Definitions for screening/data extraction

Expectation for comment (for full paper) - (no reproducible strategy is automatic “C”)
A - No revisions needed (no comment expected)
Search strategy is reported correctly and appears to be methodologically sound; any limits are adequately explained.
B - Revisions suggested (expect reviewer comment)
At least one or more elements that an experienced searcher would be compelled to comment on; it is unknown if these elements impact search retrieval and may undermine the validity of the methods, but they may.
C- Revisions required - (expect reviewer comment)
The search strategy has clear and "fatal" errors in reporting and/or methods that undermine the validity of the review.

Potential problem areas (PRESS B or C)
	•	Presence and/or reproducibility of at least one strategy (PRISMA compliance) 
	◦	The search is only narratively described, and in such a way that it could not be accurately reproduced in a database 
	◦	There are clear errors that affect reproducibility (specific errors can be detailed below, for example clearly incorrect MeSH terms) 
	•	Database Selection 
	◦	Only 1-2 databases searched 
	◦	Clear subject-specific database omissions (ex., CINAHL for a nursing topic) 
	•	Supplemental Strategies (reference tracking, grey lit, author contact, etc) 
	◦	No indication of any supplemental strategies/resources used to identify unpublished studies (trial registries, conference proceedings, open web, reference tracking, author contact, etc. Mention of at least one=pass) 
	•	Search Date Range 
	◦	No mention of search date 
	◦	Search end more than 2 years old (maybe 1 year? Hard because of publication lag…) with no mention of an update - early 2015 or earlier 
	◦	Frontend date limit with no explanation (i.e., 2005-2019 with no reason) 
	•	Translation of the research question 
	◦	Clear concept omissions 
	◦	Including unnecessarily limiting concept inclusions (i.e., including outcomes when not necessary) 
	•	Boolean and proximity operators 
	◦	Clear boolean AND, OR, NOT errors 
	◦	Use of inappropriate NOT 
	◦	Proximity operators in databases where they do not function 
	◦	Search terms with no boolean operators to define the strategy (ex search methods only narratively reports terms used with no operators between them) 
	•	Subject headings 
	◦	Complete omission of controlled vocabulary terms altogether 
	◦	Obvious missing major subject headings 
	◦	Obvious incorrect subject headings 
	◦	Improper use of subheadings (sh on all terms, etc) 
	•	Text words 
	◦	Complete omission of keyword terms altogether 
	◦	Obvious missing major keywords 
	◦	Lack of appropriate derivative terms/truncation 
	•	Spelling, syntax and line numbers 
	◦	Obvious spelling, syntax, or line number errors 
	•	Limits and filters (language, publication type, humans, etc) 
	◦	Use of language/English only limit AS PART OF THE SEARCH STRATEGY 
	◦	Publication type limits at the search level (may be ok depending on strategy used) 
	◦	Other inappropriate limits (peer reviewed only, etc) 
	▪	Age limit using MeSH only (without Cochrane NOT NOT) 
	▪	Human limit using MeSH only (without Cochrane NOT NOT)