Evidence Synthesis-Health Sciences

Reviews facilitate healthcare decisions by patients and the general public, clinicians, guideline developers, administrators and policy makers. They also inform future research. A clear statement of findings, a considered discussion and a clear presentation of the authors’ conclusions are, therefore, important parts of the review. Guidelines and checklists will help you report the details of your review paper.

Reviews typically have five sections: introduction, methods, results, discussion, and conclusion.  You will: 

1. Review the reporting standards you will use (e.g. PRISMA)
2. Gather your completed data tables and PRISMA flow diagram. 
3. Write the introduction to the topic and your study, methods of your research, results of your research, and discussion of your results.
4. Write an abstract describing your study and a conclusion summarizing your paper. 
5. Cite the studies included in your systematic review and any other articles you may have used in your paper using a citation manager (e.g. Zotero) 
6. If you wish to publish your work, choose a target journal for your article.

PRISMA-Search

Cochrane Handbook Chapter 9: Summarizing study characteristics and preparing for synthesis

Discussing the findings in Hewitt-Taylor, J. (2017). The essential guide to doing a health and social care literature review . Routledge.

Using Excel to Find Systematic Review Patterns https://youtu.be/2QfiM0Xer9Q

Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews A Product from the ESRC Methods Programme

Follow and  report standards when writing your review. This helps ensure that you communicate essential components of your methods, results, and conclusions. There are a number of tools that can be used to ensure compliance with reporting guidelines. A few review-writing resources are listed below.

A reporting guideline is a simple, structured tool for health researchers to use while writing manuscripts. A reporting guideline provides a minimum list of information needed to ensure a manuscript can be, for example:

• Understood by a reader,
• Replicated by a researcher,
• Used by a doctor to make a clinical decision, and
• Included in a systematic review.

Reporting guidelines are more than just some thoughts about what needs to be in an academic paper. We define a reporting guideline as:

“A checklist, flow diagram, or structured text to guide authors in reporting a specific type of research, developed using explicit methodology.”

Enhancing the QUAlity and Transparency Of health Research (EQUATOR)  https://www.equator-network.org/

Systematic Review, Scoping Review and MetaAnalysis Reporting Guidelines