Skip to Main Content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.

Library Subject Guides

Systematic Reviews: Databases

Databases by subject

Subject area Databases
Economics/Business

Scopus

Business Source Complete

JSTOR

Google Scholar

Education

Education Source

PsycINFO

ERIC

Engineering

Compendex

IEEEXplore

Scopus

ASCE Research Library

Google Scholar

Health Science

Key databases: Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, Medline, EMBASE

Clinical trial registers: see Grey Literature for Health

Subject specific databases: PsycINFO, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus

Citation Indexes: Scopus, Google Scholar

Dissertations and Theses

Social Sciences

Scopus

JSTOR

Political Science Complete

SocINDEX

 

Google Scholar?

While it should not be relied on alone for systematic reviews, according to the Cochrane Handbook Google Scholar can be used a replacement for the Web of Science or Scopus. There are, however, some limitations with Google Scholar: it retrieves more duplicates than Scopus, exporting large numbers of results is difficult, result numbers are limited to 1000 and how those 1000 are selected is not disclosed.

Haddaway, N. R., Collins, A. M., Coughlin, D., & Kirk, S. (2015). The role of Google Scholar in evidence reviews and its applicability to grey literature searching. PloS One, 10(9), e0138237. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0138237

Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods, 11(2), 181-217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378

 

Further reading by discipline

Health

Cochrane Handbook See Chapter 4: “Searching for and Selecting Studies”

CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in health care

JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis

Not all parts of the PICO question are equally useful and the Outcomes can often be left out of a search:

Frandsen, T. F., Nielsen, M. F. B., Lindhardt, C. L., & Eriksen, M. B. (2020). Using the full PICO model as a search tool for systematic reviews resulted in lower recall for some PICO elements. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 127, 69–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.07.005

Economics and Business 

Geyer-Klingeberg, J., Hang, M., & Rathgeber, A. (2020). Meta-analysis in finance research: Opportunities, challenges, and contemporary applications. International Review of Financial Analysis, 71, Article 101524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2020.101524

Havránek, T., Stanley, T. D., Doucouliagos, H., Bom, P., Geyer‐klingeberg, J., Iwasaki, I.,Reed, W. R., Rost, K. & van Aert, R. (2020). Reporting guidelines for meta-analysis in economics. &Journal of Economic Surveys, 34(3), 469–475. https://doi.org/10.1111/joes.12363

Kraus, S., Breier, M., & Dasí-Rodríguez, S. (2020). The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 16(3), 1023–1042. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00635-4

Engineering

Kitchenham, B., Pearl Brereton, O., Budgen, D., Turner, M., Bailey, J., & Linkman, S. (2009). Systematic literature reviews in software engineering: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 51(1), 7–15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2008.09.009

Social Sciences

Dacombe, R. (2018). Systematic reviews in political science: What can the approach contribute to political research? Political Studies Review, 16(2), 148–157. https://doi.org/10.1177/1478929916680641

Zawacki-Richter, O., Kerres, M., Bedenlier, S., Bond, M., & Buntins, K. (2020). Systematic reviews in educational research: Methodology, perspectives and application. Springer.

Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2008). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. John Wiley & Sons.

Papaioannou, D., Sutton, A., Carroll, C., Booth, A., & Wong, R. (2010). Literature searching for social science systematic reviews: consideration of a range of search techniques. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 27(2), 114–122. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00863.x