EduPort 2023, 7(2):1-18 | DOI: 10.21062/edp.2023.005

SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS IN EDUCATION: TYPOLOGY, STANDARDIZED METHODOLOGY AND A PROCESS EXAMPLE OF CONDUCTING THEM

Jiří Kantor1, Dagmar Sedláčková1, Jana Marečková1, Zuzana Svobodová 2, Kate-řina Veselá1, Alžběta Smrčková1, Jitka Klugarová3, Miloslav Klugar3
1 Pedagogická fakulta, Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci (Česká republika)
2 Fakulta zdravotnických studií, Univerzita Palackého v Olomouci, Česká republika
3 Ústav zdravotnických informací a statistiky České republiky, Praha, Česká republika

Systematic reviews are a fundamental design for evidence synthesis. Their essential features are systema-ticity, transparency and replicability. They are one of the main pillars of evidence-based education and can facilitate the use of scientific evidence in making recommendations for the education system and in deci-sion-making by practitioners. In Czech educational research, systemic reviews have not been produced so far and researchers and practitioners lack a deeper orientation on this issue. However, this unfavourable situation does not apply only to the Czech environment. A large part of foreign studies with the title of systematic review, which are published even in the best indexed pedagogical journals, are in fact rather literature reviews and contain many serious methodological problems.  Therefore, the pedagogical commu-nity needs to be educated on these issues. The aim of this paper is to introduce the importance of systemat-ic reviews in educational research, the reasons for their emergence in the context of evidence-based medi-cine, the typology of systematic reviews, explain the difference between systematic and literature/narrative reviews, and describe the different stages of systematic review development. These phases, which we doc-ument with numerous examples, include developing a prospective study protocol, searching databases and other sources (including sources of grey literature), assessing the relevance of studies, assessing the risk of bias of included studies (also called critical appraisal), synthesising data, and assessing the certainty of the evidence for the main outcomes of the systematic review. In this paper, we focus primarily on the issue of systematic reviews of effectiveness. We pay particular attention to the individual steps for data synthesis, which in the case of systematic reviews of effectiveness includes not only meta-analysis of data from in-cluded studies, but also analysis of sensitivity, subgroup analysis and assessment of the degree of hetero-geneity between studies. This is based on methodologies developed and standardised within the interna-tional organisation JBI.

Keywords: secondary research, systematic review, evidence-based education, JBI, Campbell, GRADE.

Published: September 1, 2023  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Kantor J, Sedláčková D, Marečková J, Svobodová Z, Veselá K, Smrčková A, et al.. SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS IN EDUCATION: TYPOLOGY, STANDARDIZED METHODOLOGY AND A PROCESS EXAMPLE OF CONDUCTING THEM. EduPort. 2023;7(2):1-18. doi: 10.21062/edp.2023.005.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Aromataris, E. & Munn, Z. (Eds.). (2020). JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-01. Go to original source...
    2. Bondebjerg, A., Dalgaard, N. T., Filges, T., & Viinholt, B. C. A. (2023). The effects of small class sizes on students' academic achievement, socioemotional development and well-being in special education: A systematic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 19, e1345. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1345 Go to original source...
    3. Dalgaard, N.T., Bondebjerg, A., Bjørn C. A. Viinholt & Filges, T. (2022). The effects of inclusion on acade-mic achievement, socioemotional development and wellbeing of children with special educational ne-eds. Campbell Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1291 Go to original source...
    4. De Brún, C., & Perce-Smith, N. (2014). Searching Skills Toolkit. Finding Evidence (C. Heneghan, R. Perera, & D. Badenoch Eds. 2nd ed.). Chilchester, West Sussex, UK: John Wiley & Son, Ltd. Go to original source...
    5. Grant, M.J., Booth, A., A (2009). Typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Inf Libr J. 26(2): 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x Go to original source...
    6. Higgins, J., & Green, S. (2014). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interven- tions. Version 5.1. 0. updated March 2011. handbook web site.
    7. Higgins, J.P.T., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M.J. & Welch, V.A. (editors). (2022). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, version 6.3 (updated February 2022). https://training.cochrane.org/handbook#how-to-access
    8. JBI. 2020. Critical Appraisal tools. JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. https://jbi.global/critical-appraisal-tools
    9. Kantor et al. (2023a). Speciální pedagogika osob s omezením pohyblivosti a koncept praxe založené na důkazech. Olomouc: UPOL. (publikace v tisku)
    10. Kantor J, Corcoran RP, Du J, Li J, Peng D, Ptáčková M, Sedláčková D, Smrčková A, Veselá K, Zeng S, Ma-reckova J, Schünemann H. (2022). Assessing the use of the Population, Interventions, Comparator and Outcomes (PICO) framework in studies published in education: A meta-survey (Protocol). Cochrane Da-tabase of Systematic Reviews TBD, Issue TBD. Art. No.: CA000351. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CA000351. Go to original source...
    11. Kantor J, Li J, Du J, Svobodová Z, Klugar M, Salehi-Pourmehr H, Hampton D, Smolíková M, Kantorová L, Marečková J, Zmeškalová D, Munn Z. (2023b). Impact of educational and psychological interventions compared with standard care in college/university students with autism spectrum disorder: a systema-tic review protocol. JBI Evid Synth. 2023 Jun 1;21(6):1299-1309. doi: 10.11124/JBIES-22-00251. Go to original source...
    12. Klugar M., (2015). Systematická review ve zdavotnictví. Olomouc: UPOL. ISBN 978-80-244-4782-7
    13. Klugarová, J. (2015) Ch2: Vyhldávání nejlepších vědeckých důkazů. In Marečková, J., Klugarová, J. et al. Evidence-Based Healthcare: Zdravotnictví založené na důkazech, 17-33. Olomouc: UPOL. ISBN 978-80-244-4781-0 (e-kniha)
    14. Lockwood, C., Porritt, K., Munn, Z., Rittenmeyer, L., Salmond, S., Bjerrum, M., Loveday, H., Carrier, J. & Stannard, D. Ch.2: Systematic reviews of qualitative evidence. In: Aromataris E, Munn Z (Editors). JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI, 2020. Available from https://synthesismanual.jbi.global. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-03 Go to original source...
    15. Methley, A.M., Campbell, S., Chew-Graham, C., McNally, R. & Cheraghi-Sohi, S. (2014). PICO, PICOS and SPIDER: a comparison study of specificity and sensitivity in three search tools for qualitative systematic reviews. BMC Health Serv Res 14, 579. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-014-0579-0 Go to original source...
    16. Munn Z, Aromataris E, Tufanaru C, Stern C, Porritt K, Farrow J, Lockwood C, Stephenson M, Moola S, Lizarondo L, McArthur A, Peters M, Pearson A & Jordan Z. (2019). The development of software to support multiple systematic review types: the Joanna Briggs Institute System for the Unified Ma-nagement, Assessment and Review of Information (JBI SUMARI). Int J Evid Based Healthc. 17(1):36-43. doi: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000152. Go to original source...
    17. Munn, Z., Stern, C., Aromataris, E. et al. (2018). What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC Med Res Methodol 18, 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0468-4 Go to original source...
    18. Munn, Z., Pollock, D., Price, C., Aromataris, E., Stern, C., Stone, J.C., Barker, T.H., Godfrey, C.M., Clyne, B., Booth, A., Tricco, A.C., Jordan, Z. (2023). Investigating different typologies for the synthesis of evidence: a scoping review protocol. JBI Evid Synth. 1;21(3):592-600. doi: 10.11124/JBIES-22-00122. Go to original source...
    19. Naing, C., Whittaker, M. A., Aung, H. H., Chellappan, D. K., & Riegelman, A. (2023). The effects of flipped classrooms to improve learning outcomes in undergraduate health professional education: A systema-tic review. Campbell Systematic Reviews, 19, e1339. https://doi.org/10.1002/cl2.1339 Go to original source...
    20. Page, M.J., McKenzie, J.E., Bossuyt, P.M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T.C., Mulrow, C.D., et al. (2020). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ 2021;372:n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71 Go to original source...
    21. Peters, M.D.J., Godfrey, C., McInerney, P., Munn, Z., Tricco ,A.C. & Khalil, H. Chapter 11: Scoping Reviews (2020 version). In: Aromataris E, Munn Z (Eds). JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis, JBI, 2020. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-12 Go to original source...
    22. Pokorná, A. & Dolanová, D. (2019). Ch.5: Metodika tvorby klinické (výzkumné) otázky. In Beharková, N. et al. Metodika ke zpracování závěrečné práce pro vybrané nelékařské zdravotnické obory. Brno: Masa-rykova univerzita. http://elportal.cz/publikace/metodika-zp
    23. Reichow, B., Lemons, C.J., Maggin, D.M. & Hill, D.R. Beginning reading interventions for children and adolescents with intellectual disability. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2019, 12. Art. No.: CD011359. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011359.pub2 Go to original source...
    24. Rothstein, H.R., Sutton, A.J., Dr. & Borenstein, M. 2005. Ch.1: Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis In Pu-blication Bias in Meta-Analysis: Prevention, Assessment and Adjustments.John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.(1-7)DOI:10.1002/0470870168 Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content