A systematic review: principles and steps
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58423/2786-6742/2022-2-47-53Keywords:
review types, systematic review, PRISMA, PICO, agriculture, сільське господарствоAbstract
There has been an explosion of literature information over the last decades along with a large increasing primary research publication. On the one hand, this process has been accompanied by an expansion in the range of different methodological approaches and reviews. The first aim of this publication is to give a short overview regarding the main differences among the reviews, then secondly the author focuses on the frequently used method, the so-called systematic review because there are significant inconsistences and variabilities how to properly conduct and report a systematic review and it can lead to misleading results. The systematic review has been performed in various and popular fields like nursing, sport, medicine, health care, psychologic, anaesthesiology. The third aim this publication is to provide a comprehensive summary regarding how to conduct and implement a systematic review. Results show that it is necessary and useful to implement a PRISMA checklist and a PICO flow chart. In this publication the second part connect to a hot topic namely agriculture. In the case of agriculture, the literature of systematic reviews can also be found however these reviews focus on a little part of economic and social matters as smart agriculture, health and safety in agriculture works and landscape and there are only a few literatures examining other aspect of agriculture like productivity and efficiency. Moreover, there is a gap in literature of systematic reviews examine the environmental aspect. The last objective, a longer-term aim, will be to report and conduct a systematic literature review regarding relevant topic in agriculture I connection with climate change, productivity and efficiency and will contribute the existing literature in this field.
References
Sutton, A., Clowes, M., Preston, L. and Booth, A. (2019). Meeting the Review Family: Exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. Health information and libraries journal, 2019-09, Vol.36 (3), p.202-222. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/hir.12276
What is Meta-Analysis? https://study.com/learn/lesson/meta-analysis-methods-examples.html
What type of review is right for you? Cornell University Library. Available from: https://www.library.cornell.edu/sites/default/files/SystematicReview_DecisionTreeMethodologies_v3.pdf
Booth, A. (2016). Review Ready Reckoner - Assessment Tool (RRRsAT). Available from: https://guides.temple.edu/ld.php?content_id=58184158
Cochrane. Background to Systematic Reviews. Available from: https://ph.cochrane.org/sites/ph.cochrane.org/files/public/uploads/Unit_One.pdf
CRD (2001). Undertaking Systematic Reviews of Research on Effectiveness. CRD’s Guidance for those Carrying Out or Commissioning Reviews. CRD Report Number 4 (2nd Edition). NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York. March 2001.
Ahn, E.J. and Kang, H. (2018). Introduction to systematic review and meta-analysis. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2018 April; 71(2). 103–112. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2018.71.2.103
Stannard, D. (2022). A Systematic Approach to Systematic Reviews. AORN journal February 2022. DOI: 10.1002/aorn.13610 Association of periOperative Registered Nurses DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/aorn.13610
Yannascoli, S.M., Schenker, M.L., Carey, J.L., Ahn, J., Baldwin, K.D. (2013). How to Write a Systematic Review: A Step-by-Step Guide. UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA ORTHOPAEDIC JOURNAL. Vo. 23. 64-69.
Page M.J., McKenzie J.E., Bossuyt, P.M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T.C., Mulrow, C.D. (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. PLoS Med 18(3): e1003583. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003583
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D.G. (2009). Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. The PRISMA Statement. PLoS Medicine. Vol (6) Issue 7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Danson, B. (2007). Seven steps to systematic literature reviews. Medical Device and Diagnostic Industry News Products and Suppliers. Available from: https://www.academia.edu/8302757/ Seven_Steps_to_Systematic_Literature_Reviews?msclkid=9cd38392b00611ec9ad67ea5ea568b21
Khan, K.S. - Kunz, R. - Kleijnen, J. - Antes, G. (2003). Five steps to conducting a systematic review. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 2003 Mar; 96(3), pp. 118–121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1258/jrsm.96.3.118
Livinski, A., Joubert, D., Terry, N. (2015). Undertaking a Systematic Review: What You Need to Know. National Institute of Health. Available from: https://www.nihlibrary.nih.gov/sites/ default/files/SR_Training_oct2015.pdf?msclkid=9cd48ae7b00611ecbcb02442fd08ef3e
European Union priorities 2019-2024. Available from: https://european-union.europa.eu/priorities-and-actions/eu-priorities_en
The new common agricultural policy: 2023-27. Available from: https://ec.europa.eu/info/food-farming-fisheries/key-policies/common-agricultural-policy/new-cap-2023-27_en
Fugazza, D., Aletti, G., Bertoni, D., Cavicchioli, D. (2022). Farmland use data and remote sensing for ex-post assessment of CAP environmental performances: An application to soil quality dynamics in Lombardy. Remote Sensing Applications Society and Environment 26(1).100723. DOI: 10.1016/j.rsase.2022.100723 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rsase.2022.100723
Tzemi, D., Mennig, P. (2022). Effect of agri-environment schemes (2007–2014) on groundwater quality; spatial analysis in Bavaria, Germany. Journal of Rural Studies 91(1):136-147 DOI: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2022.03.006 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2022.03.006
Mills, J., Chiswell, H., Gaskell, P., Courtney, P., Brockett, B., Cusworth, G., Lobley, M. (2020). Developing Farm-Level Social Indicators for Agri-Environment Schemes: A Focus on the Agents of Change. Sustainability 13(7820) DOI: 10.3390/su13147820 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su13147820
Balogh, J.M. –Jámbor, A. (2020). Az agrárkereskedelem környezeti hatásainak vizsgálata szisztematikus szakirodalmi áttekintés segítségével. Közgazdasági Szemle, LXVII. évf., 2020. szeptember, 930–949.o. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18414/KSZ.2020.9.930
Nagy, Zs. – Baráth, L. (2021). An examination of the Effect of Participation in Agri-Environmental Schemes (AES) on farms’ applied technology and technical efficiency ICEBM2021 Conference, 12 november 2021, Cluj-Napoca, Romania
Barath, L. –Bakucs, Z.L. –Nagy, Zs. – Fertő, I. (2021). DIFFERENCES IN EFFICIENCY AND PRODUCTIVITY BETWEEN CONVENTIONAL AND ORGANIC FARMS: THE CASE OF HUNGARIAN CEREAL OILSEED AND PROTEIN (COP) CROP PRODUCING FARMS (2010-2015). 13 th International Conference of J. Selye University Economics Section 31 https://doi.org/10.36007/4119.2022.031 DOI: https://doi.org/10.36007/4119.2022.031
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Zsuzsanna Nagy
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons CC BY-NC License.
