1. Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Chapter 6 Finding the Evidence: Informational Sources, Search Strategies, and Critical Appraisal

2. Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Chapter Overview Be familiar with how and where to find “evidence” in various informational sources. Evidence can be used to corroborate or contradict previous research findings. Discuss the hierarchy of evidence in terms of its presentation/publication (prestige or importance of a refereed scientific journal in its field). Concept of the Invisible Web. Use of Boolean logic as your search strategy. How to critically review and appraise scientific literature as evidence. Various factors influence and determine the quality of informational sources. Benefits and limitations of the journal impact factor.

3. Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Informational Sources and the Reference Librarian A reference librarian helps point you towards your most likely resources, but he or she will not necessarily be able to answer your research question(s). The goals of the reference librarian: to help you find suitable informational sources and to provide guidance and instruction for using effective search strategies. Although the research librarian is there to help you, they do not represent the culmination of your search.

4. Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Electronic Sources and Databases Information from Web sites and non-refereed documents is questionable in terms of the accuracy and reliability of content. Peer-reviewed journal articles from databases can usually be trusted to be credible and valid. Journal databases are generally inaccessible to search engine indexes. The inaccessible areas are called the Invisible Web. Databases are electronic libraries of indexed journals, books, and non-journal bibliographic literature that are overseen, managed, and updated on a regular basis. Refereed journals publish articles that have undergone peer-review prior to acceptance for publication The peer-review process is one by which a panel of experts judges the content and correctness of one’s work before accepting a research document for journal publication.

5. Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Search Strategies Search results are only as good as the search strategies employed. Planned investigation begins with the understanding that searching and reviewing the literature is a purposeful and sometimes tiresome process. Consider using Boolean logic as part of your search strategy. –Boolean searching is based on the logical relationships among search terms. The operator terms (OR, AND, NOT) are used to combine search terms to create a different set of search directions for the computer to follow.

6. Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Critical Review and Appraisal Sort out and organize search results/ “evidence” as it accumulates. This involves determining the relevance and readability of the literature and the quality and importance of the source. General appraisal should precede critical appraisal. Appraisal refers to judgments about the relevance and readability of the evidence. During preliminary evaluation, the suitability of a paper is determined by a quick read of the abstract. The paper is also scanned for appropriateness of content, comparable context, date of publication, high regard of authors, reputation of the journal, and references. Critical review is the structured reading, undertaken to answer questions, identify key points, and recognize significance.

7. Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Following Critical Review and Appraisal 1.Read the entire paper to get a sense of the “big picture,” and identify any unfamiliar terminology or phrases. 2. Read one section at a time for comprehension. When you can make out the purpose, the independent and dependent variables of interest, the methods, and the results of the study, then you have finished reading the paper.

8. Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Questions to Help You Locate information in a Paper Topic: What was the article about? What was the issue or research problem in the article? Purpose: In your own words, why was the study or experiment done? Methods and procedures: What was being measured in the study, and how was it tested? Results: What were the statistical findings from the study or experiment? If something of interest was measured, what was the outcome? How did one variable influence or change another? Conclusions: In your own words, what was the “take-home message” of the article? Theoretical significance: Why did you choose this particular article? What did you learn from the article, and how does it connect to the theories and research perspectives in other works? Critical appraisal: Objectively review and comment on the methodology of the study.

9. Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Quality of Informational Sources In an evidence-based context, the quality of an informational source as evidence is associated with the ranking or hierarchy of the evidence. Know the expectations regarding the quality of informational sources prior to initiating search strategies. Confirm quality requirements before finalizing critical review and appraisal. Differences in research methods and data analysis influence the quality or strength of evidence.

10. Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Impact Factor Journal impact factor (JIF) is widely considered a determinant of journal status associated with Journal Citation Reports. Impact factor is a mathematical rating system based on the numbers of journal citations and article publications within a two-year time frame. The quality of the peer-review process is not an extension of the journal impact factor. Controversy can exist regarding journals with high impact factors that are regularly assumed to be more prestigious, but for which the accuracy of these assumptions is questionable.

11. Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Impact Factor Limitations The metric comparison used does not tell us anything about the reputation of the peer-review process for scientific literature. As a result, there have been questions of validity and misuse. Rankings are limited by the fact that frequency in citation and publication do not necessarily equate to scientific expertise, quality of scholarship, or an active research agenda. Depending upon the mass of the scientific discipline and the extensiveness of the circulation of the journal, the journal impact factor ranking could be skewed. Human judgment is the greatest limitation of the journal impact factor. This results in the debate over journal popularity versus journal influence and importance.

12. Copyright © 2011 Wolters Kluwer Health | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Chapter Summary and Key Points Learning to decipher how the evidence fits together requires patience, prudence, intellectual curiosity, and a willingness to look beyond the obvious. There are no shortcuts to finding the evidence. Evidence is evaluated based on a hierarchy. The peer-review process is one by which a panel of experts judges the content and correctness of one’s work before accepting a research document for journal publication. The abstract is an abbreviated summation of the main points of importance from the paper. It provides a synopsis of the article by stating the purpose, methods, results, and a list of key terms. Journal impact factor (JIF) is widely considered a determinant of journal status associated with Journal Citation Reports.