{"id":34,"date":"2021-10-25T21:04:14","date_gmt":"2021-10-25T21:04:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/chapter\/things-to-keep-in-mind-when-conducting-systematic-reviews\/"},"modified":"2023-02-15T15:40:56","modified_gmt":"2023-02-15T15:40:56","slug":"things-to-keep-in-mind-when-conducting-systematic-reviews","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/chapter\/things-to-keep-in-mind-when-conducting-systematic-reviews\/","title":{"raw":"Systematic Reviews","rendered":"Systematic Reviews"},"content":{"raw":"<h1><span>What Are Systematic Reviews?<\/span><\/h1>\r\nA systematic review is also known as <strong>evidence synthesis<\/strong> because it brings together information from a range of sources to answer a specific research question. It differs from a traditional literature review, in that it aims to [pb_glossary id=\"143\"]synthesize[\/pb_glossary] and [pb_glossary id=\"148\"]analyze[\/pb_glossary] the research in an unbiased, rigorous and [pb_glossary id=\"147\"]systematic [\/pb_glossary] way so that it can be used to support evidence-based practice.\r\n<h2><strong><span>Characteristics <\/span>\u00a0<\/strong><\/h2>\r\n<ul>\r\n \t<li style=\"font-weight: 400\">The scope of the review is established in advance (including the research question and pre-defined eligibility criteria).<\/li>\r\n \t<li style=\"font-weight: 400\">A systematic search is conducted in order to identify all studies\/resources that would meet the eligibility criteria.<\/li>\r\n \t<li style=\"font-weight: 400\">The methodology used to search, assess, analyze and synthesize studies\/resources is explicit and reproducible.<\/li>\r\n \t<li style=\"font-weight: 400\">The review assesses the validity of the studies\/resources for a risk of [pb_glossary id=\"150\"] bias [\/pb_glossary].<\/li>\r\n \t<li style=\"font-weight: 400\">The review uses explicit methods for extracting and synthesizing study findings ([pb_glossary id=\"142\"]qualitative[\/pb_glossary] or [pb_glossary id=\"151\"]quantitative[\/pb_glossary]).<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<h1><span>Types of Systematic Reviews<\/span><\/h1>\r\nThere are <strong>different types of reviews<\/strong> that involve evidence synthesis and a systematic review is the most well known version. Other examples include a rapid review or a scoping review.\u00a0 We define the different types in more detail below.\r\n<div class=\"textbox textbox--examples\"><header class=\"textbox__header\">\r\n<h2 class=\"textbox__title\"><span style=\"color: #000000\">Example<\/span><\/h2>\r\n<\/header>\r\n<div class=\"textbox__content\">\r\n\r\n<span>[h5p id=\"11\"]<\/span>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n&nbsp;\r\n<div class=\"textbox textbox--exercises\"><header class=\"textbox__header\">\r\n<h2>Learning Activity<\/h2>\r\n<\/header>\r\n<div class=\"textbox__content\">\r\n\r\nDetermine what type of review would be the best fit for each of the following research questions.\r\n\r\n<span>[h5p id=\"12\"]<\/span>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<h2>Teams and Time Considerations<\/h2>\r\nA review like a systematic review or a meta-analysis can take <strong>at least a year to complete<\/strong> and is usually <strong>conducted by a team<\/strong>. \u00a0If your review is for <strong>a class assignment,<\/strong> you can still conduct a systematic review without a team or a year to complete it.\u00a0 If your aim is to eventually publish your review, keep in mind that one of the main goals of a systematic review is to try and eliminate potential bias, and working independently can be viewed negatively.\u00a0 If you must work independently, you should identify this limitation when writing your review.\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"attachment_451\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"429\"]<img src=\"http:\/\/pressbooks.library.ryerson.ca\/graduatereviews\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/263\/2021\/10\/7658288734_ef1e177b53_o-300x200.jpg\" alt=\"Books on the left on a desk. Student holding a pen thinking hard about the material she is reading. \" width=\"429\" height=\"286\" class=\"wp-image-451\" \/> <a href=\"https:\/\/www.flickr.com\/photos\/83633410@N07\/7658288734\/in\/dateposted\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span>A college girl is studying for her end of year exam.<\/span><\/a> By Flickr user <a href=\"https:\/\/www.flickr.com\/photos\/83633410@N07\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">CollegeDegrees360<\/a>. \u00a0Licensed under Creative Commons <a href=\"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-sa\/2.0\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"cc-license-identifier\">CC BY-SA 2.0<\/span><\/a>[\/caption]\r\n<h2>Systematic Reviews and Bias<\/h2>\r\nEliminating bias as much as possible is one of the key characteristics of systematic reviews. By bias, we mean that some type of systematic error has occurred during the review stage that leads to the acceptance of outcomes and conclusions of a study. This can result in the possibility of unfair or misleading information within the reviews. Bias is potentially introduced at any stage of the research process, from formulating your research question to choosing which sources to include.\r\n\r\nIn order to reduce bias in your review, you will need to undertake a quality assessment throughout the review process. Your <strong>protocol<\/strong> (see next section) and your [pb_glossary id=\"153\"]screening[\/pb_glossary] process will\u00a0 help you reduce your bias. Another way to reduce bias is to work in a team setting, and this is why some reviews require more than one person.\u00a0 We will cover how to check for bias when screening sources in <a href=\"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/chapter\/documenting-your-selection-process-and-addressing-bias-for-systematic-reviews\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Module 3 Organizing, Managing and Screening Sources<\/a><span style=\"color: #ff00ff\">.\u00a0<\/span>\r\n<h1>Why Are Systematic Reviews Important?<\/h1>\r\nA systematic review can generally give us the most dependable answer to a specific research question, and it can identify gaps in our knowledge that require further research. It also communicates the strength of the available evidence and the quality of included studies. This indicates how much confidence practitioners, service users, managers, policy makers, and the popular media should have in the results (Gough &amp; Richardson, 2018).\r\n<h1>What Type of Systematic Review is Right for You?<\/h1>\r\nBooth et. al (2016) suggest that your choice of review methods should be determined by five main considerations captured by the acronym, TREAD\r\n\r\nThese and other factors may determine what kind of review is most appropriate to answer your research question.\r\n\r\nThe original version of this chapter contained H5P content. You may want to remove or replace this element.\r\n<div class=\"textbox textbox--exercises\"><header class=\"textbox__header\">\r\n<h2 class=\"textbox__title\">Learning Activity<\/h2>\r\n<\/header>\r\n<div class=\"textbox__content\">\r\n\r\n<strong>Decision Tools<\/strong>\r\n\r\nThe following tools can help you pick the right systematic review:\r\n<ul>\r\n \t<li style=\"font-weight: 400\"><a href=\"https:\/\/guides.hsict.library.utoronto.ca\/ld.php?content_id=35310435\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Knowledge Synthesis Decision Tool<\/a> Unity Health Toronto Health Science Library, St. Michael\u2019s Hospital<\/li>\r\n \t<li><a href=\"https:\/\/guides.temple.edu\/ld.php?content_id=58184158\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Review Ready Reckoner - Assessment Tool (RRRsAT)<\/a>. Temple University Libraries<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<div class=\"textbox textbox--key-takeaways\"><header class=\"textbox__header\">\r\n<h2 class=\"textbox__title\"><span style=\"color: #000000\">Key Takeaways<\/span><\/h2>\r\n<\/header>\r\n<div class=\"textbox__content\">\r\n\r\nIt is important to understand and meet the specific requirements of your chosen review, especially if you plan to publish your review.\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>","rendered":"<h1><span>What Are Systematic Reviews?<\/span><\/h1>\n<p>A systematic review is also known as <strong>evidence synthesis<\/strong> because it brings together information from a range of sources to answer a specific research question. It differs from a traditional literature review, in that it aims to <button class=\"glossary-term\" aria-describedby=\"34-143\">synthesize<\/button> and <button class=\"glossary-term\" aria-describedby=\"34-148\">analyze<\/button> the research in an unbiased, rigorous and <button class=\"glossary-term\" aria-describedby=\"34-147\">systematic <\/button> way so that it can be used to support evidence-based practice.<\/p>\n<h2><strong><span>Characteristics <\/span>\u00a0<\/strong><\/h2>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400\">The scope of the review is established in advance (including the research question and pre-defined eligibility criteria).<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400\">A systematic search is conducted in order to identify all studies\/resources that would meet the eligibility criteria.<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400\">The methodology used to search, assess, analyze and synthesize studies\/resources is explicit and reproducible.<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400\">The review assesses the validity of the studies\/resources for a risk of <button class=\"glossary-term\" aria-describedby=\"34-150\"> bias <\/button>.<\/li>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400\">The review uses explicit methods for extracting and synthesizing study findings (<button class=\"glossary-term\" aria-describedby=\"34-142\">qualitative<\/button> or <button class=\"glossary-term\" aria-describedby=\"34-151\">quantitative<\/button>).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h1><span>Types of Systematic Reviews<\/span><\/h1>\n<p>There are <strong>different types of reviews<\/strong> that involve evidence synthesis and a systematic review is the most well known version. Other examples include a rapid review or a scoping review.\u00a0 We define the different types in more detail below.<\/p>\n<div class=\"textbox textbox--examples\">\n<header class=\"textbox__header\">\n<h2 class=\"textbox__title\"><span style=\"color: #000000\">Example<\/span><\/h2>\n<\/header>\n<div class=\"textbox__content\">\n<p><span><\/p>\n<div id=\"h5p-11\">\n<div class=\"h5p-iframe-wrapper\"><iframe id=\"h5p-iframe-11\" class=\"h5p-iframe\" data-content-id=\"11\" style=\"height:1px\" src=\"about:blank\" frameBorder=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" title=\"M1 Types of Systematic Reviews\"><\/iframe><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<div class=\"textbox textbox--exercises\">\n<header class=\"textbox__header\">\n<h2>Learning Activity<\/h2>\n<\/header>\n<div class=\"textbox__content\">\n<p>Determine what type of review would be the best fit for each of the following research questions.<\/p>\n<p><span><\/p>\n<div id=\"h5p-12\">\n<div class=\"h5p-iframe-wrapper\"><iframe id=\"h5p-iframe-12\" class=\"h5p-iframe\" data-content-id=\"12\" style=\"height:1px\" src=\"about:blank\" frameBorder=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" title=\"M1 What Type of Systematic Review is This?\"><\/iframe><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<h2>Teams and Time Considerations<\/h2>\n<p>A review like a systematic review or a meta-analysis can take <strong>at least a year to complete<\/strong> and is usually <strong>conducted by a team<\/strong>. \u00a0If your review is for <strong>a class assignment,<\/strong> you can still conduct a systematic review without a team or a year to complete it.\u00a0 If your aim is to eventually publish your review, keep in mind that one of the main goals of a systematic review is to try and eliminate potential bias, and working independently can be viewed negatively.\u00a0 If you must work independently, you should identify this limitation when writing your review.<\/p>\n<figure id=\"attachment_451\" aria-describedby=\"caption-attachment-451\" style=\"width: 429px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" src=\"http:\/\/pressbooks.library.ryerson.ca\/graduatereviews\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/263\/2021\/10\/7658288734_ef1e177b53_o-300x200.jpg\" alt=\"Books on the left on a desk. Student holding a pen thinking hard about the material she is reading.\" width=\"429\" height=\"286\" class=\"wp-image-451\" \/><figcaption id=\"caption-attachment-451\" class=\"wp-caption-text\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.flickr.com\/photos\/83633410@N07\/7658288734\/in\/dateposted\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span>A college girl is studying for her end of year exam.<\/span><\/a> By Flickr user <a href=\"https:\/\/www.flickr.com\/photos\/83633410@N07\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">CollegeDegrees360<\/a>. \u00a0Licensed under Creative Commons <a href=\"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by-sa\/2.0\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span class=\"cc-license-identifier\">CC BY-SA 2.0<\/span><\/a><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<h2>Systematic Reviews and Bias<\/h2>\n<p>Eliminating bias as much as possible is one of the key characteristics of systematic reviews. By bias, we mean that some type of systematic error has occurred during the review stage that leads to the acceptance of outcomes and conclusions of a study. This can result in the possibility of unfair or misleading information within the reviews. Bias is potentially introduced at any stage of the research process, from formulating your research question to choosing which sources to include.<\/p>\n<p>In order to reduce bias in your review, you will need to undertake a quality assessment throughout the review process. Your <strong>protocol<\/strong> (see next section) and your <button class=\"glossary-term\" aria-describedby=\"34-153\">screening<\/button> process will\u00a0 help you reduce your bias. Another way to reduce bias is to work in a team setting, and this is why some reviews require more than one person.\u00a0 We will cover how to check for bias when screening sources in <a href=\"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/chapter\/documenting-your-selection-process-and-addressing-bias-for-systematic-reviews\/\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Module 3 Organizing, Managing and Screening Sources<\/a><span style=\"color: #ff00ff\">.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<h1>Why Are Systematic Reviews Important?<\/h1>\n<p>A systematic review can generally give us the most dependable answer to a specific research question, and it can identify gaps in our knowledge that require further research. It also communicates the strength of the available evidence and the quality of included studies. This indicates how much confidence practitioners, service users, managers, policy makers, and the popular media should have in the results (Gough &amp; Richardson, 2018).<\/p>\n<h1>What Type of Systematic Review is Right for You?<\/h1>\n<p>Booth et. al (2016) suggest that your choice of review methods should be determined by five main considerations captured by the acronym, TREAD<\/p>\n<p>These and other factors may determine what kind of review is most appropriate to answer your research question.<\/p>\n<p>The original version of this chapter contained H5P content. You may want to remove or replace this element.<\/p>\n<div class=\"textbox textbox--exercises\">\n<header class=\"textbox__header\">\n<h2 class=\"textbox__title\">Learning Activity<\/h2>\n<\/header>\n<div class=\"textbox__content\">\n<p><strong>Decision Tools<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The following tools can help you pick the right systematic review:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li style=\"font-weight: 400\"><a href=\"https:\/\/guides.hsict.library.utoronto.ca\/ld.php?content_id=35310435\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Knowledge Synthesis Decision Tool<\/a> Unity Health Toronto Health Science Library, St. Michael\u2019s Hospital<\/li>\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/guides.temple.edu\/ld.php?content_id=58184158\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">Review Ready Reckoner &#8211; Assessment Tool (RRRsAT)<\/a>. Temple University Libraries<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"textbox textbox--key-takeaways\">\n<header class=\"textbox__header\">\n<h2 class=\"textbox__title\"><span style=\"color: #000000\">Key Takeaways<\/span><\/h2>\n<\/header>\n<div class=\"textbox__content\">\n<p>It is important to understand and meet the specific requirements of your chosen review, especially if you plan to publish your review.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"glossary\"><div class=\"glossary__tooltip\" id=\"34-143\" hidden><p>The\u00a0examining\u00a0and\u00a0combining\u00a0of information\u00a0with other information to produce a final\u00a0interpretation, theory or conclusion.<\/p>\n<\/div><div class=\"glossary__tooltip\" id=\"34-148\" hidden><p>To examine methodically and in detail the \u00a0structure or elements of the information presented. Typically for purposes of explanation and interpretation.<\/p>\n<\/div><div class=\"glossary__tooltip\" id=\"34-147\" hidden><p>Carried out using a\u00a0planned,\u00a0ordered\u00a0procedure. Methodical.<\/p>\n<\/div><div class=\"glossary__tooltip\" id=\"34-150\" hidden><p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p>Bias is a disproportionate weight in favor of or against an idea or thing. Example: when a systematic review does not identify all available data on a topic.<\/p>\n<\/div><div class=\"glossary__tooltip\" id=\"34-142\" hidden><p>Qualitative research relies on data obtained by the researcher from first-hand observation, interviews, questionnaires (on which participants write descriptively), focus groups, participant-observation, recordings made in natural settings, documents, and artifacts. The data are generally nonnumerical.<\/p>\n<\/div><div class=\"glossary__tooltip\" id=\"34-151\" hidden><p>Quantitative\u00a0data can be counted, measured,\u00a0<em>and<\/em>\u00a0expressed using numbers.<\/p>\n<\/div><div class=\"glossary__tooltip\" id=\"34-153\" hidden><p>The purpose of screening is to eliminate studies that do not meet your inclusion criteria. If you are a team, each team member should independently\u00a0 screen all studies, starting with a title and abstract, followed by a full-text screening.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"author":18,"menu_order":6,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[50],"contributor":[],"license":[],"class_list":["post-34","chapter","type-chapter","status-publish","hentry","chapter-type-numberless"],"part":23,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/34","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/18"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/34\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":245,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/34\/revisions\/245"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/23"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/34\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=34"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=34"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=34"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/pressbooks.library.torontomu.ca\/graduatereivews2\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=34"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}