10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Doing a systematic review in health sciences Translated title: La revisión sistemática en las ciencias de la salud

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          ABSTRACT This paper aims to provide a practical, summarized, and clear guide of steps to carry out a systematic review and is aimed at researchers in the field of Health Sciences. The review process runs from the initial questioning to the final report, providing useful information on tools available at each stage. Systematic review and meta-analysis are currently the evidence synthesis tools of the highest level of scientific quality. They are in themselves a secondary research methodology, whose objective is to locate, evaluate, and synthesize the best evidence by selecting original papers or quality primary publications. The procedure to achieve the objective is presented as a sequential and systematized process, in stages, following the transparency principle, so as to ensure its replicability.

          Translated abstract

          RESUMEN Este trabajo pretende proporcionar una guía práctica, resumida y clara de los pasos para llevar a cabo una revisión sistemática y está dirigido a los investigadores del ámbito de las ciencias de la salud. El proceso de revisión se desarrolla desde el planteamiento inicial de la pregunta hasta la elaboración del informe final, proporcionando información útil sobre herramientas disponibles en cada etapa. La revisión sistemática y el metaanálisis son actualmente las herramientas de síntesis de evidencia de más alto nivel de calidad científica. Constituyen en sí mismas una metodología de investigación secundaria, cuyo objetivo es localizar, valorar y sintetizar la mejor evidencia seleccionando los trabajos originales o publicaciones primarias de calidad. El procedimiento para alcanzar el objetivo se plantea como un proceso secuencial y sistematizado, por etapas, siguiendo el principio de transparencia, de modo que se asegure su replicabilidad.

          Related collections

          Most cited references11

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found

          How to Do a Systematic Review: A Best Practice Guide for Conducting and Reporting Narrative Reviews, Meta-Analyses, and Meta-Syntheses

          Systematic reviews are characterized by a methodical and replicable methodology and presentation. They involve a comprehensive search to locate all relevant published and unpublished work on a subject; a systematic integration of search results; and a critique of the extent, nature, and quality of evidence in relation to a particular research question. The best reviews synthesize studies to draw broad theoretical conclusions about what a literature means, linking theory to evidence and evidence to theory. This guide describes how to plan, conduct, organize, and present a systematic review of quantitative (meta-analysis) or qualitative (narrative review, meta-synthesis) information. We outline core standards and principles and describe commonly encountered problems. Although this guide targets psychological scientists, its high level of abstraction makes it potentially relevant to any subject area or discipline. We argue that systematic reviews are a key methodology for clarifying whether and how research findings replicate and for explaining possible inconsistencies, and we call for researchers to conduct systematic reviews to help elucidate whether there is a replication crisis.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Journal article reporting standards for quantitative research in psychology: The APA Publications and Communications Board task force report.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Standards on how to develop and report systematic reviews in Psychology and Health

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                clinsa
                Clínica y Salud
                Clínica y Salud
                Colegio Oficial de la Psicología de Madrid (Madrid, Madrid, Spain )
                1130-5274
                2174-0550
                2020
                : 31
                : 2
                : 77-83
                Affiliations
                [02] Balearic Islands orgnameBalearic Islands Health Research Institute (IdISBa) Spain
                [01] Balearic Islands orgnameUniversity of the Balearic Islands Spain
                Article
                S1130-52742020000200002 S1130-5274(20)03100200002
                10.5093/clysa2020a15
                e6d3b00c-4681-4738-8c5b-3ae54dd10094

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

                History
                : 24 April 2020
                : 06 April 2020
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 0, Equations: 0, References: 25, Pages: 7
                Product

                SciELO Spain

                Categories
                Research Article

                Ciencias de la salud,Revisión sistemática,Health sciences,Research,Guide,Investigación,Evidencia,Systematic review,Guía,Metaanálisis,Evidence,Meta-analysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article