Smore logo
remove_red_eye 1.1K

Systematic Reviews

A Thoughtful Approach

SystematicReviewsA Thoughtful Approach

What Is a Systematic Review? What Is a Systematic Review?

A systematic review answers a well-defined research question, typically on an intervention, by collecting and summarizing all available evidence. Systematic reviews aim to minimize bias by using systematic, rigorous methods. Systematic reviews are a key component of evidence-based medicine.


Standards, Guidelines, and Publications on SR Methodology


  • Campbell Collaboration Systematic Reviews (Campbell Collaboration)
  • Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Cochrane Collaboration)
  • Methodological Expectations for Cochrane Intervention Reviews (Cochrane Collaboration)
  • JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis (JBI)
  • Systematic Reviews (Centre for Reviews and Dissemination)
  • Standards for Systematic Reviews (National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine) - alternative link in NCBI
  • Evidence-based Reports on Methodology (AHRQ)

What Will I Need to Begin? What Will I Need to Begin?

  • a well-defined research question
  • a team with expertise and experience in the subject matter and/or the systematic review process
  • a protocol to describe the context and rationale for the review, strategies for screening and data collection, the approach to critical appraisal, and a timetable
  • inclusion and exclusion criteria
  • a few key articles that you consider relevant to the topic (these will help formulate the formal literature search)
  • a framework for critical appraisal of the evidence
  • time - systematic reviews take more time than the average review - according to some sources, an average of 67.3 weeks (Borah R, et. al.)


See the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine's Standards for Systematic Reviews for more information on the systematic review process.

PROSPERO
Search PROSPERO for other in-process systematic review protocols, or register your own protocol.
SR Toolbox
The SR Toolbox provides suggestions for tools for many steps of the systematic review process.

How Can a Librarian Help Me? How Can a Librarian Help Me?

A librarian can help you plan, execute, and document the search strategy, remove duplicate results from the final set, and place the results in a citation manager like RefWorks or EndNote. Librarians can also suggest title/abstract review strategies and software to help you and your team through the screening process. Finally, librarians may assist with fulfilling the reporting items for systematic reviews, aid in the writing of the search methodology, and perform updates of former searches when needed.

The Search The Search

All searches will need to be documented, including details such as what search terms were used, which databases on which platforms were searched, what dates the searches were run, the number of results, and and the number and method of deduplication. PRISMA-S recommends including all the searches in an appendix or supplemental file. It is highly recommended that you invite an information specialist or librarian to your authorship team.

Systematic Review Reporting Systematic Review Reporting


  • The PRISMA Statement was published in 2009 and contains a checklist and a diagram for reporting your review
  • The PRISMA Checklist is a 27-item checklist regarding the content of a systematic review and what items or processes should be documented and reported
  • The PRISMA Flow Diagram depicts the flow of information through the stages of a systematic review
  • The PRISMA-P is a PRISMA extension for systematic review protocols
  • The PRISMA-S is a PRISMA extension for reporting the search

What Are Systematic Reviews? What Are Systematic Reviews?

What is a Systematic Review?

Not Sure if a Systematic Review is Right for You? Not Sure if a Systematic Review is Right for You?


An Overview of Review Types

  • Akl, E.A., Haddaway, N., Rada, G., & Lotfi, T. (2020). Evidence synthesis 2.0: when systematic, scoping, rapid, living, and overviews of reviews come together? Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, online. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.01.025
  • Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91-108.

  • Munn, Z., Stern, C., Aromataris, E., Lockwood, C., & Jordan, Z. (2018). What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC medical research methodology, 18(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0468-4

  • Peters, M., Marnie, C., Tricco, A. C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., Godfrey, C. M., & Khalil, H. (2021). Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Implementation, 19(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000277
  • Sutton, A., Clowes, M., Preston, L., & Booth, A. (2019). Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 36(3), 202–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12276


Integrative Reviews


  • Torraco, R. J. (2005). Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human resource development review, 4(3), 356-367.


Scoping Reviews


  • Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International journal of social research methodology, 8(1), 19-32.
  • 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, 18(1), 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x

  • Pham, M. T., Rajić, A., Greig, J. D., Sargeant, J. M., Papadopoulos, A., & McEwen, S. A. (2014). A scoping review of scoping reviews: advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency. Research synthesis methods, 5(4), 371-385.


Rapid Reviews


  • Khangura, S., Konnyu, K., Cushman, R., Grimshaw, J., & Moher, D. (2012). Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach. Systematic reviews, 1(1), 10.


Realist Reviews


  • Pawson, R., Greenhalgh, T., Harvey, G., & Walshe, K. (2005). Realist review: a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. Journal of health services research & policy, 10(1_suppl), 21-34.


Umbrella Reviews


  • Aromataris, E., Fernandez, R., Godfrey, C. M., Holly, C., Khalil, H., & Tungpunkom, P. (2015). Summarizing systematic reviews: methodological development, conduct and reporting of an umbrella review approach. International journal of evidence-based healthcare, 13(3), 132-140.

zoom_out_map

Carrie Price, Health Professions Librarian

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4345-3547

Email: carrieprice@towson.edu
Website: https://libraries.towson.edu
Location: Albert S. Cook Library, York Road, Towson, MD, USA
Phone: 410-704-6324
Twitter: @carrieprice78

Loading indicator

close

Created with

Communicate quickly and effectively with interactive newsletters.

Smore empowers educators to connect with their community, streamline school communications,
and increase engagement.

Create a newsletter