1. Literature searching peer review in practice: enhancing the skills of searchers
Rachel Playforth & Igor Brbre
Brighton and Sussex NHS Library & Knowledge Service
HLG Conference 15 June 2018

2. Peer review (noun)
evaluation of scientific, academic, or professional work by others working in the same field

3. Background 3 libraries located at 3 sites
Brighton and Sussex NHS Library and Knowledge Service
3 libraries located at 3 sites
29 members of staff, 15 searchers
Regular peer review of recently completed searches
This project
Demonstrate how searching peer review works in practice
Assess the impact
Areas for improvement

4. Literature review
Pragmatic literature review April papers selected.
Results in three main categories:
about the PRESS instrument
reports on usage of search peer review checklists
guidelines encouraging peer review of searching
No reports of formal searching peer review practice in libraries were found.

5. Why we do it Continuous service improvement Professional development
Knowledge management and exchange
‘to detect errors, to improve quality, and to reduce not only the risk of missing relevant studies but also the risk of identifying unnecessarily large numbers of irrelevant records’ - HTAi Vortal, 2017

6. PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies
study reveals errors in systematic review search strategies CADTH funded study to assess the elements important for peer review of search strategies the first report including PRESS checklist published 2012, research shows searching peer review improves quality CADTH funds an update of the 2007 study revised guideline statement and checklist published

7. PRESS and our adaptation
Our form pre-2015
Our current form
PRESS 2015
Search question
Translation into concepts (PICO, followed up request?)
[searcher supplied question and PICO]
Translation
Sources chosen
Sources (strategy adapted?)
[searcher supplied; single database only]
Search strategy
Search operators
Boolean and proximity operators
Subject headings
Natural language
Text word searching
Spelling & syntax
Spelling, syntax and line numbers
Search filters
Limits and filters
Limits
Search fields utilized
[in Text word searching]
Attachments and cover sheet
Presentation (search notes and summary)
Time spent
CPD needs identified
General comments
Overall evaluation

8. How we do it Managed through Searching and Teaching Peer Group
Random pairings, every 4 months
Review meeting in pairs
Structured discussion using PRESS-based checklist
Completed forms anonymised and summarised by chair of S&T Group
Summary shared and discussed in the S&T group meeting
Issues and CPD requirements taken forward and actioned

9. What we think of it Survey sent to 15 current and 7 former searchers
Response rate n=11 (50%)
Anonymous
Asked about aspects of searching and opinions on peer review process
All but 1 thought peer review had made them a better searcher

13. What we think of it Areas people found most difficult
The peer review meeting itself
The summaries discussed in our group meetings
Suggestions
Do it less frequently
Review (some) searches before (and after) completion
Adapt the form for non-database searches
Make feedback more actionable, develop training

14. What we will do next Revise our peer review form
Discuss peer reviewing (some) searches before completion

15. Collaboration options
PRESS Forum
KnowledgeShare

16. What else do we do
Since peer review of teaching
Journal club

17. Selected bibliography
Sampson M, McGowan J. Errors in search strategies were identified by type and frequency. J Clin Epidemiol 2006;59(10): [accessed 25 April 2018]. Available from:
Sampson M, McGowan J, Cogo E, Grimshaw J, Moher D, Lefebvre C. An evidence-based practice guideline for the peer review of electronic search strategies. J Clin Epidemiol 2009 Sep;62(9): [accessed 25 April 2018]. Available from: X/fulltext
McGowan, J., Sampson, M., & Lefebvre, C. (2010). An Evidence Based Checklist for the Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS EBC). Evidence Based Library and Information Practice, 5(1), [accessed 25 Apr 2018]. Available from:
Spry C, Mierzwinski-Urban M, Rabb D. Peer review of literature search strategies: does it make a difference? Presented at Canadian Health Libraries Association (CHLA) Conference; May 2013; Saskatoon, Saskatchewan: Canada [accessed 25 April 2018]. Available from:
McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, Cogo E, Foerster V, Lefebvre C. PRESS Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Statement. J Clin Epidemiol Jul;75:40-6 [accessed 25 April 2018]. Available from:

18. Contacts Rachel Playforth Rachel.playforth@bsuh.nhs.uk @archelina
Igor Brbre
@iroberger
@BrightonSx_LKS