Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Journal of Diabetes & Metabolic Disorders 1/2021

08.04.2021 | Review article

The rationale behind systematic reviews in clinical medicine: a conceptual framework

verfasst von: Hamideh Moosapour, Farzane Saeidifard, Maryam Aalaa, Akbar Soltani, Bagher Larijani

Erschienen in: Journal of Diabetes & Metabolic Disorders | Ausgabe 1/2021

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

A systematic review (SR) is a type of review that uses a systematic method to provide a valid summary of existing literature addressing a clear and specific question. In clinical medicine (CM), the concept of SR is well recognized, especially after the introduction of evidence-based medicine; The SR of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) is considered the highest level of evidence on therapeutic effectiveness. Despite the popularity of the SRs and the increasing publication rate of SRs in CM and other healthcare literature, the concept has raised criticisms. Many of proper criticisms can be due to the deviation of some existing SRs from the original philosophy and well-established rationale behind the concept of SR. On the other hand, many criticisms are misconceptions about SRs which still exist even several decades after introducing the concept. This article presents a conceptual framework for clarifying the rationale behind SR in CM by providing the relevant concepts and their inter-relations, explaining how methodological standards of an SR and its rationale are connected, and discussing the rationale under the three-section: SR as a type of synthetic research, SR as a more informed and less biased review, and SR as an efficient scientific tool.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Higgins JP, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews. The Cochrane collaboration. 2008;5(0). Higgins JP, Green S. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews. The Cochrane collaboration. 2008;5(0).
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Hayward RS, Wilson MC, Tunis SR, Bass EB, Guyatt G. Users' guides to the medical literature. JAMA. 1995;274(7):570–4.CrossRef Hayward RS, Wilson MC, Tunis SR, Bass EB, Guyatt G. Users' guides to the medical literature. JAMA. 1995;274(7):570–4.CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Ioannidis JP. The mass production of redundant, misleading, and conflicted systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Milbank Q. 2016;94(3):485–514.CrossRef Ioannidis JP. The mass production of redundant, misleading, and conflicted systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Milbank Q. 2016;94(3):485–514.CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Greenhalgh T, Thorne S, Malterud K. Time to challenge the spurious hierarchy of systematic over narrative reviews? Eur J Clin Invest. 2018;48(6). Greenhalgh T, Thorne S, Malterud K. Time to challenge the spurious hierarchy of systematic over narrative reviews? Eur J Clin Invest. 2018;48(6).
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Petticrew M, Roberts H. Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide: John Wiley & Sons 2008. Petticrew M, Roberts H. Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide: John Wiley & Sons 2008.
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Petticrew M. Why certain systematic reviews reach uncertain conclusions. BMJ. 2003;326(7392):756–8.CrossRef Petticrew M. Why certain systematic reviews reach uncertain conclusions. BMJ. 2003;326(7392):756–8.CrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Petticrew M. Systematic reviews from astronomy to zoology: myths and misconceptions. BMJ. 2001;322:98–101.CrossRef Petticrew M. Systematic reviews from astronomy to zoology: myths and misconceptions. BMJ. 2001;322:98–101.CrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Haddaway NR, Bilotta GS. Systematic reviews: separating fact from fiction. Environ Int. 2016;92:578–84.CrossRef Haddaway NR, Bilotta GS. Systematic reviews: separating fact from fiction. Environ Int. 2016;92:578–84.CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Sofaer N, Strech D. The need for systematic reviews of reasons. Bioethics. 2011;26(6):315–28.CrossRef Sofaer N, Strech D. The need for systematic reviews of reasons. Bioethics. 2011;26(6):315–28.CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Strech D, Sofaer N. How to write a systematic review of reasons. J Med Ethics. 2012;38(2):121–6.CrossRef Strech D, Sofaer N. How to write a systematic review of reasons. J Med Ethics. 2012;38(2):121–6.CrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Oliver S, Dickson K. Policy-relevant systematic reviews to strengthen health systems: models and mechanisms to support their production. Evid Policy. 2016;12(2):235–59.CrossRef Oliver S, Dickson K. Policy-relevant systematic reviews to strengthen health systems: models and mechanisms to support their production. Evid Policy. 2016;12(2):235–59.CrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Mullen PD, Ramírez G. The promise and pitfalls of systematic reviews. Annu Rev Public Health. 2006;27:81–102.CrossRef Mullen PD, Ramírez G. The promise and pitfalls of systematic reviews. Annu Rev Public Health. 2006;27:81–102.CrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Morrison J. The challenges of systematic reviews of educational research. BMJ. 2005;331(7513):391.CrossRef Morrison J. The challenges of systematic reviews of educational research. BMJ. 2005;331(7513):391.CrossRef
14.
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Daley BJ, Durning SJ, Torre DM. Using concept maps to create meaningful learning in medical education. MedEdPublish. 2016 10;5. Daley BJ, Durning SJ, Torre DM. Using concept maps to create meaningful learning in medical education. MedEdPublish. 2016 10;5.
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Me D. The Joanna Briggs institute: its contribution to evidence-based practice. Clin Nurse Spec. 2005;19(4):184–6.CrossRef Me D. The Joanna Briggs institute: its contribution to evidence-based practice. Clin Nurse Spec. 2005;19(4):184–6.CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Leeuw FL. Institutionalization of Second-Order Evidence-Producing Organizations. In The Evidence Book Routledge 2017 (pp. 35–58). Leeuw FL. Institutionalization of Second-Order Evidence-Producing Organizations. In The Evidence Book Routledge 2017 (pp. 35–58).
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Cook DA, West CP. Conducting systematic reviews in medical education: a stepwise approach. Med Educ. 2012;46(10):943–52.CrossRef Cook DA, West CP. Conducting systematic reviews in medical education: a stepwise approach. Med Educ. 2012;46(10):943–52.CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Tsafnat G, Dunn A, Glasziou P, Coiera E. The automation of systematic reviews. (2013): f139. Tsafnat G, Dunn A, Glasziou P, Coiera E. The automation of systematic reviews. (2013): f139.
20.
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Ely JW, Osheroff JA, Ebell MH, Bergus GR, Levy BT, Chambliss ML, et al. Analysis of questions asked by family doctors regarding patient care. BMJ. 1999;319(7206):358–61.CrossRef Ely JW, Osheroff JA, Ebell MH, Bergus GR, Levy BT, Chambliss ML, et al. Analysis of questions asked by family doctors regarding patient care. BMJ. 1999;319(7206):358–61.CrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat Cook DJ, Mulrow CD, Haynes RB. Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126(5):376–80.CrossRef Cook DJ, Mulrow CD, Haynes RB. Systematic reviews: synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Ann Intern Med. 1997;126(5):376–80.CrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Pae CU. Why systematic review rather than narrative review? Psychiatry Investig. 2015;12(3):417–9.CrossRef Pae CU. Why systematic review rather than narrative review? Psychiatry Investig. 2015;12(3):417–9.CrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Cipriani A, Geddes J. Comparison of systematic and narrative reviews: the example of the atypical antipsychotics. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2003;12(3):146–53.CrossRef Cipriani A, Geddes J. Comparison of systematic and narrative reviews: the example of the atypical antipsychotics. Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci. 2003;12(3):146–53.CrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Inf Libr J. 2009;26:91–108.CrossRef Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Inf Libr J. 2009;26:91–108.CrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Sugimoto CR, Larivière V. Measuring research: what everyone needs to know. Oxford University Press; 2018. Sugimoto CR, Larivière V. Measuring research: what everyone needs to know. Oxford University Press; 2018.
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Abramo G. Revisiting the scientometric conceptualization of impact and its measurement. J Inf Secur. 2018;12(3):590–7. Abramo G. Revisiting the scientometric conceptualization of impact and its measurement. J Inf Secur. 2018;12(3):590–7.
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Ioannidis JP. Meta-research: why research on research matters. PLoS Biol. 2018;16(3):e2005468.CrossRef Ioannidis JP. Meta-research: why research on research matters. PLoS Biol. 2018;16(3):e2005468.CrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Moattar H, Moosapour H, Soltani A, Larijani B. The effect of Chloroquine on pro-inflammatory cytokines levels in graves‘ disease: historical cohort from a pilot randomized controlled trial. Pharmacol & Pharm. 2013;4(4):392–7.CrossRef Moattar H, Moosapour H, Soltani A, Larijani B. The effect of Chloroquine on pro-inflammatory cytokines levels in graves‘ disease: historical cohort from a pilot randomized controlled trial. Pharmacol & Pharm. 2013;4(4):392–7.CrossRef
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Chin YH, Ng CH, Lee MH, Koh JW, Kiew J, Yang SP, et al. Prevalence of thyroid eye disease in graves’ disease: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Clin Endocrinol. 2020;93(4):363–74.CrossRef Chin YH, Ng CH, Lee MH, Koh JW, Kiew J, Yang SP, et al. Prevalence of thyroid eye disease in graves’ disease: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Clin Endocrinol. 2020;93(4):363–74.CrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Muñoz-Velandia OM, Fernández-Ávila DG, Patino-Hernandez D, Gómez AM. Metrics of activity in social networks are correlated with traditional metrics of scientific impact in endocrinology journals. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2019;13(4):2437–40.CrossRef Muñoz-Velandia OM, Fernández-Ávila DG, Patino-Hernandez D, Gómez AM. Metrics of activity in social networks are correlated with traditional metrics of scientific impact in endocrinology journals. Diabetes Metab Syndr. 2019;13(4):2437–40.CrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Polit DF, Beck CT. Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: myths and strategies. Int J Nurs Stud. 2010;47(11):1451–8.CrossRef Polit DF, Beck CT. Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: myths and strategies. Int J Nurs Stud. 2010;47(11):1451–8.CrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Nasser M, Van Weel C, Van Binsbergen JJ, van de Laar FA. Generalizability of systematic reviews of the effectiveness of health care interventions to primary health care: concepts, methods, and future research. Fam Pract. 2012;29(suppl_1):i94–103.CrossRef Nasser M, Van Weel C, Van Binsbergen JJ, van de Laar FA. Generalizability of systematic reviews of the effectiveness of health care interventions to primary health care: concepts, methods, and future research. Fam Pract. 2012;29(suppl_1):i94–103.CrossRef
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Johnston BC, Supina AL, Vohra S. Probiotics for pediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhea: a meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials. CMAJ. 2006;175(4):377–83.CrossRef Johnston BC, Supina AL, Vohra S. Probiotics for pediatric antibiotic-associated diarrhea: a meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials. CMAJ. 2006;175(4):377–83.CrossRef
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Lau J, Antman EM, Jimenez-Silva J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. Cumulative meta-analysis of therapeutic trials for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1992;327(4):248–54.CrossRef Lau J, Antman EM, Jimenez-Silva J, Kupelnick B, Mosteller F, Chalmers TC. Cumulative meta-analysis of therapeutic trials for myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1992;327(4):248–54.CrossRef
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Belur J, Tompson L, Thornton A, Simon M. Interrater reliability in systematic review methodology: exploring variation in coder decision-making. Sociol Methods Res 2018:0049124118799372. Belur J, Tompson L, Thornton A, Simon M. Interrater reliability in systematic review methodology: exploring variation in coder decision-making. Sociol Methods Res 2018:0049124118799372.
37.
Zurück zum Zitat PLoS Medicine Editors. Best practice in systematic reviews: the importance of protocols and registration. PLoS Med. 2011;8(2):e1001009.CrossRef PLoS Medicine Editors. Best practice in systematic reviews: the importance of protocols and registration. PLoS Med. 2011;8(2):e1001009.CrossRef
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Straus S, Moher D. Registering systematic reviews. CMAJ. 2010;182(1):13–4.CrossRef Straus S, Moher D. Registering systematic reviews. CMAJ. 2010;182(1):13–4.CrossRef
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Ge L, Tian JH, Li YN, Pan JX, Li G, Wei D, et al. Association between prospective registration and overall reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews: a meta-epidemiological study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;93:45–55.CrossRef Ge L, Tian JH, Li YN, Pan JX, Li G, Wei D, et al. Association between prospective registration and overall reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews: a meta-epidemiological study. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018;93:45–55.CrossRef
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Booth A, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Moher D, Petticrew M, Stewart L. Establishing a minimum dataset for prospective registration of systematic reviews: an international consultation. PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e27319.CrossRef Booth A, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Moher D, Petticrew M, Stewart L. Establishing a minimum dataset for prospective registration of systematic reviews: an international consultation. PLoS One. 2011;6(11):e27319.CrossRef
41.
Zurück zum Zitat Booth A, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Moher D, Petticrew M, Stewart L. An international registry of systematic-review protocols. Lancet. 2011 Jan 5;377(9760). Booth A, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Moher D, Petticrew M, Stewart L. An international registry of systematic-review protocols. Lancet. 2011 Jan 5;377(9760).
42.
Zurück zum Zitat Beyer F, Wright K. Comprehensive searching for systematic reviews: a comparison of database performance. York: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York. 2011. Beyer F, Wright K. Comprehensive searching for systematic reviews: a comparison of database performance. York: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York. 2011.
43.
Zurück zum Zitat Moat KA, Lavis JN, Wilson MG, Røttingen JA, Bärnighausen T. Twelve myths about systematic reviews for health system policymaking rebutted. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013;18(1):44–50.CrossRef Moat KA, Lavis JN, Wilson MG, Røttingen JA, Bärnighausen T. Twelve myths about systematic reviews for health system policymaking rebutted. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013;18(1):44–50.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
The rationale behind systematic reviews in clinical medicine: a conceptual framework
verfasst von
Hamideh Moosapour
Farzane Saeidifard
Maryam Aalaa
Akbar Soltani
Bagher Larijani
Publikationsdatum
08.04.2021
Verlag
Springer International Publishing
Erschienen in
Journal of Diabetes & Metabolic Disorders / Ausgabe 1/2021
Elektronische ISSN: 2251-6581
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40200-021-00773-8

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2021

Journal of Diabetes & Metabolic Disorders 1/2021 Zur Ausgabe

Leitlinien kompakt für die Innere Medizin

Mit medbee Pocketcards sicher entscheiden.

Seit 2022 gehört die medbee GmbH zum Springer Medizin Verlag

Notfall-TEP der Hüfte ist auch bei 90-Jährigen machbar

26.04.2024 Hüft-TEP Nachrichten

Ob bei einer Notfalloperation nach Schenkelhalsfraktur eine Hemiarthroplastik oder eine totale Endoprothese (TEP) eingebaut wird, sollte nicht allein vom Alter der Patientinnen und Patienten abhängen. Auch über 90-Jährige können von der TEP profitieren.

Niedriger diastolischer Blutdruck erhöht Risiko für schwere kardiovaskuläre Komplikationen

25.04.2024 Hypotonie Nachrichten

Wenn unter einer medikamentösen Hochdrucktherapie der diastolische Blutdruck in den Keller geht, steigt das Risiko für schwere kardiovaskuläre Ereignisse: Darauf deutet eine Sekundäranalyse der SPRINT-Studie hin.

Bei schweren Reaktionen auf Insektenstiche empfiehlt sich eine spezifische Immuntherapie

Insektenstiche sind bei Erwachsenen die häufigsten Auslöser einer Anaphylaxie. Einen wirksamen Schutz vor schweren anaphylaktischen Reaktionen bietet die allergenspezifische Immuntherapie. Jedoch kommt sie noch viel zu selten zum Einsatz.

Therapiestart mit Blutdrucksenkern erhöht Frakturrisiko

25.04.2024 Hypertonie Nachrichten

Beginnen ältere Männer im Pflegeheim eine Antihypertensiva-Therapie, dann ist die Frakturrate in den folgenden 30 Tagen mehr als verdoppelt. Besonders häufig stürzen Demenzkranke und Männer, die erstmals Blutdrucksenker nehmen. Dafür spricht eine Analyse unter US-Veteranen.

Update Innere Medizin

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.