Are systematic reviews the best study design for you?
Try the quiz below to find out
Here is a guide to some of the literature review types available and their key characteristics.
| Systematic Review | Integrative Review | Scoping Review | Literature Review | |
| Purpose & Features |
To evaluate all the best quality evidence on a topic to answer a particular research question. Rigorous with explicit and reproducible methodology. Inclusion criteria, search strategies and analysis details are included. |
Gather and synthesize both empirical and theoretical evidence relevant to a clearly defined problem. States inclusion criteria, search strategy, extraction, appraisal and analysis plan. |
Assess the size and scope of existing literature on a topic, generally conducted when literature is diverse in type. Does not aim to answer a particular question. Rigorous with explicit and reproducible methodology. Inclusion criteria, search strategies and methods are included. |
Broad, selective view of the literature on a topic. Analysis may be chronological, conceptual or thematic. Usually lacks inclusion criteria and search strategies. Not comprehensive and vulnerable to bias. |
| Research Question |
Specific |
Directly linked to the identified problem, where there is a knowledge gap |
May be broad |
Not specific |
| Literature types included |
Well-defined; usually primary research. |
Empirical and theoretical types. |
All types depending on the research question. |
High-quality peer-reviewed articles, but also may include conference papers, news or other credible sources. |
|
Data Extraction |
Always | Varies depending on objectives | Varies depending on objectives | Not required |
| Resources | More than 2 people. 12 - 18+ months. |
Flexible | Flexible | Flexible |
Cochrane systematic review:
Kumar, A., Delbaere, K., Zijlstra, G. A. R., Carpenter, H., Iliffe, S., Masud, T., Skelton, D., Morris, R., & Kenick, D. (2014). Exercise for reducing fear of falling in older people living in the community. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009848.pub2
Qualitative systematic review:
Mytton, J., Ingram, J., Manns, S., & Thomas, J. (2014). Facilitators and Barriers to Engagement in Parenting Programs: A Qualitative Systematic Review. Health Education & Behavior, 41(2), 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198113485755
Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) systematic review:
Ellwood, L., Torun, G., Bahar, Z., & Fernandez, R. (2019). Effects of flavonoid-rich fruits on hypertension in adults: A systematic review. JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, 17, 2075-2105. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00050
Mixed methods systematic review:
Kinsella, N., Stattin, P., Cahill, D., Brown, C., Bill-Axelson, A., Bratt, O., Carlsson, S., & Van Hemelrijck, M. (2018). Factors influencing men’s choice of and adherence to active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: A mixed-method systematic review. European Urology, 74(3), 261–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.02.026
|
Further reading Dhollande S., Taylor A., Meyer S., & Scott M. (2021) Conducting integrative reviews: A guide for novice nursing researchers. Journal of Research in Nursing, 26(5), 427-438. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987121997907 Dobbins, M. (2017). Rapid review guidebook. National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. https://www.nccmt.ca/tools/rapid-review-guidebook Grant, M.J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x Mak S, Thomas A. (2022). Steps for Conducting a Scoping Review. Journal of Graduate Medical Education,14(5), 565-567. https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-22-00621.1 Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 143–143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x Toronto, C., & Remington, R. (2020). A step-by-step guide to conducting an integrative review. Springer International. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37504-1
|
A systematic review attempts to identify, appraise and synthesize all the empirical evidence that meets pre-specified eligibility criteria to answer a given research question. Researchers conducting systematic reviews use explicit methods aimed at minimizing bias, in order to produce more reliable findings that can be used to inform decision making. (See Section 1.2 in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions).
You might undertake a systematic review under the following circumstances:
Adapted from Salis, A. Systematically review the literature [Webinar]. Salis Institute. https://www.salisinstitute.com/
This video from The Evidence Synthesis Academy at Brown University walks you through the basic steps on how to conduct a systematic review.
For more detail, please consult the Systematic Review Process page.
The following resources are essential to a successful systematic review:
Time. Systematic reviews can take between 6-18 months (or more) to complete and publish.
Documentation. Searches must be reproducible, so you'll have to have a documented search strategy and process. You can use something as simple as a notebook or a spreadsheet, although software is available. It is recommended that you register your review ahead of time in a systematic review protocol database such as PROSPERO.
Personnel. The Cochrane Handbook recommends that systematic reviews be undertaken by more than one person. The team should include subject experts as well as those to assist with searching and screening literature. It can be helpful to include an experienced systematic review author on your team. Librarians can provide guidance on search strategies, documentation and resources.
Information resources. Systematic reviews require extensive literature searching of both subscription and free databases, and possibly grey literature.
For more detail, please consult the Systematic Review Process page.
Before your appointment: make sure you have read any systematic reviews guidelines provided by your School, read the Systematic literature searching pages in the Library Research guide, and reviewed the Library's Systematic Reviews Service Charter.
Systematic review services are only provided for postgraduates, researchers and academic staff at the University of Notre Dame Australia. Appointments are structured by the two-part process outlined below.
1. Scoping: this session covers the essentials you will need to plan an effective SR. Please bring any planning materials you have created so far, including project proposals, protocols, or outlines. By the end of this session, you will have the tools you need to identify databases, gather keywords and do some scoping and initial line-by-line concept searches.
Duration:
Please bring (if applicable):
2. Searching: this session will help you to refine your preliminary searches towards building a final strategy. We will review your experiences with initial searches and advise on advanced database features, search filters, limiters and text mining tools. We will also cover the effective use of citation management software (e.g. EndNote).
Duration:
Please bring (if applicable):
Introduction to Health Research (90min)
Research Governance Service (RGS): A Researcher’s Guide (2hr)
Literature Searching & Management (60min)
Good Clinical Practice in Australia (4.5hrs)
A Practical Guide to Critical Appraisal (90min)
Research with People who Experience Mental Health Illnesses (60min)
The Essentials of Writing a Research Protocol (90min)
Health Economics Application to Research (90min)
Health Economics: Cost Effectiveness for Clinical Trials (90min)
Lung Health in First Nations Children: Module 1 (90min)
Lung Health in First Nations Children: Module 2 (90min)
Help the Biostatistician Help You (30min)
Guide to HeSANDA and Health Data Australia (15min)
How to Involve Consumers in Health and Medical Research (30min)
Consumer and Community Involvement in Health Research (30min)
Consumer and Community Involvement and Grant Writing (30min)
Copyright © 2025 The University of Notre Dame Australia | CRICOS Provider Code: 01032F | TEQSA PRV12170 | RTO Code 0064
