What to do if you find a systematic review in your literature search, if you are unsure.
Systematic Reviews (SR) are the highest form of evidence, but they do not fit easily into the structure of this assignment. The authors will have carried out a scientific search and identified the key articles of sound quality. They will have spent 1-3 years doing this. So, you cannot match them.
- If you find a systematic review do include it in your 8 (approx.) articles’ table.
- Note the date. If it is older, you might find newer articles which conflict with the SR’s findings. That might be interesting.
- However, what I would do is report on the SR, as shown below.
- Do not try to appraise the SR unless you feel very confident.
- Note carefully the findings of the SR, and then, after you have appraised the two articles, compare their findings with that of the SR.
- You really cannot completely ignore the SR but keep it in its place!!
|Title||Methodology of study||Research Methods||Results||Implications for practice|
|Negi AM, Kennedy CC, Thabane L, Veroniki AA, Adachi JD, Richardson J, Cameron ID, Giangregorio A, Petropoulou M, Alsaad SM, Alzahrani J, Maaz M, Ahmed MM, Kim E, Tehfe H, Dima R, Sabanayagam K, Hewston P, Abu Alrob H, Papaioannou A. Management of Frailty: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2019 Oct;20(10):1190-1198. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2019.08.009. PMID: 31564464.||Systematic Review||Data sources-Relevant randomized A total of 66 RCTs were included after screening of 7090 citations and 749 full-text articles. NMA of frailty outcome (including 21 RCTs, 5262 participants, and 8 interventions controlled trials (RCTs) were identified by a systematic search of several electronic databases including MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and AMED. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach.||A total of 66 RCTs were included after screening of 7090 citations and 749 full-text articles. 5262 participants, and 8 interventions||Physical activity is one of the most effective frailty interventions. The quality of evidence of the current review is low and very low. More robust RCTs are needed to increase the confidence of our NMA results and the quality of evidence.|