Original Title: Desarrollo de protocolos de búsqueda bibliográfica de la literatura adaptándolos a los diferentes productos de evaluación

Authors' objectives: Firstly, to define the main advantages and disadvantages of using bibliographic search protocols. Secondly, to define a series of criteria that could aid in prioritising the information resources to be consulted for each research project.

Authors' results and conclusions: Some of the advantages defined were: systematisation of the searches and transparency and repeatability of the process. The disadvantages were: inflexibility to be adapted to some situations; inability to establish time frameworks; and the difficulty of incorporating experts’ opinions into closed protocols. Five areas of prioritisation criteria were defined: study topic; characteristics of the database and other information resources; databases interface; characteristics of the organisation; kind of research output for which the information is intended. 21 prioritisation criteria were established with the objective of prioritising the information resources. It was defined a search protocol for six different research products: systematic reviews; clinical trials, economic evaluations, emergent technologies, generic databases; and clinical practice guidelines.

Authors' recommendations: The information specialists of the documentation area consulted agreed that search protocols are useful tools for guiding systematic searches; the criteria are the first systematic approach to determine the sources to consult in a bibliographic search. Similar methodological exercises should be done in other contexts or use them to extend the information resources to consult despite of the main ones or 'core'. Twenty one prioritisation criteria were established in order to prioritise information resources. It was defined a searchprotocol to six different research outputs: systematic reviews, clinical trials, economic evaluation, emergent technology, generic databases, and clinical practice guidelines.

Authors' methods: Firstly, a consensus group meeting with the information specialists of the Spanish agencies and units of Health Technology Assessment AUnETS was developed, where technique analysis SWOT [strengths, weakness, opportunities and threats] was used to discuss about the usefulness of using search protocols. Secondly, an open questionnaire was e-mailed to the Spanish Health Technology Assessment Agencies (AUnETS) group to evaluate the usefulness of using bibliographic search protocols. Thirdly, the group designed a final prioritisation criteria questionnaire intended for Health Technology Assessment International’s Information Resources Group (HTAi-IRG) based on a draft version previously defined by the Basque Office of HTA (Osteba). The responses to this questionnaire leaded to establish a ranking of prioritisation criteria. Finally: it was created an Excel Table where the ranking of prioritisation criteria and the different information resources where crossed in order to establish a ranking of information resources to consult.

Project Status: Completed

Year Published: 2008

URL for published report: https://www.euskadi.eus/contenidos/informacion/2008_osteba_publicacion/es_def/adjuntos/e_08_03_protocolos.pdf

English language abstract: An English language summary is available

Publication Type: Not Assigned

Country: Spain

Organisation Name: Basque Office for Health Technology Assessment

Contact Address: C/ Donostia – San Sebastián, 1 (Edificio Lakua II, 4ª planta) 01010 Vitoria - Gasteiz

Contact Name: Lorea Galnares-Cordero

Contact Email: lgalnares@bioef.eus

Copyright: <p>Basque Office for Health Technology Assessment, Health Department Basque Government (OSTEBA)</p>