Systematic Reviews

A systematic review is a review of all published and unpublished evidence on a specific topic. A systematic review is a methodology for conducting a review, and uses an explicit game plan that can be reproduced by another researcher or team.

From the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2019):

A systematic review attempts to collate all the empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria in order to answer a specific research question. It uses explicit, systematic methods that are selected with a view to minimizing bias, thus providing more reliable findings from which conclusions can be drawn and decisions made.

Systematic reviews are important, often rewarding and, at times, exciting research projects. They offer the opportunity for authors to make authoritative statements about the extent of human knowledge in important areas and to identify priorities for further research. They sometimes cover issues high on the political agenda and receive attention from the media.

Conducting research with these impacts is not without its challenges, however, and completing a high-quality systematic review is often demanding and time-consuming. 

Munn, Z., Stern, C., Aromataris, E. et al. (2018). What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC Med Res Methodol 18, 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017.

Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x. 

A UC Merced librarian can step in at different points of your systematic review to:

• provide you with information and resources on the systematic review process;
• help you determine if there are existing reviews on your topic;
• recommend databases and citation management software;
• guide you through government resources and gray literature; and
• suggest additional search terms and edits for your search strategy.

Librarians' availability for consultation and assistance may vary through the semester. Please plan accordingly, and contact us as soon as possible in your evidence synthesis process.

Systematic reviews are a powerful tool for evidence-based public health (EBPH) because they provide:

• a clearly stated set of objectives with pre-defined eligibility criteria for studies
• an explicit, reproducible methodology
• a systematic search that attempts to identify all studies that would meet the eligibility criteria
• an assessment of the validity of the findings of the included studies, for example through the assessment of risk of bias
• a systematic presentation, and synthesis, of the characteristics and findings of the included studies

in order to meet the following objectives: 

1. address a specific (well focused, relevant) question
2. collate the results of the research in a systematic way
3. appraise the quality of the research in the light of the research question
4. make the knowledge base more accessible
5. identify gaps; to place new proposals in the context of existing knowledge
6. propose a future research agenda; to make recommendations

From Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2019) and Torgerson (2003).

A student may be asked to create a "systematic review" in a single semester. Systematic reviews are typically researched and compiled by teams of researchers, not individuals. A review conducted in a single semester by a single researcher is a rapid review, not a systematic review. Rapid reviews are useful when there's a need to assemble evidence for a study in a very limited time. They tend to be extremely focused on a single question.

There's an excellent series of videos on systemic review searches, "Systemic Searches," on the Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library webpage. Access them here: https://library.medicine.yale.edu/tutorials/subjects/systematic-searches