Skip to Main Content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.

Health Sciences - Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses: Home

LibGuide on Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: a step-by-step guide

Image result for systematic review meta analysis

If you are considering doing a systematic review or meta-analysis, this step-by-step guide aims to support you along the way. It explains the background to these methodologies, what is involved, and how to get started, keep going, and finish!

It will direct you to useful resources provided by the University of Johannesburg (UJ) researchers and external bodies. We welcome others who have been through the process, to add useful hints and tips, and up-to-date resources particularly relevant to researchers and students at UJ.

What is a systematic review or meta-analysis?

systematic review answers a defined research question by collecting and summarising all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria.

meta-analysis is the use of statistical methods to summarise the results of these studies.

Systematic reviews, just like other research articles, can be of varying quality. They are a significant piece of work (the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at York estimates that a team will take 9-24 months), and to be useful to other researchers and practitioners they should have:

  • clearly stated objectives with pre-defined eligibility criteria for studies
  • explicit, reproducible methodology
  • a systematic search that attempts to identify all studies
  • assessment of the validity of the findings of the included studies (e.g. risk of bias)
  • systematic presentation, and synthesis, of the characteristics and findings of the included studies

Image result for systematic review meta analysis tips and tricks

It is essential that each review is approached rigorously and with careful attention to detail. Plan carefully, and document everything. The consensus reporting guidelines for different study designs proposed by EQUATOR (http://www.equator-network.org/) are a useful starting point. PRISMA provides guidance on what you should include when reporting a systematic review.

Step 1: Why do a systematic review? 

Step 2: Who will be involved? 

Step 3: Formulate the problem. Has it been done before? Registering your review. 

Step 4: Perform your search. 

Step 5: Data extraction. 

Step 6: Critical appraisal of studies (quality assessment). 

Step 7 Data synthesis. 

Step 8: Presenting results (writing the report). 

Step 9: Archiving and updating

 

Note: If you have any useful resources that would be beneficial for this guide, please let us know (Dorcas Rathaba or Mlungisi Dlamini).

 

Acknowledgements and References

Much of this advice is based on the excellent (and extensive) guidance from the Cochrane Collaboration (https://training.cochrane.org/handbook) and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at York (http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/SysRev/!SSL!/WebHelp/SysRev3.htm). If you are proposing to perform a systematic review these provide invaluable detailed advice, and useful examples.

Systematic Review vs Literature Review

Image result for systematic review meta analysis tips and tricks

Faculty Librarian: Health Sciences

Profile Photo
Dorcas Rathaba
Contact:
University of Johannesburg Library, Doornfontein Campus
+27115596325
Skype Contact: dikomorathaba

Information Librarian: Health Sciences

Profile Photo
Mlungisi Dlamini
Contact:
University of Johannesburg Library, Doornfontein Campus
+27115596836
Website