Synthesis Review Toolkit Introduction: All Resources

Resources from Stage 2: Developing the Search

Step 1: What to Search

• Search strategy worksheet (Word document; University of Ottawa)
• Tip Sheet - Boolean Search Tips from McGill University

Organizing Terminology

• Pubvenn - Website with tool to help you practice boolean logic
• Database reference guide - A quick reference page which indicates database-specific information (e.g., truncating in OVID vs CINAHL)
• Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: a systematic review of current approaches: O’Mara-Eves, A., Thomas, J., McNaught, J., Miwa, M., & Ananiadou, S. (2015). Systematic reviews, 4(1).

Search Filters

• Tutorial from Yale on Filters and Hedges
• Choosing and using methodological search filters: searchers' views: Beale, S., Duffy, S., Glanville, J., Lefebvre, C., Wright, D., McCool, R., ... & Smith, L. (2014). Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31(2), 133-147.
• Reporting methodological search filter performance comparisons: a literature review: Harbour, J., Fraser, C., Lefebvre, C., Glanville, J., Beale, S., Boachie, C., ... & Smith, L. (2014). Health Information & Libraries Journal, 31(3), 176-194.
• Retrieving randomized controlled trials from medline: a comparison of 38 published search filters. McKibbon, K. A., Wilczynski, N. L., & Haynes, R. B. (2009). Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(3), 187-202.

Step 2: Where to Search

Grey Literature

•  Grey Matters: a practical tool for searching health-related grey literature.

Hand Searching

• A free-of-charge online course is offered by the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Group US Project (CEVG@US Project), which is funded by the National Eye Institute (NEI): Handsearching: Identifying and Classifying Controlled Trial Reports

Searching Trial Registries

• Searching ClinicalTrials.gov and the international clinical trials registry platform to inform systematic reviews: What are the optimal search approaches?*: Glanville, J. M., M.Sc, Duffy, S., PgDip, McCool, R., B.Sc, & Varley, D., M.Sc. (2014). Journal of the Medical Library Association, 102(3), 177-83.

Contacting Authors

• Contacting of authors by systematic reviewers: protocol for a cross-sectional study and a survey. Reynders, R. M., Ladu, L., & Di Girolamo, N. (2017). Systematic reviews, 6(1), 249.

Step 3: How to Create a Search Strategy

• Checklist for Reviewing Search Strategies (University of Newcastle)
• Search Strategy Example from Scoping Review. From the article: Social media use among patients and caregivers: a scoping review. Hamm, M. et al. (2013). BMJ open, 3<(5), e002819.
• Document on Saving Searches and Articles: The document provided by Deakin University informs how to save searches and set alerts on a variety of databases

Tools for Finding Syntax and Subject Headings for Common Databases

• Systematic Review Accelerator
• Yale MeSH Analyzer

Validating the Search

• PRESS peer review of electronic search strategies: 2015 guideline statement. McGowan, J., Sampson, M., Salzwedel, D. M., Cogo, E., Foerster, V., & Lefebvre, C. (2016). Journal of clinical epidemiology, 75, 40-46.
• PRESS – Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies: 2015 Guideline Explanation and Elaboration (PRESS E&E). Ottawa: CADTH; 2016 Jan.

Action: Run your Search

• Search Strategy Example from Scoping Review. From the article: Social media use among patients and caregivers: a scoping review. Hamm, M. et al. (2013). BMJ open, 3 (5), e002819.
• Methods for documenting systematic review searches: a discussion of common issues: Rader, T., Mann, M., Stansfield, C., Cooper, C., & Sampson, M. (2014). Research synthesis methods, 5(2), 98-115.

Training for Citation Management Tools

• EndNote and EndNote basic (University of Saskatchewan Guide)
• Mendeley (YouTube channel)
• Mendeley (University of Saskatchewan Guide)
• Zotero (YouTube channel)
• Zotoro (University of Saskatchewan Guide)

Resources from Stage 3: Screening

Step 1: How to Plan Screening Process

• Booth et al. (2016) Assessing the evidence base (chapter 7). In Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review. Los Angeles : Sage.
• Cochrane Handbook, Chapter 4, section 4.6
• Conduct and reporting standards for a Campbell Collaboration Reviews

Step 2: How to Screen

• Managing and Coding References for Systematic Reviews and Scoping Reviews in EndNote, Medical Reference Services Quarterly: Micah D. J. Peters (2017) 36:1, 19-31, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02763869.2017.1259891

Step 3: How to Report Screening Process

• PRISMA's Flow Diagram Generator
• The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gøtzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P., ... & Moher, D. (2009). PLoS medicine, 6(7), e1000100.
• Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., ... & Stewart, L. A. (2015). Systematic Reviews, 4(1), 1.
• The PRISMA extension statement for reporting of systematic reviews incorporating network meta-analyses of health care interventions: checklist and explanations: Hutton, B., Salanti, G., Caldwell, D. M., Chaimani, A., Schmid, C. H., Cameron, C., ... & Mulrow, C. (2015). Annals of internal medicine, 162(11), 777-784.

Resources from Stage 4: Extracting Data

Step 1: How to Plan Data Extraction

• Cochrane Reviews' Information on Data Extraction: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 6.3 (updated February 2022). Cochrane, 2022. Note: A checklist is provided in Chapter 5 of items to consider in data extraction.
• Choice of data extraction tools for systematic reviews depends on resources and review complexity: Elamin, M. B. et al. (2009). Journal of clinical epidemiology, 62(5), 506-510.

Data extraction forms that may be able to be adapted to your review (provided by the University of Ottawa):

• Data extraction form example (suitable for small-scale literature review of a few dozen studies)
• Data extraction form example Dalhousie University Library Guide (uncoded & used to extract fine-detail/many variables)

Resources from Stage 5: Evaluating Data

Step 1: How to Identify Appraisal Criteria

• University of Southern Australia's webpage: List of Critical Appraisal Tools
• Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) offers a range of critical appraisal tools for health research
• A road map for how to select a common critical appraisal tool in nursing: Critical Appraisal Tools and Reporting Guidelines for Evidence‐Based Practice: Buccheri, R. K., & Sharifi, C. (2017). Worldviews on Evidence-based Nursing, 14(6), 463-472.

Step 2: How to Assess Quality of Included Studies

• Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Ch 7 Assessing risk of bias in included studies.
• Hannes K. Chapter 4: Critical appraisal of qualitative research. In: Noyes J, Booth A, Hannes K, Harden A, Harris J, Lewin S, Lockwood C (editors), Supplementary Guidance for Inclusion of Qualitative Research in Cochrane Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 1 (updated August 2011). Cochrane Collaboration Qualitative Methods Group, 2011.

Step 3: Assessing the Confidence in Cumulative Evidence

• GRADE Resources (from Cochrane; Handbook, software, introduction to using GRADE, common errors in GRADE)
• GRADE-CERQual: An introduction for qualitative evidence synthesis [Cochrane webinar)
• GRADE-CERQual: Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings–paper 6: how to assess relevance of the data. Noyes, J., Booth, A., Lewin, S., Carlsen, B., Glenton, C., Colvin, C. J., ... & Tunςalp, Ö. (2018). Implementation Science, 13(1), 4.
• GRADE provides guidance for rating the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations in health care. A series of articles describing the GRADE approach were published in the Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (2011, Vol 64, Issue 4).
• GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction—GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables
• GRADE guidelines: 2. Framing the question and deciding on important outcomes
• GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence
• GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias)
• GRADE guidelines: 5. Rating the quality of evidence—publication bias
• GRADE guidelines 6. Rating the quality of evidence—imprecision
• GRADE guidelines: 7. Rating the quality of evidence—inconsistency
• GRADE guidelines: 8. Rating the quality of evidence—indirectness

Resources from Stage 6: Analysis & Synthesis

Step 1:

• Cochrane Handbook, Chapter 10 "Analyzing data and undertaking meta-analyses"
• Realist Synthesis, Rameses Training Materials (July 2013) by G Wong, G. Westthorp, R. Pawson & T. Greenhalgh. See Section 7.
• Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Levac, D., Colquhoun, H., & O'Brien, K. K. (2010). Implementation science, 5(1), 69.

All Resources from Stage 7: Writing & Publishing your Review

Step 1: How to Write your Review

Reporting standards:

• Equator Network - a repository of reporting guidelines for health sciences
• Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Checklist (PDF or DOC)
• Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions
• Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Reviewers Manual
• York University Centre for Reviews and Dissemination Guidance for Undertaking Systematic Reviews in Health Care (PDF or HTML)
• Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) Guidelines for Meta-Analyses and Systematic Reviews of Observational Studies (PDF)
• Meta-Analysis Reporting Standards (MARS) (PDF)
• Realist Syntheses and Meta-Narrative Review Reporting Standards from The RAMESES Project

Step 2: How to Publish your Review

• Guide on Predatory Publishers
• Making your publications open access: Resources to assist researchers and librarians. Dawson, D. (2013). College & Research Library News, 74(9), 473–476.
• Physician and Patient-oriented Open Access to Research (Webinar, 2018). Presented by Dr. John Willinksy, Professor, Graduate School of Education, Stanford University.

Open Access Repositories by Discipline

Full-publications

• Health & life sciences: PubMed Central (US; Canada's discontinued)
• Psychology, neuroscience, linguistics, computer science, philosophy, and biology: Cogprints
• Humanities: CORE

Preprints

• Social sciences: SocArXiv
• Agriculture: AgriXiv
• Physics, mathematics, computer science, quantitative biology, economics, finance, statistics: rXiv

Step 3: Where to Promote your Research

• Promotional Toolkit: Wiley's "one-stop shop for helping authors promote their work"

From the Wiley Network Blog:

• How to Judge the News Value of your Paper
• Using Altmetrics and Social Media for Research and Networking
• How to Promote your Research through Blogging