Systematic reviews aim to find and evaluate all studies, published and unpublished, relevant to a research question, see this helpful video for an overview. Systematic and transparent methods are used to minimise bias and allow for replication and verification.

Key characteristics

• 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 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. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. (2019). p.xxiii

Business systematic-like reviews: Deakin's excellent guidelines are here 

Articles to help you decide which review type to use

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 

Munn, Z., Peters, M. D., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x

Peters, M. D., Marnie, C., Tricco, A. C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., ... & Khalil, H. (2020). Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 18(10), 2119-2126. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-20-00167 

Tools and resources to help you decide which review type to use

JBI decision tree for selecting scoping review methodology

Right Review tool. See this article on the development of the tool: Amog, K., Courvoisier, M., Mak, M., Booth, A., Godfrey, C., Hwee, J., ... & Tricco, A. C. (2022). The web-based “Right Review” tool asks reviewers simple questions to suggest methods from 41 knowledge synthesis methods. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 147, 42-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2022.03.004

JBI Evidence Synthesis Taxonomy Initiative

A meta-analysis is an optional component of a systematic review, which uses statistical methods to quantitatively evaluate pooled data from single studies. 

If you are writing a systematic review, you need to decide whether it makes sense to include a meta analysis. This can be a difficult decision, see the books listed on this page for guidance.

Cochrane Collaboration

A not-for-profit organisation created to encourage the synthesis of health research findings. The aim is to make it easier for health professionals, patients and policymakers to make evidence-based choices about health interventions. Search via EBM Reviews (Ovid), access from the Library databases page.

Campbell Collaboration

A not-for-profit organisation promoting evidence-based policy through the creation of open access systematic reviews. Areas of interest include ageing, crime and justice, disability, education, international development, social welfare.

Here’s how Subject Librarians can help with your systematic review:

• Advise on suitable databases
• Advise/revise search strategies 
• Provide advice on how to document the search for the methods section of your review
• EndNote and Zotero support
• Research data management
• Covidence support

NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD). (2008). Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care.