Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorAdams, Jeanen
dc.contributor.authorHillier-Brown, FCen
dc.contributor.authorMoore, HJen
dc.contributor.authorLake, AAen
dc.contributor.authorAraujo-Soares, Ven
dc.contributor.authorWhite, Martinen
dc.contributor.authorSummerbell, Cen
dc.date.accessioned2016-11-24T09:40:30Z
dc.date.available2016-11-24T09:40:30Z
dc.date.issued2016-09-29en
dc.identifier.issn2046-4053
dc.identifier.urihttps://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/261283
dc.description.abstract$\textbf{Background:}$ Grey literature includes a range of documents not controlled by commercial publishing organisations. This means that grey literature can be difficult to search and retrieve for evidence synthesis. Much knowledge and evidence in public health, and other fields, accumulates from innovation in practice. This knowledge may not even be of sufficient formality to meet the definition of grey literature. We term this knowledge 'grey information'. Grey information may be even harder to search for and retrieve than grey literature. $\textbf{Methods:}$ On three previous occasions, we have attempted to systematically search for and synthesise public health grey literature and information-both to summarise the extent and nature of particular classes of interventions and to synthesise results of evaluations. Here, we briefly describe these three 'case studies' but focus on our post hoc critical reflections on searching for and synthesising grey literature and information garnered from our experiences of these case studies. We believe these reflections will be useful to future researchers working in this area. $\textbf{Results:}$ Issues discussed include search methods, searching efficiency, replicability of searches, data management, data extraction, assessing study 'quality', data synthesis, time and resources, and differentiating evidence synthesis from primary research. $\textbf{Conclusions:}$ Information on applied public health research questions relating to the nature and range of public health interventions, as well as many evaluations of these interventions, may be predominantly, or only, held in grey literature and grey information. Evidence syntheses on these topics need, therefore, to embrace grey literature and information. Many typical systematic review methods for searching, appraising, managing, and synthesising the evidence base can be adapted for use with grey literature and information. Evidence synthesisers should carefully consider the opportunities and problems offered by including grey literature and information. Enhanced incentives for accurate recording and further methodological developments in retrieval will facilitate future syntheses of grey literature and information.
dc.description.sponsorshipThis paper presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR)’s School for Public Health Research (SPHR) with support from Durham and Newcastle Universities and the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care of the South West Peninsula (PenCLAHRC). The School for Public Health Research (SPHR) is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). SPHR is a partnership between the Universities of Sheffield, Bristol, Cambridge, and UCL; The London School for Hygiene and Tropical Medicine; The Peninsula College of Medicine and Dentistry; the LiLaC collaboration between the Universities of Liverpool and Lancaster and Fuse; The Centre for Translational Research in Public Health, a collaboration between Newcastle, Durham, Northumbria, Sunderland, and Teesside Universities. FHB, CDS, HJM, WLW, AA, VAS, and AAL are members of Fuse; JA and MW are funded by the Centre for Diet and Activity Research (CEDAR). Fuse and CEDAR are UKCRC Public Health Research Centre of Excellence. Funding for Fuse and CEDAR from the British Heart Foundation, Cancer Research UK, Economic and Social Research Council, Medical Research Council, and the National Institute for Health Research, under the auspices of the UK Clinical Research Collaboration, is gratefully acknowledged.
dc.languageENGen
dc.language.isoenen
dc.publisherBioMed Central
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rightsAttribution 4.0 Internationalen
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en
dc.subjectevidence synthesisen
dc.subjectgrey informationen
dc.subjectgrey literatureen
dc.subjectinterventionsen
dc.subjectpublic healthen
dc.subjectsystematic reviewen
dc.titleSearching and synthesising 'grey literature' and 'grey information' in public health: critical reflections on three case studiesen
dc.typeArticle
prism.issueIdentifier1en
prism.number164en
prism.publicationDate2016en
prism.publicationNameSystematic Reviewsen
prism.volume5en
dc.identifier.doi10.17863/CAM.6457
dcterms.dateAccepted2016-09-13en
rioxxterms.versionofrecord10.1186/s13643-016-0337-yen
rioxxterms.versionVoRen
rioxxterms.licenseref.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/en
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2016-09-29en
dc.contributor.orcidAdams, Jean [0000-0002-5733-7830]
dc.contributor.orcidWhite, Martin [0000-0002-1861-6757]
dc.identifier.eissn2046-4053
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen
pubs.funder-project-idMRC (MR/K023187/1)
pubs.funder-project-idESRC (ES/G007462/1)
pubs.funder-project-idWellcome Trust (087636/Z/08/Z)
cam.orpheus.successThu Jan 30 12:56:56 GMT 2020 - The item has an open VoR version.*
rioxxterms.freetoread.startdate2100-01-01


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution 4.0 International
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as Attribution 4.0 International