Abstract
Preparing a review entails many judgments. The focus of the review must be decided. Studies that are relevant to the focus of the review must be identified, selected for inclusion and critically appraised. Information must be collected and synthesised from the relevant studies, and conclusions must be drawn. Checklists can help prevent important errors in this process. Reviewers, editors, content experts, and users of reviews all have a role to play in improving the quality of published reviews and promoting the appropriate use of reviews by decisionmakers. It is essential that both providers and users appraise the validity of review articles.
Keywords
Systematic reviewInclusion (mineral)Process (computing)Engineering ethicsManagement scienceQuality (philosophy)Focus (optics)PsychologyComputer scienceMEDLINEPolitical scienceEngineeringEpistemologySocial psychology
Affiliated Institutions
Related Publications
Formulating Questions and Locating Primary Studies for Inclusion in Systematic Reviews
Much time and effort are spent on designing primary research studies. Similar care must be given to planning systematic reviews. The review should be based on an important, well...
A Proposal for More Informative Abstracts of Review Articles
This proposal presents guidelines for preparing informative abstracts of review articles. Six guidelines are proposed: 1. The abstract should begin with a precise statement of t...
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...
Scope, quality, and inclusivity of clinical guidelines produced early in the covid-19 pandemic: rapid review
Abstract Objective To appraise the availability, quality, and inclusivity of clinical guidelines produced in the early stage of the coronavirus disease 2019 (covid-19) pandemic....
The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers
Introduction: Appraising the quality of studies included in systematic reviews combining qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies is challenging. To address this chal...
Publication Info
- Year
- 1994
- Type
- article
- Volume
- 309
- Issue
- 6955
- Pages
- 648-651
- Citations
- 478
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Altmetric
PlumX Metrics
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
478
OpenAlex
Cite This
Andrew D Oxman
(1994).
Systematic Reviews: Checklists for review articles.
BMJ
, 309
(6955)
, 648-651.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.309.6955.648
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1136/bmj.309.6955.648