Systematic Reviews (in the Health Sciences)

Many journals will instruct systematic review authors to "document the search" or explain what citation databases, registers, websites, etc., were searched and how these searches were conducted. The goal of documenting a search is twofold: first, to allow readers to assess whether the sources consulted were appropriate and if the searches were conducted in a thorough and detailed manner; and second, to allow a reader to replicate the search themselves (to either replicate the research, or extend the research question to include results from a new timeframe, new geographic area, new language of publication, new age group of subjects, etc.).

Any documented search needs to include these elements:

• Names of all databases, registers, websites, etc searched
• For citation databases, the name of the platform on which the database was searched
• Date(s) the searches were conducted
• Exact key words or subject headings included in the search strings
• All Boolean logic statements (AND, OR, NOT) and all parentheses, quotation marks, commas, and other punctuation marks included in the search strings
• Any limits or filters applied to limit your search to specific dates, languages, publication types, or other characteristics of the publication or the characteristics of individuals involved in the research (their ages, their genders).
• How many results were exported from each database, register, or website searched.

There are several ways to document a search-- in text, as a figure, in a table format-- and typically a journal's policies will dictate the formatting in the final manuscript.

Watch this tutorial to learn how to document a search to PRISMA standards.

The structure of a systematic review typically follows the same structure as original research articles. PRISMA Guidelines are designed to follow the structure of a systematic review manuscript format with the sections in bold and the required checklist item listed underneath

• Title: Describe your manuscript and state whether it is a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both.
• Abstract: Structure the abstract and include (as applicable): background, objectives, data sources, study eligibility criteria, participants, interventions, quality assessment and synthesis methods, results, limitations, conclusions, implications of key findings, and systematic review registration number.
• Introduction or Background: Describe the rationale for the review and provide a statement of questions being addressed.
• Methods: Include details regarding the protocol, eligibility criteria, databases searched, full search strategy of at least one database (often reported in appendix), and the study selection process. Describe how data were extracted and analyzed. If a librarian is part of your research team, that person may be best suited to write this section. 
• Results: Report the numbers of articles screened at each stage using a PRISMA diagram. Include information about included study characteristics, risk of bias (quality assessment) within studies, and results across studies.
• Discussion: Summarize main findings, including the strength of evidence and limitations of the review. Provide a general interpretation of the results and implications for future research.
• Funding: Describe any sources of funding for the systematic review
• Appendix: Include entire search strategy for at least one database in the appendix (include search strategies for all databases searched for more transparency). For more information on formatting the search strategy see Search Methods & Appendix for Manuscript

Refer to the Standards & Guidelines tab for more information

There are many factors behind the selection of a journal to publish your systematic review and the entire publication process. For more information about the process refer to the Health Sciences Libraries Scholarly Communication Research Guide.