Skip to main content

Systematic Reviewing

Introduction, Locating Studies and Data Abstraction

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Methods of Clinical Epidemiology

Part of the book series: Springer Series on Epidemiology and Public Health ((SSEH))

Abstract

A systematic review is essentially a systematic investigation of existing research data identified via a reproducible systematic search leading to data abstraction, appraisal of methodological quality, clinical relevance and consistency of published evidence on a specific clinical topic in order to provide clear suggestions for a specific health care problem. This can be followed by a quantitative synthesis, which, preserving the identity of individual studies, tries to provide an estimate of the overall effect of an intervention, exposure or diagnostic strategy. The latter is called a meta-analysis. This chapter outlines the procedure that needs to be followed to execute a standard systematic review.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  • Armstrong EC (1999) The well-built clinical question: the key to finding the best evidence efficiently. WMJ 98:25–28

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Buscemi N, Hartling L, Vandermeer B, Tjosvold L, Klassen TP (2006) Single data extraction generated more errors than double data extraction in systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 59:697–703

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers E (2004) An introduction to meta-analysis with articles from the Journal of Educational Research (1992–2002). J Educ Res 98:35–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corcoran J, Pillai VK, Littell JH (2008) Systematic reviews and meta-analysis. Oxford University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Counsell C (1997) Formulating questions and locating primary studies for inclusion in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med 127:380–387

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Dickman PW, Holm LE, Lundell G, Boice JD, Hall P (2003) Thyroid cancer risk after thyroid examination with I-131: a population-based cohort study in Sweden. Int J Cancer 106:580–587

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Doi SA, Thalib L (2008) A quality-effects model for meta-analysis. Epidemiology 19:94–100

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eden J (ed) (2011) Finding what works in health care: standards for systematic reviews. The National Academies Press for Committee on Standards for Systematic Reviews of Comparative Effectiveness Research, Institute of Medicine, National Academies Press, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Elamin MB, Flynn DN, Bassler D, Briel M, Alonso-Coello P, Karanicolas PJ, Guyatt GH, Malaga G, Furukawa TA, Kunz R, Schünemann H, Murad MH, Barbui C, Cipriani A, Montori VM (2009) Choice of data extraction tools for systematic reviews depends on resources and review complexity. J Clin Epidemiol 62:506–510

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Higgins JPT, Green S (eds) (2011) Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane collaboration. http://www.cochrane-handbook.org. Accessed 12 June 2012

  • Meline T (2006) Selecting studies for systematic review: inclusion and exclusion criteria. Contemp Issues Commun Sci Disord 33:21–27

    Google Scholar 

  • Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, The PRISMA group (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med 6:e1000097. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed1000097

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reeves S, Koppel I, Barr H, Feeth D, Hammick M (2002) Twelve tips for undertaking a systematic review. Med Teach 24:358–363

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • US National Library of Medicine (2011) Medical subject headings, entry terms and other cross-references. http://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/intro_entry.html. Accessed 21 May 2011

  • US National Library of Medicine (2012) Medical subject headings, Neoplasms. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/68009369. Accessed 21 May 2011

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Justin Clark .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Clark, J. (2013). Systematic Reviewing. In: Doi, S., Williams, G. (eds) Methods of Clinical Epidemiology. Springer Series on Epidemiology and Public Health. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37131-8_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-37131-8_12

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-37130-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-37131-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics