Department of Otorhinolaryngology, University Hospital Split, Split, Croatia.
Institute for Research in Operative Medicine (IFOM), Witten/Herdecke University, Cologne, Germany.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019 Nov 4;19(1):203. doi: 10.1186/s12874-019-0855-0.
A standard or consensus definition of a systematic review does not exist. Therefore, if there is no definition about a systematic review in secondary studies that analyse them or the definition is too broad, inappropriate studies might be included in such evidence synthesis. The aim of this study was to analyse the definition of a systematic review (SR) in health care literature, elements of the definitions that are used and to propose a starting point for an explicit and non-ambiguous SR definition.
We included overviews of systematic reviews (OSRs), meta-epidemiological studies and epidemiology textbooks. We extracted the definitions of SRs, as well as the inclusion and exclusion criteria that could indicate which definition of a SR the authors used. We extracted individual elements of SR definitions, categorised and quantified them.
Among the 535 analysed sources of information, 188 (35%) provided a definition of a SR. The most commonly used reference points for the definitions of SRs were Cochrane and the PRISMA statement. We found 188 different elements of SR definitions and divided them into 14 categories. The highest number of SR definition elements was found in categories related to searching (N = 51), analysis/synthesis (N = 23), overall methods (N = 22), quality/bias/appraisal/validity (N = 22) and aim/question (N = 13). The same five categories were also the most commonly used combination of categories in the SR definitions.
Currently used definitions of SRs are vague and ambiguous, often using terms such as clear, explicit and systematic, without further elaboration. In this manuscript we propose a more specific definition of a systematic review, with the ultimate aim of motivating the research community to establish a clear and unambiguous definition of this type of research.
目前并不存在系统综述的标准或共识定义。因此，如果二次研究中分析系统综述的研究没有关于系统综述的定义，或者定义过于宽泛，那么可能会纳入不恰当的研究。本研究旨在分析卫生保健文献中系统综述的定义、定义中使用的要素，并提出明确和不含糊的系统综述定义的起点。
我们纳入了系统综述概述、元流行病学研究和流行病学教科书。我们提取了系统综述的定义，以及可能表明作者使用的系统综述定义的纳入和排除标准。我们提取了系统综述定义的各个要素，并对其进行了分类和量化。
在分析的 535 个信息来源中，有 188 个（35%）提供了系统综述的定义。系统综述定义最常参考的是 Cochrane 和 PRISMA 声明。我们发现了 188 个不同的系统综述定义要素，并将其分为 14 类。在与检索（N=51）、分析/综合（N=23）、总体方法（N=22）、质量/偏倚/评估/有效性（N=22）和目的/问题（N=13）相关的类别中发现了最多的系统综述定义要素。同样的五个类别也是系统综述定义中最常用的组合类别。
目前使用的系统综述定义较为模糊和含糊，通常使用明确、清晰和系统等术语，而没有进一步的阐述。在本文中，我们提出了一个更具体的系统综述定义，最终目的是促使研究界为这种类型的研究建立一个明确和不含糊的定义。
