scientific content can be feasible. A few studies have evaluated the quality of review articles. Risk of bias across studies 15 Specify any assessment of risk of bias that may affect the cumulative evidence (such as publication bias, selective reporting within studies). Summary measures 13 State the principal summary measures (such as risk ratio, difference in means). In 1996 an international group that analyzed articles, demonstrated the aspects of review articles, and meta-analyses that had not complied with scientific criteria, and elaborated quorom (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses) statement which focused on meta-analyses of randomized controlled studies. Clinicians frequently benefit from review articles to update their knowledge in their field of specialization, and use these articles as a starting point for formulating guidelines., The institutions which provide financial support for further investigations resort to these reviews to reveal the need for these. Prisma statement: A 27-item checklist, title. Additional analyses 23 Give results of additional analyses, if done such as sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression (see item 16) Discussion Summary of evidence 24 Summarize the main findings, including the strength of evidence for each main outcome; consider their relevance to key groups (such.
It will be reasonable to fulfill the requirements of these items during preparation of a review article or a meta-analysis. Methods, protocol and registration 5 Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (such as a web address and, if available, provide registration information including the registration number. 9, the prisma statement elaborated to write a well-designed review articles contains a 27-item checklist. Though starting to write the review article promptly seems to be very alluring, the time you spend for the determination of important issues wont be a waste of time.
PDF On Apr 1, 2008, Dobri Atanassov Batovski and others published How to write a review article.
The fundamental rationale of writing a review article is to make a readable.
e/documents/rct_reg_e.pdf (accessed 19 May).
It is not uncommon.
Study characteristics 18 For each study, present characteristics for which data were extracted (such as study size, picos, follow-up period) and provide the citation. Later on this guideline was updated, and named as prisma (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). Murlow evaluated 50 review articles published write essay on caste groups in 1985, and 1986, and revealed that none of them had complied with clear-cut scientific criteria. Title 1 Identify the article as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both. In both of them detailed literature surveying is performed. Results, study selection 17 Give numbers of studies screened, assessed for eligibility, and included in the review, with reasons for exclusions at each stage, ideally with a flow diagram. Introduction, rationale 3 Explain the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known. Synthesis of outcomes 14 For each meta-analysis, explain methods of data use, and combination methods of study outcomes, and if done consistency measurements should be indicated (ie P test). Additional analyses 16 Describe methods of additional analyses (such as sensitivity or subgroup analyses, meta-regression if done, indicating which were pre-specified.