New publication guidelines for systematic reviews from BMC Medicine

Two articles in BioMed Central's open access journal BMC Medicine by Geoff Wong, Trisha Greenhalgh and colleagues, propose publication guidelines for both realist synthesis and meta-narrative reviews.

These are the first set of extensive guidelines covering the two types of analysis and will be invaluable to clinical researchers as well as journal editors. The standards were developed as part of the RAMESES (Realist And Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses Evolving Standards) project. The RAMESES project is a NIHR funded to produce such guidance and standards for these new forms of systematic review - Realist synthesis and Meta-narrative . The guidelines are co-published in the Journal of Advanced Nursing and are freely accessible on Wiley Online Library.

There is growing interest in realist synthesis as an alternative systematic review method. This approach offers the potential to expand the knowledge base in policy-relevant areas - for example by explaining the success, failure or mixed fortunes of complex interventions. Meta-narrative review is one of an emerging menu of new approaches to qualitative and mixed-method systematic review.

A systematic review is a review done according to an explicit, robust and reproducible methodology. Author Geoff Wong explains, "For many years reviewers undertaking Cochrane reviews and meta-analyses have followed the PRISMA publication guidelines. Other forms of , oriented to summarising and synthesising quantitative, qualitative and/or mixed-method studies, are increasing in popularity, especially in the context of , but such approaches have up to now suffered from lack of systematic guidance or publication standards."

These new guidelines for realist synthesis and meta-narrative reviews are also expected to be welcomed by , as Jigisha Patel, Medical Editor at explains, "The provision of a clear set of publication reporting standards is important for researchers, editors and, most importantly, reviewers. By defining a standard framework for researchers to report their methods and findings they aid thorough peer-review and ensure that published research is consistent in its methodology. The RAMESES publication provides much needed clarity for these new forms of literature analysis, and the upcoming publication of quality assessment tools will be needed to complement these before researchers can follow the guidelines fully "


Explore further

How should systematic reviews consider evidence on harms?

More information: Wong G., Greenhalgh T. , Westhorp G., Buckingham J . & Pawson R. (2013) RAMESES publication standards: meta-narrative reviews. Journal of Advanced Nursing ,doi: 10.1111/jan.12092.

Wong G., Greenhalgh T. , Westhorp G., Buckingham J . & Pawson R. (2013) RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. Journal of Advanced Nursing, doi: 10.1111/jan.12095

Provided by BioMed Central
Citation: New publication guidelines for systematic reviews from BMC Medicine (2013, January 28) retrieved 19 August 2019 from https://medicalxpress.com/news/2013-01-guidelines-systematic-bmc-medicine.html
This document is subject to copyright. Apart from any fair dealing for the purpose of private study or research, no part may be reproduced without the written permission. The content is provided for information purposes only.
 shares

Feedback to editors

User comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more