FAQs for Systematic and Scoping Reviews

Decisions about study inclusion, handling overlapping data, and using meta-analyses require subject matter expertise. These choices can significantly impact the validity of your review, its chances of publication, and, in the worst case, could lead to retraction.

We recommend seeking input from a peer or other content experts, and if needed, consulting a statistician or methodologist. The Biostatistics Collaboration Center (BCC) is a valuable resource for guidance on these methodological considerations. Once you determine how to handle and synthesize the data, you may need to update your protocol accordingly.

For additional guidance, refer to Cochrane Handbook Section 4.6: Selecting Studies.

Your team should use a validated tool or tools designed for specific study types to systematically assess the risk of bias within studies that meet your inclusion criteria after full-text screening. 

See the reporting research and evaluating studies guide for additional tools.

Selecting the appropriate risk of bias (ROB) tool requires careful research into the available options. Consider factors such as documentation and validation of the tool or tools, review objectives, your target audience, journal requirements, and your team’s content expertise when choosing your ROB tool.

Compare and evaluate different tools to identify the one that best aligns with your review's goals and study types. A search of related reviews may also generate tools of interest. 

Galter Library does not provide direct assistance with the selection of ROB tools or analyzing Risk of Bias (ROB) for included studies.  The selection of an appropriate ROB tool depends on content expertise, while librarian expertise lies in search strategy development and processes.

See our Reporting Research and Evaluating Studies GalterGuide or attend a Conducting a Systematic Review: Part 2 - Tools & Resources class (class recording available on class page) for tips and tools related to ROB.

Consider reaching out to the Biostatistics Collaboration Center (BCC), which supports members of Feinberg and can collaborate with investigators on all aspects of research including study design, data capture, statistical analysis and interpretation of results.

There are various methods for synthesizing data extracted during full text screening. These methods include meta-analysis, narrative synthesis, and thematic synthesis.

Your choice of synthesis depends on many factors such as data types, variability among included studies, PICO or PCC, and your review's objectives.

See the following resource for more information on data synthesis:

• FSM's Biostatistics Collaboration Center
• Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (see Chapter 12: Synthesizing and presenting findings using other methods)

Conducting a meta-analysis requires advanced statistical techniques and a solid understanding of data synthesis, including effect size calculations and data pooling. To ensure accuracy and reliability, it's essential to carefully plan your meta-analysis from the beginning of your review.

We strongly recommend consulting a statistician early in the process to help design the analysis, assess data quality, and interpret the results appropriately. If you are affiliated with Feinberg, you can schedule a free initial consultation with the Biostatistics Collaboration Center.

Additional sources:

Hansen, Christopher, et al. “How to Conduct a Meta-Analysis in Eight Steps: A Practical Guide.” Management Review Quarterly, vol. 72, no. 1, 2022, pp. 1–19, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-021-00247-4.

While Galter Library does not provide direct assistance with conducting a meta-analysis, Galter librarians can support you by developing and refining the systematic search strategies needed for your meta-analysis.