)Types of scenario planning and their effectiveness: A review of reviews (2023)Information-seeking behavior and the use of online resources: a snapshot of current health sciences faculty (2014)‘Predatory’ open access: a longitudinal study of article volumes and market characteristics (2015)Beyond Beall’s List: Better understanding predatory publishers (2015)Comprehensive Approach to Open Access Publishing: Platforms and Tools (2019)An international systematic review of cyberbullying measurements (2020)Fear of missing out (FoMO) among social media users: a systematic literature review, synthesis and framework for future research (2021)Reliability and Validity Assessment (1979)An open source machine learning framework for efficient and transparent systematic reviews (2021)Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The Titans of Bibliographic Information in Today’s Academic World (2021)PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement (2016)The impact of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) as a search strategy tool on literature search quality: a systematic review (2018)Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review (2022)Parental Phubbing and Child Social-Emotional Adjustment: A Meta-Analysis of Studies Conducted in China (2023)Large Language Models in Systematic Review Screening: Opportunities, Challenges, and Methodological Considerations (2025)Methodological Standards for Conducting High-Quality Systematic Reviews (2025)The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis (2015)Scopus as a curated, high-quality bibliometric data source for academic research in quantitative science studies (2020)Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic (2021)Fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA) in business and management research: A contemporary overview (2022)Guidelines for Bibliometric‐Systematic Literature Reviews: 10 steps to combine analysis, synthesis and theory development (2024)CiteSpace II: Detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific literature (2005)Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping (2009)bibliometrix : An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis (2017)How to search for literature in systematic reviews and meta-analyses: A comprehensive step-by-step guide (2024)Navigating long-term orientation, adaptability and crisis response: a strategic view on family business resilience (2025)Resilience of small and medium-sized enterprises in times of crisis: an umbrella review (2025)A 24-step guide on how to design, conduct, and successfully publish a systematic review and meta-analysis in medical research (2019)The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research (2020)What are the barriers, facilitators and interventions targeting help-seeking behaviours for common mental health problems in adolescents? A systematic review (2020)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2015The Role of Google Scholar in Evidence Reviews and Its Applicability to Grey Literature Searching2,381 cited
  • 2019Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta‐analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources2,361 cited
  • 2017Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study2,104 cited
  • 2021The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis2,085 cited
  • 2018Defining the process to literature searching in systematic reviews: a literature review of guidance and supporting studies561 cited
  • 2020Using the full PICO model as a search tool for systematic reviews resulted in lower recall for some PICO elements253 cited
  • 2017Systematic review finds that study data not published in full text articles have unclear impact on meta-analyses results in medical research227 cited
  • 2016Comparing the coverage, recall, and precision of searches for 120 systematic reviews in Embase, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar: a prospective study202 cited
  • 2019Exploring PubMed as a reliable resource for scholarly communications services186 cited
  • 2024Beyond Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science: An evaluation of the backward and forward citation coverage of 59 databases' citation indices134 cited
  • 2016The contribution of databases to the results of systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study118 cited
  • 2015Systematic Differences between Cochrane and Non-Cochrane Meta-Analyses on the Same Topic: A Matched Pair Analysis

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

105 cited
  • 2016Optimizing literature search in systematic reviews – are MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL enough for identifying effect studies within the area of musculoskeletal disorders?67 cited
  • 2017Supplementary search methods were more effective and offered better value than bibliographic database searching: A case study from public health and environmental enhancement66 cited
  • 2021Using Embase as a supplement to PubMed in Cochrane reviews differed across fields59 cited
  • 2019Searching for qualitative health research required several databases and alternative search strategies: a study of coverage in bibliographic databases46 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.