Chapter 3: The Aim and Scope of a Systematic Review: a logical model

Section: Aim of a Review

Review question Presents the aim of the work, enabling a

disciplined enquiry rather than a trawl for
interesting study results.
First question Broad, answered by commentaries, policy
documents, and other types of publications
and empirical studies
Second question Has distinct independent and dependent
variables
Important consideration Has a literature review been done before?
How recently has it been done?
Proviso The conclusion acknowledges the limits of
the review, so that no claims are made
beyond the scope of evidence.

Summary:

Logic is necessary from the outset if a systematic review. Several types of review questions may
be asked. A review question presents the aim of the work. A concise review question, confined
to clearly stated variables, prioritizes rigor over breadth.
Chapter 3: The Aim and Scope of a Systematic Review: a logical model
Section: PICO

P Population: people with a disease or of a

particular age or vulnerability
I Intervention: the treatment beging studied
C Control: the comparison group (placebo or
usual care)
O Outcome: the variable used to measure and
compare the treatment and control group
This formulation Sets the scope of literature for a review
PRISMA And other guidelines have extended the
acronym to PICOS, with the additional letter
denoting study type

Summary:

PICO is a helpful took in determining the review question. It is an acronym that stands for four
features of the study: population, intervention, control, and outcome.
Chapter 3: The Aim and Scope of a Systematic Review: a logical model
Section: Types of Review Questions

Cochrane Collarboration typolgy Prognostic, diagnostic and interventional

Prognosis May include factors relating to outcomes of a
health condition
epidemiological Could be a straightforward analysis of
research on prevalence
diagnostic Typically asks whether an assessment
procedure accurately identifies people with
or without a condition. Cohort or cross
sectional study
prognostic Asks about the course of a disease. Best type
of study is a prospective cohort study
Intervention questions Are the most common in systematic
literature reviewing: What is the evidence for
a particular treatment or process of care?
PICOS example Population: postsurgical patients
Intervention: morphine plus ibuprofen
Control: morphine only
Outcome: pain
Study type: RCTs
SPIDER configuration Sample: adolescents
Phenomenon of interest: social media use
Design: quasi-experimental, cohort, case-
control or qualitative
Evaluation: depression
Research type: qualitative, quantitative or
mixed method

Summary:

Various types of questions may be asked by the reviewer. Common ones are those comparing
interventions, diagnostic tests, prognostic factors, or qualitative questions. The SPIDER
configuration has broader latitude allowing it to include subjective experiences.
Chapter 3: The Aim and Scope of a Systematic Review: a logical model
Section: Eligibility Criteria and Inclusion versus exclusion

Scope of systematic review Should be set as concisely as possible

Criteria Inclusion and exclusion
Eligibility criteria Must fit the logic of the review question.
Should appear directly after the aims and
objectives in the review
Illogical placement You must state what you are looking for
before you decide how to look for it
For a systematic review, eligibility criteria Should be the most straightforward means of
determining the literature to be reviewed
Logicians Analyze the validity of a statement by
replacing concepts with symbols
Focus Should be on what you don’t want, rather
than what you do want
A restriction of English While biased, is generally acceptable due to
the high proportion of journals published in
English

Summary:

The scope of a systematic review needs to be set as concisely as possible. Criteria for selection
can be described as inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria. However, the overall term used is
eligibility. However, inclusion and exclusion are not mutually exclusive in all situations.
Chapter 4: Searching the Literature
Section: An Initial Foray

Major consideration Balancing the principles of sensitivity and

specificity
Sensitive search Comprehensive as possible
One options for finding information Google scholar
Preliminary step Gives a good idea as to what information is
already out there. You can then broaden or
narrow your research question.
Another preliminary resource PubMed

Summary: Database selection needs careful consideration. It is important to balance being too
sensitive and too specific to get accurate results. Google Scholar and PubMed are two
databases that can be useful in the search for relevant papers.
Chapter 4: Searching the Literature
Section: Facet Analysis

Facet Each element of the question (population,

treatment, and outcome).
Facet theory Was devised in 1930s by S.R. Ranganathan
Facet analysis Disassembled a topic into its essential parts.
It’s a systematic plan for the search.
Index terms Enable you to search for papers on a
particular topic in a consistent way.
Medical subject Headings of Is the best known taxonomy of index terms
PubMed/MEDLINE

Summary:

Facet analysis disassembles a topic into essential parts, finding appropriate terms to represent
those parts. Index terms should also be used. Index terms are a special vocabulary used by
bibliographic databases that categorize a paper. Examples include MeSH of PubMed/MEDLINE.
Chapter 4: Searching the Literature
Section: sources

General expectation That at least 3 bibliographic databases will be

searched
MEDLINE A database of around 5200 health science
journals
PubMed central A full-text archive of biomedical and life
science journal literature
Embase Isn’t free but claims to cover more than
Medline
Educational institutes Provide options for accessing research papers

Summary:

For a systematic review, it is assumed that at least 3 bibliographic databases will be used. These
databases include MEDLINE, PubMed central, and Embase. While some cost money, many
universities pay to allow students access to research papers.
Chapter 4: Searching the Literature
Section: Using PubMed

PubMed Free version of MEDLINE. It includes medline

and papers published ahead of print
Index terms The terms to be searched will be determined
by your review question, but need to be fine
tuned to use PubMed
MeSH terms MeSH is a thesaurus used by the National
Library of Medicine for indexing. MeSH terms
are arranged in a hierarchical structure
Descriptors Terms that reflect the content of the paper
Entry terms Synonyms or terms that are closely related ro
the descriptors
qualifiers Known as subheadings can be used to group
citations
Text words Can be used to search papers through titles
and headings
Truncation and wildcards Search words can be expanded to onclude
various usage and to reduce the need for
multiple terms for the same search topic
truncation Should be used with caution in PubMed
because it subverts automatic text mapping
and wildcards within words and adjacency do
not work.
Conditioning the search 3 basic boolem operators:
AND – includes papers that contain all of the
search terms
OR – papers that contain any of the search
terms
NOT – used to exclude papers
Filtering There are a range of limits and filters that can
be applied to make the search more specific.
Using PubMed PubMed uses a system called Atomatic term
mapping which aims to match words to
MeSH terms, journals, and then authors.
Other data sources Google scholar, grey literature such as open
Grey and the International Standard
Randomized Controlled Trial number
Reference management the process of storing, manipulating and
sharing the references. IE. Mendeley,
EndNote and others
Summary:

Searching should be repeatable by another reviewer because of the step-by-step instructions

provided in your text. Records of each stage in the search should be recorded. Each database
operates differently and it’s important to understand how to filter your research question
through the many articles.