
pmid: 25872851
Despite the increasing popularity of systematic reviews, there remains a need to ensure that they are conducted rigorously and provide an objective critical summary of research findings. The strength of a systematic review is its rigorous methodological approach to interrogating a body of literature. Both authors and readers should be familiar with the methodology used to conduct and evaluate systematic reviews. By way of introduction, this article explains and explores the steps that make up the systematic review process.
Evidence-Based Medicine, meta-synthesis, review protocol, Critical appraisal, data extraction, narrative synthesis, Social and Behavioral Sciences, meta-analysis, systematic review, Medicine and Health Sciences, Humans, Nursing Care, Delivery of Health Care
Evidence-Based Medicine, meta-synthesis, review protocol, Critical appraisal, data extraction, narrative synthesis, Social and Behavioral Sciences, meta-analysis, systematic review, Medicine and Health Sciences, Humans, Nursing Care, Delivery of Health Care
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 7 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
