An umbrella review allows the findings of reviews relevant to a review question to be compared and contrasted. An umbrella review’s most characteristic feature is that this type of evidence synthesis only considers for inclusion the highest level of evidence, namely other systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
In this post
Is an umbrella review the same as a systematic review?
In medical research, an umbrella review is a review of systematic reviews or meta-analyses. They may also be called overviews of reviews, reviews of reviews, summaries of systematic reviews, or syntheses of reviews. Umbrella reviews are among the highest levels of evidence currently available in medicine.
What is an umbrella review in research?
An umbrella review is a review of reviews. It compiles all the evidence from existing reviews on a topic to give a high level overview. An umbrella review is commonly conducted when there are multiple competing interventions for a condition.
What is the difference between a review and a systematic review?
While literature reviews require only one database or source, systematic reviews require more comprehensive efforts to locate evidence. Multiple databases are searched, each with a specifically tailored search strategy (usually designed and implemented by a specialist librarian).
What are the two main types of systematic reviews?
Systematic reviews vs. other review types
| Type of Review | Time to Complete |
|---|---|
| Rapid Review | 2-6+ months |
| Integrative Review | 2-10+ months |
| Umbrella Review | 2+ months |
| Systematic Review | 10-12+ months |
What defines a systematic review?
A systematic review is a summary of the medical literature that uses explicit and reproducible methods to systematically search, critically appraise, and synthesize on a specific issue. It synthesizes the results of multiple primary studies related to each other by using strategies that reduce biases and random errors.
What is a review of a systematic review called?
Appraisal: Critical Appraisal of systematic reviews done by at least two independent reviewers using the appropriate tool. Synthesis: Present outcome data exactly as they appear or re-analyze the outcome data in a different way.
How do you write an umbrella review protocol?
The points are: ensure that the umbrella review is really needed, prespecify the protocol, clearly define the variables of interest, estimate a common effect size, report the heterogeneity and potential biases, perform a stratification of the evidence, conduct sensitivity analyses, report transparent results, use
Can you do a review of systematic reviews?
Yes, you can and you should. In PRISMA flow-diagram there is place to mentioned how many systematic reviews were included.
What is the hierarchy of evidence in research?
Levels of evidence (sometimes called hierarchy of evidence) are assigned to studies based on the methodological quality of their design, validity, and applicability to patient care. These decisions gives the “grade (or strength) of recommendation.”
What are the four major types of reviews?
Over the years, numerous types of literature reviews have emerged, but the four main types are traditional or narrative, systematic, meta-analysis and meta-synthesis.
How many articles should be in a systematic review?
Basically, there is no limit on number of studies for a systematic review. For a meta-analysis, you can practically do it with 2 or more. However, generally speaking, a MA of less than 4 or 5 studies of controversial benefit.
What are the different types of systematic reviews?
Five other types of systematic reviews
- Scoping review. Preliminary assessment of the potential size and scope of available research literature.
- Rapid review.
- Narrative review.
- Meta-analysis.
- Mixed methods/mixed studies.
What are the three types of reviews?
There are three major types of review: Exempt, Expedited, and Full.
When would you use a systematic review?
A systematic review may be undertaken to confirm or refute whether or not current practice is based on relevant evidence, to establish the quality of that evidence, and to address any uncertainty or variation in practice that may be occurring.
What are the limitations of a systematic review?
These may include risks of bias, such as selection bias, inadequate blinding, attrition bias, and selective outcome reporting; inconsistency that includes clinical or statistical heterogeneity; and imprecision that can lead to Type I and Type II errors.
Why are systematic reviews the best?
Systematic reviews systematically evaluate and summarize current knowledge and have many advantages over narrative reviews. Meta-analyses provide a more reliable and enhanced precision of effect estimate than do individual studies.
What level of research is a systematic review?
Levels of Evidence
| Levels of Evidence | |
|---|---|
| Level I | Evidence from a systematic review or meta-analysis of all relevant RCTs (randomized controlled trial) or evidence-based clinical practice guidelines based on systematic reviews of RCTs or 3 or more RCTs of good quality that have similar results. |
How do you structure a systematic review?
Steps for writing a systematic review
- Formulate a research question. Consider whether a systematic review is needed before starting your project.
- Develop research protocol.
- Conduct literature search.
- Select studies per protocol.
- Appraise studies per protocol.
- Extract data.
- Analyze results.
- Interpret results.
What is a mapping review?
Mapping reviews are focused on a visual synthesis of the data and are question based rather than topic based like the scoping review. Mapping reviews are best designed for: When there is an abundance and a diversity of research. As a first step to a systematic review. To identify gaps in a topic area.
What is a scoping review?
‘ For the purposes of this study, a scoping review is defined as a type of research synthesis that aims to ‘map the literature on a particular topic or research area and provide an opportunity to identify key concepts; gaps in the research; and types and sources of evidence to inform practice, policymaking, and