Skip to Main Content
NYMC Library Banner
Ask a Librarian

Conducting a Systematic Review

What Is a Systematic Review?

"A review of a clearly formulated question that uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select, and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect and analyze data from the studies that are included in the review. Statistical methods (meta-analysis) may or may not be used to analyze and summarize the results of the included studies." - from the Cochrane Handbook

 

In a nutshell, a systematic review is a secondary study from a collection of primary studies (original research) that pertain to a specific research question. Those primary studies have been analyzed, examined, appraised, and evaluated for the highest level of evidence and quality of methodology, in order to provide the best answer to a research question.

The methods and/or protocol of conducting a systematic review are clear, understandable, rigorous and transparent. In a systematic review, you should see:

  • A clearly stated objective.
  • Search Methods: The where, and the how. 
  • Selection Criteria (inclusion/exclusion): What does the study need to look like to answer your research question.
    • Types of participants, problem, study design
    • Interventions, exposures, outcomes.
  • See the example below:

 

 

Additional Definitions: 

National Health Service

 

A Systematic Review is not a Literature Review

 

Systematic reviews are often confused with review articles. This type of publication are often called narrative reviews or literature reviews. 

 

Literature reviews (or narrative reviews or review articles) are valuable and help to build one's knowledge base on a topic. However, they are quite different from systematic reviews.

  • There is no research question.
  • It is an overview or BROAD examination of the published literature on a topic.
  • There is no critical appraisal of the research. No stated methods as it is not study, but rather a narrative review of the studies. 
  • See the example below:



Recent Systematic Reviews at NYMC

References

1. Akwan R, Elsharkawy MM, Zrineh A, Amleh A, Douden B, Alhouseini M, Alsaeed L, Eldesouki M. The effect of coenzyme Q10 supplementation on depressive symptoms and anxiety: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. Aug 20 2025;doi:10.1007/s00228-025-03904-9

2. Chigurupati HD, Neppala S, Chikatimalla R, Fath A, Upreti P, Bolte J, Naveed MA, Rao A, Altaee O, Sattar Y, et al. Impact of diabetes mellitus type-2 on the outcomes following mitral transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER): A meta-analysis. Am Heart J Plus. Sep 2025;57:100574. doi:10.1016/j.ahjo.2025.100574

3. Elbenawi H, Ayman Y, Hashim A, Agarwal S, Wagdy M, Hamed BM, Thakurathi P, Al-Shammari AS, Mohamed KA, Kalaiger AM, et al. Catheter Ablation for Ventricular Tachycardia in Ischemic Cardiomyopathy: A Meta-Analysis With Reconstructed Time-to-Event and Trial Sequential Analysis. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. Sep 16 2025;doi:10.1111/jce.70075

4. Farkas E, Goldblatt A, Nehorayan I, Lefkowitz RB, Fleshner L, Tepper K, Marmon S. Topical estrogen for skin aging: A systematic review of safety and efficacy. J Am Acad Dermatol. Aug 23 2025;doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2025.08.050

5. Frontera NM, Ahsan MD, Chandler IR, Levi SR, Brewer JT, Weiss JM, Ma X, Jewell ST, Sharaf RN, Frey MK. Risk of melanoma among people with BRCA1 and BRCA2 pathogenic variants: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Oncol. Sep 11 2025;201:223–234. doi:10.1016/j.ygyno.2025.08.030

6. Mousavi A, Shojaei S, Abhari AP, Mirhosseini SA, Ebrahimi R, Rajabi E, Farooqi MA, Azizpour A, Moghadam SA, Kuno T, et al. Intensive Blood Pressure Control in Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cardiovascular and Microvascular Outcomes. Am J Hypertens. Jul 24 2025;doi:10.1093/ajh/hpaf140

7. Thapa S, Shah S, Dahal K, Salem A, Gupta A, Singh S, Sah S, Mehta R, Thapa A, Frishman WH, et al. Headache Outcomes After Treatment of Cerebral Arteriovenous Malformations: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis with Clinical Implications. Cardiol Rev. Sep 10 2025;doi:10.1097/crd.0000000000001041

8. Udaikumar J, Nimmagadda R, Potluri V, Medarametla R, Garlapati S, Tummala N, Kuppili S, Goodman AJ, Marino D. Comparing Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) vs. Magnetic Resonance Cholangiopancreatography (MRCP) in the Etiological Evaluation of Idiopathic Acute Pancreatitis (IAP): A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Dig Dis Sci. Sep 27 2025;doi:10.1007/s10620-025-09408-x

9. Wang R, Karp A, Clare K, Nolan B, Spirollari E, Zeller S, Frid I, Gandhi CD, Kinon M, Tyagi R, et al. Gabapentinoids in ERAS Protocols For Spine Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Clin Spine Surg. Sep 1 2025;doi:10.1097/bsd.0000000000001877

10. Stonebraker C, Pein R, Valley ZA, Estes CM, Garber D. Demographics, Management, and Outcomes Associated With Idiopathic Vocal Fold Paralysis: A Systematic Review. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. Mar 7 2025;doi:10.1002/ohn.1195
 

Where Do I Find Published Systematic Reviews?

  • The Campbell Collaboration is an international research network that produces systematic reviews of the effects of social interventions focusing on education, crime and justice, and social welfare.
  • The Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) databases are updated daily and provide decision-makers with access to quality assessed systematic reviews, economic evaluations, summaries of health technology assessments, summaries of all Cochrane reviews and protocols, and summaries of Campbell reviews.
  • The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) includes the full text of regularly updated systematic reviews of the effects of healthcare prepared by The Cochrane Collaboration.
  • The Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) covers a broad range of health related interventions and complements the CDSR by quality-assessing and summarizing reviews that have not yet been carried out by the Cochrane Collaboration. Each abstract includes a summary of the review together with a critical commentary about the overall quality.
  • Both PubMed and PubMed Clinical Queries can be used to locate systematic reviews. The Clinical Queries tool retrieves citations identified as systematic reviews, meta-analyses, reviews of clinical trials, evidence-based medicine, consensus development conferences, guidelines, and citations to articles from journals specializing in review studies of value to clinicians.

NOTE: Linking to the Cochrane Databases and PubMed through the Health Sciences Library ensures that you have access to the full text of systematic reviews and articles when available.