EBL 101
Research Methods: Systematic Reviews
Virginia
Wilson
Director,
Centre for Evidence Based Library and Information Practice (C-EBLIP)
University
Library
University
of Saskatchewan
Saskatoon,
Saskatchewan, Canada
Email:
virginia.wilson@usask.ca
Received: 12
Aug. 2013 Accepted: 17 Aug. 2013
2013 Wilson. This is an Open Access article
distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons-Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike License 2.5 Canada (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/2.5/ca/), which permits unrestricted use,
distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is
properly attributed, not used for commercial purposes, and, if transformed, the
resulting work is redistributed under the same or similar license to this one.
A
systematic review is not merely a literature review. While we can be systematic
in preparing a literature review, a systematic review is a research method used
to address a specific research question. Systematic reviews “present a
comprehensive summary of research based knowledge that can aid both practitioners
and policy makers in decision making” (Brettle, 2009, p. 43). Meta-analysis,
“the use of statistical methods to combine results of individual studies,” may
or may not be conducted in a systematic review (The Cochrane Collaboration,
2002). Systematic reviews in LIS research were practically unheard of just over
a decade ago. However, as Denise Koufogiannakis found, they “have become an
important source of information because they both synthesize the existing
research on a topic, as well as critically appraise it and try to draw
conclusions from the total body of quality research evidence” (2012, p. 91).
The
Cochrane Collaboration and the Campbell Collaboration are two organizations
which oversee the conducting of systematic reviews based on specific guidelines.
The Cochrane Collaboration focuses on the health sciences, while the Campbell
Collaboration works in the areas of crime and justice, education, international
development, and social welfare. Additionally, an individual researcher or
research team can undertake a systematic review to attempt to answer a research
question. Khan, Kunz, Kleijnen, andAntes explain that a “review earns the
adjective systematic if it is based on a clearly formulated question,
identifies relevant studies, appraises their quality and summarizes the
evidence by use of explicit methodology. It is the explicit and systematic
approach that distinguishes systematic reviews from traditional reviews and
commentaries” (2003, p. 118).
The
process by which to undertake a systematic review has several steps:
1.
Develop a research question
As
with any research project, the development of a clear, explicit, and concise
research question is the bedrock upon which the project rests. Spend time
thinking and planning.
2.
Identify relevant work
Do
an extensive search for research studies. You may be looking at a particular
date range. Once you have exhausted the literature, decide which papers to
include and exclude based on criteria that have come out of your research
question. You will probably get a lot of results from your initial massive
searches and the criteria will help to sort out which studies belong in your
systematic review. A test run of the inclusion and exclusion criteria will show
if more or is needed or changes need to be made. Record the reasons for
inclusion or exclusion.
3.
Critically appraise the included
studies
You
need to look for quality and rigour. Quality is difficult to define but
thorough critical appraisal can help to determine if the study results are
sound. Critical appraisal will also help to determine whether or not
meta-analysis will be a part of your systematic review.
4.
Extract the data
Your
research question will guide the types of data you will want to extract from
the included studies. Create a standardized data extraction form to keep track
of everything you pull from the studies. Methodically review the articles in
order to fill out the extraction form.
5.
Synthesize and analyze the findings
“The
goal of data synthesis is to go beyond simply summarizing but to also include
‘an analysis of the relationships within and between studies and an overall
assessment of the robustness of the evidence’” (Centre for Reviews and
Dissemination, 2009, 48 as quoted in Phelps & Campbell, 2012, p. 13).
The
final and best thing I can pass along is that Denise Koufogiannakis along with
several contributors put together a comprehensive list of all the systematic
reviews undertaken in LIS to date. The LIS Systematic Reviews wiki includes the
reviews listed alphabetically by author and classified by topic. There is also
a nice bibliography where you can find much more information on the systematic
review.
References
Brettle, A.
(2009). Systematic reviews and evidence based library and information practice.
Evidence Based Library and Information
Practice, 4(1): 43-50.
Khan, K.S.,
Kunz, R., Kleijnen, J., & Antes, G. (2003). Five steps to conducting a
systematic review. Journal of the Royal
Society of Medicine, 96: 118-121.
Koufogiannakis,
D. (2012). The LIS systematic review wiki. Retrieved 4 Sept. 2013 from http://lis-systematic-reviews.wikispaces.com/Welcome
Koufogiannakis,
D. (2012). The state of systematic reviews in library and information studies. Evidence Based Library and Information
Practice, 7(2): 91-95.
Meta-analysis.
(2002). In The Cochrane Collaboration open learning material. Retrieved 4 Sept.
2013 from http://www.cochrane-net.org/openlearning/html/mod12-2.htm
Phelps, S. F.,
and Campbell, N. (2012). Systematic reviews in theory and practice for library
and information studies. Library &
Information Research, 36(112): 6-15.