This guide will cover some steps in detail and signpost resources that will help you with others.
At least two people and preferably three+
Developing a protocol (plan) for a systematic review underpins many of the individual processes that need to be undertaken within the review process.
There are several available frameworks for developing questions, including:
i) Define inclusion and exclusion criteria - used to further focus the research question and select studies and helps to develop the search strategy
ii) Has the topic already been reviewed?
iii) Is your topic (the FINER criteria):
Feasible - i.e. is the question one that the team is capable of addressing using the available evidence
Interesting - authors need enough commitment to see the work through
Novel - is there a genuine gap in knowledge
Ethical - implication of results
Relevant - translation of finds to inform decisions
Further reading:
Richardson, W. S., Wilson, M. C., Nishikawa, J., & Hayward, R. S. (1995). The well-built clinical question: a key to evidence-based decisions [Editorial]. ACP Journal Club, 123(3), A12-13. https://www.acpjournals.org/doi/10.7326/ACPJC-1995-123-3-A12
Counsell, C. (1997, Sep). Formulating questions and locating primary studies for inclusion in systematic reviews. Annals of Internal Medicine, 127(5), 380-387. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-127-5-199709010-00008
Samson, D., & Schoelles, K. M. (2012, Jun). Chapter 2: Medical Tests Guidance (2) Developing the Topic and Structuring Systematic Reviews of Medical Tests: Utility of PICOTS, Analytic Frameworks, Decision Trees, and Other Frameworks. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 27, S11-S19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-012-2007-7
Booth, A., Noyes, J., Flemming, K., Moore, G., Tuncalp, O., & Shakibazadeh, E. (2019, Jan). Formulating questions to explore complex interventions within qualitative evidence synthesis. BMJ Glob Health, 4, Article e001107. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-001107
Once you have formulated your question, you will need to start developing a protocol to guide the conduct of your review. This will cover inclusion/exclusion criteria, screening methods, risk of bias and data analysis.
It is good practice to prospectively register your protocol and, in many cases, is a requirement for future publication of the review.
There are a number of places where you can register your protocol, for example:
Protocols from Otago staff and students can be deposited in the institutional repository, but this is not the same as registration.
Further reading:
Stewart, L., Moher, D., & Shekelle, P. (2012). Why prospective registration of systematic reviews makes sense [Editorial]. Systematic Reviews, 1(1), Article 7. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-1-7
Booth, A., Clarke, M., Dooley, G., Ghersi, D., Moher, D., Petticrew, M., & Stewart, L. (2012). The nuts and bolts of PROSPERO: An international prospective register of systematic reviews [Article]. Systematic Reviews, 1(1), Article 2. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-1-2
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.