| Are you interested in contributing your expertise to HLWIKI Canada - hlwiki.ca? contact: dean.giustini@ubc.ca
To browse other articles on a range of HSL topics, see the wiki index.
Introduction
see also: Expert searching, Hand-searching & Systematic review searching
- "Systematic reviews seek to identify as many potentially relevant studies as possible that meet the research question for a given topic."
- "...a systematic review is a scientific investigation in itself, with a pre-planned methods section and an assembly of original studies as their ‘subjects’. The results of multiple primary investigations are synthesized by using strategies that limit bias and random error. These strategies include a comprehensive search of all potentially relevant articles and the use of explicit, reproducible criteria in the selection of studies for review. Primary research designs and study characteristics are appraised, data are synthesized, and results are interpreted..."
Systematic reviews (SRs) are described as 'papers that summarize other papers' and defined as "overviews of primary studies that have used explicit and reproducible methods". Typically, SRs synthesize findings from key, high-powered trials and reports of therapies and interventions using explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria, and may or may not include a meta-analysis. (A good introduction to systematic reviews here.) As an approach to gathering, analyzing and synthesizing a body of research, SRs are very popular. SRs include clearly-defined protocols and procedures that ensure accountability and transparency and are typically collaborative in nature. Research teams work in conjunction with a group of professionals, experts and practitioners in the field to ensure that all key resources are located and evaluated. SRs are comprehensive in the way they capture relevant literature yet they often very specific. A set of criteria clearly defines which studies are to be included or excluded in the review - called "inclusion - exclusion" criteria. In the final analysis and synthesis, SRs are evaluated based on methodological rigour and a meta-analysis is conducted when possible.
See also
References
- Antes G. The new CONSORT statement. BMJ. 2010;340:c1432-c1432.
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Systematic Reviews: CRD’s guidance for undertaking reviews in health care. UK Centre for Reviews and Dissemination
- Garritty C, Tsertsvadze A, Tricco AC, Sampson M, Moher D. Updating systematic reviews: an international survey. PLoS One. 2010;5(4):e9914.
- Glanville J. Carrying out the literature search. In: Curran S, Williams CJ. Clinical research in psychiatry: a practical guide. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann, 1999, p.57-58.
- Higgins JPT, Green S. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions 4.2.6. In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 4, 2006. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
- Higgins JPT, Green S (editors). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.0.0 The Cochrane Collaboration, 2008.
- Hopewell S, Dutton S, Yu LM, Chan AW, Altman DG. The quality of reports of randomised trials in 2000 and 2006: comparative study of articles indexed in PubMed. BMJ. 2010;340:c723.
- HTAi Information Resources Vortal
- Hunt DL, McKibbon KA. Locating and appraising systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126: 532-8.
- Moher D, Hopewell S, Schulz KF, Montori V, Gotzsche PC, Devereaux PJ, Elbourne D, Egger M, Altman DG. CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. BMJ. 2010;340: c869-c869.
- Librarians Named in New IOM Standards for Systematic Reviews. Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews, one of two new reports just issued by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), recommends twenty-one standards for performing high-quality reviews. Librarians and other information specialists are mentioned under the “Standards for Finding and Assessing Individual Studies” in how to conduct comprehensive systematic searches for evidence.
- NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Undertaking systematic reviews of research on effectiveness: CRD's guidance for those carrying out or commissioning reviews. 2nd ed. (CRD report; 4). York: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, 2001.
- Ring N, Ritchie K, Mandava L, Jepson R. A guide to synthesising qualitative research for researchers undertaking health technology assessments and systematic reviews. NHS Quality Improvement Scotland. 2011
- PubMed - Systematic Reviews Subset
- Search Strategies for MEDLINE in Ovid Syntax and the PubMed translation. McMaster University, HIRU - Search Hedges
- Search Strategies to Identify Reviews and Meta-analyses in MEDLINE and CINAHL
- Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, Ji J, Doucette S, Moher D. How quickly do systematic reviews go out of date? A survival analysis. Ann Intern Med. 2007;147(4):224-33.
- U.K. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD)
- UK Cochrane Centre. Online Learning Resources for Undertaking a Systematic Review. December 2009.
- Williams HC. Cars, CONSORT 2010, and Clinical Practice. Trials 2010, 11:33.
|