grad-systematic-review
Compare original and translation side by side
🇺🇸
Original
English🇨🇳
Translation
ChineseSystematic Literature Review (PRISMA)
系统文献综述（PRISMA）
Overview
概述
A systematic review uses explicit, pre-defined methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesize all relevant research on a specific question. Unlike narrative reviews, systematic reviews follow a reproducible protocol that minimizes bias in study selection and interpretation. The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) framework provides the standard reporting structure, including the iconic flow diagram tracking records through identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion.
系统综述采用明确的、预先定义的方法来识别、筛选、评估和综合与特定研究问题相关的所有研究。与叙述性综述不同，系统综述遵循可复现的方案，最大程度减少研究筛选和解读中的偏倚。PRISMA（系统综述与Meta分析首选报告条目）框架提供了标准的报告结构，包括标志性的流程图，用于追踪文献记录从识别、筛选、合格性评估到最终纳入的整个过程。
When to Use
适用场景
- Synthesizing the totality of evidence on a well-defined research question
- Identifying gaps, contradictions, or consensus in a body of literature
- Establishing what is known before designing new empirical research
- Informing policy or practice guidelines with evidence-based synthesis
- 综合与明确研究问题相关的全部证据
- 识别文献体系中的空白、矛盾点或共识
- 在设计新的实证研究前明确已知信息
- 通过循证综合为政策或实践指南提供依据
When NOT to Use
不适用场景
- When the research question is too broad to define clear inclusion criteria
- When a scoping review (mapping the landscape) is more appropriate than a systematic review (answering a specific question)
- When time constraints prevent the rigorous protocol required
- When there is very little published research on the topic (consider a scoping review first)
- 研究问题过于宽泛，无法定义清晰的纳入标准时
- 范围综述（梳理研究领域全貌）比系统综述（回答特定问题）更合适时
- 时间限制无法满足严格的方案要求时
- 该主题已发表研究极少时（建议先开展范围综述）
Assumptions
核心假设
IRON LAW: A systematic review must be REPRODUCIBLE — every search
decision, inclusion criterion, and quality assessment must be documented
so another researcher can replicate the process. If your review cannot
be replicated, it is a narrative review, NOT a systematic review.Key assumptions:
- Transparency and reproducibility distinguish systematic from narrative reviews
- A pre-registered protocol reduces bias in study selection and analysis
- At least two independent reviewers should screen and assess studies to reduce subjective bias
- Quality assessment of included studies is mandatory — not all evidence is equal
IRON LAW: A systematic review must be REPRODUCIBLE — every search
decision, inclusion criterion, and quality assessment must be documented
so another researcher can replicate the process. If your review cannot
be replicated, it is a narrative review, NOT a systematic review.关键假设：
- 透明度和可复现性是系统综述与叙述性综述的核心区别
- 预先注册的方案可减少研究筛选和分析中的偏倚
- 至少应由两名独立评审员进行文献筛选和评估，以减少主观偏倚
- 必须对纳入研究进行质量评估——并非所有证据的价值都相同
Methodology
方法论
Step 1: Define the Research Question and Protocol
步骤1：定义研究问题与方案
Formulate a focused question using a framework (PICO for interventions, PEO for qualitative, SPIDER for mixed methods). Register the protocol (e.g., PROSPERO). Define databases, search terms, date ranges, and language restrictions.
| Framework | Components |
|---|---|
| PICO | Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome |
| PEO | Population, Exposure, Outcome |
| SPIDER | Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, Research type |
使用合适的框架（干预研究用PICO，定性研究用PEO，混合方法研究用SPIDER）制定聚焦的研究问题。注册方案（例如PROSPERO）。明确检索数据库、检索词、时间范围和语言限制。
| 框架 | 组成部分 |
|---|---|
| PICO | 研究人群（Population）、干预措施（Intervention）、对照（Comparison）、结局指标（Outcome） |
| PEO | 研究人群（Population）、暴露因素（Exposure）、结局指标（Outcome） |
| SPIDER | 样本（Sample）、研究现象（Phenomenon of Interest）、研究设计（Design）、评估方法（Evaluation）、研究类型（Research type） |
Step 2: Execute the Search Strategy
步骤2：执行检索策略
Search at least 3 databases (e.g., Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed). Use Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT) with controlled vocabulary and free-text terms. Document every search string and date. Supplement with citation chaining (forward and backward), grey literature, and hand-searching key journals.
检索至少3个数据库（例如Scopus、Web of Science、PubMed）。使用布尔运算符（AND、OR、NOT）结合受控词汇和自由文本词。记录每一条检索式和检索日期。补充引用追踪（正向和反向）、灰色文献检索以及核心期刊人工检索。
Step 3: Screen and Select Studies
步骤3：筛选与选择研究
Apply inclusion/exclusion criteria in two phases:
- Title and abstract screening — two reviewers independently; resolve disagreements by discussion or third reviewer
- Full-text screening — apply criteria to full papers; record reasons for exclusion
Document the process in a PRISMA flow diagram:
- Records identified → duplicates removed → screened → eligible → included
分两个阶段应用纳入/排除标准：
- 标题与摘要筛选——由两名评审员独立进行；通过讨论或第三方评审员解决分歧
- 全文筛选——对全文应用筛选标准；记录排除理由
用PRISMA流程图记录整个过程：
- 识别的文献记录 → 去除重复文献 → 筛选 → 合格 → 纳入
Step 4: Extract Data, Assess Quality, and Synthesize
步骤4：提取数据、评估质量与综合分析
Extract data into a standardized form. Assess quality using appropriate tools (e.g., Cochrane RoB for RCTs, CASP for qualitative, JBI checklists). Synthesize via meta-analysis (quantitative), thematic synthesis (qualitative), or narrative synthesis. Report per PRISMA 2020 checklist.
将数据提取至标准化表格。使用合适的工具评估质量（例如随机对照试验用Cochrane RoB，定性研究用CASP，JBI清单）。通过Meta分析（定量）、主题综合（定性）或叙述性综合进行分析。按照PRISMA 2020清单报告结果。
Output Format
输出格式
markdown
undefinedmarkdown
undefinedSystematic Review: [Research Question]
Systematic Review: [Research Question]
Protocol
Protocol
- Question framework: [PICO/PEO/SPIDER]
- Registration: [PROSPERO ID or equivalent]
- Databases searched: [list]
- Date range: [start-end]
- Question framework: [PICO/PEO/SPIDER]
- Registration: [PROSPERO ID or equivalent]
- Databases searched: [list]
- Date range: [start-end]
Search Strategy
Search Strategy
| Database | Search String | Records Found |
|---|---|---|
| [name] | [Boolean query] | [N] |
| Database | Search String | Records Found |
|---|---|---|
| [name] | [Boolean query] | [N] |
PRISMA Flow
PRISMA Flow
- Identified: [N] records
- Duplicates removed: [N]
- Screened (title/abstract): [N]
- Excluded at screening: [N]
- Full-text assessed: [N]
- Excluded at full-text: [N] (reasons: ...)
- Included in synthesis: [N]
- Identified: [N] records
- Duplicates removed: [N]
- Screened (title/abstract): [N]
- Excluded at screening: [N]
- Full-text assessed: [N]
- Excluded at full-text: [N] (reasons: ...)
- Included in synthesis: [N]
Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria
Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria
| Criterion | Include | Exclude |
|---|---|---|
| Population | [specification] | [specification] |
| Study type | [specification] | [specification] |
| Language | [specification] | [specification] |
| Date | [specification] | [specification] |
| Criterion | Include | Exclude |
|---|---|---|
| Population | [specification] | [specification] |
| Study type | [specification] | [specification] |
| Language | [specification] | [specification] |
| Date | [specification] | [specification] |
Quality Assessment Summary
Quality Assessment Summary
| Study | Tool Used | Overall Rating | Key Concerns |
|---|---|---|---|
| [author, year] | [RoB/CASP/JBI] | [high/moderate/low] | [specific issues] |
| Study | Tool Used | Overall Rating | Key Concerns |
|---|---|---|---|
| [author, year] | [RoB/CASP/JBI] | [high/moderate/low] | [specific issues] |
Synthesis
Synthesis
- [Key finding 1 with evidence strength]
- [Key finding 2 with evidence strength]
- Gaps identified: [what remains unknown]
- [Key finding 1 with evidence strength]
- [Key finding 2 with evidence strength]
- Gaps identified: [what remains unknown]
Limitations
Limitations
- [Search limitations]
- [Assessment limitations]
undefined- [Search limitations]
- [Assessment limitations]
undefinedGotchas
注意事项
- A systematic review without a PRISMA flow diagram is incomplete — the flow diagram is not optional
- Pre-registering the protocol prevents post-hoc changes to inclusion criteria that introduce bias
- Grey literature (theses, conference papers, reports) must be considered to reduce publication bias
- Quality assessment is NOT pass/fail — it informs how much weight to give each study in the synthesis
- Do NOT conflate systematic review with meta-analysis; meta-analysis (statistical pooling) is one possible synthesis method within a systematic review
- Inter-rater reliability for screening and quality assessment should be reported (e.g., Cohen's kappa)
- 没有PRISMA流程图的系统综述是不完整的——流程图并非可选内容
- 预先注册方案可避免事后修改纳入标准引入偏倚
- 必须考虑灰色文献（学位论文、会议论文、报告）以减少发表偏倚
- 质量评估并非简单的合格/不合格——它用于指导综合分析中对各研究的权重分配
- 不要将系统综述与Meta分析混淆；Meta分析（统计合并）是系统综述中一种可能的综合分析方法
- 应报告筛选和质量评估的评分者间信度（例如Cohen's kappa系数）
References
参考文献
- Page, M. J., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71.
- Higgins, J. P. T., et al. (Eds.). (2023). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Version 6.4). Cochrane.
- Booth, A., Sutton, A., & Papaioannou, D. (2016). Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review (2nd ed.). Sage.
- Page, M. J., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71.
- Higgins, J. P. T., et al. (Eds.). (2023). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Version 6.4). Cochrane.
- Booth, A., Sutton, A., & Papaioannou, D. (2016). Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review (2nd ed.). Sage.