Skip to Main Content

Systematic Reviews

On This Page

On this page you will find:

  • Guidance on formulating a research question
  • An overview of review types 
  • Advice on selecting a review type based on your research topic.

Related Guides

Research Questions

The research question refers to the objectives and aims of the review. A well-formulated research question will inform the rest of the review process, so it is important that the research question be formulated thoughtfully. 

Developing a question​

​When developing a research question, there are some facets of the question to consider:

  • Is the research question relevant and answerable? 
  • Will it fill an important gap in the knowledge?
  • Is the research question feasible to answer in the review? 
  • How will the inclusion and exclusion criteria be defined.

It is beneficial to conduct a preliminary search of the literature (also known as a scoping search) early in the review process to help inform the planning.

 

Further Reading

Formulating your Question

The first step in the evidence-based practice process is to formulate a clinical question. The clinical question should be relevant to the patient or the problem and constructed to help you search for an answer. There are question frameworks which can help you to: 

  • put together the parts of the clinical question
  • identify the key concepts that need to be in articles that will help answer the question
  • formulate your search strategy.
Framework Definition
PICO Population/problem - Intervention - Comparison - Outcome
PICOS Population/problem - Intervention - Comparison - Outcome - Study design
SPIDER Sample - Phenomenon of interest - Design - Evaluation - Research type
PEO Population - Exposure - Outcome
PICO For Evidence Based Medicine by University of Sydney Library

Should I do a Systematic Review?

Before you undertake a Systematic Review, it is important to assess whether a Systematic Review is both:

  • An appropriate methodology to address your research question. Systematic review research questions are usually close-ended, as the Systematic Review seeks to provide a definitive answer. If your research question is open-ended or exploratory in nature, you may consider a different type of review.  
  • A feasible undertaking given your timeline and resources. A Systematic Review requires a team of at least 3 people, will conduct searches across more than three databases, and will usually take 12-18 months to complete. If you do not have the resources to complete a Systematic Review, there are other types of review that may be more feasible. 

A table comparing the objectives, requirements of various review types, and scope of various review types can be found below.

Other Review Types

Considering undertaking a review but not sure which review type might work best for your project? Below are some review types to consider.

  Objective Typical Timeline

Typical Scope

 Team
Systematic Reviews Seeks to systematically search for, appraise and synthesis research evidence, often adhering to guidelines on the conduct of a review. 12-18 months More than 3 databases Requires a review team of usually two or more additional people.
Scoping Reviews Preliminary assessment of potential size and scope of available research literature. Aims to identify nature and extent of research. 6-12 months At least 2 databases Requires a team of at least one additional person, plus a third to resolve disagreements.
Rapid Reviews Assessment of what is already known about a policy or practice issue, by using systematic review methods to search and critically appraise existing research. 1-2 months 3 or more databases Requires a team of at least one additional person to screen, plus a third to resolve disagreements
Narrative Reviews Examines examination of recent or current literature. Can cover wide range of subjects at various levels of completeness and comprehensiveness. May include research findings. 2-12 months 3 or more databases Can be completed as an individual.
Umbrella Reviews Seek to synthesize evidence from multiple reviews into one accessible and usable document. Often focus on a broad condition or problem for which there are competing interventions and highlights reviews that address these. up to 12 months 3 or more databases Requires a team of at least one additional person, plus a third to resolve disagreements.

Based on: