Use of Scopus and WoS in literature review for doctoral theses: case study and procedures [PDF presentations]

por
Cover of the first presentation. Download links below

Presentation 1: case study

Abstract Presentation of a case study and practical guidelines for conducting a scoping review using academic databases. Emphasis on the SALSA framework and its phases, while underscoring key steps for academic writing and dissemination.

Keywords Literature reviews, scoping reviews, academic databases, research articles, peer-reviewed journals, search equations, SALSA framework, evidence base.

literature-review-case-estudy-2023-1Descarga

Presentation 2: procedures and functions

Abstract Fundamentals of the use of literature reviews in doctoral theses. Use of the Scopus and Web of Science databases for literature reviews and scoping reviews. Use with Mendeley. Advanced search functions. Boolean operators. Parametric search. Use of the results
page. Using the record for information discovery functions.

Keywords Literature reviews, scoping reviews, academic databases, Scopus, Web of Science, Mendeley, PhD. Theses

scopus-wos-literature-reviews-2023-2Descarga

References

  • Aguilera-Cora, Elisenda; Codina, Lluís (2023). Use of Scopus and WoS in literature reviews for doctoral theses: a case study illustration. http://hdl.handle.net/10230/58225
  • Arksey, H.; O’Malley, L. (2005). «Scoping Studies: Towards a Methodological Framework». Int. J. Social Research Methodology 8:1, 19-32,
    DOI: 10.1080/1364557032000119616 | Versión de repositorio
  • Booth, Andrew; Papaionnou; Sutton, Anthea. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review. London: Sage, 2012.
  • Codina Lluís (2020a). “Revisiones bibliográficas sistematizadas en Ciencias Humanas y Sociales. 1: Fundamentos”. En: Lopezosa C, Díaz-Noci J, Codina L, editores Methodos Anuario de Métodos de Investigación en Comunicación Social, 1. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra; 2020. p. 50-60.
    DOI: 10.31009/methodos.2020.i01.05
  • Codina Lluís (2020b). “Revisiones sistematizadas en Ciencias Humanas y Sociales. 2: Búsqueda y Evaluación”. En: Lopezosa C, Díaz-Noci J, Codina L, editores Methodos Anuario de Métodos de Investigación en Comunicación Social, 1. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra; 2020. p. 61-72.
    DOI: 10.31009/methodos.2020.i01.06
  • Codina Lluís (2020c). “Revisiones sistematizadas en Ciencias Humanas y Sociales. 3: Análisis y Síntesis de la información cualitativa”. En: Lopezosa C, Díaz-Noci J, Codina L, editores Methodos Anuario de Métodos de Investigación en Comunicación Social, 1. Barcelona: Universitat Pompeu Fabra; 2020. p. 73-87.
    DOI: 10.31009/methodos.2020.i01.07
  • Codina, Lluís; Aguilera Cora, Elisenda. (2023) Use of Scopus and WoS in literature reviews for doctoral theses: procedures and functions. http://hdl.handle.net/10230/58224
  • Fernández-Sánchez, H.; King, K.; Enríquez-Hernandez, C.B (2020). «Revisiones Sistemáticas Exploratorias como metodología para la síntesis del conocimiento científico». Enfermería Universitaria · Vol.17 · Núm 1 · Enero-Marzo
  • Grant, Maria J.; Booth, Andrew. «A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies». Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26, pp.91–108, 2009.
    DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
  • Lopezosa C.; Codina L.; Fernández-Planells A.; Freixa P. (2021). Journalistic innovation: How new formats of digital journalism are perceived in the academic literature. Journalism. doi:10.1177/14648849211033434
  • Manchado, R.; Tamames, S.; López-González, M.;Mohedano, L.; DÁgostino, M.; Veiga, J. (2009). «Revisiones Sistemáticas Exploratorias». Med Segur Trab (Internet) 55 (216): 12-19)
  • Mengist, W.; Soromessa, T.; Legese, G. (2020). «Method for conducting systematic literature review and meta-analysis for environmental science research». MethodsX, 7 DOI: 10.1016/j.mex.2019.100777
  • Munn, Z.; Peters, M.; Stern, C.; Tufanaru, C.; McArthur, A.; Aromataris, E. (2018). «Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach». BMC Medical Research Methodology. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x
  • Peters, M.; Godfrey C.; Khalil, H.; McInerney, P; Parker, D.; Soares, C. (2015). «Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews». International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare: September 2015 – Volume 13 – Issue 3 – p 141-146.
    doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000050
  • Peters, M.; Marnie, C.; Tricco, A.; Pollock, D.; Munn, Z.; Alexander, L.; McInerney, P.; Godfrey, C.; Khalil, H.  (2020). «Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews».JBI Evidence Synthesis: October 2020 – Volume 18 – Issue 10 – p 2119-2126 doi: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00167
  • TriccoA.; Zarin, W.; Ghassemi, M.; Nincic, V.; Lillie, E.; Page, M.; Shamseer, L.; Antony, J.; Rios, P.; Hwee, J. Angeliki, A., Moher, D.; Hartling, L.; Pham; B.; Straus; S. (2017). «Same family, different species: methodological conduct and quality varies according to purpose for five types of knowledge synthesis» Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, Volume 96, 133 – 142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.10.014
  • Tricco, A.;   Lillie, E.;  Zarin, W.;   O’Brien, K.; Colquhoun, H.; Levac, D.; Moher , D.; Peters, M.; Horsley, T.; Weeks, L.; Hempel, S.; Akl, E.; Chang, C.; McGowan, J.; Stewart, L.; Hartling, L.; Aldcroft, A.; Wilson, M.; Garritty, C.; Lewin, S.; Godfrey, C.; Macdonald, M.; Langlois, E.;  Soares-Weiser, K.; Moriarty, J.; Clifford, T.; Tunçalp, Ö.; Straus, S. (2018). «PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation». Annals of Internal Medicine, 04 september 2018. doi:10.7326/M18-0850