Where and how to find data on safety: what do systematic reviews of complementary therapies tell us?

Background: Successfully identifying relevant data for systematic reviews with a focus on safety may require retrieving information from a wider range of sources than for ‘effectiveness’ systematic reviews. Searching for safety data continues to prove a major challenge. Objectives: To examine search methods used in systematic reviews of safety and to investigate indexing. Methods: Systematic reviews focusing on safety of complementary therapies and related interventions were retrieved from comprehensive searches of major databases. Data was extracted on search strategies, sources used and indexing in major databases. Safety related search terms were compared against index terms available on major databases. Data extraction by one researcher using a pre-prepared template was checked for accuracy by a second researcher. Results: Screening of 2563 records resulted in 88 systematic reviews being identified. Information sources used varied with the type of intervention being addressed. Comparison of search terms with available index terms revealed additional potentially relevant terms that could be used in constructing search strategies. Seventy-nine reviews were indexed on PubMed, 84 on EMBASE, 21 on CINAHL, 15 on AMED, 6 on PsycINFO, 2 on BNI and HMIC. The mean number of generic safety-related indexing terms on PubMed records was 2.6. For EMBASE the mean number was 4.8 with at least 61 unique terms being employed. Most frequently used indexing terms and subheadings were adverse effects, side effects, drug interactions and herb-drug interactions. Use of terms specifically referring to safety varied across databases. Conclusions: Investigation of search methods revealed the range of information sources used, a list of which may prove a valuable resource for those planning to conduct systematic reviews of safety. The findings also indicated that there is potential to improve safety-related search strategies. Finally, an insight is provided into indexing of and most effective terms for finding safety studies on major databases.

The New Instantaneity: How Social Media are Helping us Privilege the (Politically) Correct over the True

The recent sacking of the eminent scientist Tim Hunt from one of the UK’s leading research institutions is only the latest in a series of cases where public individuals have been derided for comments made in jest on social media, with serious consequences for their professional and personal lives. This article discusses the case of Tim Hunt as an example of the extent to which the privileging of the correct over the true which has long pervaded media discourse is taken to the extreme by the instant-response culture of social media. It points to the emergence of a new form of instantaneity enabled by these networked forms of communication that serves to reinforce systemic inaction rather than the change widely associated with these technologies. It draws on philosophy and Critical Theory as useful conceptual frameworks for highlighting the ways in which Twitter & co. increasingly call us to action but crowd out thought, thereby passing over opportunities for real social change.