Definition of a systematic review used in overviews of systematic reviews, meta-epidemiological studies and textbooks.

Publisher: BioMed Central Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 100968545 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1471-2288 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 14712288 NLM ISO Abbreviation: BMC Med Res Methodol Subsets: MEDLINE

Original Publication: London : BioMed Central, [2001-

Meta-Analysis as Topic* ; Review Literature as Topic* ; Systematic Reviews as Topic*; Humans ; Biomedical Research/classification ; Biomedical Research/methods ; Epidemiologic Studies ; Evidence-Based Medicine/classification ; Evidence-Based Medicine/methods ; Reproducibility of Results ; Textbooks as Topic

Background: A standard or consensus definition of a systematic review does not exist. Therefore, if there is no definition about a systematic review in secondary studies that analyse them or the definition is too broad, inappropriate studies might be included in such evidence synthesis. The aim of this study was to analyse the definition of a systematic review (SR) in health care literature, elements of the definitions that are used and to propose a starting point for an explicit and non-ambiguous SR definition.
Methods: We included overviews of systematic reviews (OSRs), meta-epidemiological studies and epidemiology textbooks. We extracted the definitions of SRs, as well as the inclusion and exclusion criteria that could indicate which definition of a SR the authors used. We extracted individual elements of SR definitions, categorised and quantified them.
Results: Among the 535 analysed sources of information, 188 (35%) provided a definition of a SR. The most commonly used reference points for the definitions of SRs were Cochrane and the PRISMA statement. We found 188 different elements of SR definitions and divided them into 14 categories. The highest number of SR definition elements was found in categories related to searching (N = 51), analysis/synthesis (N = 23), overall methods (N = 22), quality/bias/appraisal/validity (N = 22) and aim/question (N = 13). The same five categories were also the most commonly used combination of categories in the SR definitions.
Conclusion: Currently used definitions of SRs are vague and ambiguous, often using terms such as clear, explicit and systematic, without further elaboration. In this manuscript we propose a more specific definition of a systematic review, with the ultimate aim of motivating the research community to establish a clear and unambiguous definition of this type of research.

J Oral Rehabil. 2013 Apr;40(4):263-78. (PMID: 23330989)
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097. (PMID: 19621072)
JAMA. 1992 Nov 4;268(17):2420-5. (PMID: 1404801)
BMJ. 2014 Jun 13;348:g3725. (PMID: 24927763)
Milbank Q. 2016 Sep;94(3):485-514. (PMID: 27620683)
PLoS Med. 2016 May 24;13(5):e1002028. (PMID: 27218655)
BMJ. 1996 Jan 13;312(7023):71-2. (PMID: 8555924)
Epidemiology. 2015 Mar;26(2):216-22. (PMID: 25536455)
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Jun 18;18(1):56. (PMID: 29914386)
J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Nov;91:4-5. (PMID: 28823649)
JAMA. 1998 Jul 15;280(3):280-2. (PMID: 9676682)
Indian J Urol. 2011 Oct;27(4):487-9. (PMID: 22279315)
Syst Rev. 2015 Jan 01;4:1. (PMID: 25554246)
F1000Res. 2018 Jul 04;7:1001. (PMID: 30135732)
Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1993 Dec 31;703:125-33; discussion 133-4. (PMID: 8192290)
J Clin Epidemiol. 2016 Jun;74:107-18. (PMID: 26723872)
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 May;97:1-13. (PMID: 29175415)
JAMA. 1992 Jul 8;268(2):240-8. (PMID: 1535110)
Syst Rev. 2017 Apr 7;6(1):73. (PMID: 28388960)

Keywords: Definition; Research methodology; Systematic review

Date Created: 20191106 Date Completed: 20200804 Latest Revision: 20240229

20250114

PMC6829801

10.1186/s12874-019-0855-0

31684874