Dear Researchers, I'm intending to work on a systematic review
( effect of psychoeducation interventions for people with schizophrenia) as part from my project. Up to my knowledge / search, I found one article as a systematic review, published in 2016. focusing on the effect of psychoeducation interventions for people with schizophrenia, BUT my outcomes of interest/ measures/ variables differ from this published systematic review (2016).
According to this, do you recommend to keep going to work on this systematic review OR not? what're your recommendations? Thanks in advanced.
Dear Majdi,
which review did you find?
Generally speaking, you should evaluate if your review will provide important new information, that is not contained in the current evidence. You could have a look at recent Cochrane reviews on the topic (for example Zhao et al (2015) on psychoeducation for people with serious mental illness, and Xia et al (2011) on psychoeducation for schizophrenia) to see if your work would provide new information (Cochrane reviews usually include many outcomes in details).
Moreover you could also consider whether your work would include different studies (maybe you have slightly different inclusion criteria, or anyhow your search will be more recent and it is likely that there will be new studies published after 2016).
Good luck with your work,
Irene
Dear Majdi,
Irene has explained it in details. It is not a "should" but if the outcomes are different, then your sysreview will be much different than the previous one, so keep going.
Best,
YCK
Dear Majdi,
To my knowledge, most of systematic reviews are aimed to answer specific questions. It makes them quite difficult to be significantly overlapped. Even if the question is almost identical, an updated systematic review may be helpful, especially in an active area with many new 'coming' publications. Therefore, please just go ahead when you feel confident about the novelty of your work.
Best wishes!
Thank you all for the quick answer. I will take your note into my considerations....
You can write SLR and meta-analysis. Both synthesize literature and source of citations as well
You might find the PRISMA protocol guidance helpful, check the elements and the protocol so you can judge whether a systematic review is the way to go for you http://prisma-statement.org/Protocols/ProtocolGuidance
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publisher