Traditional Reviews vs. Systematic Reviews

< Back to search results

• Format Texts
• Language/s English
• Target Audience Further education
• EBM Stage 3 - Appraising evidence
• Duration <5 mins
• Difficulty Introductory

Key Concepts addressed

• 2-2a Reviews of fair comparisons should be systematic

Details

This blog explains that systematic reviews provide a means of systematically identifying and synthesising the evidence, making it easier for policy makers and practitioners to assess such relevant information and hopefully improve patient outcomes. This blog outlines several differences between systematic reviews and traditional (non-systematic) reviews. The author argues that a review should be systematic given that systematic reviews are innately designed to minimise bias, to be exhaustive, and to be easily reproduced by other authors.

It highlights the differences between systematic and non-systematic reviews in 11 key domains:

1. Authors
2. Study protocol
3. Research question
4. Search strategy
5. Sources of literature
6. Selection criteria
7. Critical appraisal
8. Synthesis
9. Conclusions
10. Reproducibility

Read the blog

Students 4 Best Evidence (S4BE) is a growing network of students from around the world, from school age to university, who are interested in learning more about evidence-based healthcare (EBH).  The network is supported by the UK Cochrane Centre.  In addition to the website, the S4BE has a Facebook group and Twitter feed. For more information, read Selena Ryan-Vigs blog which introduces Students 4 Best Evidence.