Ad
related to: steps in systematic literature review methodology
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
A systematic review is a scholarly synthesis of the evidence on a clearly presented topic using critical methods to identify, define and assess research on the topic. [1] A systematic review extracts and interprets data from published studies on the topic (in the scientific literature), then analyzes, describes, critically appraises and summarizes interpretations into a refined evidence-based ...
The PRISMA flow diagram, depicting the flow of information through the different phases of a systematic review. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) is an evidence-based minimum set of items aimed at helping scientific authors to report a wide array of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, primarily used to assess the benefits and harms of a health care ...
A meta-analysis is typically a systematic review using statistical methods to effectively combine the data used on all selected studies to produce a more reliable result. [3] Torraco (2016) [4] describes an integrative literature review. The purpose of an integrative literature review is to generate new knowledge on a topic through the process ...
Rapid reviews are a systematic survey of literature on a topic or question of interest. Compared to a systematic review of literature, in a rapid review, several design decisions and practical steps are undertaken to reduce the time it takes to identify, aggregate and answer the question of interest.
The PICO process (or framework) is a mnemonic used in evidence-based practice (and specifically evidence-based medicine) to frame and answer a clinical or health care related question, [1] though it is also argued that PICO "can be used universally for every scientific endeavour in any discipline with all study designs". [2]
Review (literature review, systematic review) Meta-analytic (meta-analysis) Sometimes a distinction is made between "fixed" and "flexible" designs. In some cases, these types coincide with quantitative and qualitative research designs respectively, [6] though this need not be the case. In fixed designs, the design of the study is fixed before ...
Critical appraisal (or quality assessment) in evidence based medicine, is the use of explicit, transparent methods to assess the data in published research, applying the rules of evidence to factors such as internal validity, adherence to reporting standards, conclusions, generalizability and risk-of-bias.
The principal methodology in health secondary research is the systematic review, commonly using meta-analytic statistical techniques. Other methods of synthesis, like realist reviews and meta-narrative reviews, have been developed in the 21st century. [5]