Rerunnable by design: every string, limit, count and exclusion that took two databases down to [9] studies appears in the HS305 Unit 5 database search log. Searches like "hs 305 unit 5 assignment example", "hs305 unit 5 sample" and "hs305 unit 5 example" land here.
What a finished HS305 Unit 5 database search log looks like
The log is a dated table followed by a screening summary. Each row records one search: the database, the date run, the exact string, the limits applied and the number of results. The first PubMed row combines the MeSH heading for low back pain with free-text terms for sit-stand, standing and height-adjustable desks, joined by OR within each concept, with AND linking the concepts, and returns [214] records. Adding limits for English, adults and the last ten years brings it to [96]. The CINAHL rows repeat the logic with CINAHL Subject Headings in place of MeSH and return [58]. A deduplication line removes [31] records found in both. The screening summary then counts titles excluded, abstracts excluded and full texts excluded, each with its reason, down to [9] included studies, with those nine listed in APA style.
How a HS305 Unit 5 example is structured
Search logs are graded on reproducibility, so this one is built to be rerun rather than read. Concepts are defined before any string appears: the population, the intervention and the outcome, each with its subject heading and its free-text synonyms in a small concept table. Strings are then shown exactly as typed, including truncation and quotation marks, because a paraphrased search cannot be repeated. Rows are kept in the order they were run, including one that returned too many results and was narrowed, since the decision to narrow is part of the record. Limits are justified in a sentence each. Screening follows the familiar flow from records identified to studies included, presented as a short numbered list rather than a diagram, with reasons for exclusion grouped and counted. A closing note records what was not searched and why, which is the honest boundary of any search.
Concepts before strings
A small table sets out population, intervention and outcome, each with its subject heading and free-text synonyms, before any search string is shown.
Strings exactly as typed
Parentheses, truncation and quotation marks appear as they were entered, because a search described in general terms cannot be repeated by anyone else.
The row that was too broad
One early search returned far too many records and was narrowed. The log keeps it, since the decision to narrow belongs to the record of the search.
Two vocabularies, one concept
MeSH in PubMed and CINAHL Subject Headings in CINAHL are used alongside free text, and the log shows each vocabulary's term for the same idea.
Exclusions counted and named
Screening moves from records found to studies kept, with each exclusion reason grouped and counted, so the final nine can be traced back through every step.
Where marks go in HS305 Unit 5
The heaviest losses go to logs that describe the search instead of recording it. A sentence saying relevant databases were searched with appropriate terms cannot be repeated, and this unit exists to replace that sentence with a table. Strings that mix concepts without parentheses, so that the Boolean operators combine unpredictably, draw deductions even when the results look reasonable. Relying on free text alone, or on subject headings alone, misses records the other would catch, and graders often check for both. Unexplained limits look like shortcuts; a ten-year limit needs a reason. Missing result counts at each step make the screening numbers impossible to follow. Exclusions without reasons, or with a single reason for everything, suggest the screening was not done record by record. Omitting the note on what was not searched overstates how thorough the log is.
Get a HS305 Unit 5 example written to your instructions
Your Unit 5 research question and the databases the course names are the two inputs that shape a search log; the rubric is the third. Strings appear as typed, limits carry reasons and exclusions are counted from first results to final set. No charge applies to the first custom sample, which takes 24-48h.
HS305 Unit 5 questions, answered
What is the difference between MeSH and CINAHL Subject Headings?
Both are controlled vocabularies that index articles by concept regardless of the words authors used. MeSH is maintained for PubMed and MEDLINE; CINAHL Subject Headings serve the nursing and allied health literature in CINAHL and often use different terms for the same idea. A search log that uses each database's own vocabulary shows the searcher understood that difference.
How many studies should the final set contain?
Whatever the screening honestly produces, within the range your assignment sets. A log that ends with [9] studies is not better or worse than one ending with [15]; what matters is that each exclusion has a reason and the numbers add up. If a search yields too few, the log records how it was widened rather than quietly adding sources from elsewhere.
Should Google Scholar appear in the log?
Some sections allow it as a supplementary source, and a log can list it alongside a caution about its limits: results cannot be exported reliably, the ranking is opaque and the same search can return different counts on different days. Most HS305 assignments expect the library databases first. The sample records only PubMed and CINAHL and says so in its closing note.