Hi, I am a medical graduate working on a systematic review. My institution has subscribed to Science Direct and OVID. My team currently has searched pubmed, Science Direct and Cochrane.
I want to enquire if Embase, Scopus and Web of Science are mandatory for a systematic review?
In my view, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science are not mandatory for a systematic review. But Pubmed/Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar and Cochrane are commonly used databases for systematic reviews.
By "mandatory," I presume you are thinking that a systematic review that did not consult these databases is rendered invalid. It does not. While I recommend that you try your best to gain access to these databases for good measure (e.g., through your official or unofficial contacts in other institutions), being not able to do in the end is not a fatal lapse for your project. Just be transparent about this in your final manuscript as it can be considered a limitation.
The customary "Big 3" databases for systematic review are PubMed (which includes MEDLINE), EMBASE and the Cochrane Library (which includes the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials or CENTRAL). Utilizing these databases provides routine assurance (not a perfect guarantee) that you cover the highest proportion of the literature available in electronic databases compared to all scenarios when you are not able to utilize all three.
The good news is that PubMed and the Cochrane Library can be used freely, while the bad news is EMBASE is used on an institutional subscription basis. Fortunately, however, the Cochrane Library, especially for controlled trials, covers literature that are indexed in PubMed and EMBASE eventually and albeit with a delay (around 3-4 months). The fact that you are not able to use EMBASE for your review is not a deal-breaker but it is best tackled in your work's discussion of limitations.
As for Scopus and Web of Science (which I think are also subscription-based), I have yet to see recent evidence that these databases have already reached the level of importance of PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Library and EMBASE in terms of indexed literature content. Unless these two databases have truly done so (please share the reference arguing for this case if you manage to find one), do not sweat it/stress yourself if you cannot use these.
As mentioned by Proloy Barua , Google Scholar may also be a good addition to your consulted databases since this is a free service as well. Whether doing so will make a significant difference is another question entirely.
Good luck!
well, it depends on the area you are working on. For instance, if your work concerns a solid clinical method, then PubMed is a must and others are not mandatory. You know, it has become a luxury to search all databases, but for most cases, PubMed-Scopus duo is satisfying. additionally, if your PICOs grabs RCTs as well and/or you need to cross-ref the review articles (secondary data) before the exclusion, you are to search the Cochrane too. To be more clear, if your aim is on sth quite related to the field of engineering or methodology, you need to search in Embase and WoS too. If you plan to have gray literature covered, google scholar is a great source. Last but not least, Embase and Scopus are tremendously overlapping, try an automated duplicates removal in advance.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Academic Journals