Retired Guide - Systematic Review (SR) Service: STEP 6: Interpreting the findings

Now you need to pull it all together.  When writing your systematic review, consider limitations such as why you included a publication as well as any related biases. Outline the strength of evidence found and consider the findings’ applicability, economic implications or impact on future research. 

 NEXT: STEP 7: Publishing your results

Selected references:
* Whiting PF, Rutjes AW, Westwood ME, Mallett S. A systematic review classifies sources of bias and variation in diagnostic test accuracy studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013 Oct;66(10):1093-104.

* Hopewell S, Boutron I, Altman DG, Ravaud P. Incorporation of assessments of risk of bias of primary studies in systematic reviews of randomised trials: a cross-sectional study. BMJ Open. 2013 Aug 23;3(8):e003342.

* Mueller KF, Meerpohl JJ, Briel M, Antes G, von Elm E, Lang B, Gloy V, Motschall E, Schwarzer G, Bassler D. Detecting, quantifying and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analyses: protocol of a systematic review on methods. Syst Rev. 2013 Jul 25;2:60.

* Muller KF, Briel M, D'Amario A, Kleijnen J, Marusic A, Wager E, Antes G, von Elm E, Lang B, Motschall E, Gloy V, Schwarzer G, Altman D, Meerpohl JJ, Bassler D. Defining publication bias: protocol for a systematic review of highly cited articles and proposal for a new framework. Syst Rev. 2013 May 21;2:34.

* Armijo-Olivo S, Stiles CR, Hagen NA, Biondo PD, Cummings GG. Assessment of study quality for systematic reviews: a comparison of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool and the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool: methodological research. J Eval Clin Prac. 2012 Feb;18(1):12-8.