방법 비교
선택한 방법을 나란히 검토하세요. 서로 다른 행은 강조 표시됩니다.
| 체계적 검색 전략× | 회색 문헌 검색× | |
|---|---|---|
| 분야 | 연구 역량 | 연구 역량 |
| 계열 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 기원 연도≠ | 1990s (formalized in Cochrane methodology) | 1990s (formalized in systematic review guidelines) |
| 창시자≠ | Cochrane Collaboration and systematic review methodologists | Information specialists and systematic review methodologists (Cochrane Collaboration, Health Technology Assessment) |
| 유형≠ | Framework | Tool |
| 원전≠ | Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. DOI ↗ | Rothstein, H. R., & Hopewell, S. (2009). Grey literature. In J. P. Higgins & S. Green (Eds.), Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions (Version 5.0.2, Chapter 13). The Cochrane Collaboration. link ↗ |
| 별칭 | search protocol, systematic search, comprehensive search strategy | grey literature, gray literature, unpublished literature |
| 관련 | 3 | 3 |
| 요약≠ | A systematic search strategy is a comprehensive, transparent protocol for retrieving all relevant literature addressing a well-defined research question. Developed by the Cochrane Collaboration and formalized in guidelines like PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses), systematic search strategies are essential for conducting unbiased literature reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Unlike ad hoc searches (searching Google Scholar or PubMed without a protocol), systematic searches document every step—which databases were searched, what search terms were used, how many results were retrieved, and what inclusion/exclusion criteria were applied—enabling other researchers to reproduce the search and verify that no relevant studies were missed. | Grey literature comprises documents and data not published through conventional commercial channels—including theses, government reports, clinical trial registries, conference abstracts, organizational policy documents, and working papers. Unlike journal articles, grey literature is not indexed in MEDLINE or Scopus and often lacks peer review. However, it is crucial for systematic reviews because it may contain null or negative findings that are less likely to be published (publication bias). Systematic grey literature searching is now a standard component of evidence synthesis and is recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration, PRISMA, and other methodological guidelines. |
| ScholarGate데이터셋 ↗ |
|
|