Evaluating Step |
Explanation |
---|---|
The citations from the searches are de-duplicated |
These are combined into a master list with the resulting number of citations documented. |
Each article is evaluated for relevancy |
At least two reviewers determine whether a citation meets the eligibility criteria for inclusion as set up in the protocol. Often inclusion/exclusion can be based on title and abstract but sometimes full-text is required for the determination. Tools are available that can help track the status of each citation. Some have AI which can speed up the process. |
Full text is obtained |
For those citations which inclusion cannot be determined by title and abstract alone. For all citations to be included in the synthesis. |
Master list of studies is complied |
Some studies may be written up in more than one article. Some articles may include more than one study. |
Each study is evaluated for quality and bias (Critical Appraisal) |
At least two reviewers determine the quality of each study. A valid quality assessment tool or checklist appropriate for the type of study should be used. |
A list of studies to be included in the synthesis is compiled | If any studies are deemed to be of lower quality or biased, documentation of their inclusion or exclusion is necessary. |
Copyright © Baylor® University. All rights reserved.
Report It | Title IX | Mental Health Resources | Anonymous Reporting | Legal Disclosures