Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors01:15

Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors

In the case of systematic errors, the sources can be identified, and the errors can be subsequently minimized by addressing these sources. According to the source, systematic errors can be divided into sampling, instrumental, methodological, and personal errors.
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Systematic Sampling Method01:17

Systematic Sampling Method

Sampling is a technique to select a portion (or subset) of the larger population and study that portion (the sample) to gain information about the population. Data are the result of sampling from a population. The sampling method ensures that samples are drawn without bias and accurately represent the population. Because measuring the entire population in a study is not practical, researchers use samples to represent the population of interest.
Systematic sampling is one of the simplest methods...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches01:23

Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches

Biopharmaceutical studies constitute a vital field aiming to enhance drug delivery methods and refine therapeutic approaches, drawing upon diverse interdisciplinary knowledge. In research methodologies, the choice between controlled and non-controlled studies significantly influences the study's reliability and accuracy.
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast, controlled...
Types of Reports III: Telephone and Verbal Reports01:26

Types of Reports III: Telephone and Verbal Reports

Telephone and Verbal Reports in healthcare settings are two communication methods for conveying therapeutic instructions from healthcare providers to nurses or other healthcare staff.
Here's an overview of each type:
Telephone Orders
Types of Reports I: Hand-off Report01:25

Types of Reports I: Hand-off Report

A hand-off report, also known as a change-of-shift report, is a crucial nursing process that ensures the smooth transition of patient care responsibilities between nursing staff.
Following are the key components and categories of hand-off reports:
Purpose and Process:
Bias in Epidemiological Studies01:29

Bias in Epidemiological Studies

Biases can arise at various stages of research, from study design and data collection to analysis and interpretation. Recognizing and addressing these biases is essential to ensure the validity and reliability of epidemiological findings.Broadly speaking, biases in epidemiology fall into three main categories: selection bias, information bias, and confounding. A more detailed description of possible biases is:

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

The Changing Landscape of Journalology in Medicine.

Seminars in nuclear medicine·2019
Same author

Systematic reviews in restorative dentistry: discussing relevant aspects.

Journal of esthetic and restorative dentistry : official publication of the American Academy of Esthetic Dentistry ... [et al.]·2019
Same author

CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne·2019
Same author

Guidance for reporting outcomes in clinical trials: scoping review protocol.

BMJ open·2019
Same author

Systematic reviews in dentistry: Current status, epidemiological and reporting characteristics.

Journal of dentistry·2019
Same author

Screening for depression in women during pregnancy or the first year postpartum and in the general adult population: a protocol for two systematic reviews to update a guideline of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care.

Systematic reviews·2019
Same journal

Harms Reporting Was Frequently Incomplete or Discordant in Biomedical Randomized Trials Published in 2023: A Meta-epidemiological Study.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026
Same journal

Using an Open Science Checklist in Grant Proposal Reviews to Predict Reproducibility of Funded Publications.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026
Same journal

A comparison of five statistical methods used to analyse longitudinal EORTC QLQ-C30 quality of life scores in randomised controlled trials: a simulation study.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026
Same journal

Sample Size Determination for Decision-centered Pragmatic Trials.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026
Same journal

Many multicenter randomized controlled trials do not account for center effect: a methodological review.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026
Same journal

Patient Acceptability of the Modified Zelen Approach to Randomized Trials - A Survey of the CAPS THA Cohort.

Journal of clinical epidemiology·2026
See all related articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jul 4, 2026

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases
05:02

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases

Published on: October 24, 2019

No consensus exists on search reporting methods for systematic reviews.

Margaret Sampson1, Jessie McGowan, Jennifer Tetzlaff

  • 1Department of Information Studies, University of Wales, Aberystwyth, Wales, UK. msampson@cheo.on.ca

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology
|July 1, 2008
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Reporting standards for systematic review searches lack consensus. Many recommended search reporting items are not consistently applied in practice, impacting review quality and reproducibility.

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jul 4, 2026

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases
05:02

Comparing Bibliometric Analysis Using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Databases

Published on: October 24, 2019

Area of Science:

  • Information Science
  • Medical Informatics
  • Evidence-Based Medicine

Background:

  • Effective reporting of systematic review search methods is crucial for critical appraisal, reproducibility, and updating.
  • Existing search reporting instruments and current practices require evaluation to identify gaps and improve standards.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To identify validated or evaluated search reporting instruments for systematic review searches.
  • To compare reported search practices against recommended standards.

Main Methods:

  • A systematic review methodology was employed to identify relevant instruments.
  • A comprehensive search strategy was executed across multiple databases (LISAs, MEDLINE, etc.), supplemented by expert consultation.
  • Reporting practices were analyzed from a cohort of 297 recent systematic reviews.

Main Results:

  • Of 11 examined instruments, only 4 were validated, despite 7 citing supporting evidence.
  • Eighteen distinct reporting items were identified, with 'databases used' being the only universally included item.
  • Current reporting practices varied significantly, from 98.7% for 'databases used' to 11.4% for 'qualifications of the searcher'.

Conclusions:

  • There is a lack of consensus on optimal reporting standards for systematic review search methods.
  • Commonly recommended search reporting items are often suboptimally reported in practice.
  • The findings highlight a need for improved guidelines and adherence to enhance systematic review quality.