Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24073615›Full record

ArticleBMC medical research methodology2013

Towards a methodology for cluster searching to provide conceptual and contextual "richness" for systematic reviews of complex interventions: case study (CLUSTER).

Andrew Booth, Janet Harris, Elizabeth Croot, Jane Springett, Fiona Campbell, Emma Wilkins

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 120 papers, 18 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
120citing papers in PubMed, 18 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

120 citing papers in PubMed, 18 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Interventions to identify and manage depression delivered by 'nontraditional' providers to community-dwelling older adults: A realist review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2022
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Pooled it
  8. Pooled it
  9. Pooled it
  10. Pooled it
  11. Pooled it
  12. Pooled it
  13. Pooled it
  14. Meta-ethnography of experiences of early discharge, with a focus on paediatric febrile neutropenia.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2018
    Pooled it
  15. Pooled it
  16. Pooled it
  17. Pooled it
  18. Pooled it
  19. Review
  20. Article

60 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Andrew BoothSchool of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Regent Court, 30 Regent Street, Sheffield S1 4DA, UK. a.booth@sheffield.ac.uk.
Janet Harris
Elizabeth Croot
Jane Springett
Fiona Campbell
Emma Wilkins

Funding

Department of Health 09/3008/04
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSystematic review methodologies can be harnessed to help researchers to understand and explain how complex interventions may work. Typically, when reviewing complex interventions, a review team will seek to understand the theories that underpin an intervention and the specific context for that intervention. A single published report from a research project does not typically contain this required level of detail. A review team may find it more useful to examine a "study cluster"; a group of related papers that explore and explain various features of a single project and thus supply necessary detail relating to theory and/or context.We sought to conduct a preliminary investigation, from a single case study review, of techniques required to identify a cluster of related research reports, to document the yield from such methods, and to outline a systematic methodology for cluster searching.

methodsIn a systematic review of community engagement we identified a relevant project - the Gay Men's Task Force. From a single "key pearl citation" we conducted a series of related searches to find contextually or theoretically proximate documents. We followed up Citations, traced Lead authors, identified Unpublished materials, searched Google Scholar, tracked Theories, undertook ancestry searching for Early examples and followed up Related projects (embodied in the CLUSTER mnemonic).

resultsOur structured, formalised procedure for cluster searching identified useful reports that are not typically identified from topic-based searches on bibliographic databases. Items previously rejected by an initial sift were subsequently found to inform our understanding of underpinning theory (for example Diffusion of Innovations Theory), context or both. Relevant material included book chapters, a Web-based process evaluation, and peer reviewed reports of projects sharing a common ancestry. We used these reports to understand the context for the intervention and to explore explanations for its relative lack of success. Additional data helped us to challenge simplistic assumptions on the homogeneity of the target population.

conclusionsA single case study suggests the potential utility of cluster searching, particularly for reviews that depend on an understanding of context, e.g. realist synthesis. The methodology is transparent, explicit and reproducible. There is no reason to believe that cluster searching is not generalizable to other review topics. Further research should examine the contribution of the methodology beyond improved yield, to the final synthesis and interpretation, possibly by utilizing qualitative sensitivity analysis.

Indexed as

Cluster AnalysisDatabases, BibliographicHumansRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicReview Literature as Topic

Identifiers

PMID24073615
PMCPMC3819734

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.