This is a very broad question Sajjad. Some people could go their whole career without knowing the answer to this question, nonetheless attempt to provide a concise answer in a situation like this.

The basic steps of a systematic review are 1) defining specific questions that you want to answer; 2) thorough, systematic, and reproducible review of the literature to identify manuscripts that answer the questions you have set forth; 3) synthesis of data from all the identified articles to answer the questions which can be presented in a narrative form and also preferably in a numeric form via meta-analysis. You must also clearly describe your search parameters in any systematic review.

To best answer your  second question you should refer to the PRISMA guidelines which cover exactly what needs to be in a systematic review and how it should be structured. Cochrane reviews has additional documentation on how to do a proper systematic review as well. If you download their freeware software RevMan, it literally takes you step by step.

This will answer your all questions regarding SLR.

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=F3825C223091A7396FBC3895915A900C?doi=10.1.1.117.471&rep=rep1&type=pdf

Dear Sajjad,

I think the answer of Dr. Möhler is right. Cochrane manual is an excellent tool but it is not easy, at least for you and now. Cochrane resources (manual and RevMan) are "The Method" par excellence but there is many resources on the net. I think you are in need of a step-by-step guide to conduct a RSL. In my view, we do not forget a classic (since 1993): the Users' Guide to the Medical Literature, published by JAMA. The UGML is a resource not for free but I think it remains as one of the best. Chapter 22 of UGML reports on the the process of a systematic review and meta-analysis. Earlier versions of UGML are in the Internet for free, but not that chapter. Originally, UGML was intended for a critical appraisal guide.

The University of Edinburgh keeps a website with a guide that I think it is useful for all of us: Systematic reviews and meta-analysis: a step-by-step guide.

I hope you find this information useful.

http://jamaevidence.mhmedical.com/book.aspx?bookid=847

http://www.ccace.ed.ac.uk/research/software-resources/systematic-reviews-and-meta-analyses

Hi,

Maybe this paper should help ?

How to Write a Good Scientific Paper: Review Articles

By: Mack, Chris

JOURNAL OF MICRO-NANOLITHOGRAPHY MEMS AND MOEMS Volume: 15 Issue: 2 Article Number: 020101 Published: APR 2016

Dear Sajjad,

I found the following two papers containing a very helpful step by step guide to conducting a systematic review.

1.       Khan, K.S., Kunz, R., Kleijnen, J. & Antes, G. (2003) Five steps to conducting a systematic review. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine. 96 (3), 118–121.

2.       Wright, R.W., Brand, R.A., Dunn, W. & Spindler, K.P. (2007) How to Write a Systematic Review: Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research. [Online] 45523–29. Available from: doi:10.1097/BLO.0b013e31802c9098.

Make sure you stick to the PRISMA guide when reporting (especially if you are planning to publish your paper), and for quality assessment I found Jadad score been heavily used to assess the quality of RCT included.

There will be some variations if you plan to encompass other design than a RCT. The book titled “doing a systematic review: A student guide” is useful as well (reference below).

3.       Angela Boland, M. Gemma Cherry, & Rumona Dickson (eds.) (2013) Doing a Systematic Review: A Student’s Guide. 1 edition. London ; Thousand Oakes, California, SAGE Publications Ltd.

The main objective of reviews is to give readers a clear idea of a book’s content so that they can make an informed judgment about the worth of the book. An ideal review will briefly survey the book as a whole, introduce the author, stating ‘why’ (aim, intention or purpose) of the author’s writing, and ‘how’ he/she achieved the aim; provide a thoughtful and perhaps detailed analysis of the content, comment on the book’s merits, and note the book’s significance in its field. It is often helpful to readers if the reviewer indicates how the content is (or is not) consonant with various school of thoughts. However, reviewing an edited collection can be more challenging. Instead of listing and describing individual contributions, some reviewers may find it helpful to focus on the collection as a whole, discussing its purpose and unifying theme, noting how well the editors achieve their aims, and letting readers know how the collection contributes to the field. The reviewer is then free to discuss two or three of the best essays more extensively. Ideal reviews are usually constructively critical; reflecting positive judgment, and in some cases a negative judgment. When criticism is necessary, reviewers must be judicious and fair in their estimation of an author’s intentions. Reviews should be between 1,500 and 2,000 words in length, save in analysis of a substantial or especially complex work; but cross-check with your review editor first.

Hello Sajjad - the first thing I suggest people check is the PRISMA Statement. In particular their 2009 article "The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration" sets the scene really well and you can download it here - http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100  It has a really common sense approach, and you can even download their flow chart to adapt for your own use. You can find more of their work at http://prisma-statement.org

Use the PRISMA checklist as a guide for designing the protocol and writing up the results: http://prisma-statement.org/PRISMAStatement/Checklist.aspx

Please have a look at this web page: http://science-network.tv/writing-a-systematic-review/

Cochrane Handbook, CRD York Systematic Review Guide and PRISMA Statements are good start as mentioned above.

Its a very good question. many of us need to know about and participate with it.

To write a Systematic Review:

Step 1: Decide that you really want to write a review article.

Step 2: Use PRISMA or Cochrane Guidlines as the skeleton of your paper and follow their checklist.

Step 3: Decide your Topic and formulate a Research Question. Depending upon your Research Question, some questions can not be converted into a systematic review. Under these circumstances just write a traditional review.

Step 4: Decide the Keywords you will use for data search

Step 5: Decide the Databases you will use for data search.

Step 6: Decide the inclusion/exclusion criteria (A MUST REQUIREMENT FOR THE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW)

Step 7: Begin Search

Step 8: Check the articles for Quality- Quality Appraisal and Quality assessment is the same thing. (Don’t get confused) (ANOTHER MUST REQUIREMENT FOR A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW)

Step 9: Organize your data according to the topic

Step 10: Analyze the data

Step 11: If Statistics is involved now and you cannot analyze data without statistics- NOW CONSIDER META-ANALYSIS - because now its becoming a meta-analysis.

Step 11: Begin Writing

Step 12: Submit the article for publication.

To write a Systematic Review:

Step 1: Decide that you really want to write a review article.

Step 2: Use PRISMA or Cochrane Guidlines as the skeleton of your paper and follow their checklist.

Step 3: Decide your Topic and formulate a Research Question. Depending upon your Research Question, some questions can not be converted into a systematic review. Under these circumstances just write a traditional review.

Step 4: Decide the Keywords you will use for data search

Step 5: Decide the Databases you will use for data search.

Step 6: Decide the inclusion/exclusion criteria (A MUST REQUIREMENT FOR THE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW)

Step 7: Begin Search

Step 8: Check the articles for Quality- Quality Appraisal and Quality assessment is the same thing. (Don’t get confused) (ANOTHER MUST REQUIREMENT FOR A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW)

Step 9: Organize your data according to the topic

Step 10: Analyze the data

Step 11: If Statistics is involved now and you cannot analyze data without statistics- NOW CONSIDER META-ANALYSIS - because now its becoming a meta-analysis.

Step 11: Begin Writing

Step 12: Submit the article for publication.

Please go through this reference

https://www.lib.uwo.ca/tutorials/how_to_perform_a_systematic_review/index.html

Kindly check this book

"Cochrane Handbook For Systematic Reviews of Interventions"

Comprehensive systematic review for advanced nursing practice

Comprehensive systematic review for advanced nursing practice

The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses)statement consists of a 27 items checklist...very helpful for writing systematic review and meta-analyses manuscript. Please see attachment.