Authors: One or more authors usually experts in the topic of interest.The main differences between traditional reviews and systematic reviews are summarised below in terms of the following characteristics: Authors, Study protocol, Research question, Search strategy, Sources of literature, Selection criteria, Critical appraisal, Synthesis, Conclusions, Reproducibility, and Update. They aim to summarise the best available evidence on a particular research topic.
Systematic reviews are overviews of the literature undertaken by identifying, critically appraising and synthesising results of primary research studies using an explicit, methodological approach(3). Although the reviews may be conducted by topic experts, due to preconceived ideas or conclusions, they could be subject to bias.
Authors aim to describe and discuss the literature from a contextual or theoretical point of view. Information is collected and interpreted unsystematically with subjective summaries of findings. Traditional reviews provide a broad overview of a research topic with no clear methodological approach (2). Reviews usually involve summaries and synthesis of primary research findings on a particular topic of interest and can be grouped into 2 main categories the ‘traditional’ review and the ‘systematic’ review with major differences between them. Reviews of literature are necessary in order to provide clinicians with accurate, up to date information to ensure appropriate management of their patients. Millions of articles are published yearly (1), making it difficult for clinicians to keep abreast of the literature.
0 kommentar(er)
