A systematic review is a literature review A literature review is a body of text that aims to review the critical points of current knowledge including substantive findings as well as theoretical and methodological contributions to a particular topic. Literature reviews are secondary sources, and as such, do not report any new or original experimental work focused on a single question that tries to identify, appraise, select and synthesize all high quality research evidence relevant to that question. Systematic reviews of high-quality randomized controlled trials A randomized controlled trial is a type of scientific experiment most commonly used in testing the efficacy or effectiveness of healthcare services (such as medicine or nursing) or health technologies (such as pharmaceuticals, medical devices or surgery). RCTs involve the random allocation of different interventions (treatments or conditions) to are crucial to evidence-based medicine Evidence-based medicine aims to apply the best available evidence gained from the scientific method to medical decision making. It seeks to assess the strength of evidence of the risks and benefits of treatments (including lack of treatment) and diagnostic tests.[1] 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 Health care or healthcare is the treatment and prevention of illness. Health care is delivered by professionals in medicine, dentistry, nursing, pharmacy and allied health. Systematic reviews are not limited to medicine Medicine is the science and art of healing humans. It includes a variety of health care practices evolved to maintain and restore health by the prevention and treatment of illness. Before scientific medicine, healing arts were practiced along with alchemical and ritual practices that developed out of religious and cultural traditions. The term & and are quite common in other sciences such as psychology Psychology is the study of human or animal mental functions and behaviors. In this field, a professional practitioner or researcher is a psychologist. Psychologists are classified as social or behavioral scientists. Psychological research can be considered either basic or applied. Psychologists attempt to understand the role of mental functions in, educational research Educational research is research conducted to investigate behavioral patterns in pupils, students, teachers and other participants in schools and other educational institutions. Such research is often conducted by examining work products such as documents and standardized test results and sociology Sociology is the study of society. It is a social science—a term with which it is sometimes synonymous—that uses various methods of empirical investigation and critical analysis to develop and refine a body of knowledge about human social activity, often with the goal of applying such knowledge to the pursuit of social welfare. Subject matter.

Contents

Characteristics

A systematic review is a summary of 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 is often applied in the biomedical Biomedical research , in general simply known as medical research, is the basic research, applied research, or translational research conducted to aid and support the body of knowledge in the field of medicine. Medical research can be divided into two general categories: the evaluation of new treatments for both safety and efficacy in what are or healthcare context, but systematic reviews can be applied in any field of research and groups like the Campbell Collaboration are promoting their use in policy-making beyond just healthcare. Selection, or screening of articles for inclusion is usually performed by reviewing the titles and abstracts of the articles identified, and excluding those that do not meet eligibility criteria. It often, but not always, uses statistical techniques (meta-analysis In statistics, a meta-analysis combines the results of several studies that address a set of related research hypotheses. In its simplest form, this is normally by identification of a common measure of "effect size", for which a weighted average might be the output of a meta-analyses. Here the weighting might be related to sample sizes) to combine these valid studies, or at least uses grading of the levels of evidence depending on the methodology used.

A systematic review uses an objective and transparent approach for research synthesis, with the aim of minimizing bias. While many systematic reviews are based on an explicit quantitative In the social sciences, quantitative research refers to the systematic empirical investigation of quantitative properties and phenomena and their relationships. The objective of quantitative research is to develop and employ mathematical models, theories and/or hypotheses pertaining to phenomena. The process of measurement is central to meta-analysis In statistics, a meta-analysis combines the results of several studies that address a set of related research hypotheses. In its simplest form, this is normally by identification of a common measure of "effect size", for which a weighted average might be the output of a meta-analyses. Here the weighting might be related to sample sizes of available data, there are also qualitative Qualitative research is a method of inquiry appropriated in many different academic disciplines, traditionally in the social sciences, but also in market research and further contexts. Qualitative researchers aim to gather an in-depth understanding of human behavior and the reasons that govern such behavior. The qualitative method investigates the reviews which adhere to the standards for gathering, analyzing and reporting evidence. The EPPI-Centre The Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre is part of the Social Science Research Unit at the Institute of Education, University of London. Its work is concerned with systematic reviews which use transparent and explicit methodologies for reviewing research evidence in order to be clear about what we know from have been influential in developing methods for combining both qualitative and quantitative research in systematic reviews.[2]

Recent developments in systematic reviews include realist reviews, developed by Ray Pawson and Trisha Greenhalgh, and the meta-narrative approach by Greenhalgh and colleagues.[3][4] These approaches try to overcome the problems of methodological and epistemological Epistemology or theory of knowledge is the branch of philosophy concerned with the nature and scope (limitations) of knowledge. It addresses the questions: heterogeneity Heterogeneity of ion channels means diversity of different types of channels serving a specific kind of current, e.g. by channels with different constitutive subunits in the diverse literatures existing on some subjects.

Cochrane Collaboration

Many healthcare journals In academic publishing, a scientific journal is a periodical publication intended to further the progress of science, usually by reporting new research. There are thousands of scientific journals in publication, and many more have been published at various points in the past . Most journals are highly specialized, although some of the oldest now publish systematic reviews, but the best-known source is The Cochrane Collaboration, a group of over 15,000 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 The Cochrane Library is a collection of databases in medicine and other healthcare specialties provided by the Cochrane Collaboration and other organisations. At its core is the collection of Cochrane Reviews, a database of systematic reviews and meta-analyses which summarize and interpret the results of medical research. The Cochrane Library aims, which to date (January 2009) contains 3,625 complete reviews and 1,921 protocols for additional reviews being conducted.

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

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.[5]

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.[6] 7% of systematic reviews needed updating at the time of publication.[6] A 2003 study suggested that extending searches beyond major databases, perhaps into gray literature Grey literature is a term used variably by the intelligence community, librarians, and medical and research professionals to refer to a body of materials that cannot be found easily through conventional channels such as publishers, "but which is frequently original and usually recent" in the words of M.C. Debachere, would increase the effectiveness of reviews.[7]

See also

References

  1. ^ "What is EBM". Centre for Evidence Based Medicine. 2009-01-26. http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=1914. Retrieved 2009-03-18.
  2. ^ Thomas J, Harden A, Oakley A, Oliver S, Sutcliffe K, Rees R. Brunton G. Kavanagh J (2004) Integrating qualitative research with trials in systematic reviews: an example from public health. British Medical Journal 328:1010-1012
  3. ^ Fraser MacFarlane; Olivia Kyriakidou; Bate, Paul; Richard Peacock; Greenhalgh, Trisha (2005). Diffusion of Innovations in Health Service Organisations: A Systematic Literature (Studies in Urban and Social Change). Blackwell Publishing Professional. ISBN The International Standard Book Number is a unique numeric commercial book identifier based upon the 9-digit Standard Book Numbering (SBN) code created by Gordon Foster, now Emeritus Professor of Statistics at Trinity College, Dublin, for the booksellers and stationers W.H. Smith and others in 1966 0-7279-1869-9.
  4. ^ Greenhalgh T, Potts HWW, Wong G, Bark P, Swinglehurst D (2009). Tensions and paradoxes in electronic patient record research: A systematic literature review using the meta-narrative method. Milbank Quarterly, 87(4), 729-88 (full text; alternate full text)
  5. ^ Moher D, Tetzlaff J, Tricco AC, Sampson M, Altman DG (2007). "Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews". PLoS Med. 4 (3): e78. doi A digital object identifier is a character string used to uniquely identify an electronic document or other object. Metadata about the object is stored in association with the DOI name and this metadata may include a location, such as a URL, where the object can be found. The DOI for a document is permanent, whereas its location and other metadata:10.1371/journal.pmed.0040078. PMID A PMID is a unique number assigned to each PubMed citation of life sciences and biomedical scientific journal articles. The related Pubmed Central archive may additionally assign a separate number, a PMCID (PubMed Central Identifier), normally written with a PMC prefix 17388659.
  6. ^ a b 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 A PMID is a unique number assigned to each PubMed citation of life sciences and biomedical scientific journal articles. The related Pubmed Central archive may additionally assign a separate number, a PMCID (PubMed Central Identifier), normally written with a PMC prefix 17638714.
  7. ^ Savoie I, Helmer D, Green CJ, Kazanjian A (2003). "Beyond Medline: reducing bias through extended systematic review search". Int J Technol Assess Health Care 19 (1): 168–78. doi A digital object identifier is a character string used to uniquely identify an electronic document or other object. Metadata about the object is stored in association with the DOI name and this metadata may include a location, such as a URL, where the object can be found. The DOI for a document is permanent, whereas its location and other metadata:10.1017/S0266462303000163. PMID A PMID is a unique number assigned to each PubMed citation of life sciences and biomedical scientific journal articles. The related Pubmed Central archive may additionally assign a separate number, a PMCID (PubMed Central Identifier), normally written with a PMC prefix 12701949.

External links

Categories: Systematic review | Evidence-based medicine | Medical research | Meta-analysis

 

The above information uses material from Wikipedia and is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License The purpose of this License is to make a manual, textbook, or other functional and useful document "free" in the sense of freedom: to assure everyone the effective freedom to copy and redistribute it, with or without modifying it, either commercially or noncommercially. Secondarily, this License preserves for the author and publisher a.
Some facts may not have been fully verified for accuracy. [Disclaimers Wikipedia is an online open-content collaborative encyclopedia, that is, a voluntary association of individuals and groups working to develop a common resource of human knowledge. The structure of the project allows anyone with an Internet connection to alter its content. Please be advised that nothing found here has necessarily been reviewed by]
This page was last archived by our server on Sat Sep 4 00:04:33 2010. [ refresh local cache ]
Displaying this page or its contents does not use any Wikimedia Foundation's resources.
The owners of this site proudly support the Wikimedia Foundation.

[Hide]▼
'Systematic Review' Images
fig2 gif
ehponline.org
fig2 gif
422px x 544px | 28.60kB

[source page]

Figure 2 Scatterplot and weighted regression line weighted by the inverse of the standard error of the natural log relative risk of the natural log relative risk of GI

Yahoo Images Search: Systematic review,
Sat Sep 4 00:04:43 2010
'Systematic Review' Blogs
High Yield Otitis Media Comprehenisive Board Review | COMLEX USMLE ...
comlexflashcards.com
High Yield Otitis Media Comprehenisive Board Review | COMLEX USMLE ...

COMLEX USMLE blogger

Fri, 06 Aug 2010 20:16:03 GM

Systematic reviews. and guidelines in children support this approach and suggest that choice of initial antibiotic usually is not critical, paving the way for the use of this less expensive and narrower-spectr​um agent. ...

Google Blogs Search: Systematic review,
Sat Sep 4 00:04:44 2010
[Hide]▲