Systematic Reviews

1. Prepare Before You Start Your Systematic Review

Planning ahead is key to a successful systematic review. Taking the time to prepare before diving into the review process can significantly reduce the risk of discrepancies and bias. Your preparation should include setting clear timelines and milestones to keep your project on track. A project management tool, such as a Gantt chart, can help visualize your timeline and ensure you allocate sufficient time for each phase of the review. Remember, thorough preparation can save you time and headaches down the road by making your review process more efficient and ensuring your results are reliable.

2. Use a Review Framework to Define Eligibility Criteria

Well-defined eligibility criteria are the backbone of any systematic review. Using a review framework, such as PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome), can help you create clear and concise eligibility criteria that will guide the development of your search strategy and facilitate the screening process. A clear framework not only keeps your review focused but also helps you stay consistent in your approach to selecting studies, ensuring that your review remains systematic and minimizes bias.

3. Let Your Protocol Guide the Data Extraction Template

Your protocol is more than just a plan—it’s the foundation of your entire systematic review. Use it to inform the structure of your data extraction template. A well-thought-out protocol will minimize the risk of selective reporting by providing a clear roadmap for what data needs to be collected. It also serves as a valuable tool for your review team, reducing the likelihood of arbitrary decision-making and ensuring that everyone is on the same page throughout the review process.

4. Register Your Protocol to Avoid Research Wastage

If you plan to publish your review findings, registering your protocol is a crucial step. Registration not only helps to avoid research duplication and wastage but also increases the credibility of your review by demonstrating that your protocol was established before the review began. It provides a public record of your intended methods and objectives, adding an extra layer of transparency and accountability to your work.

5. Use the Protocol as a Framework for the Final Report

These tips are just the beginning! For a deeper dive into best practices, strategies, and expert insights, download our comprehensive eBook on intervention systematic review protocols. In this eBook, we compile the collective knowledge of Covidence experts, our user community, and leading resources like Cochrane and PRISMA to provide you with everything you need to craft top-notch protocols that set your reviews up for success.

https://www.covidence.org/blog/writing-the-protocol/

• PRISMA-P  - https://www.prisma-statement.org/protocols

• What it is:

  PRISMA-P, or Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols, is a checklist of 17 items. These items guide authors in detailing key aspects of their systematic review protocol. 

• What it's for:

  PRISMA-P is primarily intended for authors preparing systematic review protocols for publication or other forms of dissemination. It can also be used by those commissioning or funding reviews, as well as by peer reviewers and editors. 

• Why it's important:

  A well-developed protocol is crucial for conducting a rigorous and transparent systematic review. PRISMA-P helps ensure that all essential elements of the review are clearly outlined from the start, including the research question, inclusion/exclusion criteria, search strategy, data extraction methods, and analysis plan. 

• Relationship to PRISMA:

  PRISMA-P is related to the broader PRISMA statement, which provides guidelines for reporting the completed systematic review itself. While PRISMA focuses on the final report, PRISMA-P focuses on the planning and development of the review protocol. 

• Key elements:

  The PRISMA-P checklist covers essential aspects of a systematic review protocol, including:
  • The review's rationale and objectives 
  • The specific research question(s) 
  • Inclusion and exclusion criteria for studies 
  • Search strategy (databases, keywords, etc.) 
  • Methods for data extraction and synthesis 
  • Assessment of study quality and risk of bias 
  • Potential conflicts of interest 
  • Plans for dissemination and updating the review 

Authors should write and register a protocol outlining the review methodology.

Registering a protocol:

• helps avoid duplication of similar reviews
• ensures transparency and reproducibility
• decreases the chance of reporting bias by enabling comparison of the registered protocol to the completed review
• increases the likelihood that a systematic review will be successfully completed

According to Cochrane,

"a protocol outlines the question that the review authors are addressing, detailing the criteria against which studies will be assessed for inclusion in the review, and describing how the authors will manage the review process. Protocols contain information that defines the health problem and the intervention under investigation, how benefits and harms will be measured, and the type of appropriate study design. The protocol also outlines the process for identifying, assessing, and summarizing studies in the review. By making this information available the protocol is a public record of how the review authors intend to answer their research question."

Several networks are available to register systematic reviews:

• PROSPERO: the first prospective register of systematic reviews with a focus in  healthcare, public health, crime, justice, social welfare, and education. Systematic reviews, rapid reviews, and umbrella reviews can be registered in PROSPERO’s database. Scoping reviews are not registered on this platform and students are not able to register their reviews here.
• INPLASY: accepts a wider variety of protocols including scoping reviews. Retrospective protocol registration is possible but is strongly discouraged. Protocols are usually published within 48 hours. 
• Open Science Framework (OSF): contains pre-published manuscripts and pioneering research protocols. Pre-registration regarding the project is required to capture key information that is permanently stamped with a DOI.  Information can be made private for up to four years. Updates can be made throughout this time. A central repository can be created to collaborate with other researchers on the team. 
• Research Registry: includes all types of research studies including systematic reviews. Allows prospective and retrospective registrations. 

Methods Wizard

The Methods Wizard helps the review team develop the methods section of a systematic review protocol.