Methodology of systematic reviews
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.6016/ZdravVestn.3138Keywords:
systematic review, methodology, guidelines, standards, medical writingAbstract
Systematic reviews are a type of literature reviews that use systematic methods to collect data, critically appraise research studies and synthesize evidence (quantitative approach) and findings (qualitative approach). A systematic review provides a complete, exhaustive summary of current literature to a research question. Conducting a systematic review involves several steps and leads to a research question; this is followed by the implementation of a search strategy, data collection and quality assessment methods. The results may be aggregated, analysed and interpreted. The typical method in quantitative systematic review is statistical meta-analysis, while in qualitative systematic analysis the interpretative method is meta-synthesis. The main findings from the review are summarised. The limitations of the study and the reliability of the results are presented. Finally, the strengths and weaknesses of the review are discussed.
Downloads
References
1. National Institutes of Health. About NIH. Bethesda: National Insitutes of Health; 2020 [cited 2020 Sep 5]. Available from: https://www.nih.gov/about-nih/contact-us.
2. Campbell M, Egan M, Lorenc T, Bond L, Popham F, Fenton C, et al. Considering methodological options for reviews of theory: illustrated by a review of theories linking income and health. Syst Rev. 2014;3(1):114.
DOI: 10.1186/2046-4053-3-114
PMID: 25312937
3. Siddaway AP, Wood AM, Hedges LV. How to do a systematic review: a best practice guide for conductionand reporting narrative reviews, meta-analysis and meta-sintheses. 2019.
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010418-102803
4. Baumeister R, Leary M. Writing narrative literature reviews. Rev Gen Psychol. 1997;1(3):311-20.
DOI: 10.1037/1089-2680.1.3.311
5. Robinson P, Lowe J. Literature reviews vs systematic reviews. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2015;39(2):103.
DOI: 10.1111/1753-6405.12393
PMID: 25827181
6. Arshed N, Danson M. The literature review. In: O’Gorman K, MacIntosh R. Research Methods for Business & Management. 2. Oxford: Goodfellow Publishers Ltd; 2015.
DOI: 10.23912/978-1-910158-51-7-2790
7. Munn Z, Peters MD, Stern C, Tufanaru C, McArthur A, Aromataris E. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):143.
DOI: 10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x
PMID: 30453902
8. Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info Libr J. 2009;26(2):91-108.
DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
PMID: 19490148
9. Cronin P, Ryan F, Couhglan M. Undertaking a literature review: A step-by-step approach. Br J Nurs. 2008;17(1):38-43.
DOI: 10.12968/bjon.2008.17.1.28059
PMID: 18399395
10. Gough D. Qualitative and mixed methods in systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):181.
DOI: 10.1186/s13643-015-0151-y
PMID: 26670769
11. Petticrew M, Roberts H. Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Malden: Blackwell Publishing; 2006.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470754887
12. Cook DJ, Mulrow CD, Haynes RB. Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126(5):376-80.
DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-126-5-199703010-00006
PMID: 9054282
13. Petticrew M, Roberts H. Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Malden: Blackwell Publishing; 2006.
DOI: 10.1002/9780470754887
14. Gopalakrishnan S, Ganeshkumar P. Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis: Understanding the Best Evidence in Primary Healthcare. J Family Med Prim Care. 2013;2(1):9-14.
DOI: 10.4103/2249-4863.109934
PMID: 24479036
15. Pollock A, Berge E. How to do a systematic review. Int J Stroke. 2018;13(2):138-56.
DOI: 10.1177/1747493017743796
PMID: 29148960
16. Boyd CM, Singh S, Varadhan R, Weiss CO, Sharma R, Bass E. Methods for Benefit and Harm Assessment in Systematic Reviews. Rockvill (MD). Rockville, Maryland: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2012.
17. Rose S, Bisson J. Brief early psychological interventions following trauma: a systematic review of the literature. J Trauma Stress. 1998;11(4):697-710.
DOI: 10.1023/A:1024441315913
PMID: 9870222
18. Ščuka L. Pomen metanalize v medicini. Zdrav Vestn. 2005;74(1):39-48.
19. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; 2019 [cited 2020 Sept 06]. Available from: https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current/.
20. Cochrane Methods Qualitative and Implementation. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons; 2019 [cited 2020 Sept 07]. Available from: https://methods.cochrane.org/qi/welcome/.
21. Ohlsson A. Systematic reviews—theory and practice. Scand J Clin Lab Invest Suppl. 1994;219(sup219):25-32.
DOI: 10.3109/00365519409088573
PMID: 7701235
22. Hardan A. Mixed-Methods Systematic Reviews: Integrating Quantitative and Qualitative Findings. Focus, Technical Brief. 2010(25):1-8.
23. Jahan N, Naveed S, Zeshan M, Tahir MA. How to Conduct a Systematic Review: A Narrative Literature Review. Cureus. 2016;8(11):e864.
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.864
PMID: 27924252
24. National Institute for Health Research. PROSPERO. Internatioanl prospective register for systematic reviews. York: University of York; 2020 [cited 2020 Sept 11]. Available from: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO.
25. Paez A. Grey literature: an important resource in systematic reviews. J Evid Based Med. 2017;10(3):233-40.
DOI: 10.1111/jebm.12266
PMID: 29266844
26. OpenDOAR. London: Jisc; 2020 [cited 2020 Sept 12]. Available from: https://v2.sherpa.ac.uk/opendoar/.
27. Worldcat. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC; 2020 [cited 2020 Sept 12]. Available from: https://www.worldcat.org.
28. Cochrane. Trusted evidence. Informed decisions. Better health. Dublin, Ohio: OCLC; 2020 [cited 2020 Sept 12]. Available from: https://www.worldcat.orga.
29. Equator network: Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research. Oxford: University of Oxford; 2020 [cited 2020 Sept 15]. Available from: https://www.equator-network.org/.
30. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71.
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n71
PMID: 33782057
31. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gøtzsche PC, Ioannidis JP, et al. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2009;339:b2700.
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.b2700
PMID: 19622552
32. Campana LG, Clover AJ, Valpione S, Quaglino P, Gehl J, Kunte C, et al. Recommendations for improving the quality of reporting clinical electrochemotherapy studies based on qualitative systematic review. Radiol Oncol. 2016;50(1):1-13.
DOI: 10.1515/raon-2016-0006
33. Munn Z, Stern C, Aromataris E, Lockwood C, Jordan Z. What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18(1):5.
DOI: 10.1186/s12874-017-0468-4
PMID: 29316881
34. Li D, Wang Z, Wang L, Sohn S, Shen F, Murad MH, et al. A Text-Mining Framework for Supporting Systematic Reviews. Am J Inf Manag. 2016;1(1):1-9.
PMID: 29071308
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
The Author transfers to the Publisher (Slovenian Medical Association) all economic copyrights following form Article 22 of the Slovene Copyright and Related Rights Act (ZASP), including the right of reproduction, the right of distribution, the rental right, the right of public performance, the right of public transmission, the right of public communication by means of phonograms and videograms, the right of public presentation, the right of broadcasting, the right of rebroadcasting, the right of secondary broadcasting, the right of communication to the public, the right of transformation, the right of audiovisual adaptation and all other rights of the author according to ZASP.
The aforementioned rights are transferred non-exclusively, for an unlimited number of editions, for the term of the statutory
The Author can make use of his work himself or transfer subjective rights to others only after 3 months from date of first publishing in the journal Zdravniški vestnik/Slovenian Medical Journal.
The Publisher (Slovenian Medical Association) has the right to transfer the rights of acquired parties without explicit consent of the Author.
The Author consents that the Article be published under the Creative Commons BY-NC 4.0 (attribution-non-commercial) or comparable licence.
