A systematic review specifies search strategy, inclusion criteria, and appraisal method in advance, then applies them to identify and evaluate all relevant studies. It may or may not include a quantitative meta-analysis.
The protocol distinguishes it from a narrative review.
Alternative Names:
Evidence Review, Structured Literature Review
Why it Matters?
The predefined protocol is what distinguishes a systematic review from an expert's selective literature summary, since specifying criteria in advance prevents choosing studies after seeing their results. That distinction is a productive line of examination, because an expert who reviewed the literature without a protocol may have selected supportive studies without recognizing the selection. Published systematic reviews from independent bodies carry more weight than litigation-prepared summaries.
Frequently Confused with
Related terms
Frequently asked questions
What distinguishes a systematic review?
Why does that matter in testimony?
