Year-end Sale % OFF 
Abstract
BackgroundUsing internet search engines (such as Google search) in systematic literature reviews is increasingly becoming a ubiquitous part of search methodology. In order to integrate the vast quantity of available knowledge, literature mostly focuses on systematic reviews, considered to be principal sources of scientific evidence at all practical levels. Any possible individual methodological flaws present in these systematic reviews have the potential to become systemic.Main textThis particular bias, that could be referred to as (re)search bubble effect, is introduced because of inherent, personalized nature of internet search engines that tailors results according to derived user preferences based on unreproducible criteria. In other words, internet search engines adjust their user’s beliefs and attitudes, leading to the creation of a personalized (re)search bubble, including entries that have not been subjected to rigorous peer review process. The internet search engine algorithms are in a state of constant flux, producing differing results at any given moment, even if the query remains identical. There are many more subtle ways of introducing unwanted variations and synonyms of search queries that are used autonomously, detached from user insight and intent. Even the most well-known and respected systematic literature reviews do not seem immune to the negative implications of the search bubble effect, affecting reproducibility.ConclusionAlthough immensely useful and justified by the need for encompassing the entirety of knowledge, the practice of including internet search engines in systematic literature reviews is fundamentally irreconcilable with recent emphasis on scientific reproducibility and rigor, having a profound impact on the discussion of the limits of scientific epistemology. Scientific research that is not reproducible, may still be called science, but represents one that should be avoided. Our recommendation is to use internet search engines as an additional literature source, primarily in order to validate initial search strategies centered on bibliographic databases.
Highlights
This particular bias, that could be referred to assearch bubble effect, is introduced because of inherent, personalized nature of internet search engines that tailors results according to derived user preferences based on unreproducible criteria
In order to integrate the vast quantity of available knowledge, literature mostly focuses on systematic reviews, considered to be principal sources of scientific evidence at all practical levels [4]
Alternative trajectories of acquiring scientific knowledge are tempting, but add to the risk of bypassing one of the primary safeguards – including entries that have not been subjected to rigorous peer review process
Summary
Many guidelines exist on how to methodologically plan, implement and report a search of biomedical scientific literature. Internet search engines can be useful in reviewing literature not found in common bibliographic databases. Despite the fact that even systematic reviews that are based solely on bibliographic databases may not be entirely reproducible [17], using internet search engines has an profound, additional negative influence primarily on the processes of data searching, retrieval, storage and reporting of systematic literature reviews [6, 7, 9, 14, 15, 18]. Our recommendation is to use internet search engines as an additional literature source, primarily in order to validate and review initial search strategies centered on bibliographic databases. When facing the issue of reproducibility, one should at least make best effort to prevent, predict and to control possible harms These commitments cannot be met when using internet search engines in systematic reviews as they are out of subjects reach
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
