What differentiates JBI reviews in the search component is our explicit 3-step search process.
The first step is an initial exploratory search (usually of MEDLINE and CINAHL databases) to find ‘seed references’ –– that is, records of studies that meet the inclusion criteria for the review question. Google, Google Scholar, Library discovery tools (PRIMO, OneSearch, SumSearch, etc.) and Generative AI tools (e.g. ChatGPT) can be useful for finding these seed references. However, for sources found via ChatGPT, it is important to verify that they are not hallucinations. Following these initial exploratory searches, the keywords in the title and abstract, along with indexed terms (also referred to as MeSH terms, Thesaurus, Controlled Vocabulary) of the seed references are harvested. Consultation with the review team to gather other keywords and indexed terms should be sought.
The second step is to develop a comprehensive search strategy using these harvested keywords and indexed terms for the key database for the protocol. The development of a comprehensive search is an iterative process that involves testing combinations of keywords and indexed terms and checking that the seed references are being captured by the search strategy. Once the search strategy is developed in the primary database, it is then translated across to other databases and grey literature sources. Some databases, such as Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO, include grey literature.
The third step is supplementary searching of the grey literature, citation searching and handsearching. The TARCiS Statement (Terminology, Application and Reporting of Citation Searching) provides guidance on when and how to conduct citation searching as a supplementary search technique in evidence synthesis, and importantly, how to report it (Hirt et al. 2024). For review questions that are complex, forward and backward citation searching is considered mandatory.