Systematic Review

708 Words2 Pages

Summary
A systematic review is a process of systematic identification, appraisal and summaries of all the primary studies of the highest level of evidence based on the explicit and reproducible methodologies. A case report describes the presentation and/or course of a disease. Individual case reports are useful for formulating hypothesis and are extremely helpful in the acquisition of evidence in the absence of any other information. Systematic reviews and case reports have been placed on the top and bottom of the hierarchy of evidence, respectively. However, modifications in the hierarchy pyramid have also been suggested. The current review provides succinct summaries of the level of evidence provided by systematic review and individual case …show more content…

Many important parameters such as disease history, clinical description, diagnosis, treatment or prognosis might be explained to the veterinary profession. Case report could present a novel finding; explain an undocumented course of a familiar disease or description of a rare disease. New and emerging diseases and rare complications of interventions could be documented. A case report could provide early warning systems for new and emerging diseases. Rare complications of interventions may be reported that may not be documented in other research trials. New and emerging diseases may be first described as a case report. They may serve as early indicators of novel developments, risks and diagnostic and therapeutic options. Individual case reports are useful for formulating hypothesis and are extremely helpful in the acquisition of evidence in the absence of any other information. Case reports are important particularly in studies of harm (unwanted events) which could not be readily studied in an intentional manner, or because of their rarity, cannot be studied prospectively (Elamin and Montori, 2012). However, the …show more content…

It is a process of systematic identification, appraisal and summaries of all the primary studies of the highest level of evidence based on the explicit and reproducible methodologies (Petticrew & Roberts, 2006, Moberly et al., 2015; Greenhalgh, 2000; Cockcroft and Holmes, 2003). Ideally, most important research hypothesis should be tested more than once by different research teams and different locations. Systematic reviews and meta-analysis help to increase the evidence provided by individual studies. Many characteristics such as design characteristics (randomisation generation and concealment, masking, intention to treat analysis, quality of enrolment of study subjects), benefits and harms of clinical studies of various interventions could be compared. Systematic reviews produce the best available evidence (Guyatt et al., 2002) and could enhance applicability of this evidence through meta-analyses by increasing the precision of the estimates of treatment effect (Elamin and Montori, 2012). Meta-analysis is an optional component of a systematic review (Green, 2005). A systematic review has a high level of evidence and holds a high relevance to the real world. Systematic reviews use strict protocols to reduce bias by analysing already completed studies (Mithun et al., 2012). However, systematic reviews and meta-analyses could not reduce the biases present in the selected studies (Elamin

Open Document