Skip to Main Content

LEARNA: Systematic Literature Searching

Background reading

Before you start looking for and reading journal articles it is important that you have first done some background reading and have a basic understanding of the topic.  Without background reading you may struggle to identify keywords, to read journal articles, and to write your introduction.  Journal articles are much more focused and narrower in their topics than books and aren't usually as easy to read.

If your topic is very broad, then you may find your search results overwhelming.  If you have already done some background reading and have an idea of what you are going to be writing, it can sometimes be easier to divide your searches up into manageable chunks.

Inclusion and Exclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria define the characteristics that make a study eligible for inclusion. These criteria specify the population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes of interest.

Exclusion criteria identify characteristics that lead to the exclusion of studies from the review

These should be clearly defined before you begin your systematic searches.

Grey Literature

Grey literature is materials and research produced by organizations outside of the traditional commercial or academic publishing and distribution channels. This includes things like theses, reports, working papers, government publications, registers of control trials and white papers.  It can be challenging to discover, access, and evaluate, but it plays a crucial role in research, in particular when accessing emerging information before it is published via the traditional channels like books and journals.

Preliminary searches and picking a topic

Before you do your main, focused search for journal articles you might want to consider some broader keyword searching.  FINDit article search is perfect for this as it cross searches a wide range of resources across a range of subject areas.

This will allow you to see if there is a lot of research on your topic, or not very much and you may then want to adjust your assignment title accordingly.  It will also help you to see what keywords work and which don't and potentially pick up new ones.  It will also help you to see if your keywords are picking up a lot of irrelevant articles and see if you need to take steps to negotiate that.

FINDit and Google Scholar are good places for background reading as they search widely. 

Once you have done some preliminary searches you should be able to chose a topic and fit to a framework (if necessary).  For the best experience, you want to avoid very broad topics and things which have no evidence base.

FINDit pros and cons

  • Searches widely (All of USW's collections in one go).
  • Good for preliminary searching.
  • Searches items with full text available.
  • Can save favourite items and searches.
  • Only searches USW's collections so not the best place for a thorough systematic literature search.
  • Number of results can be overwhelming.
  • Searches all USW subject areas, not just healthcare resources 
  • No option to search abstract

Google Scholar for a systematic search

Google Scholar is a very large source of information so it is recommended for use as a secondary search, to supplement the main searches in the healthcare databases.

Google Scholar searches more widely than the databases, so can be a good source of grey literature.

Tips for using Google Scholar are:

  • Set up USW Library links.  To do this click on Settings then Library Links. Type University of South Wales into the search box and select FINDit@University of South Wales – Viewonline@USW.Tick the boxes next to the results and save. You will now be able to access our subscriptions via Google Scholar.
  • Use the 'Advanced Search' for additional search options.
  • Use the 'Cited by' link to find citations for articles that you have already identified.  This will allow you to keep your research up to date.
  • Use the 'Saved Searches' feature to rerun your searches and check for new results at a later date.

Searching techniques

Frameworks

  • Patient, Population or Problem 
    • What are the characteristics of the patient or population (demographics, risk factors, pre-existing conditions, etc)? 
    • What is the condition or disease of interest?
  • Intervention 
    • What is the intervention under consideration for this patient or population? 
  • Comparison 
    • What is the alternative to the intervention (e.g. placebo, different drug, surgery)? 
  • Outcome 
    • What are the included outcomes (e.g. quality of life, change in clinical status, morbidity, adverse effects, complications)? 

Taken from Cochrane Library Cochrane Library About PICO | Cochrane Library

Cochrane library (2024). Cochrane Library About PICO | Cochrane Library. [online] www.cochranelibrary.com. Available at: https://www.cochranelibrary.com/about-pico.

  • (P) – Population refers to the sample of subjects you wish to recruit for your study. There may be a fine balance between defining a sample that is most likely to respond to your intervention (e.g. no co-morbidity) and one that can be generalized to patients that are likely to be seen in actual practice.

  • (I) – Intervention refers to the treatment that will be provided to subjects enrolled in your study.

  • (C) – Comparison identifies what you plan on using as a reference group to compare with your treatment intervention. Many study designs refer to this as the control group. If an existing treatment is considered the ‘gold standard’, then this should be the comparison group.

  • (O) – Outcome represents what result you plan on measuring to examine the effectiveness of your intervention. Familiar and validated outcome measurement tools relevant to common chiropractic patient populations may include the Neck Disability Index or Roland-Morris Questionnaire. There are, typically, a multitude of outcome tools available for different clinical populations, each having strengths and weaknesses.

  • (T) – Time describes the duration for your data collection.

Taken from What is your research question? An introduction to the PICOT format for clinicians - PMC (nih.gov)

Riva, J. J. et al. (2012) What is your research question? An introduction to the PICOT format for clinicians. Journal of the Canadian Chiropractic Association. 56 (3), 167–171.

 

Population             Who?

Intervention           What or How?

Comparison          Compared to what?

Outcome                What are you trying to accomplish / improve?

Context                  In what kind of organization / circumstances?

Taken from What is a PICOC? » CEBMa

cebma.org. (2024). What is a PICOC?» CEBMa. [online] Available at: https://cebma.org/resources/frequently-asked-questions/what-is-a-picoc/.

 Population (including animal species)

 Exposure 

Comparator

Outcomes 

Taken from Identifying the PECO: A framework for formulating good questions to explore the association of environmental and other exposures with health outcomes - PMC (nih.gov)

Morgan, R.L., Whaley, P., Thayer, K.A. and Schünemann, H.J. (2018). Identifying the PECO: A framework for formulating good questions to explore the association of environmental and other exposures with health outcomes. Environment International, [online] 121(1), pp.1027–1031. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2018.07.015.

Condition
  • Which condition, disease, problem or symptom are you looking at?
Context
  • When is this happening?
  • Where is this happening? (Geographical location, e.g. Australia / Service location, e.g. hospital)
Population
  • How is your population defined? (e.g. age, gender, ethnic group …)

 

Taken from What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences - PMC (nih.gov)

Munn, Z. et al. (2018) What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC medical research methodology. [Online] 18 (1), 5–5.

Setting: the location or environment relevant to your research (e.g. accident and emergency unit) 
​Population (or perspective): the type of group that you are studying (e.g. older people)

Intervention: the intervention/practice/treatment that you are evaluating (e.g. initial examination of patients by allied health staff)

Comparator: an intervention with which you compare the above comparator (e.g. initial examination by medical staff) 
Evaluation: the hypothetical result you intend to evaluate e.g. lower mortality rates)

 

Taken from: Booth, A (2004) Formulating answerable questions. In Booth, A & Brice, A (Eds) Evidence Based Practice for Information Professionals: A handbook. (pp. 61-70) London: Facet

Expectation
  • What is the information you find going to be used to support?
Client group
  • Who is the service for?
Location
  • Where is the service run from? (e.g. community centre or hospital)
Impact
  • What is the desired change to service, if any?
  • How are you defining success?
  • How will you measure success?
Professionals
  • Who is providing the service?
  • Who will be involved in improving the service?
Service
  • Which service are you searching for information on?

 

Taken from Wildridge, V. & Bell, L. (2002) How CLIP became ECLIPSE: a mnemonic to assist in searching for health policy/management information. Health information and libraries journal. [Online] 19 (2), 113–115.

 

 

 

 Sample

Phenomenon of Interest

Design

Evaluation 

Research type

Taken from Beyond PICO: the SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis - PubMed (nih.gov)

Cooke, A. et al. (2012) Beyond PICO: The SPIDER Tool for Qualitative Evidence Synthesis. Qualitative health research. [Online] 22 (10), 1435–1443.

Reference management software

Systematic review software

NB: USW Library does not provide support with using these tools