| GROUP | PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY | NOTES |
|---|---|---|
| Librarian | Preliminary Search | Librarian performs the preliminary search upon receipt of the completed Systematic Review Request Form. |
| SR Team | Benchmark Articles |
It is important to determine if a systematic review on your research topic has been published within the last five years or a protocol has been submitted to PROSPERO or other registry.
Upon receipt of the Systematic Review Request Form from the SR Team, the Librarian will perform a preliminary keyword search and/or review the SR Team's preliminary search.
Based on the outcome of the preliminary search, the SR Team will decide next steps as noted in the SR flowchart (shown on the right).
The individual (i.e., primary investigator/project lead) completing the Library's Systematic Review Request Form is asked to identify at least three benchmark articles which meet the proposed review's inclusion criteria. If the SR Team decides to proceed, the SR Team can either ask a Librarian to join the team (fee-based) or the SR Team can handle their own searches.
If a Librarian joins the SR Team, the benchmark articles provide the Librarian helpful feedback whether the proposed search strategy retrieved articles that the SR Team would expect to see in the results.
If the SR Team decides to handle their own searches, they can request training with applicable Level 1 – Education tasks by submitting the Training Request Form.
| GROUP | PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY | NOTES |
|---|---|---|
| SR Team | X | |
| Librarian | Librarian reviews and/or provides feedback on the research question as part of the fee-based service |
Developing a well-defined SR question takes time – it provides the foundation for a successful systematic review by:
Using a standardized format or framework improves the scientific rigor of the SR and helps organize the parts of the question and identify key concepts. The PICO mnemonic concept – introduced in 1995 by Richardson, et. al. – was developed to help answer health-related quantitative questions by breaking down the question into searchable keywords.
Over the years, the framework has evolved to include additional components, such as "T" (Timeframe) and "TT" (Type of question + Type of study design). (Davies, 2011; Richardson, Wilson, Nishikawa, & Hayward, 1995)
The effort invested to develop the question, will not only save time but will more likely identify relevant information.
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, 2nd ed., 2019 (Wiley Online Library) by 
Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews, 2011 (NCBI Bookshelf) by | GROUP | PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY | NOTES |
|---|---|---|
| SR Team | X | |
| Librarian | Librarian contributes to the search section of the protocol design and provides guidance on protocol registration as part of the fee-based service. |
Written by the SR Team, the SR protocol includes the research question, context, and rationale for the review, study design, search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria, procedures for study collection, data collection and extraction, data synthesis, reporting, and other components of the research plan. The SR protocol is important for several reasons (IOM (Institute of Medicine), 2011; Moher et al., 2015; Shamseer et al., 2015):
PRISMA-P, published in 2015, includes a 17-item checklist intended to facilitate the preparation and reporting of a robust protocol for the systematic review. The developers note that there are many review types outside of this scope. They recommend that due to the general lack of protocol guidance for other types of reviews, reviewers preparing any type of review protocol make use of PRISMA-P as applicable.
Registering the SR protocol helps minimize bias in the conduct and reporting of the review, reduce duplication, and keep systematic reviews updated.(IOM (Institute of Medicine), 2011) Review registries include but are not limited to:
Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews (NCBI Bookshelf) by
Recommends standards for systematic reviews of the comparative effectiveness of medical or surgical interventions, and the standards are meant to assure objective, transparent, and scientifically valid systematic reviews. Addresses the entire systematic review process, from locating, screening, and selecting studies for the review, to synthesizing the findings (including meta-analysis) and assessing the overall quality of the body of evidence, to producing the final review report.
Review the related materials at specific review registries.
| GROUP | PRIMARY RESPONSIBILITY | NOTES |
|---|---|---|
| Librarian | Develops strategy Identifies databases |
Librarian collaborates with the SR Team primary contact to develop search strategy for their review and approval and identifies databases to search as part of the fee-based service. |
| SR Team | Approves strategy |
It is important to locate and identify all relevant studies using a wide range of resources and search methods for the systematic review. Developing the search strategy is different from conducting the search. A comprehensive search strategy will help to reduce the risk of bias by identifying as much relevant evidence as possible. (Tsafnat et al., 2014; Higgins JPT, 2020)
A well-defined SR question is essential to develop a comprehensive search strategy. As a member of the SR team, the Librarian:
Note: The SR Team also reviews and approves each search strategy in the remaining databases.
Finding What Works in Health Care: Standards for Systematic Reviews, 2011 (NCBI Bookshelf) by Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, 2nd ed., 2019 (Wiley Online Library) by 