A systematic review is a summary of the medical literature that uses explicit methods to perform a comprehensive literature search and critical appraisal of individual studies and that uses appropriate statistical techniques to combine these valid studies. (CEBM).
Key characteristics of a systematic review are:
Meta-analysis is a systematic review process that uses quantitative methods to synthesize and summarize the results.
Meta-synthesis is a systematic review process that synthesises a number of qualitative studies to reveal new understandings
Jahan, N., Naveed, S., Zeshan, M., & Tahir, M. A. (2016). How to conduct a systematic review: A narrative literature review. Cureus, 8(11), e864. doi:10.7759/cureus.864
Shamseer, L., & Moher, D. (2015). Planning a systematic review? Think protocols. Retrieved from BioMed Central blog:https://blogs.biomedcentral.com/bmcblog/2015/01/05/planning-a-systematic-review-think-protocols/
JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions
The Equator Network develops and provides Reporting Guidelines for all types of studies
The Collaboration for Environmental Evidence (CEE) has developed a set of standards and methods specifically for reviews on environmental issues.
Reproduced from: Bettany-Saltikov, J. (2010). Learning how to undertake a systematic review: Part 1. Nursing Standard, 24(40): 47-55.
| Systematic Review | Narrative Review | |
| Question | Focused on a single question | Not necessarily focused on a single question, but may describe an overview |
| Protocol | A peer review protocol or plan is included | No protocol is included |
| Background | Both provide summaries of the available literature on a topic | |
| Objectives | Clear objectives are identified | Objectives may or may not be identified |
| Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria | Criteria stated before the review is conducted | Criteria not specified |
| Search Strategy | Comprehensive search conducted in a systematic way | Strategy not explicitly stated |
| Process of Selecting Articles | Usually clear and explicit | Not described in a literature review |
| Process of Evaluating Articles | Comprehensive evaluation of study quality | Evaluation of study quality may or may not be included |
| Process of Extracting Relevant Information | Usually clear and specific | Not clear or explicit |
| Results and Data Synthesis | Clear summaries of studies based on high quality evidence | Summary based on studies where the quality of the articles may not be specified. May also be influenced by the reviewer's theories, needs and beliefs |
| Discussion | Written by an expert or group of experts with a detailed and well grounded knowledge of the issues | |
Bramer, W.M., Rethlefsen, M.L., Kleijnen, J. et al. Optimal database combinations for literature searches in systematic reviews: a prospective exploratory study. Syst Rev 6, 245 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-017-0644-y
Jahan, N., Naveed, S., Zeshan, M., & Tahir, M. A. (2016). How to conduct a systematic review: A narrative literature review. Cureus, 8(11), e864. doi:10.7759/cureus.864
Saltikov, J., & Fernandes, T. (2010). Learning how to undertake a systematic review: Part 1. Nursing Standard, 24(50), 47-55; quiz 56. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.usc.edu.au:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/751264535?accountid=28745
Bettany-Saltikov, J. (2010). Learning how to undertake a systematic review: Part 2. Nursing Standard, 24(51), 47-56; quiz 58, 60. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.usc.edu.au:2048/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/751267350?accountid=28745
Saltman,D., Jackson,D., Newton, P.J. & Davidson, P.M. (2013). In pursuit of certainty: Can the systematic review process deliver? BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 13, 25. doi:10.1186/1472-6947-13-25
http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6947/13/25/abstract
Petticrew, M. (2009). Systematic reviews in public health: Old chestnuts and new challenges [Editorial]. Bulletin of the World Health Organization, 87(3), 163. doi: 10.2471/BLT.09.063719 . Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2654648/ (Good argument for the role of SRs where there is no single clinical question).
Kable, A. K., Pich, J., & Maslin-Prothero, S. E. (2012). A structured approach to documenting a search strategy for publication: A 12 step guideline for authors. Nurse Education Today, 32(8), 878-886. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2012.02.022
Special thanks to Debbie Booth and the University of Newcastle Library for permission to reuse and modify most of the information on this guide.
View the original U of N Systematic Review guide.
