Systematic Reviews in the Health Sciences

A systematic review attempts to identify, appraise and synthesize all the empirical evidence that meets pre-specified eligibility criteria to answer a given research question. Researchers conducting systematic reviews use explicit methods aimed at minimizing bias, in order to produce more reliable findings that can be used to inform decision making. (See Section 1.2 in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.)

Do you really want to do a systematic review? Answer the following questions to determine:

• Do I have a clearly defined clinical question with established inclusion and exclusion criteria?
• Do I have a team of at least three people assembled?
• Do I have time to go through as many search results as we might find?
• Do I have resources to get foreign language articles appropriately translated?
• Do I have the statistical resources to analyze and pool data?

If you answered “No” to any of the first four questions, a traditional Literature Review will be more appropriate to do.

If you answered “No” to the last question, a meta-analysis will not be an appropriate methodology for your review.

The following further outlines the difference between a "Systematic Review" and a "Literature Review."

If you think you do not need a systematic review but still need a Literature Review that is exhaustive, but not protocol-driven, librarians can still assist.