Skip to main content

Principles of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses

Part of the Methods in Molecular Biology book series (MIMB,volume 2345)

Abstract

In this chapter, we summarize the key principles involved in designing and conducting a rigorous systematic review focused on an intervention question. We provide key definitions on what systematic reviews and meta-analysis are and how they differ from other types of reviews. We cover the principles for designing a good systematic review question, research team, designing and conducting literature searches, screening and selecting studies, extracting data, assessing the risk of bias of the included studies, conducting qualitative and quantitative syntheses, and appraising the certainty of the body of evidence. Finally, we describe the best tools for reporting a systematic review and meta-analysis and for assessing its quality.

Key words

  • Systematic review
  • Meta-analysis
  • Evidence synthesis
  • Research methods

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Protocol
USD   49.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • DOI: 10.1007/978-1-0716-1566-9_1
  • Chapter length: 15 pages
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
eBook
USD   169.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • ISBN: 978-1-0716-1566-9
  • Instant PDF download
  • Readable on all devices
  • Own it forever
  • Exclusive offer for individuals only
  • Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout
Hardcover Book
USD   219.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Springer Nature is developing a new tool to find and evaluate Protocols. Learn more

References

  1. Higgins JP, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (2019), editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. John Wiley & Sons: Sep 23

    Google Scholar 

  2. Guyatt G, Rennie D, Meade M, Cook D (2002) Users’ guides to the medical literature: a manual for evidence-based clinical practice. AMA Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  3. Munn Z, Stern C, Aromataris E, Lockwood C, Jordan Z (2018) What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC Med Res Methodol 18(1):5

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  4. Schünemann HJ, Reviews ML (2015) Rapid! Rapid! Rapid! …and systematic. Syst Rev 4(1):4

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  5. Dudden RF, Protzko SL (2011) The systematic review team: contributions of the health sciences librarian. Med Ref Serv Q 30(3):301–315

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  6. Pollock A, Campbell P, Struthers C, Synnot A, Nunn J, Hill S et al (2018) Stakeholder involvement in systematic reviews: a scoping review. Syst Rev 7(1):208

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  7. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Kunz R, Atkins D, Brozek J, Vist G et al (2011) GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol 64(4):395–400

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  8. Paez A (2017) Gray literature: an important resource in systematic reviews. J Evid Based Med 10(3):233–240

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  9. Florez ID, Sierra JM, Niño-Serna LF (2020) Gelatin tannate for acute diarrhoea and gastroenteritis in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Arch Dis Child 105(2):141–146

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Altman D, Antes G et al (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (Chinese edition). J Chinese Integr Med 7(9):889–896

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  11. Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, Savović J, Berkman ND, Viswanathan M et al (2016) ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 355:i4919

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  12. Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JP, Rothstein HR (2010) A basic introduction to fixed-effect and random-effects models for meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods 1(2):97–111

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  13. Borenstein M, Higgins JP, Hedges LV, Rothstein HR (2017) Basics of meta-analysis: I2 is not an absolute measure of heterogeneity. Res Synth Methods 8(1):5–18

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  14. Borenstein M, Higgins JP (2013) Meta-analysis and subgroups. Prev Sci 14(2):134–143

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  15. Sun X, Briel M, Walter SD, Guyatt GH (2010) Is a subgroup effect believable? Updating criteria to evaluate the credibility of subgroup analyses. BMJ 340:c117

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  16. Egger M, Smith GD, Schneider M, Minder C (1997) Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ 315(7109):629–634

    CAS  CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  17. Debray TP, Moons KG, Riley RD (2018) Detecting small-study effects and funnel plot asymmetry in meta-analysis of survival data: a comparison of new and existing tests. Res Synth Methods 9(1):41–50

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  18. Schwarzer G, Carpenter JR, Rücker G (2015) Small-study effects in meta-analysis. Meta-analysis with R. Springer, New York, pp 107–141

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  19. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P et al (2008) GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ 336(7650):924–926

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  20. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Schünemann HJ, Tugwell P, Knottnerus A (2011) GRADE guidelines: a new series of articles in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. J Clin Epidemiol 64(4):380–382

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  21. Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, Thuku M, Hamel C, Moran J et al (2017) AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both. BMJ 358:j4008

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ivan D. Florez .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature

About this protocol

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this protocol

Morgan, R.L., Florez, I.D. (2022). Principles of Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses. In: Evangelou, E., Veroniki, A.A. (eds) Meta-Research. Methods in Molecular Biology, vol 2345. Humana, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-1566-9_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-0716-1566-9_1

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Humana, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-0716-1565-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-0716-1566-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Protocols