A systematic review is defined as "a review of the evidence on a clearly formulated question that uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select and critically appraise relevant primary research, and to extract and analyze data from the studies that are included in the review." The methods must be reproducible and transparent. (University of York, 2001)
Systematic reviews can be distinguished from narrative reviews.
"Literature reviews are conducted for the purpose of (a) locating information on a topic or identifying gaps in the literature for areas of future study, (b) synthesizing conclusions in an area of ambiguity and (c) helping clinicians and researchers inform decision-making and practice guidelines. Literature reviews can be narrative or systematic, with narrative reviews aiming to provide a descriptive overview of selected literature, without undertaking a systematic literature search. By contrast, systematic reviews use explicit and replicable methods in order to retrieve all available literature pertaining to a specific topic to answer a defined question. (Higgins 2011)." (Atkinson, 2018)
The Cochrane library notes that a systematic review attempts to identify, appraise, and synthesize all the empirical evidence that meets pre-specified eligibility criteria to answer a specific research question. Researchers conducting systematic reviews use explicit, systematic methods that are selected with a view aimed at minimizing bias, to produce more reliable findings to inform decision making.
The systematic review process seeks to:
Benefits include:
Atkinson, L. Z., & Cipriani, A. (2018). How to carry out a literature search for a systematic review: a practical guide. BJPsych Advances, 24(2), 74-82.
University of York. NHS Centre for Reviews & Dissemination. (2001). Undertaking Systematic Reviews of Research on Effectiveness: CRD's Guidance for Those Carrying Out Or Commissioning Reviews (No. 4). Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York.