Adapted from: The University of North Carolina. (2023). Systematic reviews- legacy (2020-2022): Types of reviews. University Libraries. https://guides.lib.unc.edu/systematic-reviews-legacy/review-types
| TYPE OF REVIEW |
DESCRIPTION |
SEARCH STRATEGY | OTHER INFORMATION |
| Meta-Analysis | A statistical test that combines the results from multiple studies to answer one or more research questions. | Aims for exhaustive, comprehensive search. |
Møller AM, Myles PS. What makes a good systematic review and meta-analysis?. Br J Anaesth. 2016;117(4):428-430. doi:10.1093/bja/aew264 |
| Systematic Review | Attempts to identify, appraise, and synthesize all the empirical evidence that meets pre-specified eligibility criteria to answer a given research question. Uses explicit methods aimed at minimizing bias in order to produce more reliable findings that can be used to inform decision making. | Aims for exhaustive, comprehensive search. | Lodge M. Conducting a systematic review: finding the evidence. J Evid Based Med. 2011;4(2):135-139. doi:10.1111/j.1756-5391.2011.01130.x |
| Umbrella Review | Reviews other systematic reviews and meta-analyses on a topic. Focuses on a broad condition or problem for which there are competing interventions and highlights reviews that address these interventions and their results. | Identification of component reviews but no search for primary studies. Librarian collaboration recommended. | Smith V, Devane D, Begley CM, Clarke M. Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11(1):15. Published 2011 Feb 3. doi:10.1186/1471-2288-11-15 |
| Integrative Review | Reviews, critiques, and synthesizes representative literature on a topic in an integrated way such that new frameworks and perspectives on the topic are generated. | Aims for exhaustive, comprehensive search. Librarian collaboration recommended. | Whittemore R, Knafl K. The integrative review: updated methodology. J Adv Nurs. 2005;52(5):546-553. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x |
| Rapid Review | Assesses what is already known about a policy or practice issue by using systematic review methods to search and critically appraise existing research. | Completeness of searching determined by time constraints. Librarian collaboration recommended. | Khangura S, Konnyu K, Cushman R, Grimshaw J, Moher D. Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach. Syst Rev. 2012;1:10. Published 2012 Feb 10. doi:10.1186/2046-4053-1-10 |
| Scoping Reviews | Presents a preliminary assessment of the potential size and scope of available research literature. Aims to identify nature and extent of research evidence (usually including ongoing research). | Completeness of searching determined by time/scope constraints. | Peters MDJ, Godfrey C, McInerney P, Munn Z, Tricco AC, Khalil, H. Chapter 11: Scoping Reviews (2020 version). In: Aromataris E, Munn Z (Editors). JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis, JBI, 2020. Available from https://synthesismanual.jbi.global. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-12 |
| Narrative/Literature Review | Collates relevant studies and draws conclusions from them. | Search strategy not typically reported. Not comprehensive, which could introduce bias. | Collins JA, Fauser BC. Balancing the strengths of systematic and narrative reviews. Hum Reprod Update. 2005;11(2):103-104. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmh058 |
Recommended Resources: