In some medical and nursing journals we see manuscripts which has been conducted by either the integrative or systematic review. But, when we check the search strategies and method section there are many similarities between them. What are the exact differences between integrative review and systematic review?
Thanks for your contribution in the scientific discussions.
Dear Mr Mansour,
An Integrative review (IR) is not a systematic review of the literature (SRL). We are lucky because the author of a very good paper on IR is in Researchgate and we can obtain the fulltext of the article titled An overview of the integrative research review, by Cynthia Russell. As she wrote, "...integrative review can precisely represent the state of the current research literature. The integrative literature review can also be used to evaluate the strength of the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, identify the need for future research, build a bridge between related areas of work, identify central issues in an area, generate a research question, identify a theoretical or conceptual framework, and explore which research methods have been used successfully" . Both of them, IR and SRL, are secondary research methods but a SRL is, according The Cochrane Collaboration:
"1.2.2 What is a systematic review? (from Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions)"
A systematic review attempts to collate all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria in order to answer a specific research question. It uses explicit, systematic methods that are selected with a view to minimizing bias, thus providing more reliable findings from which conclusions can be drawn and decisions made. The key characteristics of a systematic review are:
- a clearly stated set of objectives with pre-defined eligibility criteria for studies;
- an explicit, reproducible methodology;
- a systematic search that attempts to identify all studies that would meet the eligibility criteria;
- an assessment of the validity of the findings of the included studies, for example through the assessment of risk of bias; and
- a systematic presentation, and synthesis, of the characteristics and findings of the included studies.
Many systematic reviews contain meta-analyses. Meta-analysis is the use of statistical methods to summarize the results of independent studies. By combining information from all relevant studies, meta-analyses can provide more precise estimates of the effects of health care than those derived from the individual studies included within a review. They also facilitate investigations of the consistency of evidence across studies, and the exploration of differences across studies."
I hope you will find this useful.
http://handbook.cochrane.org/
http://handbook.cochrane.org/chapter_1/1_2_2_what_is_a_systematic_review.htm
Article An overview of the integrative research review
Hello Mansour,
please follow this link , it may clarify some points :
https://www.hindawi.com/journals/nrp/2012/501564/abs/
Dear Mr Mansour,
An Integrative review (IR) is not a systematic review of the literature (SRL). We are lucky because the author of a very good paper on IR is in Researchgate and we can obtain the fulltext of the article titled An overview of the integrative research review, by Cynthia Russell. As she wrote, "...integrative review can precisely represent the state of the current research literature. The integrative literature review can also be used to evaluate the strength of the scientific evidence, identify gaps in current research, identify the need for future research, build a bridge between related areas of work, identify central issues in an area, generate a research question, identify a theoretical or conceptual framework, and explore which research methods have been used successfully" . Both of them, IR and SRL, are secondary research methods but a SRL is, according The Cochrane Collaboration:
"1.2.2 What is a systematic review? (from Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions)"
A systematic review attempts to collate all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria in order to answer a specific research question. It uses explicit, systematic methods that are selected with a view to minimizing bias, thus providing more reliable findings from which conclusions can be drawn and decisions made. The key characteristics of a systematic review are:
- a clearly stated set of objectives with pre-defined eligibility criteria for studies;
- an explicit, reproducible methodology;
- a systematic search that attempts to identify all studies that would meet the eligibility criteria;
- an assessment of the validity of the findings of the included studies, for example through the assessment of risk of bias; and
- a systematic presentation, and synthesis, of the characteristics and findings of the included studies.
Many systematic reviews contain meta-analyses. Meta-analysis is the use of statistical methods to summarize the results of independent studies. By combining information from all relevant studies, meta-analyses can provide more precise estimates of the effects of health care than those derived from the individual studies included within a review. They also facilitate investigations of the consistency of evidence across studies, and the exploration of differences across studies."
I hope you will find this useful.
http://handbook.cochrane.org/
http://handbook.cochrane.org/chapter_1/1_2_2_what_is_a_systematic_review.htm
Article An overview of the integrative research review
Dear Dr. Tabares
Thanks very much for your comprehensive and constructive comments. I appreciate your response.
Good luck
Please have a look at this web page: http://science-network.tv/writing-a-systematic-review/
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Philology
- Classical Philology
- Manuscripts