This research guide provides an overview of the Systematic and Scoping review process and how the Faculty Librarian can help postgraduate students and researchers during the process. This guide focuses on Systematic and Scoping reviews in a Health Sciences setting.
A Systematic Review is defined as “[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 analyse data from the studies that are included in the review. Statistical methods (meta-analysis) may or may not be used to analyse and summarise the results of the included studies” (The Cochrane Collaboration, 2005).
Do you need assistance completing a systematic review for class?
Are you a student or researcher struggling to develop search strategies?
Do you need help navigating databases, conducting a grey literature search, or managing your citations?
The CHS Faculty Librarian is pleased to offer a variety of literature search services to students and researchers and consist of the following elements:
Murdock University Systematic Reviews Research Guide
Curtin University Library's Systematic Review guide
Murdoch University's Library Systematic Review Guide
Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info Libr J. 2009 Jun;26(2):91-108. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x. Review. PubMed PMID: 19490148.
Duke University: Medical Center Library & Archives Online Tutorial
Peters M, Godfrey C, Khalil H, et al. Guidance for Conducting Systematic Scoping Reviews. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015;13:141-146.
A systematic review is a thorough compilation and analysis of all known evidence on a given subject. In order to be formally recognised by publishers and repositories, a systematic review must include the following elements:
McKeown, S., & Ross-White, A. (2019). Building capacity for librarian support and addressing collaboration challenges by formalizing library systematic review services. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 107(3), 411.
Spencer, A. J., & Eldredge, J. D. (2018). Roles for librarians in systematic reviews: a scoping review. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 106(1), 46.
Eriksen, M. B., & Frandsen, T. F. (2018). The impact of patient, intervention, comparison, outcome (PICO) as a search strategy tool on literature search quality: a systematic review. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 106(4), 420.
Kocher, M., & Riegelman, A. (2018). Systematic reviews and evidence synthesis: Resources beyond the health sciences. College & Research Libraries News, 79(5), 248.
Bramer, W. M., Rethlefsen, M. L., Mast, F., & Kleijnen, J. (2018). Evaluation of a new method for librarian‐mediated literature searches for systematic reviews. Research synthesis methods, 9(4), 510-520.
Morris, M., Boruff, J. T., & Gore, G. C. (2016). Scoping reviews: establishing the role of the librarian. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 104(4), 346.
Ross-White, A. (2016). Librarian Involvement in Systematic Reviews at Queen’s University: An Environmental Scan. Journal of the Canadian Health Libraries Association/Journal de l'Association des bibliothèques de la santé du Canada, 37(2).
Foster, M. J. (2015). Overview of the role of librarians in systematic reviews: From expert search to project manager.
Cooper, I. D., & Crum, J. A. (2013). New activities and changing roles of health sciences librarians: a systematic review, 1990–2012. Journal of the Medical Library Association: JMLA, 101(4), 268.
Khan, K. S., Kunz, R., Kleijnen, J., & Antes, G. (2003). Five steps to conducting a systematic review. Journal of the royal society of medicine, 96(3), 118-121.
University of the Western Cape,
Robert Sobukwe Road,
Tel: 021 959 2946