Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Mar 2;18(1):246.
doi: 10.1186/s12885-018-4163-6.

Systematic reviews and cancer research: a suggested stepwise approach

George A Kelley  1 , Kristi S Kelley  2
Affiliations

Systematic reviews and cancer research: a suggested stepwise approach

George A Kelley et al. BMC Cancer. .

Abstract

Systematic reviews, with or without meta-analysis, play an important role today in synthesizing cancer research and are frequently used to guide decision-making. However, there is now an increase in the number of systematic reviews on the same topic, thereby necessitating a systematic review of previous systematic reviews. With a focus on cancer, the purpose of this article is to provide a practical, stepwise approach for systematically reviewing the literature and publishing the results. This starts with the registration of a protocol for a systematic review of previous systematic reviews and ends with the publication of an original or updated systematic review, with or without meta-analysis, in a peer-reviewed journal. Future directions as well as potential limitations of the approach are also discussed. It is hoped that the stepwise approach presented in this article will be helpful to both producers and consumers of cancer-related systematic reviews and will contribute to the ultimate goal of preventing and treating cancer.

Keywords: Cancer; Guidelines; Meta-analysis; Methods; Systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Authors’ information

GAK has more than 20 years of successful experience in the design and conduct of all aspects of meta-analysis. With a unique background in applied biostatistics and meta-analysis, he has been an NIH-R01 funded principal investigator for approximately 20 years, with all funding aimed at conducting meta-analytic research. KSK has approximately 19 years of successful experience in conducting meta-analytic research in collaboration with GAK.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable. This is a review and guideline document.

Consent for publication

Not applicable. This is a review and guideline document.

Competing interests

The first author (GAK) serves as a Statistical Advisor for BMC Cancer. Both authors declare that they have no other competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Results of PubMed search for systematic reviews, with or without meta-analysis, in the field of cancer up to November 7, 2017
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Results of PubMed search for systematic reviews, with or without meta-analysis, limited to the journal BMC Cancer up to November 8, 2017
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Suggested stepwise approach for the systematic review process
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Davidoff F, Haynes B, Sackett D, Smith R. Evidence based medicine. BMJ. 1995;310(6987):1085–1086. doi: 10.1136/bmj.310.6987.1085. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sacks HS, Berrier J, Reitman D, Ancona-Berk VA, Chalmers TC. Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. N Engl J Med. 1987;316:450–455. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198702193160806. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Smith V, Devane D, Begley CM, Clarke M. Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2011;11(1):15. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-11-15. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Aromataris E, Fernandez R, Godfrey CM, Holly C, Khalil H, Tungpunkom P. Summarizing systematic reviews: methodological development, conduct and reporting of an umbrella review approach. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2015;13(3):132–140. doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000055. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Ioannidis JPA. The mass production of redundant, misleading, and conflicted systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Milbank Q. 2016;94(5):485–514. doi: 10.1111/1468-0009.12210. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

LinkOut - more resources