Skip to Main Content

Systematic Reviews and Other Evidence Synthesis Types Guide

Systematic Reviews and Other Evidence Synthesis Types Guide

Systematic Review or Meta-Analysis

Systematic Review – seeks to systematically search for, appraise and synthesize research evidence on a specific question, often adhering to guidelines on the conduct of a review.

Meta-analysis – a technique that statistically combines the results of quantitative studies to provide a more precise effect of the results. A good systematic review is essential to a meta-analysis of the literature.

Standards (see the Books tab) and guidelines have been developed on how to conduct and report systematic reviews and meta analyses.

Guidelines and Best Practices

Reporting Guidelines

Protocol Guidelines

Protocol Registration

Note: It is recommended that the SR Team register their protocol in PROSPERO.

The Cochrane Library includes:

    • Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews – peer-reviewed systematic reviews and protocols)
    • Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) – reports of randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials
    • Cochrane Clinical Answers (CCAs) – developed to inform point-of-care decision-making each CCA contains a clinical question, a short answer, and relevant outcomes data for the clinician
Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) recommends that protocols of eligible review projects be registered with PROSPERO.
  • Cumpston, M. S., McKenzie, J. E., Welch, V. A., & Brennan, S. E. (2022). Strengthening systematic reviews in public health: guidance in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, 2nd edition. J Public Health (Oxf), 44(4), e588-e592. https://doi.org/10.1093/pubmed/fdac036
  • Jackson, N., & Waters, E. (2005). Criteria for the systematic review of health promotion and public health interventions. Health Promotion International, 20(4), 367-374. https://doi.org/10.1093/heapro/dai022
  • Thomas, B. H., Ciliska, D., Dobbins, M., & Micucci, S. (2004). A process for systematically reviewing the literature: providing the research evidence for public health nursing interventions. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 1(3), 176-184. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-475X.2004.04006.x

3 Should I undertake a scoping review or a systematic review? (Ask JBI) on YouTube (12:43).

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality

Campbell Collaboration and the Open Learning Initiative

Cochrane

Joanna Briggs Institute

Johns Hopkins University/Coursera

University of North Carolina Health Sciences Library

References

  • Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., … PRISMA-P Group (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic reviews, 4(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1
  • Page, M. J., Moher, D., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., McGuinness, L. A., Stewart, L. A., Thomas, J., Tricco, A. C., Welch, V. A., Whiting, P., & McKenzie, J. E. (2021). PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n160. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n160
  • Rethlefsen, M. L., Kirtley, S., Waffenschmidt, S., Ayala, A. P., Moher, D., Page, M. J., Koffel, J. B., & PRISMA-S Group (2021). PRISMA-S: an extension to the PRISMA Statement for Reporting Literature Searches in Systematic Reviews. Systematic reviews, 10(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-020-01542-z
  • Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, Shekelle P, Stewart LA, the PRISMA-P Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ 2015;349:g7647. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7647