Conducting a preliminary search:
Recognizing and reducing bias in a systematic review is a big deal. Document all of your steps starting now.
Preliminary searches also offer a way to fine tune your research question.
Depending on the type of review, you may want to use a question framework such as SPICE, PCC, SPIDER, etc.
Access the databases below to search for prospective and published systematic reviews. Searching these resources is a good place to start as you begin your own systematic review.
Cline Library offers support for many citation management tools including Mendeley and Zotero. These tools are especially helpful when you need to export a large number of records, or if you are searching multiple databases that may have duplicative content. Citation tools can find and merge duplicate records.
A protocol is the plan (or roadmap) for the research. A complete plan should include the conceptual background, the research question or questions, objectives, the scope or extent of the review, the methods for searching (including the resources and the search strategies), screening processes specifying the inclusion and exclusion criteria, data extraction, quality appraisal, and synthesis. Many protocols are published. The protocol establishes transparency, rigor, and is helpful to other researchers. Importantly when the criteria is established in advance it minimizes bias in the screening and selection process.
Examples of protocol papers are found on the following sites:
Social Science Protocols Journal
PubMed - search for protocol papers
Examples of research question formulation guides:
PICO (quantitative studies) |
|||
Population/patient | Intervention | Comparison | Outcome |
SPIDER (qualitative or mixed methods) | ||||
Sample | Phenomenon of interest | Design | Evaluation | Research Type |
SPICE (qualitative) | ||||
Setting | Perspective | Intervention | Comparison | Evaulation |
There are numerous frameworks to assist with formulation research questions. See the supplementary file from:
Booth A, Noyes J, Flemming K, et al. Formulating questions to explore complex interventions within qualitative evidence synthesis. BMJ Global Health 2019;4:e001107. https://gh.bmj.com/content/4/Suppl_1/e001107
It is a good idea to search databases of systematic reviews, such as Cochrane and Campbell. Cline Library has access to Cochrane, which focuses on health interventions. While it isn't always relevant for research questions in the social sciences it can serve as a good place to look at examples. You will at least get an idea of how time consuming a systematic review can be (months to years).
A minimum of two databases is necessary. However the number of databases and which ones to search will depend on your research questions. Another good time to ask your librarian for help, if you have questions about which ones to include.
Check out the links on the Evidence synthesis database box to the left.
PubMed Central (PMC) is a massive, open access database from the National Institutes of Health containing free peer-reviewed publications across the fields of medicine and health sciences.
Methodological quality assessment - there are several tools available to review the methodological quality (risk of bias) described in articles.
The table below is an excerpt from: Methodological quality (risk of bias) assessment tools for primary and secondary medical studies: what are they and which is better?
Development Organization |
Tool’s name |
Type of study |
The Cochrane Collaboration |
Cochrane RoB tool and RoB 2.0 tool |
Randomized controlled trial |
The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) |
CASP checklist |
Randomized controlled trial |
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) |
NIH quality assessment tool |
Controlled intervention study |
The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) |
JBI critical appraisal checklist |
Randomized controlled trial |
Shea BJ et al. |
AMSTAR and AMSTAR 2 |
Systematic review |