Skip to Main Content
Monash Health Library
Click here to chat with a librarian

Health Research Study Designs

A review or evidence synthesis is a comprehensive analysis of existing research on a specific topic, designed to summarise and critically evaluate the current evidence base. These are important tools in health research and come in various forms, such as systematic reviews, meta-analyses, scoping reviews, and literature/narrative reviews.

Why is it important?

  • They provide clinicians, policymakers, and researchers with a synthesis of the best available evidence to inform decisions.
  • Reviews highlight areas where evidence is insufficient, guiding future research priorities.
  • Increases efficiency by summarising existing knowledge and preventing duplication of research efforts.
  • Evidence syntheses contribute to developing guidelines, protocols, and best practices, ultimately improving patient outcomes.
  • For someone new to health research, participating in a review team can be a valuable way to develop research skills and gain in-depth knowledge of a specific topic.

Recommended resources:

Choosing the right review for you

A literature review, or narrative review, is a review of literature on a topic. The methodology is more flexible, unstructured, and subjective than a systematic review. Its purpose is to teach or learn about a topic, or plan future research

Requirements

  • 1-6 months of time and at least 1 team member to undertake the review.
  • There are no reporting requirements for literature reviews.

How to conduct a literature review

  1. Develop a research question
  2. Develop a hypothesis and aim
  3. Search the literature
  4. Select studies
  5. Summarise and discuss findings
  6. Write the review
  7. Reference your sources
  8. Publish your research
Examples
Sammut, R., et al. (2021). Strategies to improve response rates to web surveys: A literature review. International journal of nursing studies, 123, 104058. 
Wormald, J. S., et al. (2020). Design and establishment of a cancer registry: a literature review. ANZ journal of surgery, 90(7-8), 1277–1282. 

Recommended resources:

Literature Searching Guide

Mount Sinai Health System. (2023). How to Conduct a Literature Review for Nursing Research and Evidence-Based Practice.

A scoping review maps current evidence to determine what is known about a topic, identify research gaps, and clarify concepts. Unlike systematic reviews, which focus on answering a specific research question with a high level of evidence, scoping reviews are broader and more exploratory. Its purpose is to assess and understand an existing body of research.

Requirements

  • 12 months of time and at least 2 team members to undertake the review.
  • Scoping reviews need to adhere to the PRISMA-ScR requirements.

How to conduct a scoping review

  1. Develop a research question
  2. Develop a hypothesis and aim
  3. Develop a protocol
  4. Search the literature
  5. Select and screen studies
  6. Extract and organise data
  7. Critically appraise studies
  8. Synthesis and summarise findings
  9. Write the review in accordance with PRISMA-ScR
  10. Reference your sources
  11. Publish your research
Examples
González-García, A., et al. (2021). Nurse managers' competencies: A scoping review. Journal of nursing management, 29(6), 1410–1419. 
Uchino, H., et al. (2023). Enhanced recovery protocols in trauma and emergency abdominal surgery: a scoping review. European journal of trauma and emergency surgery, 49(6), 2401–2412.

Recommended resources:

Literature Searching Guide

JBI. (2022). What are scoping reviews?

A rapid review is an assessment of what is already known about an issue. The methodology is influenced by time constraints. The purpose of a rapid review is to provide timely evidence on emergent or high-priority topics.

Requirements

How to conduct a rapid review

  1. Develop a research question
  2. Develop a hypothesis and aim
  3. Develop a protocol
  4. Search the literature 
    1. A rapid review will have a more streamlined search approach, searching in fewer databases or with additional filters.
    2. You may need assistance from a librarian.
  5. Select and screen studies
  6. Extract and organise data
  7. Critically appraise studies
    1. A rapid review will use quick, validated tools and checklists.
  8. Synthesis and summarise findings
  9. Write the review in accordance with Cochrane's interim advice.
  10. Reference your sources
  11. Publish your research
Examples
McLure, M., et al. (2021). A rapid review of advanced life support guidelines for cardiac arrest associated with anaphylaxis. Resuscitation, 159, 137–149. 
Spiers, G. F., et al. (2021). Measuring frailty in younger populations: a rapid review of evidence. BMJ open, 11(3), e047051. 

Recommended resources:

Literature Searching Guide

JBI. (2020). What are rapid reviews?

A systematic review systematically searches for, appraises and synthesises research evidence. It has a rigorous and transparent methodology including a published protocol. Its purpose is to inform clinical practice and decision-making.

Requirements

  • 12 months of time and at least 3 team members to undertake the review.
  • Systematic reviews must adhere to the PRISMA guidelines.

How to conduct a systematic review

  1. Develop a research question
  2. Develop a hypothesis and aim
  3. Develop a protocol
  4. Search the literature 
  5. Select and screen studies
  6. Extract and organise data
  7. Critically appraise studies
  8. Synthesis and summarise findings
  9. Write the review in accordance with PRISMA
  10. Reference your sources
  11. Publish your research

Recommended resources:

Systematic Review Guide

Cochrane. (2016). What are systematic reviews?

A meta-analysis is a statistical technique combining the results of quantitative studies. It is based on a systematic literature
search for relevant studies. Its purpose is to inform clinical practice and decision-making.

Requirements

  • 12 months of time and at least 3 team members to undertake the review.
  • Meta-analyses must adhere to the PRISMA guidelines.

How to conduct a meta-analysis

  1. Develop a research question
  2. Develop a hypothesis and aim
  3. Develop a protocol
  4. Search the literature 
  5. Select and screen studies
  6. Extract and organise data
  7. Critically appraise studies
  8. Perform the statistical analysis
  9. Synthesis and summarise findings
  10. Write the review in accordance with PRISMA
  11. Reference your sources
  12. Publish your research

Recommended resources:

Systematic Review Guide


TARG Bristol. (2017). A three minute primer on meta-analysis.

An umbrella review is a review of systematic reviews and/or meta-analyses. Its purpose is to inform clinical practice and decision-making on topics with many existing reviews.

Requirements

  • 12 months of time and at least 3 team members to undertake the review.
  • Umbrella reviews must adhere to the PRIOR Statement.

How to conduct a meta-analysis

  1. Develop a research question
  2. Develop a hypothesis and aim
  3. Develop a protocol
  4. Search the literature 
    1. Include limits for systematic review and/or meta-analyses
    2. You will need assistance from a librarian.
  5. Select and screen studies
  6. Extract and organise data
  7. Critically appraise studies
  8. Synthesis and summarise findings
  9. Write the review in accordance with PRIOR
  10. Reference your sources
  11. Publish your research
Examples
McIsaac, D. I., et al. (2022). Prehabilitation in adult patients undergoing surgery: an umbrella review of systematic reviews. British journal of anaesthesia, 128(2), 244–257. 
Valkenburg, P. M., et al. (2022). Social media use and its impact on adolescent mental health: An umbrella review of the evidence. Current opinion in psychology, 44, 58–68. 

Recommended resources:

Systematic Review Guide

JBI. (2024). What are Umbrella Reviews?