Skip to Main Content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.

Systematic Reviews

Information on how to conduct systematic reviews in psychology and the health sciences

Systematic Review versus Literature Review Searches

Systematic Review

  Literature Review

Search strategies must be replicable

  • Document database names & platforms (Medline/Ovid, CINAHL/ EBSCO), search dates, all search terms & limits used in the methods section of a publication or in an appendix.
  • Informationists who create the search strategy often write the methods section.

Search strategies do not need to be replicable

  • Normally not published in the methods section.
  • Are less detailed when published.

Follow specific search methodologies that ensure comprehensive results

  • Search strategies are highly sensitive to find relevant articles.
  • Many databases are searched.
  • Other sources, such as ClinicalTrials.gov & handsearching, are used.

Searches vary in how comprehensive      they are

  • Search strategies may not be as comprehensive in:
    • search terms used
    • the number of resources that searched.

Require a significant time commitment

  • Because of the methodology of systematic reviews, they can take 18-24 months to complete, even with a team involved.

Take much less time

  • The time frame depends on the topic, what you are trying to achieve with the search, & thus how comprehensive the search needs to be, but it can be significantly shorter.

Typically retrieve high number of results

  • Searches produce large numbers of search results because of the sensitivity of an SR search strategy.
  • Citations are excluded after manual review.

Retrieve lower number of results

  • These searches retrieve fewer results than SR search strategies because they are more specific than sensitive.
  • A manual review may not be necessary.

Require a team

  • Generally, two or more individuals independently review each article separately to determine whether it meets inclusion criteria.
  • Conflicts are solved by a third party. 

Can be completed by individuals

  • Results do not need to be reviewed for inclusion or exclusion by multiple individuals.

Protocol-driven

  • Answers a specific clinical question.
  • Has specific inclusion & exclusion criteria.
  • Uses methods for assessing bias.

Does not use a protocol

 

Adapted from Penn State Hershey