Reference management software for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: an exploration of usage and usability

BMC Medical Research Methodology

William A Ghali¹  Diane L Lorenzetti¹ 

[1] Department of Community Health Sciences, University of Calgary, 3280 Hospital Drive NW, Calgary T2N 4Z6 Alberta, Canada

关键词: Reference management software;    Software;    Bibliographic;    Databases;    Data collection;    Systematic reviews;    Meta-analysis;   

Others  :  866574
DOI  :  10.1186/1471-2288-13-141

 received in 2013-08-06, accepted in 2013-11-12,  发布年份 2013

【 摘 要 】

Background

Reference management software programs enable researchers to more easily organize and manage large volumes of references typically identified during the production of systematic reviews. The purpose of this study was to determine the extent to which authors are using reference management software to produce systematic reviews; identify which programs are used most frequently and rate their ease of use; and assess the degree to which software usage is documented in published studies.

Methods

We reviewed the full text of systematic reviews published in core clinical journals indexed in ACP Journal Club from 2008 to November 2011 to determine the extent to which reference management software usage is reported in published reviews. We surveyed corresponding authors to verify and supplement information in published reports, and gather frequency and ease-of-use data on individual reference management programs.

Results

Of the 78 researchers who responded to our survey, 79.5% reported that they had used a reference management software package to prepare their review. Of these, 4.8% reported this usage in their published studies. EndNote, Reference Manager, and RefWorks were the programs of choice for more than 98% of authors who used this software. Comments with respect to ease-of-use issues focused on the integration of this software with other programs and computer interfaces, and the sharing of reference databases among researchers.

Conclusions

Despite underreporting of use, reference management software is frequently adopted by authors of systematic reviews. The transparency, reproducibility and quality of systematic reviews may be enhanced through increased reporting of reference management software usage.

【 授权许可】

   
2013 Lorenzetti and Ghali; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Nashelsky J, Earley J: Reference management software: selection and uses. Libr Software Rev 1991, 10:174-178.
• [2]Garfield JM, Flanagan H, Fox J: A comparison of two microcomputer-based programs for bibliographic retrieval and formatting. J Clin Monit 1989, 5:177-185.
• [3]Gilmour R, Cobus-Kuo L: Reference management software: a comparative analysis of four products. Issues Sci Technol Libr 2011., 66doi:10.5062/F4Z60KZF
• [4]Wachtel R: Personal bibliographic databases. Science 1987, 235:1093-1096.
• [5]Bibliographic management 2.0. [http://www.ukeig.org.uk/elucidate/issue/feature-article-bibliographic-management-20 webcite]
• [6]King R, Hooper B, Wood W: Using bibliographic software to appraise and code data in educational systematic review research. Med Teach 2011, 33:719-723.
• [7]Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. [updated March 2011] [http://www.cochrane-handbook.org webcite]
• [8]Senarath U: Bibliographic referencing made easy: use of bibliographic software in health research. Ceylon Med J 2007, 52:38-39.
• [9]Steele SE: Bibliographic citation management software as a tool for building knowledge. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 2008, 35:463-466.
• [10]Ware M, Mabe M: The STM report: an overview of scientific and scholarly journal publishing. The Netherlands; 2012.
• [11]Betran AP, Say L, Gulmezoglu AM, Allen T, Hampson L: Effectiveness of different databases in identifying studies for systematic reviews: experience from the WHO systematic review of maternal morbidity and mortality. BMC Med Res Methodol 2005, 5:6. BioMed Central Full Text
• [12]Lohonen J, Isohanni M, Nieminen P, Miettunen J: Coverage of the bibliographic databases in mental health research. Nord J Psychiatry 2010, 64:181-188.
• [13]Royle P, Waugh N: Literature searching for clinical and cost-effectiveness studies used in health technology assessment reports carried out for the national institute for clinical excellence appraisal system. Health Technol Assess 2003, 7:iii-64.
• [14]Royle P, Milne R: Literature searching for randomized controlled trials used in cochrane reviews: rapid versus exhaustive searches. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2003, 19:591-603.
• [15]Dembe AE, Partridge JS, Geist LC: Statistical software applications used in health services research: analysis of published studies in the U.S. BMC Health Serv Res 2011, 11:252. BioMed Central Full Text
• [16]Uniform requirements for manuscripts submitted to biomedical journals: writing and editing for biomedical publications. [http://www.icmje.org/ webcite]
• [17]Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG: Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 2009, 6:e1000097.
• [18]Bax L, Yu LM, Ikeda N, Moons KG: A systematic comparison of software dedicated to meta-analysis of causal studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2007, 7:40. BioMed Central Full Text
• [19]Brantz MH, Galla J: Is there an optimal bibliographic software product for end users? Bull Med Libr Assoc 1988, 76:216-220.
• [20]Hernandez DA, El-Masri MM, Hernandez CA: Choosing and using citation and bibliographic database software (BDS). Diabetes Educ 2008, 34:457-474.
• [21]Ovadia S: Managing citations with cost-free tools. Behav Soc Sci Librar 2011, 30:107-111.
• [22]Wallace BC, Schmid CH, Lau J, Trikalinos TA: Meta-analyst: software for meta-analysis of binary, continuous and diagnostic data. BMC Med Res Methodol 2009, 9:80. BioMed Central Full Text