Systematic reviews: Brief overview of methods, limitations, and resources

Systematic reviews are a valuable resource for nurses in academia and practice.1-3 Well done systematic reviews, which include but not limited to meta-analyses, offer an efficient way evaluate large amounts of information decision-makers areas research, policy, patient care. can help us know what we about topic, is yet known, often greater extent than the findings single study.4 The process comprehensive enough establish consistency generalizability research across settings populations.3 A meta-analysis type review that statistically combines results multiple quantitative studies. According Grant Booth,5 “although many present their without combining data this way, good essential literature” (p. 98). have grown numbers since they first emerged field medicine late 1970s.4, 6 Other types scholarly mistitled as review.4 Conceptual overlap muddiness exist among found literature.6 by Martinic,7 complicating factor lack consensus standard definition reviews. However, synthesize primary reports on topic with effort limit bias random error.4 Baker1 noted three criteria review: it explicit, rigorous, reproducible. These withstood test time, appearing earlier literature describing methods.4, 8 This article offers brief overview methodology discussion potential limitations, resources authors editors. Sutton colleagues9 while all follow system inquiry, thus nature, To decrease confusion between other important existing well-established published methodology. Fully used using consistent terminology when writing or referring also helpful. An clearly describe may be within same family, such described above, minimize conceptual overlap.9 steps any assure consumers was conducted thoughtful intent rigor. There number checklists available guide range from few many; best choice guided level expertise need detailed instruction. One example well-known one builds Preferred Reporting Items Meta-Analyses search extension (PRISMA-S).8, 10-12 last part preparation final report, ideally inclusion external peer evaluates both dissemination transparency.1 rationale perform should determined before begins.1 typically begins well-defined guiding statement question. question includes PICO(T) elements Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, sometimes Time frame.8, 13 At early point, advisable register database, International Prospective Register Reviews (PROSPERO, https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/) allows updates status provide transparency avoid duplication.13, 14 Predetermine relevant databases specific terms keywords, title, abstract fields each database; Search keywords index appropriate databases; Expand searching reference list studies obtained previous steps.1 second third called snowballing reverse snowballing6; sample potentially assures exhaustive nature search. continued until repetition evident various sources. In addition literature, unpublished sources (grey literature). health sciences librarian invaluable support determine strategy evidence.1 Use two screeners strongly recommended.1, 2, 6, 10 Each person independently, followed comparison, reach needed, conclusions. Another recommended technique two-step screening considers study sample, full manuscript, including listed references.1 use retrospective, observational design, subject recent Doleman et al.13 explanation these limitations. In-depth limitations beyond scope article; however, mention considered risks bias, selection inadequate blinding, attrition selective outcome reporting; inconsistency clinical statistical heterogeneity; imprecision lead Type I II errors. consideration publication bias. It preferable publish demonstrated significant even though do demonstrate significance very clinically significant, review, especially providers.6, 13, 15 complex undertaking involve hundreds, possibly several thousand articles, depending amount available. electronic management products organize analyze retrieved increase accuracy add efficiency process. completed team. Such team at minimum author who has methodological expertise. more assist search; experience analysis. graduate students complexity inherent persons dissertation project committee. As been undertaken 50 years, there Table 1 lists time-honored related performing evaluating review. helpful challenges unique methodology, useful is, not, Discusses main discriminate attributes Describes summarizes methods qualitative Lists strengths weaknesses examples Discussion visuals disseminate meta-analyses Includes taxonomy graphical displays (e.g., forest plot like, funnel trends, effect size distribution, size) historical development visualization functionality features plots significance, details measures dichotomous continuous variables; calculation mean size; examine bias; presentation problems PRISMA-S checklist use; explanations examples; glossary core standards principles frequently encountered Differentiates reviewing Addresses synthesis PRISMA items necessary report eliminate disseminating evidence 17 subitems Characterizes based Defines family (and types) subtypes links AHRQ publications topics review's, comparing interventions; selecting topics, assessing levels risk harms Offers how find grey Provides series PowerPoint presentations designed faculty clinicians familiarize novice researchers slides quiz basic official Cochrane Handbook Interventions online book option; ability download some PDFs; link purchase Methods Groups participants discuss global community Siddaway16 that, “The draw broad theoretical conclusions means, linking theory theory” 747). end, high quality seeking write editors one. explicitly stated, defined exclusion criteria. supported further references initial results. Finally, sufficient description so required reproduce study. Careful attention established criteria, easily rigor types. Jacqueline K. Owens, PhD, RN, CNE professor nursing Ashland University Schar College Nursing Health Sciences Ashland, OH. She Editor-in-Chief OJIN: Online Journal Issues Nursing. Prior position, she served Associate Editor 2007 2011 became journal's Editorial Assistant 2003. Dr. Owens presented workshops regional days throughout Ohio. Particular interest publishing, predatory publishing practices, publication. member Authors-in-Residence Nurse Author & Editor.