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.
Joel Gagnier, Associate Professor in the department of Orthopedic Surgery and Epidemiology at the University of Michigan, discusses basic principles and types of systematic reviews, using data extraction tables, effect size, fixed and random effects, and using a forest plot.
Call Number: UCF ONLINE General Collection -- GN11 2019
Systematic reviews study the findings of research already undertaken. They provide a reliable account of the state of current knowledge (the evidence base) on an issue by appraising and synthesizing the results of "existing research using explicit, accountable rigorous research methods". Systematic reviews developed out of a need to use research findings to help inform policy, practice, and individual decision-making and further research. To use research findings, we need to know what these findings are. What is the current evidence base? What do we know from research and how do we know it? Clarity of what is already known from research is thus the starting point for both using research findings and for planning new research.
Gopalakrishnan S, Ganeshkumar P. Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis: Understanding the Best Evidence in Primary Healthcare. J Family Med Prim Care. 2013 Jan;2(1):9-14. doi: 10.4103/2249-4863.109934. PMID: 24479036; PMCID: PMC3894019.