Jane
Here is an example of an unsystematic review for you:
Systematic review: The evidence base for long-term management of coeliac disease.<http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18671779>
Haines ML, Anderson RP, Gibson PR.
Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2008 Nov 1;28(9):1042-66. Epub 2008 Jul 30. Review.
Of course, it is often a judgement call when a poorly reported or conducted review should be called non-systematic. For example, I have come across several systematic reviews conducted by/for NICE which I would not downgrade to non-systematic merely because they do not report which studies were excluded or the reasons for exclusion.
The example I have given you is a fairly comprehensive review, but the methods are so scantily reported ("Review of medical literature from 1975") that it really can't be called systematic.
The review does include observational studies, which is perfectly reasonable if this is the best available evidence.
If you have time, it might be interesting to compare a 5-star systematic review with a 0-star "systematic review".
BW
Michael
From: Jane Farrelly (Librarian, KGH) [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 30 June 2010 16:53
Subject: Un-Systematic Reviews
Hi everybody
I'll be helping with a critical appraisal session soon and I thought it might be useful to compare some studies. What I'm looking for are some examples of "un-systematic" reviews (reviews that claim to be systematic but maybe only focus on one database, one language etc.) and perhaps some examples of not very random or controlled, randomized controlled trials. An added bonus would be if the topics covered were a bit fun and of interest to a wide population.
Hoping somebody out there has already done something similar and can help!
Thanks and Best Wishes
Jane
Jane Farrelly
Librarian
HSE South Library & Information Services
Kerry General Hospital
Ireland
066 7184084
