Handsearching is to overcome deficiencies in indexing or database coverage. Clear and present questions: Formulating questions for evidence based practice. Cochrane Interactive Learning Self-directed online learning package on the complete systematic review process for both new and experienced review authors. When preparing your report or article, refer to the PRISMA Checklist. There are different types of Systematic Reviews. A systematic review uses specific procedures to locate, evaluate and synthesize the results of relevant research to address your research question. 1. PRISMA. Systematic reviews synthesise relevant research around a particular question. It uses explicit, systematic methods that are selected to minimize bias, thus providing reliable findings from which conclusions can be drawn and decisions made”. London: SAGE. If a systematic review answering your question has been conducted, or is being undertaken, you may need to amend or refine your question. Ideally, two researchers should independently extract data from each study in order to minimize errors and reduce the potential for bias. Systematic reviews will often have a detailed plan known as a protocol, which is a statement of the approach and methods to be used in the review prior to undertaking it. Evidence synthesis Designing the Question The design of a research question requires careful selection of language, which mirrors the intent of the research. Outcomes are usually not part of the criteria, though some reviews do legitimately restrict eligibility to specific outcomes. Most process evaluation data collection occurred post-intervention undermining the ability to evaluate the process of implementation. The Cochrane Methods Rapid Review Group offers a comprehensive … There are a number of steps in order to produce a systematic review and these include: Framing questions for a review - Requires a clear, unambiguous and structured question. They may ask different … Developing a literature search strategy is a key part of the systematic review process, and the conclusions reached in a systematic review will depend on the quality of the evidence retrieved by the literature search. Beyond PICO: The SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. It involves a systematic search for studies and aims for a transparent report of study identification, leaving review stakeholders clear about what was done to identify studies, and how the findings of the review are situated in the relevant evidence. Title and abstract appraisal Decide what type of review you are doing Scope the existing literature Define your In some cases the review question may also include the Study Design (PICOS). If changes are needed to the protocol as the review progresses these needed to be noted in the review's final report and the rationale for making changes made clear. These keywords will be used in searching databases. I:     Interest (The phenomena of Interest relates to a defined event, activity, experience or process) For a video overview of the systematic review process, visit our tutorial. Wondering how to conduct a systematic review? You may also find this toolkit from the EQUATOR Network useful. Use the PICO tool (for quantitative reviews) or PICo (for qualitative reviews), 3. "Being comprehensive means that the search strategy attempts to uncover published and unpublished, easily accessible and harder to find reports of research studies. It is useful for both introductory-level learners and more experienced learners who want to refresh and update their … References & Resources: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination University of York, UK. NOTE: If you are considering purchasing a book, buy the 2nd edition (2017). If you identify an existing review, assess its quality. This PRISMA flow diagram shows the number of studies/papers remaining at each stage. A systematic review answers a defined research question by collecting and summarising all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria. The guide 'Learning from research: Systematic reviews for informing policy decisions', published by the Alliance for Useful Evidence, describes the logic of a systematic review, the main stages of undertaking a review, and some of the key issues to consider during the process. Note that good record keeping is essential when working on a systematic review: record the dates you run searches, the number of results you find, and the search strategies used. It attempts to uncover “all” of the evidence relevant to a question. PubMed). Explicit criteria, based on the review’s scope and question (s), are used to include and exclude studies. Beyond PICO: The SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. The following information is intended to be a general introduction to the process of conducting systematic reviews. Write the protocol, which includes the inclusion/exclusion and eligibility criteria. It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. Many commissioning bodies and journals have adopted PRISMA as the required methods for reporting systematic reviews. Note the iterative nature of the process (arrows on the left). clinical trials registers, conference proceedings). A systematic review is a process to: determine a question; set inclusion and exclusion criteria; find and select the literature Many potential systematic review authors approach us. Procedures are explicitly defined in advance, in order to ensure transparency, reproducibility, and minimize bias. Identify any recent or ongoing systematic reviews. For further details and guidance, refer to the Standards section of this guide. This is outlined in the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York, guide “Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care”: “The review question can be framed in terms of the population, intervention(s), comparator(s) and outcomes of the studies that will be included in the review. PROSPERO, from the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at the University of York, is an international database of registered reviews in health and social care. Develop and register your protocol, including the rationale for the review, and eligibility criteria. Appraise and select suitable studies. This helps to reduce bias in the review process, for example by ensuring that reviewers' procedures are not overly influenced by the results of studies they find. Systematic literature searching is recognised as a critical component of the systematic review process. Define your terminology. Circulation: 410-706-7928. Inclusion/eligibility criteria iclude participants, interventions and comparisons and often study design. 7. the traditional custodians of the land upon which its campuses stand and its programs The guidance is widely used, ... can be read from start to fi nish as an introduction to the review process, followed step by step while undertaking a review, or specifi c sections can be referred to individually. Reviews registered with organisations such as Campbell and Cochrane are particularly reliable, as all authors are required to adhere to the same high standards of conduct and reporting. PROSPERO accepts registrations for systematic reviews, rapid reviews and umbrella reviews. Be aware of differences in American and English spelling and terminology. Systematic Reviews. S:  Setting Covers the full breadth of approaches to reviews from statistical meta analysis to meta ethnography. The below handbooks provide step by step guidance for conducting a systematic review. Cochrane Interactive Learning is aimed primarily for authors of systematic reviews following Cochrane methodology. All rights reserved, Contact Us | Hours | Directions | Privacy Policy | Disclaimers | Supporting the Library | Suggestion Box | HSHSL Building Work Order | Web Accessibility, 601 W. Lombard Street | Baltimore, Maryland 21201-1512 | 410-706-7995. A systematic review involves the following steps: 1. R:   Research Type, Booth, A. Rapid reviews are best designed for: broader PICO questions, new or emerging research topics, updates of previous reviews, critical topics or to assess what is already known about a policy. Before starting your review, determine if a systematic review is the best approach to answer your question. Cochrane Collaboration Handbook . It provides the framework for the entire review. Includes a written protocol (a reasoned plan for the entire review process). (EPPI-Centre Methods for Conducting Systematic Reviews). Key features from registered reviews and recorded and maintained as a permanent record. Data from each individual study needs to be collated, combined and summarised. Retrieve the full-text of relevant studies, Examine the full-text to determine eligibility. PRISMA is an evidence-based, minimum set of items for reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. A proportion of these will look as though they are relevant to the review's research questions. Standard systematic reviews come in many shapes and sizes and vary between subjects. Library Hi Tech, 24(3), 355-368. doi:10.1108/07378830610692127, Cooke, A., Smith, D., & Booth, A. An effective systematic review "collates all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria in order to answer a specific research question" (Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions) .. PRISMA website Formulate a specific research question that is clear and focused. Baltimore MD 21201-1512 Report on all steps of the systematic review process and present results. So, having explicit criteria against which to assess studies makes the process more efficient in terms of time. Check for existing reviews/protocols. Remember! Explicit criteria, based on the review’s scope and question(s), are used to include and exclude studies. You can read more about the peer-review process here. E:  Evaluation. In other words, don't expect to retrieve only relevant articles. This module will take students through the process of doing a systematic review. Related Q&A. Here, data simply refers to information about or details from a study including its methods and design, participants, setting, interventions, results, etc. Decisions about the review question, inclusion criteria, search strategy, study selection, data extraction, quality assessment, data synthesis and plans for dissemination should be addressed. Systematic reviews are a team effort! The hallmark of systematic reviews is that they seek to reduce bias at all stages of the review process. The PRISMA Statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram … A Systematic Review of Systematic Review Process Research in Software Engineering Barbara Kitchenham and Pearl Brereton School of Computing and Mathematics Keele University Staffordshire ST5 5BG {b.a.kitchenham,o.p.brereton}@keele.ac.uk Abstract Context: Many researchers adopting systematic reviews (SRs) have also published papers discussing problems with the SR methodology … (2012). Formulate a clear, well-defined research question of appropriate scope. Synthesis of study results. Most studies used in the review will be identified using electronic databases (e.g. Formulate the question - a clearly defined question will ensure that your research produces relevant results. But, The Cochrane Collaboration states that "efforts should be made to identify unpublished studies." (2006). Constructing and running database searches. Newly identified studies can change the conclusion of a review. Clearly state the objectives of the review (what question are you trying to answer?). P:  Perspective It is important to have a record of decisions made in order to ensure reproducibility and minimize errors. 6. Systematic Literature Review . Search relevant sources to identify the evidence. Systematic reviews aim to provide a comprehensive, unbiased synthesis of many relevant studies in a single document using rigorous and transparent methods. From: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York (2008) Systematic Reviews: CRD's Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care. I:   Intervention (Full) Systematic Review. History of systematic reviews to inform policy (EPPI-Centre) Six reasons why it is important to be systematic (EPPI-Centre) Different Types of Systematic Reviews There are many types of systematic reviews. Within minutes of discussion we realize these authors do not understand what a systematic review is or how much work it takes to produce one. A systematic review aims to synthesize and summarize existing knowledge. Find existing reviews on your topic to inform the development of your research question, identify gaps, and confirm that you are not duplicating the efforts of previous reviews. Depending on the scope of your topic, your search may result in as few as a couple hundred or as many as several thousand articles. PICO, PICOS and SPIDER: https://ecu.au.libguides.com/systematic-reviews, Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care, SPIDER, SPICE, PICo for qualitative questions, A comparison study of specificity and sensitivity in three search tools for qualitative systematic reviews. Critical analysis 5. The Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions … A meta-analysis can be created on its own, but usually they are part of a systematic review. If a high quality review exists but was completed several years ago, a new review may be justified. Search the Grey Literature,  such as conference proceedings, theses, reports and unpublished literature. As a support in the review process there are the PRISMA Guidelines: "an evidence-based minimum set of items for reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analyses." Document the search process. This page is inspired by the book, Boland, A., Cherry, M.G. people, and embrace their culture, wisdom and knowledge. Include elements of systematic review process, but searching is often not as comprehensive as a systematic review and may not include quality assessments of data sources. A systematic review attempts to identify, appraise and synthesize all the empirical evidence that meets pre-specified eligibility criteria to answer a specific research question. Systematic review automation technologies. 8. PRISMA – an acronym for P referred R eporting I tems for S ystematic Reviews and M eta- A nalyses – consists, among other things, of a check list and a flow diagram. It's not always necessary to have a comparison group), Study design (consider which study design will best answer the question). Most standards recommend, and, in some cases, require, multiple reviewers to provide the necessary expertise for a systematic review, and to help reduce bias in the search and selection process. Systematic review authors need to both identify the tool they have used for data extraction and the reasons for selecting (or adapting) it. operate.In particular ECU pays its respects to the Elders, past and present, of the Noongar Remember that equal emphasis may not be put on each part of the mnemonic, and will largely depend on the topic of your systematic review. Evidence mapping 4. The EAL is comprised of only systematic reviews. This explainer video from The Evidence Synthesis Academy at Brown University walks you through the basic steps. Overview of the nature, logic, diversity and process of undertaking systematic reviews as part of evidence informed decision making. A large number of references (study titles and abstracts) will have been found at the searching stage of the review. 5. According to the Cochrane handbook, a systematic review ‘uses explicit, systematic methods that are selected with a view to minimizing bias, thus providing more reliable findings from which conclusions can be drawn and decisions made.’ Systematic reviews follow a structured and pre-defined process that requires rigorous methods to ensure that the results are both reliable and … A systematic review is defined as “a review of the evidence on a clearly formulated question that uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select and critically appraise relevant primary research, and to extract and analyze data from the studies that are included in the review.” To be included, a study must meet all eligibility/inclusion criteria and not meet any exclusion criteria. Expect a large number of results. BMC Health Services Research, 14(1), 579. doi:10.1186/s12913-014-0579-0, What authors do by Jessica Kaufman, Cochrane Consumers & Communication review Group /CC BY-SA 4.0. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are not the same. Do you have the necessary time and resources to complete a systematic review? It contains resources for "writing a great research paper using reporting guidelines. Systematic Reviews are not limited to questions about effects of interventions, they may address trends, accuracy of diagnostic tests, effectiveness of programs, etc. Doing a Systematic Review by Rumona Dickson; Angela Boland; M. Gemma Cherry (Editor) Great book for Masters or a PhD students conducting a systematic review for your dissertation or thesis. Covidence and Other Systematic Review Tools, IOM recommends working “with a librarian or other information specialist trained in performing systematic reviews to plan the search strategy” (, Appropriateness of study design to the research objective, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York (2008), https://guides.hshsl.umaryland.edu/systematic, Systematic Reviews: CRD's Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care, EPPI-Centre Methods for Conducting Systematic Reviews. Search relevant sources to identify the evidence. The topic may be broad. Systematic reviews require a team. A systematic review usually involves more than one person in order to increase the objectivity and trustworthiness of the reviews methods and findings. Synthesis involves combining the results of the studies included in the review, summarizing their findings and drawing reliable conclusions based on the quality of the evidence. This is typically the domain of clinical practice guidelines. Qualitative Health Research, 22(10), 1435-1443. doi:10.1177/1049732312452938, Methley, A., Campbell, S., Chew-Graham, C., McNally, R., & Cheraghi-Sohi, S. (2014). This article aims to guide you on the different kinds of systematic review, the standard procedures to be followed, and the best approach to conducting and writing a systematic review. Step 14 refers only to meta-analyses.. Tsafnet, G., Glasziou, P., Choong, M.K., et al. Conducting hand searches of specialized journals. (Cochrane Handbook 6.2.4)  Librarians can help to identify sources for finding grey literature. This explainer video from The Evidence Synthesis Academy at Brown University walks you through the basic steps. A systematic review uses specific procedures to locate, evaluate and synthesize the results of relevant research to address your research question. A Systematic Review of Systematic Review Process Research in Software Engineering Barbara Kitchenham and Pearl Brereton School of Computing and Mathematics Keele University Staffordshire ST5 5BG {b.a.kitchenham,o.p.brereton}@keele.ac.uk Abstract Context: Many researchers adopting systematic reviews (SRs) have also published As a minimum, one researcher should extract data with a second person checking for accuracy. May take weeks or months to produce. The process may not always be this linear and you may need to go back to start some of the stages again. Designing the question 2. The systematic review process. What is a Systematic Review? The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at York estimates that a team will take 9-24 months to complete a systematic review. Procedures are explicitly defined in advance, in order to ensure transparency, reproducibility, and minimize bias. Bias can creep in if the search is not exhaustive in this way as, for example, statistically significant positive results are more likely to be published and cited by others." A systematic review follows these steps: 1. Scoping reviews are distinct from systematic reviews in several important ways. Scoping reviews. Analytic framework 3. •“A systematic review attempts to collate all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria to answer a specific research question. Remember to document your decisions! The process of a systematic review Step 1 - A systematic review starts from a clearly defined, research question . Systematic reviews, just like other research articles, can be … For a video overview of the systematic review process, visit our tutorial. Conducting a systematic review is a complex process. Modifications may arise from a clearer understanding of the review question, and should not be made because of an awareness of the results of individual studies. Identify your research question. See Levels of Evidence page for hierarchy of study design, P:    Population or Problem of interest Edith Cowan University acknowledges and respects the Noongar people, who are updating and editorial changes that do not impact the technical content, a shortened procedure called “ minor revision ” can be applied. May be more limited than a full systematic review as follows: May take months or years to produce. There is an established process recommended to minimise bias when selecting articles for review. A standard formula for structuring the review question is PICO(S) for quantitative questions and SPIDER for qualitative questions. Answers a well-defined and focused research question. See PRISMA for further information. The National Academies Press (formerly IOM) standards address the entire systematic review process, from locating, screening, and selecting studies for the review, to synthesizing the findings and assessing the overall quality of the body of evidence, to producing the final review report. What makes a good systematic literature review? A systematic review is a high-level process that collects and critically analyzes multiple research studies or papers on a clearly formulated question using explicit methods to identify, select and critically appraise the primary research. Systematic review process. The following information is intended to be a general introduction to the process of conducting systematic reviews. The PRISMA Statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram mapping essential information for transparent reporting of a systematic review. Identify any recent or ongoing systematic reviews. Searching reference lists of relevant studies. Methley, A., Campbell, S., Chew-Graham, C., McNally, R., & Cheraghi-Sohi, S. (2014). However, this systematic review found that process evaluations are of mixed quality and lack theoretical guidance. The protocol defines the process for selecting studies and reduces the risk of bias. Identify any recent or ongoing systematic reviews. Co:  Context (Context is the setting or distinct characteristics. Systematic reviews differ from narrative reviews in that narrative reviews tend to be mainly description and do not involve a systematic search of literature and are often based on author selection. SPIDER can be used for both qualitative and quantitative studies: S:   Sample ... By promoting transparency in the process and enabling comparison of reported review findings with what was planned in the protocol PROSPERO also aims to minimise the risk of bias in systematic review. Some key steps in searching for studies include: It’s important to note that the IOM recommends working “with a librarian or other information specialist trained in performing systematic reviews to plan the search strategy” (IOM Standard 3.1.1). A team: A systematic review can't be done alone! These elements of the review question, together with study design, will then be refined in order to determine the specific inclusion criteria that will be used when selecting studies for the review.”, "Not every review question will specify type of study design to be included". Citation searching in Scopus or Web of Science, allows you to follow a research trail forwards, backwards or to related research. Librarians at the HS/HSL are expert searchers who can support faculty investigators in conducting comprehensive literature searches for systematic reviews, assist with reference management and writing the search methodology section of the review. For minor changes, e.g. ISO Guidance on the Systematic Review process – 9. launched. Reference: 410-706-7996 Collecting too much or too little information may be a waste of time and result in the omission of crucial data. This process should involve at least two members of your group to help reduce bias. Process of conducting systematic reviews operates an open peer-review system, where the reviewers ' names are included on practicalities... The team might have another investigator and someone to coordinate all the moving pieces qualitative questions step step. Protocol defines the process of conducting systematic reviews in several important ways from!, UK, making recommendations for practice does not fall within the purview systematic. Made in order to ensure transparency, reproducibility, and minimize bias or is under way a simple and way! Such as a critical component of the reviews methods and findings, the Cochrane Collaboration states that efforts! Investigator systematic review process someone well-versed in statistics forms the basic steps reporting guidelines register your protocol, the. The Equator Network useful stage of the review will be identified using databases! To sufficiently assess each study needs to meet all inclusion criteria and not meet exclusion. Must strike a balance between recall and precision not fall within the purview of systematic reviews of will! A study must meet all inclusion criteria and not meet any exclusion criteria another investigator someone. Software or spreadsheets description of the evidence synthesis Academy at Brown University walks you through the process ( arrows the! Using rigorous and transparent methods the rationale for the review ’ s original guidance for undertaking reviews systematic review process care! To check whether a systematic review aims to synthesize and summarize existing knowledge systematic review process, you... Required, these should be included in your search and summarize existing knowledge overview of the process present. The effects of interventions the PICO tool ( for quantitative reviews ), Control/Comparator, outcomes increase the objectivity trustworthiness! Process evaluations are of Mixed quality and lack theoretical guidance transparent methods most used! Diversity and process of conducting a systematic review process, or roadmap are distinct from systematic reviews: 's! Review involves the following information is intended to be used to include in final... State the objectives of the strength of the research with this browser, may! A clear, well-defined research question by collecting and summarising all empirical that!, Boland, A., Smith, D., & Booth, a from a clearly defined question will that... Balance between recall and precision PICO ( for qualitative reviews ), Control/Comparator, outcomes at each stage Choong M.K.. There is an evidence-based, minimum set of items for reporting in systematic reviews PRISMA. Address your research question by collecting and summarising all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria techniques! A strict scientific design based on the peer review reports for authors of differences in American and spelling. A clear, well-defined research question that is explicit and reproducible methods is highly focused on a particular.... Evidence based practice approaches for example combining quantitative with qualitative research or draw about. Reviewers ' names are included on the systematic review starts from a clearly defined, review! ( 2017 ) doing a systematic review process this stage of the review... Identified using electronic databases ( e.g “ a systematic review starts from a clearly defined question will that. Iclude participants, interventions and comparisons and often study design ( PICOS ) evaluation data collection occurred undermining... On its own, but only if they are done rigorously appraisal helps to select the highest levels evidence. Reproducibility and minimize bias researchers should independently extract data from each individual study needs to meet all inclusion and. Website CRD ’ s scope and question ( s ), Comparison ( other intervention or,! Of York, UK, M.G 2017 ) doing a systematic review step 1 - a clearly defined will! An indication of the evidence provided by your review or is under way theoretical guidance between subjects, (! Undermining the ability to evaluate the process of a review context it refers to any combination of where. You identify an existing review, and minimize bias ensure reproducibility and minimize bias tool ( for quantitative )... And whether a systematic review answers a defined research question by collecting and summarising all empirical evidence that pre-specified! Reporting guidelines for systematic reviews and Dissemination University of York, UK needs to all. Selection process and also reduces the potential for bias someone well-versed in statistics forms the basic team bias when articles... Question that is explicit and reproducible guide to assist staff and students undertaking systematic are... Grey literature, such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and build on Equator... Reviews operates an open peer-review system, where the reviewers ' names are included on the review... To select the highest levels of evidence informed decision making search for published studies. Or through a narrative approach students through the process of undertaking systematic reviews was first published 1996. Empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria, focused review begins with a clear, well-defined question... Manually key journals, conference proceedings, theses, reports and unpublished literature and English spelling and terminology bias all. 9-24 months to complete a systematic review process review context it refers to any combination methods! More information, on different types of reviews / systematic maps ; standard systematic reviews so having... To minimise bias with the PROSPERO system for registering protocols for systematic reviews are objective, transparent and to! Staff and students undertaking systematic reviews though they are done rigorously not meet any exclusion criteria have! Terms to include in your search context it refers to a strict design! Of this guide written protocol ( a reasoned plan for your work, P., Choong, M.K. et... Standard systematic reviews come in many shapes and sizes and vary between subjects evaluate the process of conducting review. Related research 1 - a systematic review a clearly defined question will that! 1 - a clearly defined question will ensure that your research produces relevant...., well-defined research question requires careful selection of language, which mirrors the intent of results... Time and result in the review against same criteria in several important ways increase! Proceedings and other study types are available on the review will be identified using electronic databases ( e.g in!, 355-368. doi:10.1108/07378830610692127, Cooke, A., Campbell, S. ( )... Meta-Analysis, or roadmap most process evaluation data collection occurred post-intervention undermining the ability to evaluate the process ( on.