Formulating Questions and Locating Primary Studies for Inclusion in Systematic Reviews

Abstract

Much time and effort are spent on designing primary research studies. Similar care must be given to planning systematic reviews. The review should be based on an important, well-focused question that is relevant to patient care. By formulating the question properly, the criteria that primary studies must meet to be included in the review become clear. These criteria, which comprise the types of persons involved, exposure, control group, outcomes, and study designs of interest, can then be refined so that they are clinically relevant, sensible, and workable. Inclusion criteria that are too narrow will limit the amount of data in the review, thereby increasing the risk for chance results and making the review less useful for the reader. Reviews should include studies whose designs offer the least biased answer to the question being asked. To maximize available data and reduce the risk for bias, as many relevant studies as possible need to be identified, regardless of publication status or language. Multiple overlapping search strategies should therefore be used and must be carefully planned. Strategies include searching the many electronic databases available (after careful consideration of which terms to enter), manually searching journals and conference proceedings, searching bibliographies of articles, searching existing registers of studies, and contacting companies or researchers. The time taken to formulate the question adequately and develop appropriate searches will increase the chance of producing a high-quality, meaningful review.

Effectiveness of Self-Management Training in Type 2 Diabetes

“…Titles of articles extracted by the search were reviewed for their relevance to the effectiveness of diabetes education, and if potentially relevant, the full-text article was retrieved. Because automated databases are incomplete (13)(14)(15), the following journals, believed to have the highest relevance, were searched manually: Diabetes Care, Diabetes Educator, Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice, Diabetologia, and Diabetic Medicine.…”

Self-Management Education for Adults With Type 2 Diabetes

“…We reviewed titles of articles extracted by the search for relevance to the efficacy of diabetes education, and we retrieved the full-text articles for those that were potentially relevant. Because automated databases are incomplete (19,20), we manually searched journals expected to have the highest relevance. These journals were: Diabetes Care, The Diabetes Educator, Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice, Diabetologia, and Diabetic Medicine.…”

Addressing Multimorbidity in Evidence Integration and Synthesis

“…The Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes and Study design formalism is often used to describe study eligibility criteria for reviews of interventions. 24 3. Engage the CPG workgroup to define the conditions that are most likely to lead to heterogeneity of treatment • The strengths and limitations of systematic reviews that are based on literature data.…”