Systematic reviews provide high-quality critical appraisal and evidence-based summaries on a topic. They represent a key resource for time-pressured clinicians as they strive to deliver better patient care. Robust methodology and adhering to rigorous standards forms the foundation of this type of article. As such, writing a systematic review can prove a great challenge. This article aims to provide an overview of the methodology as well as certain tips and tricks which will help the surgeon when taking on such a project.
HemingwayPBreretonN. What is a systematic review?2nd ed.London: Hayward Medical Communications, 2009.
2.
WrightRWBrandRADunnW. How to write a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res2007; 455: 23–29.
3.
PhillipsBBallCSackettD. Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine. Levels of evidence, www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=1025 (accessed 15 March 2016).
4.
National Health Service. NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Undertaking systematic reviews of research on effectiveness: CRD’s guidance for those carrying out or commissioning reviews. CRD Report 4. York: University of York, 2001.
5.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJ. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA statement. Int J Surg2010; 8: 336–341.
6.
RaiBPShelleyMColesB. Surgical management for upper urinary tract transitional cell carcinoma (UUT-TCC): A systematic review. BJU Int2012; 110: 1426–1435.
7.
DindoDDemartinesNClavienPA. Classification of surgical complications: A new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg2004; 240: 205–213.
