Need to contact the Library's Research Support?
Call
+61 7 4631 2589
1800 063 632 (free call within Australia)
Virtual Help Desk (Zoom)
There are many different types of reviews that belong to the family of systematic reviews (Sutton et al., 2019). These include systematic reviews, systematic literature reviews, scoping reviews, rapid reviews, systematic quantitative literature reviews, and many more. The common theme is that they are systematic and follow a structured process.
Search for manuals or articles that provide the framework for undertaking specific types of systematic reviews. Two of the frameworks available include Cochrane and Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) - these frameworks can be used and adapted to a broad range of systematic reviews.
Note that at UniSQ, an assessment or research task of a "Systematic Literature Review" may be set. This type of review would follow the same steps as a systematic review, but recognises the limitations that an individual working on such a review has, such as not having a team, the reduced time limits of an assessment period, and reduction in the number of resources that can be assessed. Some guides call also call this type of review a "Systematised Review" (Grant & Booth, 2009). Clarify with your tutor or supervisor which type of review you are expected to complete.
There are several important differences between a systematic, and a narrative literature review, such as inclusion of a protocol and evaluation of study quality.
See the table below from Lynn Kysh's poster presentation on the key differences, link to the full download is provided below.
| Systematic Review | Literature Review | |
| Definition | High-level overview of primary research on a focused question that identifies, selects, synthesizes, and appraises all high quality research evidence relevant to that question | Qualitatively summarizes evidence on a topic using informal or subjective methods to collect and interpret studies |
| Goals | Answers a focused clinical question Eliminate bias |
Provide summary or overview of topic |
| Question | Clearly defined and answerable clinical question Recommend using PICO as a guide |
Can be a general topic or a specific question |
| Components | Pre-specified eligibility criteria Systematic search strategy Assessment of the validity of findings Interpretation and presentation of results Reference list |
Introduction Methods Discussion Conclusion Reference list |
| Number of authors | Three or more | One or more |
| Timeline | Months to years | Weeks to months |
| Requirements | Thorough knowledge of topic Perform searches of all relevant databases Statistical analysis resources (for meta-analysis) |
Understanding of topic Perform searches of one or more databases |
| Value | Connects practicing clinicians to high quality evidence Supports evidence-based practice |
Provides summary of literature on the topic |
The following are just some of the systematic type of reviews that you might decide to do:
| Systematic review (SR) | Has a specific research question; requires a team of people including at least 2 reviewers to reduce the risk of bias; has a Protocol registered prior to undertaking the review; may include a meta analysis and can take months to complete. |
| Systematic literature review (SLR) | May have a research question or broader focus on a topic; borrows from the same systematic approach that a Systematic Review has, but can be mostly undertaken by an individual (it should still include at least 2 reviewers to reduce the risk of bias); may be guided by a Protocol but the Protocol might not be registered; and can usually be done in a shorter timeframe than a full Systematic Review. |
| Systematic Quantitative Literature Review (SQLR) | This highly publishable type of review is differentiated by the production of a database developed by the researcher that tracks the development of conversations about the topic across time and geography. It is an effective way to develop expertise with an unfamiliar area of research. See here for more details. |
| Scoping review | Has a broader research question; explores what exists in the literature on the topic and identifies gaps; See Chapter 11 of JBI Manual for more details. |
| Rapid review | A systematic review undertaken in a shorter timeframe; usually used to inform policy; many frameworks available - an example is the Cochrane Rapid Review Methods Group guide. |
| Umbrella review | A systematic review of existing reviews; See Chapter 10 of the JBI Manual for more details. |
The JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis provides authors with a guide to conducting and writing up a range of systematic type of reviews. Chapter 1 provides an overview and the other chapters focus on specific type of reviews eg Chapter 11 Scoping Reviews.
A Cochrane Review is a systematic review of research in health care and health policy that is published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. There are different types of Cochrane Reviews including intervention, prognosis, qualitative evidence syntheses, methodology, overviews, rapid and prototype review. Detailed guidance is available on specific types of Cochrane Review - for example, Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group guidelines.
The purpose of the What Works Clearinghouse is to review and summarize the quality of existing research in educational programs, products, practices, and policies. The WWC refines its procedures and standards based on improvements in education research and research synthesis methods. The Handbook is a detailed resource for Education specific reviews.