Home > FAQ > How do I document a search strategy so my winter-health review is reproducible?

How do I document a search strategy so my winter-health review is reproducible?

November 2, 2026
search strategy documentationreproducible literature searchPRISMA flow countssystematic review methodsdatabase search strings

Record each database, the search date, the full search string, any limits, and the result count, then check that a second person could rerun the strategy and match your PRISMA flow counts. Cochrane's guidance on documenting searches and PRISMA 2020's reporting checklist and flow diagrams both point to this level of detail.

What to capture for each source

  • The source name and interface, such as PubMed or a reference list.
  • The exact date the search was run, since records and indexing change over time.
  • The complete search string as entered, including field tags, phrase marks, and filters. The PubMed User Guide describes field tags, phrase searching, filters, and Advanced Search, so record which of these you used.
  • Any limits applied, such as date range or language.
  • The number of records returned before and after de-duplication.

How to build the appendix

  1. Write one entry per source in the order you searched, and paste the full string exactly as run so a reader can rerun it without reconstructing it.
  2. Reconcile each entry's counts with the PRISMA flow diagram, so the records identified, screened, and included add up across sources.
  3. Ask a second person to rerun one search from the appendix alone; if the string or limits are ambiguous, revise the entry until the rerun is straightforward.

Why the counts matter

PRISMA 2020 asks reviewers to report what methods were used and what studies were found and included. A search appendix that matches the flow diagram lets readers trace how each included study entered the review. Cochrane's chapter on searching and selecting studies covers planning searches, choosing sources, developing strategies, searching reference lists, documenting searches, and managing records, which gives you a structure for the appendix sections.

Common gaps to fix

A string copied from a database's history view can drop filters or field tags; paste the version actually executed. A count recorded after de-duplication can hide how many records each source contributed; keep both figures. When a source returns no results, record the string and date so the gap is visible in the flow.

←
PreviousHow do I document a search audit when a co-author questions my screening decisions?
NextHow do I document AI-assisted screening in a reproducible review methods section?
→