Skip to Main Content

Reviewing the literature

Planning

Spending time on planning the review can save time in the long run.

Before beginning, check if a review on the topic has already been conducted or being planned.

Developing the review question is the first step of planning a review, and will depend on the aims of the review. There may be sub-questions as well. Frameworks can help develop a clear and focused question.

A protocol is the plan of how the review will be conducted and is developed at the start of the review. They may be registered or published.

Before beginning a review, check if a review on the chosen topic or question has already been conducted or is being planned. The following sources can be used to search for existing reviews or review protocols.

Material on the effects of interventions in health care. Hosted on the Wiley InterScience platform. The Library comprises the following databases: The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews; Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness; The Cochrane Controlled Trials Register. The NHS Economic Evaluation database. The Cochrane Database of Methodology Reviews. Health Technology Assessment Database.

Resources for evidence-based research including Best Practice information sheets, systematic reviews and electronic journals and conference papers.

Registers systematic, rapid, and umbrella reviews (no scoping reviews).

A collection of published reviews and protocols by the Campbell Collaboration, which focuses on reviews outside of clinical medicine.

An open community of stakeholders working towards a sustainable global environment and the conservation of biodiversity. CEE seeks to promote and deliver evidence syntheses on issues of greatest concern to environmental policy and practice as a public service.

The following frameworks are often used in reviews to develop the question.

PICO:

Is usually used for very specific questions about interventions. Other variations may include a timeframe or study type as additional elements. 

PCC:

Is often used for broader questions such as those in scoping reviews. 

SPIDER: 

Is often used for qualitative questions that focus on the study design. 

A protocol is the plan of how the review will be conducted and is developed at the beginning of the review. It generally has: 

  • An introduction: Includes the review aims and objectives 
  • The search process: Including a search strategy and where evidence will be searched for 
  • The selection process: The inclusion and exclusion criteria, how disagreements will be resolved  
  • The charting process: How data will be extracted and analysed 

PRISMA-P is a checklist for reporting systematic review protocols, and can be adapted for scoping review protocols. It can be used to ensure you have reported on everything required for the protocol.

Registration

Protocols may be published in a journal or registered. The following websites are often used to register or publish protocols.

Registers systematic, rapid, and umbrella reviews (no scoping reviews).

Resources for evidence-based research including Best Practice information sheets, systematic reviews and electronic journals and conference papers.

Figshare is a collaborative digital repository for Federation researchers, professional staff and Higher Degree by Research students to store, share and publish their digital files

A general pre-print repository by the Center for Open Science covering a wide range of disciplines.

Open Education Resource

For more information, the following PDF is the draft of an Open Education Resource currently under revision. The videos and activities are unavailable until the OER is published online. 

Key readings

Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., Stewart, L. A., & Prisma-P. Group. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic Reviews, 4(1), Article 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1    

Peters, M. D. J., Godfrey, C., McInerney, P., Khalil, H., Larsen, P., Marnie, C., Pollock, D., Tricco, A. C., & Munn, Z. (2022). Best practice guidance and reporting items for the development of scoping review protocols. JBI Evidence Synthesis, 20(4), 953–968. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-21-00242