- 20 Apr 2020, 10:19
#4047
Systematic reviews systematically summarize or statistically combine the currently available knowledge. They are to be done as any other research study with a detailed protocol and eligibility criteria defined a-priori (before the systematic review is conducted).
Systematic reviews often concentrate on narrow and specific clinical questions but in-depth, has a comprehensive source of information, criteria-based selection and a critical appraisal and synthesis of the evidence. But on the other hand, narrative reviews usually address a wide range of questions, cites the literature specifically and provides a qualitative summary.
Mainly, systematic review only summarizes the evidence, but narrative reviews generally mix evidence with opinion.
poojitha wrote: ↑19 Apr 2020, 14:27 How to differentiate a systematic review from narrative review?Systematic reviews have the strength of authority over narrative review in the field of evidence-based medicine. Hence, for a reader to be able to come to a conclusion based on a review, it is important to understand this basic but vital difference.
Systematic reviews systematically summarize or statistically combine the currently available knowledge. They are to be done as any other research study with a detailed protocol and eligibility criteria defined a-priori (before the systematic review is conducted).
Systematic reviews often concentrate on narrow and specific clinical questions but in-depth, has a comprehensive source of information, criteria-based selection and a critical appraisal and synthesis of the evidence. But on the other hand, narrative reviews usually address a wide range of questions, cites the literature specifically and provides a qualitative summary.
Mainly, systematic review only summarizes the evidence, but narrative reviews generally mix evidence with opinion.