Components of a Systematic Review
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
Documenting a Search
The Publication Process
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.
Helpful Websites
- Online Writing Lab (OWL) at Purdue -General Writing ResourcesThese OWL resources will help you with the writing process: pre-writing (invention), developing research questions and outlines, composing thesis statements, and proofreading.
- Grammar GirlOffers grammar and writing tips in short, actionable advice from friendly and informed authorities.
Writing Support
- Center for Academic Supportcall (213) 740-0776, email study@usc.edu
Writing Tips and Guides
Conducting Your Literature Review by
This book is a step-by-step guide to writing a literature review, and includes tips for modifying the process as needed depending on your audience, purpose, and goals. The lessons in this book can be applied to writing the background section for a thesis or an original research publication. Literature reviews are now much more challenging to compile today than they used to be. You need a structured approach to handle the sheer volume of published research available. This book will help you formulate a strategy for making decisions about what to include and not include in your review, and produce a reliable and unbiased summary of the existing research. You will learn skills for defining research questions, using search tools and managing citations. This book is part of the American Psychological Association's Concise Guides to Conducting Behavioral, Health, and Social Science Research series. Aimed at undergraduate students in research methods courses or others with a lab or research project, each book describes a key stage in the research process. Collectively, these books provide a solid grounding in research from start to finish.
ISBN: 9781433830921Publication Date: 2019-09-10
From Research to Manuscript by
Observations Plus Recipes It has been said that science is the orderly collection of facts about the natural world. Scientists, however, are wary of using the word 'fact. ' 'Fact' has the feeling of absoluteness and universality, whereas scientific observations are neither ab- lute nor universal. For example, 'children have 20 deciduous [baby] teeth' is an observation about the real world, but scientists would not call it a fact. Some children have fewer deciduous teeth, and some have more. Even those children who have exactly 20 deciduous teeth use the full set during only a part of their childhood. When they are babies and t- dlers, children have less than 20 visible teeth, and as they grow older, children begin to loose their deciduous teeth, which are then replaced by permanent teeth. 'Children have 20 deciduous [baby] teeth' is not even a complete scientific sta- ment. For one thing, the statement 'children have 20 deciduous teeth' does not tell us what we mean by 'teeth. ' When we say "teeth," do we mean only those that can seen be with the unaided eye, or do we also include the hidden, unerupted teeth? An observation such as 'children have 20 deciduous teeth' is not a fact, and, by itself, it is not acceptable as a scientific statement until its terms are explained: scientifically, 'children have 20 deciduous teeth' must be accompanied by definitions and qualifiers.
Publication Date: 2009-01-01
Mastering Scientific and Medical Writing by Call Number: Norris Medical Library, Upper Level, Z 253 R729m 2007ISBN: 9783540345077Publication Date: 2006
Scientific Papers and Presentations: Navigating Scientific Communication in Today S World by ISBN: 1283716720Publication Date: 2012-01-01
The Elements of Style by
The classic manual for writing is now in its fourth edition. A new Foreword by Roger Angell reminds readers that the advice of Strunk and White is as valuable today as when it was first offered. A new glossary of the grammatical terms used in the book provides a convenient reference for readers.
