Abstract
Abstract Background and objectives: The expansion of evidence‐based practice across sectors has lead to an increasing variety of review types. However, the diversity of terminology used means that the full potential of these review types may be lost amongst a confusion of indistinct and misapplied terms. The objective of this study is to provide descriptive insight into the most common types of reviews, with illustrative examples from health and health information domains. Methods: Following scoping searches, an examination was made of the vocabulary associated with the literature of review and synthesis (literary warrant). A simple analytical framework—Search, AppraisaL, Synthesis and Analysis (SALSA)—was used to examine the main review types. Results: Fourteen review types and associated methodologies were analysed against the SALSA framework, illustrating the inputs and processes of each review type. A description of the key characteristics is given, together with perceived strengths and weaknesses. A limited number of review types are currently utilized within the health information domain. Conclusions: Few review types possess prescribed and explicit methodologies and many fall short of being mutually exclusive. Notwithstanding such limitations, this typology provides a valuable reference point for those commissioning, conducting, supporting or interpreting reviews, both within health information and the wider health care domain.
Keywords
Affiliated Institutions
Related Publications
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have become increasinglyimportant in health care. Clinicians readthem to keep up to date with their field (1, 2), and they areoften used as ...
PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews
The methods and results of systematic reviews should be reported in sufficient detail to allow users to assess the trustworthiness and applicability of the review findings. The ...
Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations II: Pilot study of a new system
Abstract Background Systems that are used by different organisations to grade the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations vary. They have different strengths and...
Maximizing the Impact of Systematic Reviews in Health Care Decision Making: A Systematic Scoping Review of Knowledge-Translation Resources
Systematic review producers provide a variety of resources to help policymakers, of which focused summaries are the most common. More evaluations of these resources are required...
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Background: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement, published in 2009, was designed to help systematic reviewers transparently...
Publication Info
- Year
- 2009
- Type
- review
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 91-108
- Citations
- 9338
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
Cite This
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x