A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES The expansion of evidence-based practice across sectors has lead to an increasing variety of review types. However, the diversity of terminology used means that the full potential of these review types may be lost amongst a confusion of indistinct and misapplied terms. The objective of this study is to provide descriptive insight into the most common types of reviews, with illustrative examples from health and health information domains. METHODS Following scoping searches, an examination was made of the vocabulary associated with the literature of review and synthesis (literary warrant). A simple analytical framework -- Search, AppraisaL, Synthesis and Analysis (SALSA) -- was used to examine the main review types. RESULTS Fourteen review types and associated methodologies were analysed against the SALSA framework, illustrating the inputs and processes of each review type. A description of the key characteristics is given, together with perceived strengths and weaknesses. A limited number of review types are currently utilized within the health information domain. CONCLUSIONS Few review types possess prescribed and explicit methodologies and many fall short of being mutually exclusive. Notwithstanding such limitations, this typology provides a valuable reference point for those commissioning, conducting, supporting or interpreting reviews, both within health information and the wider health care domain.

[1]  Michele Tarsilla Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions , 2010, Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation.

[2]  E. Tacconelli Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care , 2010 .

[3]  Alison Brettle,et al.  Systematic Reviews and Evidence Based Library and Information Practice , 2009 .

[4]  Ruth Wong,et al.  Applying findings from a systematic review of workplace-based e-learning: implications for health information professionals. , 2009, Health information and libraries journal.

[5]  Christine Urquhart,et al.  Bibliotherapy for mental health service users Part 1: a systematic review. , 2008, Health information and libraries journal.

[6]  Kalyani Ankem,et al.  Evaluation of method in systematic reviews and meta-analyses published in LIS , 2008 .

[7]  P. Doherty,et al.  Developing research capacity in health librarians: a review of the evidence. , 2008, Health information and libraries journal.

[8]  R. Ward,et al.  The attitudes of health care staff to information technology: a comprehensive review of the research literature. , 2008, Health information and libraries journal.

[9]  Cecelia M. Brown,et al.  The information trail of the 'Freshman 15'--a systematic review of a health myth within the research and popular literature. , 2008, Health information and libraries journal.

[10]  Steve Wheeler,et al.  Second Life: an overview of the potential of 3-D virtual worlds in medical and health education. , 2007, Health information and libraries journal.

[11]  Alison Brettle,et al.  Evaluating information skills training in health libraries: a systematic review. , 2007, Health information and libraries journal.

[12]  M. Grant The role of reflection in the library and information sector: a systematic review. , 2007, Health information and libraries journal.

[13]  K. Davies,et al.  The information-seeking behaviour of doctors: a review of the evidence. , 2007, Health information and libraries journal.

[14]  Krystal Harvey,et al.  The Cochrane Library and mother-to-child transmission of HIV: an umbrella review , 2007 .

[15]  Annette Swinkels,et al.  Two physiotherapists, one librarian and a systematic literature review: collaboration in action. , 2006, Health information and libraries journal.

[16]  Andrew Booth,et al.  "Brimful of STARLITE": toward standards for reporting literature searches. , 2006, Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA.

[17]  N. Wiebe,et al.  Effective Methods for Teaching Information Literacy Skills to Undergraduate Students: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis , 2006 .

[18]  Denise Koufogiannakis,et al.  Research in librarianship: issues to consider , 2006, Libr. Hi Tech.

[19]  Andrew Booth,et al.  Counting what counts: performance measurement and evidence‐based practice , 2006 .

[20]  G. Walton,et al.  Effective e-learning for health professionals and students--barriers and their solutions. A systematic review of the literature--findings from the HeXL project. , 2005, Health information and libraries journal.

[21]  Sandy Oliver,et al.  An Emerging Framework for Including Different Types of Evidence in Systematic Reviews for Public Policy , 2005 .

[22]  A. Weightman,et al.  The value and impact of information provided through library services for patient care: a systematic review. , 2005, Health Information and Libraries Journal.

[23]  J. Lind A treatise of the scurvy , 2004 .

[24]  G. Walton,et al.  Information overload within the health care system: a literature review. , 2004, Health information and libraries journal.

[25]  Christian Kay,et al.  The Oxford English Dictionary Online , 2004, Lit. Linguistic Comput..

[26]  Alison Brettle,et al.  Information skills training: a systematic review of the literature. , 2003, Health information and libraries journal.

[27]  Andrew Booth,et al.  Clear-cut?: facilitating health librarians to use information research in practice. , 2003, Health information and libraries journal.

[28]  C. Beverley,et al.  Clinical librarianship: a systematic review of the literature. , 2003, Health information and libraries journal.

[29]  A. Booth,et al.  The role of the information specialist in the systematic review process: a health information case study. , 2003, Health information and libraries journal.

[30]  L. Hedges,et al.  A Brief History of Research Synthesis , 2002, Evaluation & the health professions.

[31]  Andrew Booth Will health librarians and related information workers ever work together to create an international network , 2001 .

[32]  Stuart James,et al.  Oxford English Dictionary Online2000288Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford: Oxford University Press 2000. online database www.oed.com , 2000 .

[33]  Per Capita,et al.  About the authors , 1995, Machine Vision and Applications.

[34]  G H Guyatt,et al.  Users' guides to the medical literature. VI. How to use an overview. Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group. , 1994, JAMA.

[35]  C. Mulrow The medical review article: state of the science. , 1987, Annals of internal medicine.

[36]  Linda S. Lotto Qualitative Data Analysis: A Sourcebook of New Methods , 1986 .

[37]  Suzanne M. Shultz,et al.  Hospital Library Reference , 1982 .

[38]  Mls Robert E. Skinner Ba,et al.  Bibliographic Instruction in the Health Sciences , 1982 .

[39]  F B ROGERS,et al.  Medical Subject Headings , 1948, Nature.

[40]  D. Herron,et al.  Evidence Based Library and Information Practice , 2009 .

[41]  Akers,et al.  Systematic Reviews [ressource électronique]. CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care , 2009 .

[42]  Michelle Maden,et al.  Attitudes and barriers to critical appraisal facilitation among UK healthcare librarians. , 2008 .

[43]  Jennie Popay,et al.  Chapter 20: Qualitative research and Cochrane reviews , 2008 .

[44]  Kalyani Ankem,et al.  Use of information sources by cancer patients: results of a systematic review of the research literature , 2006, Inf. Res..

[45]  M. R. Harris The librarian's roles in the systematic review process: a case study. , 2005, Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA.

[46]  Gary D Byrd,et al.  Evaluating the effectiveness of clinical medical librarian programs: a systematic review of the literature. , 2004, Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA.

[47]  K. A. McKibbon,et al.  Evidence-based practice. , 1998, Bulletin of the Medical Library Association.

[48]  Deborah J. Cook,et al.  Systematic Reviews: Synthesis of Best Evidence for Health Care Decisions , 1998, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[49]  R. Burchfield Oxford English dictionary , 1982 .

[50]  J. Lind A Treatise on the scurvy : in three parts : containing an inquiry into the nature, causes, and cures of that disease : together with a critical and chronological view of what has been published on the subject , 1980 .

[51]  G. Smith,et al.  Medicines for the year 2000 , 1979 .