Systematic review

Jump to: navigation, search

WikiDoc Resources for Systematic review

Articles

Most recent articles on Systematic review

Most cited articles on Systematic review

Review articles on Systematic review

Articles on Systematic review in N Eng J Med, Lancet, BMJ

Media

Powerpoint slides on Systematic review

Images of Systematic review

Photos of Systematic review

Podcasts & MP3s on Systematic review

Videos on Systematic review

Evidence Based Medicine

Cochrane Collaboration on Systematic review

Bandolier on Systematic review

TRIP on Systematic review

Clinical Trials

Ongoing Trials on Systematic review at Clinical Trials.gov

Trial results on Systematic review

Clinical Trials on Systematic review at Google

Guidelines / Policies / Govt

US National Guidelines Clearinghouse on Systematic review

NICE Guidance on Systematic review

NHS PRODIGY Guidance

FDA on Systematic review

CDC on Systematic review

Books

Books on Systematic review

News

Systematic review in the news

Be alerted to news on Systematic review

News trends on Systematic review

Commentary

Blogs on Systematic review

Definitions

Definitions of Systematic review

Patient Resources / Community

Patient resources on Systematic review

Discussion groups on Systematic review

Patient Handouts on Systematic review

Directions to Hospitals Treating Systematic review

Risk calculators and risk factors for Systematic review

Healthcare Provider Resources

Symptoms of Systematic review

Causes & Risk Factors for Systematic review

Diagnostic studies for Systematic review

Treatment of Systematic review

Continuing Medical Education (CME)

CME Programs on Systematic review

International

Systematic review en Espanol

Systematic review en Francais

Business

Systematic review in the Marketplace

Patents on Systematic review

Experimental / Informatics

List of terms related to Systematic review

Overview

A systematic review is a literature review focused on a single question which tries to identify, appraise, select and synthesize all high quality research evidence relevant to that question. Systematic reviews are generally regarded as the highest level of medical evidence by evidence-based medicine professionals. An understanding of systematic reviews and how to implement them in practice is becoming mandatory for all professionals involved in the delivery of health care.

Characteristics

A systematic review is a summary of healthcare research that uses explicit methods to perform a thorough literature search and critical appraisal of individual studies to identify the valid and applicable evidence. It often, but not always, uses appropriate techniques (meta-analysis) to combine these valid studies, or at least uses grading of the levels of evidence depending on the methodology used.

While many systematic reviews are based on an explicit quantitative meta-analysis of available data, there are also qualitative reviews which nonetheless adhere to the standards for gathering, analyzing and reporting evidence.

Cochrane collaboration

Many healthcare journals now publish systematic reviews, but the best-known source is the Cochrane Collaboration, a group of over 6,000 specialists in health care who systematically review randomised trials of the effects of treatments and, when appropriate, the results of other research. Cochrane reviews are published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews section of the Cochrane Library, which to date (February 2007) contains 2,893 complete reviews and 1,646 protocols.

The Cochrane Group provides a handbook for systematic reviewers of interventions, where they suggest that each systematic review should contain the following main sections:

  • Background
  • Objectives
  • Methods of the review
  • Results
  • Conclusion and discussion

There are seven steps for preparing and maintaining a systematic review, as outlined in the Cochrane Handbook:

  1. Formulating a problem
  2. Locating and selecting studies
  3. Critical appraisal of studies
  4. Collecting data
  5. Analyzing and presenting results
  6. Interpreting results
  7. Improving and updating reviews

Strengths and weaknesses

While systematic reviews are regarded as the strongest form of medical evidence, a review of 300 studies found that not all systematic reviews were equally reliable, and that their reporting could be improved by a universally agreed upon set of standards and guidelines.[1]

A further study by the same group found that of 100 guidelines reviewed, 4% required updating within a year, and 11% after 2 years; this figure was higher in rapidly-changing fields of medicine, especially cardiovascular medicine.[2] 7% of systematic reviews needed updating at the time of publication. [2]

See also

References

  1. Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco AC, Sampson M, Altman DG (2007). "Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews". PLoS Med. 4 (3): e78. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040078. PMID 17388659.
  2. 2.0 2.1 Shojania KG, Sampson M, Ansari MT, Ji J, Doucette S, Moher D (2007). "How quickly do systematic reviews go out of date? A survival analysis". Ann. Intern. Med. 147 (4): 224–33. PMID 17638714.

External links




Linked-in.jpg