Background
Abstracting and Indexing (A&I) databases are the primary source of information for systematic reviews, be the retrieved information actual systematic reviews themselves, or their constituent units of analysis, e.g. randomized controlled trials, observational studies etc.
A systematic review, irrespective of type, benefits from reviewers being able to consult multiple databases. However, while such databases fit the general label of being Abstracting and Indexing (A&I) database resources, they vary in their scope and coverage, in their editorial policies and processes as well as in how the information may be retrieved from them.
This has the practical consequence that while a search can be designed to generally follow the same sequence of conceptual blocks, the exact formulation of the search terms and syntax needs to be adapted for each database.
The search discussed here is an Ovid MEDLINE search that was constructed and run to support the production of a qualitative systematic review, the results of which were reported in the paper “Patients’ perspectives on interprofessional collaboration between health care professionals during hospitalization: a qualitative systematic review” and published in the journal JBI Evidence Synthesis (see references below).
The Ovid MEDLINE search was one of six searches, each being constructed separately for the six databases considered by the systematic review. An initial search was constructed and run in 2017 and then updated in 2018. The search considered here is the updated version from 2018. To inspect and compare the equivalent search run in APA PsycInfo on Ovid, please see Search Strategies for a Qualitative Systematic Review – JBI EBP Database (Part 2).
Search Stategy
1. Patient Care Team/
2. exp Interprofessional Relations/
3. ((doctor$1 or physician$1) adj1 nurse$1 adj2 (collaboration or communication or cooperation or relation$1 or round$1)).ab,ti,kf.
4. ((interprofessional or inter-professional or interdisciplinary) adj2 (care or collaboration or communication or cooperation or healthcare or management or relation$1 or round$1 or team$1)).ab,ti,kf.
5. (team$1 adj1 (care or healthcare)).ab,ti,kf.
6. teamwork.ab,ti,kf.
7. (((collaboration or communication or cooperation or relation$1) adj2 (provider$ 1 or clinician$1)) not (patient$1 adj2 (provider$1 or clinician$1))).ab,ti,kf.
8. or/1-7
9. exp Patient Satisfaction/
10. Patient Participation/
11. ((patient$1 or inpatient$1 or client$1 or user$1 or wom#n$1) adj3 (participation or perspective$1 or view$1 or viewpoint$1 or perception$1 or satisfaction or experience$1 or attitude$1 or role$1 or preference$1 or expectation$1 or involve$1 or involvement or engagement or dissatisfaction$1)).ab,ti,kf.
12. or/9-11
13. (qualitative or interview_ or findings or focus group_ or themes or mixed method$1).mp. or exp qualitative research/
14. 8 and 12 and 13
15. limit 14 to yr=‘‘1980 -Current’’
Reviewers
Primary: Michael Fanning
Secondary: Charlotte Viken
Review Date: 2023-07-13
Expiry Date: 2023-12-31
Original search produced by:
JBI
References:
Patients’ perspectives on interprofessional collaboration between health care professionals during hospitalization: a qualitative systematic review. JBI Evid Synth 2020; 18(6):1208–1270.
DOI:10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00121
Note: The above reference is from the journal JBI Evidence Synthesis, published by Wolters Kluwer and subject to Lippincott Open Access policies. For further details see https://www.wolterskluwer.com/en/solutions/lippincott-journals/lippincott-open-access
Citation:
Ovid Customer Support, Search Strategies for a Qualitative Systematic Review – JBI EBP Database (Part 1), Ovid Expert Searches Portal, Version: 8th May 2023, Visited: 11th May 2023.