Review
The development of a question has the most significant impact on the conduct of any review.
The Family of Reviews
Types of reviews
Scoping reviews
Peters MDJ, Godfrey CM, Khalil H, et al. (2015) Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. International journal of evidence-based healthcare 13(3): 141–146.
Lockwood C, Borgess dos Santos K and Pap R (2019) Practical guidance for knowledge synthesis: Scoping Review Methods. Asian nursing research. DOI: 10.1016/j.anr.2019.11.002.
VIDEO: How to conduct and report a scoping review
Examples
Pandis N, Fleming PS, Katsaros C, et al. (2021) Dental Research Waste in Design, Analysis, and Reporting: A Scoping Review. Journal of dental research 100(3): 245–252.
Gomez-Rossi J, Hertrampf K, Abraham J, et al. (2020) Interventions to improve oral health of older people: A scoping review. Journal of dentistry 101: 103451.
Systematic reviews
Page MJ, Moher D, Bossuyt PM, et al. (2021) PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 372. British Medical Journal Publishing Group. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n160.
Tawfik GM, Dila KAS, Mohamed MYF, Tam DNH, Kien ND, Ahmed AM, et al. A step by step guide for conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis with simulation data. Trop Med Health. 2019;47:46.
What are systematic reviews video
VIDEO: Planning and protocol development for systematic reviews
Course: https://oli.cmu.edu/courses/systematic-reviews-and-meta-analysis-o-f/
Explanation: What is a meta-analysis and R code
Examples
Observational studies
Uribe SE, Innes N and Maldupa I (2021) The Global Prevalence Of Early Childhood Caries: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis Using the WHO Diagnostic Criteria. International journal of paediatric dentistry / the British Paedodontic Society [and] the International Association of Dentistry for Children. DOI: 10.1111/ipd.12783.
Intervention
Askar H, Krois J, Göstemeyer G, et al. (2020) Secondary caries risk of different adhesive strategies and restorative materials in permanent teeth: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Journal of dentistry: 103541.
Schwendicke F, Jäger AM, Paris S, et al. (2015) Treating pit-and-fissure caries: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Journal of dental research 94(4): 522–533.
Diagnostic
Uribe SE, Rojas LA and Rosas CF (2013) Accuracy of imaging methods for detection of bone tissue invasion in patients with oral squamous cell carcinoma. Dento maxillo facial radiology 42(6): 20120346.
Network meta-analysis
Askar H, Krois J, Göstemeyer G, et al. (2020) Secondary caries risk of different adhesive strategies and restorative materials in permanent teeth: Systematic review and network meta-analysis. Journal of dentistry: 103541.
Umbrella reviews
Fusar-Poli P and Radua J (2018) Ten simple rules for conducting umbrella reviews. Evidence-based mental health 21(3): 95–100.
Examples
Soares RC, da Rosa SV, Moysés ST, et al. (2020) Methods for prevention of early childhood caries: Overview of systematic reviews. International journal of paediatric dentistry. DOI: 10.1111/ipd.12766.
López NJ, Uribe SE and Martinez B (2015) Effect of periodontal treatment on preterm birth rate: a systematic review of meta-analyses. Periodontology 2000 67(1). Wiley Online Library: 87–130.
O’Sullivan JW, Muntinga T, Grigg S, et al. (2018) Prevalence and outcomes of incidental imaging findings: umbrella review. BMJ 361: k2387.
Classification
Types of reviews, read here
Why review?
Reviewing the literature is an essential initial step in any biomedical research project. It offers researchers a thorough understanding of the current knowledge on the topic and identifies gaps or areas for further investigation. Conducting a literature review before starting a new research project helps avoid duplicating research efforts, ensures the research is relevant and contributes to advancing the field. Moreover, a comprehensive literature review informs critical aspects of the research design, including the methodology, sampling strategy, and data analysis techniques.
By leveraging existing knowledge through a thorough literature review, researchers can develop more informed research questions, build on existing knowledge, and produce more impactful findings.
You can learn them for FREE using these courses:
Review observational studies
Tools for review/critical appraisal/study design/reporting
Reporting guidelines for main study types
Readings
Manuals
Articles
Devillé WL, Buntinx F, Bouter LM, et al. (2002) Conducting systematic reviews of diagnostic studies: didactic guidelines. BMC medical research methodology 2(1): 9.
Lockwood C, Borgess dos Santos K and Pap R (2019) Practical guidance for knowledge synthesis: Scoping Review Methods. Asian nursing research. DOI: 10.1016/j.anr.2019.11.002.
Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS medicine 6(7). Public Library of Science: e1000097.
Moher D, Shamseer L, Clarke M, et al. (2015) Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic reviews 4: 1.
Munn Z, Moola S, Lisy K, et al. (2015) Methodological guidance for systematic reviews of observational epidemiological studies reporting prevalence and cumulative incidence data. International journal of evidence-based healthcare 13(3): 147–153.
Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, et al. (2007) Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC medical research methodology 7(1): 10.
Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. (2000) Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA: the journal of the American Medical Association 283(15): 2008–2012.