scholarly journals Comprehensive search filters for retrieving publications on nonhuman primates for literature reviews (filterNHP)

Author(s):  
Lauren C. Cassidy ◽  
Cathalijn H. C. Leenaars ◽  
Alan V. Rincon ◽  
Dana Pfefferle
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Ana Luiza Peres Baldiotti ◽  
Gabrielle Amaral-Freitas ◽  
Joice Fonseca Barcelos ◽  
Juliana Freire-Maia ◽  
Matheus de França Perazzo ◽  
...  

A highly cited paper is seen as a landmark in any field and can influence both research and clinical practice. This study aimed to quali-quantitatively analyze the 100 most-cited papers in Cariology. A search strategy was first determined using specific keywords related to the field. A comprehensive search was then conducted in the Thompson Reuters Web of Science citation indexing database up to April 2019. Papers focused on any aspect of Cariology were included. A panel of 4 researchers conducted the selection of papers and extracted data on the number of citations, title, authors, country, year, journals, study design, and topic of interest. Scopus and Google Scholar were also searched to compare the number of citations. The VOSviewer software was used to generate bibliometric networks. The number of citations among the top 100 most-cited papers ranged from 168 to 1,961 with a mean of 292,66. Three papers had more than 1,000 citations. The <i>Journal of Dental Research</i> (20%) and <i>Caries Research</i> (17%) had more top papers. The oldest and the most recent papers were published in 1960 and 2015. Literature reviews (35%) and laboratorial studies (31%) were the most common study designs. The countries with the highest number of most-cited papers were the USA (40%), Sweden (10%), and Japan (9%). The most studied fields of interest were etiology/pathogenesis (41%) and prevention (20%). VOSviewer maps revealed collaborative networks between countries and organizations. The top 100 most-cited papers in Cariology were published mainly by European and Anglo-Saxon American authors and were composed mainly of literature reviews with etiology/pathogenesis as the most frequent topic of interest.


2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (69) ◽  
pp. 1-148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol Lefebvre ◽  
Julie Glanville ◽  
Sophie Beale ◽  
Charles Boachie ◽  
Steven Duffy ◽  
...  

BackgroundEffective study identification is essential for conducting health research, developing clinical guidance and health policy and supporting health-care decision-making. Methodological search filters (combinations of search terms to capture a specific study design) can assist in searching to achieve this.ObjectivesThis project investigated the methods used to assess the performance of methodological search filters, the information that searchers require when choosing search filters and how that information could be better provided.MethodsFive literature reviews were undertaken in 2010/11: search filter development and testing; comparison of search filters; decision-making in choosing search filters; diagnostic test accuracy (DTA) study methods; and decision-making in choosing diagnostic tests. We conducted interviews and a questionnaire with experienced searchers to learn what information assists in the choice of search filters and how filters are used. These investigations informed the development of various approaches to gathering and reporting search filter performance data. We acknowledge that there has been a regrettable delay between carrying out the project, including the searches, and the publication of this report, because of serious illness of the principal investigator.ResultsThe development of filters most frequently involved using a reference standard derived from hand-searching journals. Most filters were validated internally only. Reporting of methods was generally poor. Sensitivity, precision and specificity were the most commonly reported performance measures and were presented in tables. Aspects of DTA study methods are applicable to search filters, particularly in the development of the reference standard. There is limited evidence on how clinicians choose between diagnostic tests. No published literature was found on how searchers select filters. Interviewing and questioning searchers via a questionnaire found that filters were not appropriate for all tasks but were predominantly used to reduce large numbers of retrieved records and to introduce focus. The Inter Technology Appraisal Support Collaboration (InterTASC) Information Specialists’ Sub-Group (ISSG) Search Filters Resource was most frequently mentioned by both groups as the resource consulted to select a filter. Randomised controlled trial (RCT) and systematic review filters, in particular the Cochrane RCT and the McMaster Hedges filters, were most frequently mentioned. The majority indicated that they used different filters depending on the requirement for sensitivity or precision. Over half of the respondents used the filters available in databases. Interviewees used various approaches when using and adapting search filters. Respondents suggested that the main factors that would make choosing a filter easier were the availability of critical appraisals and more detailed performance information. Provenance and having the filter available in a central storage location were also important.LimitationsThe questionnaire could have been shorter and could have included more multiple choice questions, and the reviews of filter performance focused on only four study designs.ConclusionsSearch filter studies should use a representative reference standard and explicitly report methods and results. Performance measures should be presented systematically and clearly. Searchers find filters useful in certain circumstances but expressed a need for more user-friendly performance information to aid filter choice. We suggest approaches to use, adapt and report search filter performance. Future work could include research around search filters and performance measures for study designs not addressed here, exploration of alternative methods of displaying performance results and numerical synthesis of performance comparison results.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and Medical Research Council–NIHR Methodology Research Programme (grant number G0901496).


2007 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy K. Mello ◽  
S. Stevens Negus ◽  
Inge M. Knudson ◽  
Maureen Kelly ◽  
Jack H. Mendelson
Keyword(s):  

ALQALAM ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 30 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Muhammad Nadratuzzaman Hosen ◽  
Deden Misbahudin Muayyad

This article explains about the Islamic law of gift from Bank to customers related to saving and gyro accounts of Islamic Bank. The Islamic Banks give gift directly  and  indirectly  to  new  ettstomers  and  old  customers  through drawing  (qur'ah) or lottery and non-drawing. There are disputes (ikhtilaf) among Islamic Law  Experts (Fuqaha’) about the status of law when Islamic Banks give the gift. Hanafi and  Syafi'i  Schools  of thought  opined  that  the gift  can  be given  to  the customers as long as there is no agreement between bank and costomers meanwhile the banks still have a debt to consumers, this is permissible. Maliki and Hanbali schools opined that the gift is not permissible during the time of borrowing and lending. Majority Islamic Exsperts allow to give gift after banks have already paid­ back the debt to consumers as long as there is no agreement between bank and cusiomers, but Maliki School do not allow lo give gift at that condition. Also, for giving gift should free from gambling or elements of gambling (muqamarah).  The method of this article is using literature reviews from classical Islamic Law's books and contemporary Islamic law's books related to drawing or lottery and gambling, meanwhile the aims if this mticle are to investigate the law status if gift from bank to new customers and old customers with direct and indirect ways.   Keywords : gift, saving and gyro accounts, disputes, drawing and elements of gambling


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document