|
As you might expect, there are problems with both these approaches. If you don't look very hard, the studies you do find are not likely to be representative of all the studies done. The reasons for this are explained in detail in the module on 'Publication bias'. For now, you just need to know that studies with dramatic results are much easier to find than studies that don't have dramatic findings. The other problem with only looking for a few studies is that you end up with less information. This can limit the precision of the results of your review, and restrict the conclusions you can make.
However, is it feasible to find absolutely every relevant study that has ever been done? It's certainly not easy and might not be possible in most reviews. Many studies are never published, and those that are may not be indexed in places, such as MEDLINE, you'd normally look. At some point, the effort required to find more studies becomes too much, but there is relatively little evidence on exactly when we need to stop. So, for now, most people adopt a pragmatic approach - look as far and as wide as possible, taking care to look in such a way that we take account of what we know about the biases in finding studies.
In the meantime, one of the major, ongoing efforts of the Cochrane Collaboration is to make the reports of relevant studies easier to find.
Developing a logical approach to searching
In developing your search strategy, there are a few principles. Your search should:
- be sensitive (trying to find as many studies as possible)
- minimise bias
- be efficient
|