Science topic

Systematic Reviews - Science topic

A systematic review is a literature review focused on a research question that tries to identify, appraise, select and synthesize all high quality research evidence relevant to that question. Systematic reviews of high-quality randomized controlled trials are crucial to evidence-based medicine.
Questions related to Systematic Reviews
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
2 answers
I am confused about choosing appropriate quality assessment tool for various types of studies I have taken for my current systematic review. Please help. Thanks
Relevant answer
Answer
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
4 answers
Do we have a systematic review on this topic? grounding, attention training, paced breathing have been proposed, but not sure if we have actually looked into effect sizes of these change methods.
Relevant answer
Answer
Thank you Oliver Hamer I'd love to see a meta-analysis on that too!
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
Hi everyone,
I intend to conduct a systematic literature review. I have selected my search strings and the database (Scopus). Nevertheless, the results were enormous (like 2,000 articles). As such, is there any way that I can include articles from Q1 journals only during the search process?
I understand that I can do it manually by filtering the source title during the process. However, it must be done manually by checking the source title in Scimago to see their quartile rank, which takes some time.
I really appreciate your answer.
Best Regards
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Faiz Faiz ,
I have my doubts about your intended selection criterium. I don’t think it is scientifically sound to focus exclusively on Q1 journals. I would expect that the relevance of a paper is determined by other factors than its impact factor/quartile.
Check a number of systematic reviews to see how to screen their selection in order to end up with the most relevant (and manageable amount of) papers.
Best regards.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
2 answers
1. A systematic review can be registered in PROSPERO. Should an update of the same systematic review registered in PROSPERO? (In particular, where the authors are different to the initial review)
2. Is there any guide available for writing updated systematic reviews?
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
5 answers
Systematic review.
Relevant answer
Answer
The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently report why the review was done, what the authors did, and what they found. Over the past decade, advances in systematic review methodology and terminology have necessitated an update to the guideline. The PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
4 answers
Hi All
I recently done a Systematic review and checked the quality of methodology of the included studies (almost 30 in number) for the effect of intervention by Down's and Black quality assessment tool. However, there were not a single study with high quality.
My main questions are:
1. Is it okay to continue SR without any meta analysis as there are not any high quality studies seen through Down's and Black quality assessment tool? If so, is there any article for the justification, will be greatly appreciated.
2. Is it possible to do the meta analysis of only moderate quality studies rather than including all other low quality studies in the same Systematic review?
Thanks, and regards
Preet
Relevant answer
Answer
Meta-analysis is a mathematical method of pooling the results of several or more studies; a meta-analysis may be based on a systematic review, but this is not always the case. A systematic review is a multistage process aimed at the identification of all reliable evidence regarding a specific clinical problem. Systematic reviews make it possible to objectively address particular issues according to the current state of clinical knowledge and therefore constitute a reliable basis for clinical decision-making. An appropriate systematic review should include: 1) a defined clinical question, 2) pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria, 3) complex search for medical evidence sources according to a search strategy, 4) critical evaluation of reliability of identified clinical trials, 5) qualitative or quantitative data synthesis and 6) evidence based conclusions. These simple criteria, formulated by Cook et al. more than 10 years ago, allow to differentiate between a reliable systematic review and a "quasi-systematic" one, as well as between a reliable meta-analysis based on a systematic review and a potentially misleading meta-analysis without a systematic review.
Review articles, systematic reviews and meta-analyses: which can be trusted? - PubMed (nih.gov)
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
2 answers
I am doing a systematic review for my Msc International Human Resource Management course and I have been struggling to devise a research question. Could you please help me understand which area of HR/ which HR intervention would be suitable for a systematic review. I was thinking about the effects of downsizing on survivors'' performance but not sure if this is suitable ie. if there are already comprehensive systematic reviews on the topic and another review would not be conclusive. i would much appreciate your insights into this matter.
Relevant answer
Answer
I taught advanced research to doctoral students recently. First, check with your committee/advisor and ask if a systematic literature review is acceptable: It is not for a PhD dissertation at most accredited universities. The RQ emerges from gaps in the literature. What have you not found in the current literature? Here is an example that comes to mind: Research conducted without application of a theoretical perspective. Research conducted without cultural diversity. Research conducted with gender gaps. Research conducted with age bias. I hope this helps.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
my study has 3 mean and SD of 3 different areas on the body in the control group and the same for the experimental group. i want to sum the 3 calculations of each group, so i can calculate the SMD and SD in my systematic review.
Relevant answer
Answer
how did you get the means? you need primary data to estimate that. alternatively, analyze the means.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
4 answers
Dear all, I would like to ask about the literature search process. If I have 2 research questions in my systematic review about two notions, is it possible to apply two searches (two sets of keywords ) in web of science, for example or should I apply one literature search and analyze the literature and answer the questions? Thank you in advance).
Relevant answer
Answer
Thank you!
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
I am writing a systematic review where I will be including RCT and also randomized trials without the control group. Which risk of bias will be best to use for both please?
Relevant answer
Answer
Gracie Pretty It is a standard to use the Version 2 of the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials (RoB 2). And, it is expected by PRISMA reporting also.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
2 answers
Hi,
What do you recommend as the best method to know the unpublished researchers for a systematic review research question?
Other than the ResearchGate platform.
Thanks in advance!
Relevant answer
Answer
I think that the best solution is to extend your database search to Google Scholar, where you can find pre-print papers, gray literature articles, doctoral theses, raw data, books, and conference proceedings (in other words, those research items that are not usually published in scientific journals, but are still meaningful to give the "whole picture"). In fact, recent advances in bibliographic research methodology also show that the optimal database combination for systematic reviews should always include at least Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar.
Check these references for further details:
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
2 answers
Or is it better to wait for the approval before submitting to journals?
Their reply is taking pretty long.
Relevant answer
Answer
You can have your manuscript accepted and published without registration.
As an editor/reviewer, I never recommend publication unless the protocol has been published first. It is true that such registration might give better impression to editors or reviewers.
Now a days, there are difficulties in registering with PROSPERO at the moment as they are overloaded with COVID-19 reviews.
Regards,
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
5 answers
Hi!
I need (a quick) training for how to use the GRADE tool on gradepro.org.
Thanks to anyone who will help me.
Relevant answer
Answer
This guide by Cochrane is very helpful. It will help you with the basic concepts: when to downgrade etc..
For more about the online software watch this video:
Note that it has been updated since this video was released, but you will figure it out.
Good luck
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
Dear Researchers,
I am currently working on a Systematic Literature Review, and a few days back, I could access the Scopus database and search for journals using keywords and Boolean operators. But, since Yesterday, I have been unable to find this search option. I only see all the other options, but not the search by using keywords. I am logged in but still facing this issue. Is there any problem? Can anyone please help?
Best regards
Riad
Relevant answer
Answer
The problem is solved. If anyone faces the same situation, please do knock me.
Warm regards
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
2 answers
Dear research community, we need your help. We are conducting a systematic and narrative review on conditioned pain https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42021266688.. If you know of any report or paper (published or unpublished) on the topic, please contact  sahaj.kang@ugent.be
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Yaakov,
Thank you so much for your reply and the suggestions. These studies seem to be about conditioned pain modulation (CPM) and hence different from what we are interested in, which is the associative learning procedure known as classical conditioning. We often find that these two are easily confused due to the almost identical names. Anyhow, your help is much appreciated.
Kind regards,
Sahaj
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
4 answers
Hi
How can I do filtration for RCT studies in Google Scholar for a systematic review?
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi Jumanah
You should include RCT in your search terms. I mean you should add RCT (with AND) to your search terms. Because as I know there is not any filtering tool in the Google scholar. You can also use Advanced search in Google scholar.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
6 answers
Performing the research search process in a specific area is very useful to systematize scientific productivity. However, performing a systematic review without software can be a slow and error-prone process. Therefore, my question is what software do you recommend to perform a systematic review?
Relevant answer
Answer
I agree that R and Revman are two effective and accessible (free download from internet) software packages for Meta-Analysis. They can also provide good images of the outputs of your analysis.
In the preparatory stages of the literature review, it can be useful to do the selection and 2-reviewer blind assessment process through a central database. Covidence is good for this (https://www.covidence.org/). You can import the results from various literature search engines direct into Covidence, build a reference list, and share this with your co-authors. Covidence has the different stages of the literature review and selection process built into it, so that y0u can track the stages of the PRISMA and produce a good flow diagram of the review/selection process. (Import, screen title and abstract, screen full text, quality assessment, check reviewer consensus, "conflict" resolution, inter-rater reliability and limit of agreement, data extraction,)
After that, Revman or R are useful for the analysis of the literature data that you ahve selected.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
8 answers
Are there any systematic reviews on the relationship between trauma exposure and resilience?
Relevant answer
Answer
Thanks Beatrice. Interesting that Agaibi and Wilson identified five classes of variables and considered their interactions. I would love to see meta-analyses being conducted building on their review.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
I'm doing a scoping review in the field of robotics and neurosurgery but with a specific topic. I chose scoping review to assess the gap of knowledge on the topic being investigated.
After doing the search (PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus) and assessing according to inclusion and exclusion criteria I finished with only 3 articles. Can I continue writing my paper or three articles are insufficient to make a scoping review?
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi Muhammad, I agree with Suraj's point and it sounds like you are investigating a cool topic. To broaden your search you could try data bases such CINAHL, Web of Science, and Medline. I found it extremely beneficial to consult with some librarians to assist in developing my search syntax (particularly as I found some subtle differences in the syntax as I searched between databases). This might help broaden your search.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
4 answers
Please does anyone know how I can gain access to Scorpus and Web of science as an independent researcher? I am working on a project that requires systematic literature review methodology and these databases are required for my search/ work.
Relevant answer
Answer
I think you should be able to obtain access to UK university libraries. Outsiders can get access to most (if not all) university libraries in the US. You may have to physically visit the library as opposed to getting electronic access to those databases.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
4 answers
I've been looking around for a risk of bias assessment tool specifically made for observational studies, mouse references suggest using Cochrane's ROBINS but it doesn't seem sound enough to use for observational studies(esp since the tool itself states it's for non-randomized interventions) I'm also not comfortable with the comparability implication of using it with observational studies.
Do you have any other tools to suggest or if you suggest using ROBINS (or perhaps a modified version?)
Thank you
Relevant answer
Answer
These Assessment Tools maybe useful
3. CHECKLIST FOR QUASI-EXPERIMENTAL STUDIES (NON-RANDOMIZED
4. Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and
secondary medical studies: what are they and which is better?
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
2 answers
Dear all,
I am conducting a systematic review of the diagnostic studies to identify vascular complications after liver transplantation in pediatrics. Among the findings, there were 4 studies where controls (x2) and comparisons between index/reference tests (x2) were found.
I still find it difficult to extract data from these studies and present it in a word document as a table or something. Is it handy to conduct a meta-analysis and/or standardization of the data somehow?
What is your point of view and suggestions on extracting relevant data + analyzing these?
My understanding of these is very basic.
Thanks,
Bader.
Relevant answer
Answer
These resources maybe useful (see screen shots) for meta-analysis
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
How do I make a systematic review using SYRCLE'S guidelines since it contains many in vivo studies. What are the steps of SYRCLE'S guidelines?
Relevant answer
Answer
thank you mam
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
I wonder it there is a tool to export a lot of citations (more than 10 000 citations) from google scholar at once to a library like (EndNote).
Relevant answer
Answer
In RG it can't be exported . The number of citations are also not the same with h-index .
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
I’m currently undertaking a systematic review comparing Digital Breast Tomosynthesis with Digital Mammography vs. Digital Mammography alone. There are 6 studies that are all prospective and the same
population undergo both DM+DBT and DM alone, 1 is a randomised controlled trial and the remaining 5 are cohort studies.
they all comment on Cancer detection rate, recall rate, positive predicitive value after recall and false positive predictive value after recall.
there is no mention of specificity.
I would greatly appreciate any approach statistical methods in regards to this.
can this data be put into forest plots?- if so how do I do this?
should risk ratios be adopted? How is this then placed into Stata.
I don’t believe I can produce meta-analysis due to heterogeneity.
Relevant answer
1- Berwanger, Otávio et al. Como avaliar criticamente revisões sistemáticas e metanálises?. Revista Brasileira de Terapia Intensiva [online]. 2007, v. 19, n. 4 [Acessado 8 Maio 2022] , pp. 475-480. Disponível em: <https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-507X2007000400012>. Epub 22 Jan 2008. ISSN 1982-4335. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0103-507X2007000400012.
2- Legramanti Rodrigues C, Klarmann Ziegelmann P. Metanálise: Um Guia Prático. Clin Biomed Res [Internet]. 2011Jan.11 [cited 2022May8];30(4). Available from: https://www.seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/hcpa/article/view/16571
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
I've completed a systematic review protocol and am ready to submit it. I'm wondering if there are any journals that will publish a protocol without charging the authors? It does not have to be open to the public. The subject is about pregnancy and childbirth.
Relevant answer
Answer
Fatemeh Darsareh I suggest:
  • J Clin Epidemiology.
  • Hindawi Limited - Open Access Publisher.
  • JMIR Research Protocols.
  • Journal of Advanced Nursing and Gerontology.
  • BMC Journals.
In addition:
  1. Open Science Framework. (OSF)
  2. BMC Journals.
  3. National Information Center on Health Services Research and Health Care Technology (NICHSR)
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
8 answers
I am doing my first systematic review. I have included two different study types; cohort studies and RCTs.
Regarding the quality assessment. What is the best thing to do?
Should i assess the cohorts using e.g. the Newcastle-Ottawa scale and the RCTs using e.g. Cochrane risk-of-bias?
Or is there a combined quality assessment tool for use in these cases where different study types are included?
Is there any gold standard for this?
Thanks in advance
Relevant answer
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
4 answers
Using PRISMA guideline 2020 is desirable.
Relevant answer
Answer
Use Rev-Man or R or Jamovi or BioEstat to do your meta-analyses
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
4 answers
Can qualitative software, like Nvivo, be used for scoping reviews after the data has been extracted in an Excel spreadsheet.
What is the application for use?
Relevant answer
Answer
Yes, NVivo would definitely be useful for a scoping review.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
4 answers
I`m trying to publish a systematic review and in the flow diagram the final number of papers is 13. One of the reviewers claims that 13 is not an adequate number for a systematic review. However, I can't find information about the minimum number of papers to analyse. How can I answer this point by quoting some paper or manual?
Relevant answer
Answer
I agree with both previous comments. If your systematic review retains only 13 it means that there are only 13 studies to answer to your question (which per se is an important information to report to your research area). The number of 13 is quite high in various fields of research. In my area (veterinary science) having 13 studies is very high number (sometime we hardly finish with-3-7 studies...). Sometimes reviewers throw comments just because of a "guts feeling" but without any science beyond this.
In case it may helps you can see this following peer reviewed references addressing specific issues on very small samples (<5 studies)
Mathes T, Kuss O. A comparison of methods for meta-analysis of a small number of studies with binary outcomes. Res Synth Methods. 2018 Sep;9(3):366-381. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1296. Epub 2018 Apr 26. PMID: 29573180.
The latter is another specific study on the number of study to assess random effect models
Guolo A, Varin C. Random-effects meta-analysis: the number of studies matters. Stat Methods Med Res. 2017 Jun;26(3):1500-1518. doi: 10.1177/0962280215583568. Epub 2015 May 7. PMID: 25953957.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
6 answers
Hello,
I am currently working on a systematic review and targeting ( Automation in construction) Journal. I reviewed about 20 papers of their systematic review published papers in the last two years. I found that the average number of papers used in the study is about 100. Moreover, the search engines are usually (Scopus and Web of Science). My question is, my identified articles are only 24 (from Scopus only). Would that be enough ?? my topic is a specific topic related to BIM, which means the papers are expected to be lower than average.
Kindly give me some advice or recommendations
Thanks in advance
Relevant answer
Answer
I totally agree with previous collagues opion.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
6 answers
Hi everyone,
We'd like to open a huge topic by a literature systematic review. However, the topic is so broad, the initial search on Web of Science only provided us od over 25 000 papers which met our search criteria. (Sure this can be reduced, but only slightly.)
I'd like to explore computer asisted review's possibilities - there must be some software capable of performing an analysis of some sort. Is there anyone who has experience in this field?
Thank you for your thoughts.
Best regards,
Martin
Relevant answer
Answer
Here are some references which should be helpful!
Michelson, M., Chow, T., Martin, N. A., Ross, M., Ying, A. T. Q., & Minton, S. (2020). Artificial intelligence for rapid meta-analysis: Case study on ocular toxicity of hydroxychloroquine. Journal of medical Internet research, 22(8), e20007.
•Lämsä, J., Espinoza, C., Tuhkala, A. ., & Hämäläinen, R. (2021). Staying at the front line of literature: How can topic modelling help researchers follow recent studies?. Frontline Learning Research, 9(3), 1 - 12. https://doi.org/10.14786/flr.v9i3.645
•Ferdinands, G., Schram, R., de Bruin, J., Bagheri, A., Oberski, D. L., Tummers, L., & van de Schoot, R. (2020, September 16). Active learning for screening prioritization in systematic reviews - A simulation study. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/w6qbg
•van de Schoot, R., de Bruin, J., Schram, R. et al. An open source machine learning framework for efficient and transparent systematic reviews. Nat Mach Intell 3, 125–133 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s42256-020-00287-7
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
5 answers
Dear colleagues,
I am currently working with a mentor to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis for a prevalence and risk of a specific condition in a specific duration. The purpose is to evaluate cross-sectional studies. The problem is that there is plenty of different risk of bias assessments to assess the risk of bias of cross-sectional studies, and I am confused about which assessment is the best for my study. Therefore, can you guide me to solve this problem?
I am looking forward to your help. Thank you in advance.
Relevant answer
Answer
Fatimah Albahrani you can use Jonna Briggs Methodology and use their critical appraisal tools for assessing risk of bias of studies. Please see link below:
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
I am facing problem to find articles as mentioned above.
Relevant answer
Hello
Would you please be more specific
Best regards
Ph.D. Ingrid del Valle García C
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
1 answer
I understand that quantitative and qualitative research may have certain criteria for reliability and validity checks. However, to think of same with SLR appears a bit new to me at the moment. Could this be the inclusion and exclusion criteria used for selection or something else?
I will appreciate your constructive views, guides, or any useful resources you may offer. Thanks in advance!
Relevant answer
Answer
This link maybe useful
"JBI’s critical appraisal tools assist in assessing the trustworthiness, relevance and results of published papers"
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
7 answers
why the researchers used these method?
Relevant answer
Answer
In a nut shell agree with Dr Sathish Kumar. A systematic review is a detailed, systematic and transparent means of gathering, appraising and synthesisingevidence to answer a well-defined question. While meta-analysis is a statistical procedure for combining numerical data from multiple separate studies. While there is substantial overlap between the two they are not the same. A meta-analysis should only be conducted in the context of a systematic review.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
16 answers
  1. Which database is more preffered?
  2. How do you make your search term generate more papers?
  3. How do you set your boundaries?
  4. What other things needs consideration?
Relevant answer
Answer
A rapid review (or rapid evidence assessment) is a variation of a systematic review that balances time constraints with considerations in bias.
Step 1: Form/refine Question. ...
Step 2: Define Parameters. ...
Step 3: Identify Biases. ...
Step 4: Plan & Execute Search. ...
Step 5: Screen & Select. ...
Step 6: Quality Appraisal.
More items...•May 5, 2021
Rapid Review Protocol - Research Guides - Virginia Commonwealth ...
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
1 answer
I am using NIH quality assessment tool (https://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/health-topics/study-quality-assessment-tools) to critically appraise controlled intervention studies and before-after studies as part of my Msc dissertation. I am aware that it is not advised to use a numeric score to infer quality of the study, can anybody advise if there is a best way to determine poor/ fair/ good or is it simply opinion? I am concerned of the bias introduced if I simply state I decided poor/ fair/ good.
Thanks in advance
Relevant answer
Answer
You can mark 1 point for every yes and 0 for no; (although there are other options like CD-cannot determine, NR-not reported ) and score the same out of 14 points in Microsoft excel. The grading will be decided on the total score: 0-5 (Poor) , 6-10 (fair) and 11-14 (Good)
Hope it helps
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
4 answers
I am doing a systematic review on the role of the parkinson nurse in patients with advanced parkinson diease in the UK.I am looking for studies done which support the role or those that show there is no differences.
Any pointers I will be pleased
Relevant answer
Answer
I highly recommend that you work with a librarian trained in doing systematic reviews, preferably one trained by the Cochrane Collaboration. I highly recommend that you spend time at the Cochrane website (www.cochrane.org) familiarizing yourself with the procedures. Doing a quality systematic review is a rigorous process.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
Can we do a systematic review of case reports? If yes, how exactly can we do it?
Relevant answer
Answer
As a rule, a systematic review of case reports is carried out when only limited (retrospective) reports are available, e.g. when rare or single cases are involved and prospective studies on these are not feasible, e.g. due to the rarity of the reported events (example: orphan diseases).
The question for systematic reviews of case reports must be clearly defined. The parameters suitable and necessary to answer this question must be considered as selection criteria. It is helpful if standard parameters are also recorded as selection criteria, because this makes it possible to describe the "population" of the selected cases (demographic data, etc.).
The analysis depends on the research question and is usually only descriptive.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
8 answers
Kindly clarify my doubt and provide reasoning as I am unable to find proper reasoning for either. And I have seen review papers in both the format as included and not included without reasoning.
Relevant answer
Answer
Without any doubt review papers are also part of the state of the arts in any subject you are preparing your review study. You may use them as part of the references to use in your paper, but more as a guide to know and find the novel issues on your own and to update them through your survey. Nevertheless, most of the references used in a review paper should be research original papers.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
9 answers
I am conducting a systematic review and need to merge the metadata of the articles resulting from the search in these databases (Web of Science and Scopus) to analyze in WOSviewer. How can I do this?
Relevant answer
Answer
Hey Claudio,
You could use Zotero too. I think it's easier to use than Mendeley.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
I am looking for suggestions for protocols other than PRISMA which I can explore for systematic literature reviews specifically for research in Design.
Relevant answer
Answer
PRISMA is the undisputed leader, but not the only possibility. You may find this helpful:
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
14 answers
I'm curious to hear about your experiences :
  • how long did the longest study you've co-authored last ?
  • How long did it take you to finish the quickest study you've done ?
( excluding submission phase)
Mine were 7 months in a systematic review
2 weeks in a commentary
Relevant answer
Answer
Sharing the scores.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
I´m going to perform a qualitative systematic review and one thing that really confuses me is the fact
that most articles, during sections like the discussion, tend to support their findings by citing external literature, so they are only providing theories as to why something turned out one way or the other during the investigation.
I was wondering if those analysis could or even should be taken into account doing the results synthesis given that the qualitative method usually makes use of as much information available as possible.
Relevant answer
Answer
As David L Morgan said, this is not commonly observed. Discussion is generally used for contextualizing the results or identifying gaps of knowledge. The protocol that you are building for your own review is important to include in your "a priori" plan the way you would use discussion. Most of time I say to my students not to focus too much on the discussion because it is the most "opinion-oriented" part of a manuscript. Traditionnally authors are self-citing their previous work and theories eluding other work (at least partially). However, in field where there are paucity of data it may be relevant to mention the competing theories but being cautious on the fact that discussion can be biased toware authors' opinions...
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
6 answers
Because of the inclusion criteria of the search very few studies meet the criteria we were looking for. So, I wonder, can we submit to a journal a systematic review which based the conclusions just on three studies? Is there any guideline about that?
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi Cibeles Miralles,
Yes it is. Recently we have conducted a empirical study which covers 20,000 + meta-analyses, we emulate the situation that only 3 earliest studies available, 4 earilest, ...., 10 eaerlieest studies available, and compared the results to the full meta-analyses. We found that, in 81% of the situation, 3 studies can achieve the same conclusion to the full meta-analyses.
You may follow our paper, it will be online few weeks later.
Best regards
Chang
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
9 answers
Educational research.
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Dr. Dahal!
I consider duplication of research as a case of plagiarism. Scopus is a nice starting point and Elsevier offers help in the process:
2) A case - study: Yury V. Chekhovich, Andrey V. Khazov, Analysis of duplicated publications in Russian journals, Journal of Informetrics, Volume 16, Issue 1,
Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
I'm working on approach to use a transformer based model to classify a dataset based in one specific topic in systematic review.
There is some database or website, that have more than one topic of systematic review? with the reviews classification of the research and the keywords or the review question ?
Relevant answer
Answer
Also PROSPERO is the database for registration of systematic reviews. It is very useful to check what systematic reviews are already been registered. Usually they include key and indexed terms, as well as, review questions:
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
5 answers
I myself have experience only with: https://www.rayyan.ai/
Relevant answer
Answer
You'll find a wide range of tools to carry out a systematic review and meta-analysis.
For the screening phase particularly, I've used abstrackr (http://abstrackr.cebm.brown.edu/account/login), revtools (https://revtools.net/), and screenatron (https://sr-accelerator.com/#/screenatron), all highly recommended!
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
I'm doing a systematic review and I need an access to EMBASE and Scopus databases to do research (my institution doesn't offer such an access)
Could someone help?
Regards,
Relevant answer
Answer
I ran into the same issue a while back, your best bet is to reach out to someone that studies/works in an institution that has access (preferably a friend or a colleague not a stranger) and ask for their institution credentials (you access their account on your computer) though this might not always work since the IP difference is usually detected and you are not always granted access from outside the institution. I would suggest someone in Qatar University, you can use their credentials at your working place and it has basically all the databases. Someone in the US or Occupied Palestine can also do the trick but watch out for the IP issue. Finally, if none of the above works, you can try emailing your search strategy (I would advise tailoring it according to the rules of the database) to someone with access and have them run the search for you and send the results. Good luck!
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
13 answers
We are conducting a Systematic Literature Review and we would like to know how to merge the different results in a unique database as to easily recognise duplicates. Merging excel files seems not to be an immediate procedure.
Relevant answer
Answer
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
2 answers
How can one export records from Science Direct to excel sheet for systematic literature review purpose?
Relevant answer
Answer
This may help:
Also, consider using the free Rayyan tool to screen records easier than in Excel.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
I am doing a systematic review of research regarding a (relatively newly developed) psychological intervention for youth, but all of the current studies are at a pilot/feasibility stage. They do all report pre and post effects (the different studies vary wildly in their statistical methods, measurements, study design some case design studies, some open trial etc).
I am wondering if anyone has any experience or know about other systematic reviews of such emerging clinical intervention research, I am not sure how to present the studies in a clear and concise manner (as I said meta-analysis is not possible because of sample sizes and other issues).
I am particularly wondering how to present effect sizes, I feel it would be too chaotic to go through each study and explain each one (there are 9 studies). I would really like to have some way to easily present them, perhaps in a table or graphically, but the heterogeneity of the populations (in terms of the diagnosis) might make this problematic.
Any ideas would be appreciated.
Relevant answer
Answer
The line between a case series, a pilot study and the actual study is difficult to define (the authors give different names to their articles) and for the systematic review you have to define the inclusion criteria yourself. If you decide to carry out a systematic review of the cases, treat each case from each report separately. If you are reviewing studies by other authors, start by compiling them in a table - this will help you find common domains for their synthesis. You will start with the fact that each study has a number of participants, some intervention, some results - try to specify these domains as much as possible. It may happen that the criteria of your review will be met by 3 studies and their results cannot be compared - such a review may also be valuable for science: it indicates poor quality of the research, the need for more, etc. This is not a failure of the review, that the researchers have not yet have published corresponding studies.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
Hello,
I have a question, probably extremely stupid but I have to know for sure.
I need to know if the process described above is possible and feasible to do.
Imagine the I have a CSV file, which contains PubMed Advanced Search information: Paper title, Unique code (PMIDS), Author, year.
However, I do not know what ADVANCED SEARCH TERMS were used to obtain this search.
My question is: is it possible to somehow do it the other way around --> Pubmed there you go here is my CSV file and now you tell me which terms would I have needed to use to have found papers included in MY CSV file.
It sounds even more ridiculous when I type it, but I will give it it try.
Thank you!!
Relevant answer
Answer
My problem is that I have data retracted from 2014-2018 from pubmed, I have a CSV file but I do not have the search strategy that was used to retrieve these papers. Now I want to repeat the search between 2018-2021 and thats why I am trying this approach. Thank you!
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
I would like to know the clear definitions of Population, Intervention, Control and Intervention shortened as PICO and how is it used in a systematic review?
Relevant answer
Answer
These terms are used to define the inclusion criteria and exclusion from the review. For each of the domains (PICOTS), you define inclusion criteria for the review and exceptions to them as exclusion criteria. P - population / study group / patient / problem; I - intervention / drug; C - comparison / control group; O - outcomes (in which domains you want to measure results); T - time frame (it is about limitation, for example, to new sources); S - settings / study design (eg type of research sought, publication language and other "technical" details of the reports sought). Once you're done with this, you apply these findings to your search strategy.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
8 answers
I am a Masters Student at Sharda University and I have written a systematic Review article which I need to publish
Relevant answer
Answer
I agree with @Babak Daneshfard. I think most of the journals publish review article. But chose journals carefully.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
Hello everyone
Can you share your experience with me about the literature review? How do you record the studies? How do you create a research matrix and classification the studies? What tools do you use for this purpose? , etc.
Regards
Vahid
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear,
You can define the research keywords, then using google scholar you look for articles that combine these keywords and extract the citation.
In writing the literature review, the categorization of similar articles is recommended based on methods, time, spatial, etc.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
1 answer
I look forward to work on three different systematic reviews on an exploratory sequential study which aims at testing user acceptance of a virtual museum of endangered dances. How possible is working on this under the review of related literature?
Relevant answer
Answer
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
2 answers
I’ve managed to plot multiple sub-group analyses in one forest plot on RevMan. However, I would like one of the subgroups to be analysed with a fixed effects model due to low heterogeneity, yet it is not possible to use different effect models for different subgroups in RevMan.
is there any way to do this (i.e. to plot subgroups on one combined forest plot with fixed and random effects) in RevMan or R?
Relevant answer
Answer
Interpretation of statistical heterogeneity should never be a reason for choosing between fixed-effect and random-effects models. Choosing between the two models should be based on the reviewers' understanding/justified assumptions on how differences in effect estimates between included studies occur. Besides, the lower the statistical heterogeneity, the more similar the effect size and dispersion estimates are from the two models. A tau-squared of 0, in fact, leads to the fixed-effect and random-effects models giving the exact same estimates from the same set of data.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
8 answers
Hi all, currently doing a systematic review and unfortunately a paper I'm extracting data from has provided median and SD but not the mean. They have not provided the range of values or IQR - is there any way to calculate the mean from just the median and SD?
Relevant answer
Answer
In addition to what Debopam Ghosh said (which, unfortunately, is unlikely to be the case as normality tests are seldom reported or even performed), try to get in touch with the corresponding author for the values you are looking for or for the raw data so you can compute them yourself.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
9 answers
I'm currently working on a systematic review including more than 150 studies. However, a large amount of experimental studies haven't reported sufficiently means and SDs for the outcome measures. Is there any alternative way to include them in the meta-analysis?
Relevant answer
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
8 answers
I am performing a systematic review of prevalence studies. I have pooled prevalence rates using the program MetaXL (double arcsine transformation, random effects model) which gives me a point estimate and confidence intervals for each subgroup. I am trying to figure out how to perform a statistical test for a difference between subgroups.
The problem I am trying to solve is similar to what is presented in this paper:
Subgroup 1 Prevalence: 18.58% [95%CI:12.26-25.8] (pooled 11 studies, n=699)
Subgroup 2 Prevalence: 20.18% [95%CI: 16.64-23.96] (pooled 37 studies, n=6453)
Conclusion from paper is that the difference between subgroups is non-significant (p=0.71), however I can't figure out how they calculated the p-value.
I would also like to be able to perform a test for subgroup differences where there are more than 2 subgroups. For this study, when evaluating more than 2 subgroups, they did not report a p-value.
I have tried creating a 2x2 table and performing a chi-square test but the p-value I get (0.32) is very different.
Relevant answer
Answer
The paper describes use of a double arcsin transformation . I'm not sure how they did significance test.
Using a t test would give SE of difference:
sqrt ( 0.0345 x 0.0345 + 0.0187 x 0.0187) = sqrt 0.00154 = 0.0392
and t46 = (0,2018 - 0.1858) / 0.0392 = 0.016/0.0392 = 0.408 ;P about 0.68 , which is pretty close to 0.71.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
8 answers
HI guys, hope you are well. I am doing a systematic literature review on the use of VR in education and was wondering if I can use PRISMA 2009 instead of 2020 as it seems more easier to understand?
Thank you
Relevant answer
Answer
As per my opinion you can use.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
4 answers
What are some free tools that can be used to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis? Beginning from the first step, kindly let know for each step separately of some comprehensive tool that covers all these.
1. Protocol registration?
2. Literature search, title and abstract selction? Visual tool to depict the PRISMA study flow?
3. Data abstraction?
4. Risk of Bias Analysis for each kind of included studies (RCT's, non-randomised studies, single prospective cohort, retrospective case series)? Visualizatiuon tools to represent the ROB?
5. Statistical analysis (meta-analysis of comparing interventions, single arm meta-analysis, network meta-analysis, meta-review, overlap analysis in meta-reviews) and visulaization tools to depict the results graphically?
6. Summary of findings table, evidence profile and evidence based practice recommendations?
Relevant answer
Answer
Hi Singh
For systematic review & Meta-analysis I gave found RevMan as a useful tool , free and user friendly. With this software you can generate PRISMA ow diagram, forest plots, funnel plots, Risk of bias and quality as outlined by Corchrane guideline. You can also make summary of findings table.For registration of protocol you will need to use PROSPERO
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
2 answers
I am doing a Systematic review on the topic "Exploring the opportunities of applying Digital Twins for Intrusion Detection in Industrial Control Systems of Production and Manufacturing" for my final dissertation. Please share your ideas, materials & resources relevant to this topic.
Relevant answer
Answer
Dear Nipuna Sankalpa,
here is my little list of literature sources. You might find something new for yourself here.
Best regards and much success
Anatol Badach
Guodong Shao: Use Case Scenarios for Digital Twin – Implementation Based on ISO 23247; NIST Advanced Manufacturing Series 400-2; May 2021, DOI: 10.6028/NIST.AMS.400-2
Matthias Eckhart, Andreas Ekelhart: „Digital Twins for Cyber-Physical Systems Security: State of the Art and Outlook“; In book: Security and Quality in Cyber-Physical Systems Engineering, Nov 2019
Christian Gehrmann, Martin Gunnarsson: A Digital Twin Based Industrial Automation and Control System Security Architecture; IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, Vol. 16, Issue 1, Jan 2020; DOI: 10.1109/TII.2019.2938885
Abhishek Pokhrel, Vikash Katta, Ricardo Colomo-Palacios: „Digital Twin for Cybersecurity Incident Prediction: A Multivocal Literature Review“; ICSEW'20: Proceedings of the IEEE/ACM 42nd International Conference on Software Engineering; Jun 2020, DOI: 10.1145/3387940.3392199
Ana Cristina Franco da Silva, Stefan Wagner, Eddie Lazebnik, Eyal Traitel: Using a Cyber Digital Twin for Continuous Automotive Security Requirements Verification; arXiv:2102.00790v1, Feb 2021
Jeffrey Voas, Peter Mell,Vartan Piroumian: Draft NISTIR 8356 – Considerations for Digital Twin Technology and Emerging Standards; Apr 2021, DOI:10.6028/NIST.IR.8356-draft
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
5 answers
I am conducting a systematic review, and I decided to not limit the design of included studies to a single type. Can I use the different risk of bias assessment for each study due to the different designs?
Relevant answer
Answer
Thank you for all the answers, It is certainly helpful, and I would look into it more if it's justifiable to use various designs on the review.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
4 answers
Hello!
I am writing a systematic review. The results that I have obtained contains many types of study design like RCT, cross-sectional, cohorts, case-control, and case reports.
Can i use different types of quality assessment tools like CASP, Cochrane, JBI, to analyse the different types of studies that I have collected?
Thank you!
Relevant answer
Answer
Yes absolutely, the tools are specific to study types and therefore designed to assess the different types of bias associated with these.
Equally, when synthesising the data, it is important to apply appropriate methods of data synthesis for each type of data, quantitative and qualitative. Ideally, these methods would be pre-specific in a protocol as some methods are capable of producing different results.
Section 1.3.5 Data synthesis in the CRD handbook can help: https://www.york.ac.uk/media/crd/Systematic_Reviews.pdf
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
10 answers
I want to know if using different studies with different study designs could affect the quality of systematic review? If yes, what things to consider while analysing the data?
Relevant answer
Answer
This paper maybe useful
This paper suggests that Inclusive Approach - all study designs including randomized control trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental and observational studies) - is preferable.
Tufanaru, Catalin MD, MPH, MClinSci (EBHC); Munn, Zachary PhD; Stephenson, Matthew PhD; Aromataris, Edoardo PhD Fixed or random effects meta-analysis? Common methodological issues in systematic reviews of effectiveness, International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare: September 2015 - Volume 13 - Issue 3 - p 196-207
doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000065
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
4 answers
Dear all,
Currently I'm working on a systematic review. In many studies I just have information on the odds ratios and not the raw data (events, totals). In RevMan I want to make a forest plot with the OR, but I can't figure out how to work only with the OR because the program asks for also the raw data (events and totals).
Is there a way how to work only with the odds ratio, in case of missing the raw data?
Thank you.
Relevant answer
Answer
The odds ratio is calculated by dividing the odds of the first group by the odds in the second group. In the case of the worked example, it is the ratio of the odds of lung cancer in smokers divided by the odds of lung cancer in non-smokers: (647/622)/(2/27)=14.04.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
is it we have to convert pearson into spearman
Relevant answer
Answer
Yes I believe you do include non significant (the demarcation between sig and non sig is arbitrary anyway) as well as significant. Because significance can be an outcome of small sample size - you could have ten studies with non-significant correlations but all with the same sign, and combining them would show an overall consistent and significant effect.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
Hello,
I am looking for a GRADE checklist for measuring study quality in my systematic review and meta-analysis study. Does anyone have any recommendations of papers that include this?
Relevant answer
Answer
Hello James Haley I am not sure if about GRADE checklist. However the GRADE handbook is free to be used and you can access via this link https://gdt.gradepro.org/app/handbook/handbook.html
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
6 answers
I'm looking to submit a systematic review protocol in the field of Sports Performance Analysis (no health outcomes). Any journal suggestions? Thanks
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
6 answers
Which is better to assess the publication bias-Eggers's test or plotting of Funnel plot in systematic review and meta-analysis?
Relevant answer
Answer
Interpreting funnel plot asymmetry can be quite tricky since it is primarily a subjective process. Egger test is arguably more objective since it has a precise mathematical component. Nevertheless, the Cochrane Handbook suggests that funnel plot assessment, either by asymmetry determination or Egger test, is unlikely to be conclusive when the number of included studies is less than ten (https://handbook-5-1.cochrane.org/chapter_10/10_4_3_1_recommendations_on_testing_for_funnel_plot_asymmetry.htm).
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
10 answers
When we read the draft paper (PRISMA) , we can see that all sections of this type of systematic review specialized for medical purposes. Can we adaptive this type of paper to another fields?
Relevant answer
Answer
Thank you for asking this question Mr A.s. Albahri because I was wondering the same thing.
Mr Chukwuma John Okolie 's reply is very helpful giving the link here to the PRISMA 2020 statement which I have looked at and found that under 'Scope of the guideline' it specifically states:
"The PRISMA 2020 statement has been designed primarily for systematic reviews of studies that evaluate the effects of health interventions, irrespective of the design of the included studies. However, the checklist items are applicable to reports of systematic reviews evaluating other interventions (such as social or educational interventions), and many items are applicable to systematic reviews with objectives other than evaluating interventions (such as evaluating aetiology, prevalence, or prognosis)."
you can find more about PRISMA directly here: http://www.prisma-statement.org/
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
5 answers
Neuropathic pain (NP) is common affecting 7-10% in general population. The treatment response is inadequate with the currently available pharmacological therapy. Botulinum toxin A has demonstrated a positive effect on peripheral and central neuropathic pain in several randomised and non-randomised research. This updated systematic review and meta-analysis
concludes given the consistency of the VAS outcome measures used for most of the RCTs, the toxin had a statistically significant effect on pain consistent with previous systematic reviews and it is safe to treat neuropathic pain with the toxin. The treatment effect is durable over an extended period. However, there is still lack of satisfactory evidence from a high quality RCT for translating evidence to practice. We believe further research is required in this area which may lead to improved outcomes for a difficult problem which has languished for two decades. This systematic review with meta-analysis has called for the design of an RCT investigating botulinum toxin A for its use as a first line agent.
Relevant answer
Answer
BoNT injections are effective treatments for post-herpetic neuralgia, diabetic neuropathy, trigeminal neuralgia, and intractable neuropathic pain, such as poststroke pain and spinal cord injury
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
4 answers
What is a Systematic Review? How does it differ from a Conventional Literature Review? Is it possible to do a Systematic review in the IT discipline within 3 months?.
Please share your ideas on this matter...
Relevant answer
Answer
There is an updated version by another author group from 2019 of the article given by shin murakami, which is identifying also the associated information retrieval requirements.
see below:
Sutton A, Clowes M, Preston L, Booth A. Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. Health Info Libr J 2019;36(3):202–22.
there is a free version available at:
hope it helps
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
1 answer
Hey, everyone, I have been working on firm resilience for my masters' thesis now I wish to convey a systematic review on this title and I look forward to finding a research partner.
Relevant answer
Answer
سلام و وقت بخیر. در خدمتتون هستم.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews
Question
3 answers
If I have 10 studies reporting on an outcome (for eg:- level of hemoglobin) but due to significant heterogeneity among studies I cant pool the studies to do a meta forestplot, how should I report on the results? I have seen in some Systematic reviews quantitatively mentioning the findings of the study in detail. Any good read on this aspect?
Thanks in advance
Relevant answer
Answer
You determine the study eligibility criteria and thus which studies make it into your meta-analysis. If the effect size for a study is odd compared to the others, you need to determine whether this study really belongs in your meta-analysis. If you think it does, you need to determine the research design factor(s) that can explain why it (and maybe others) is (are) different from the rest.
  • asked a question related to Systematic Reviews