4.1. Analysis and Reporting

Once the database searches have been completed and articles that meet the inclusion criteria have been identified, it will be necessary to document the characteristics of the included studies. Identifying the included studies will provide a significant level of convenience from the introduction of the review to the discussion section. Table 2 provides the information needed to create the bibliography of the articles included in the systematic review. Having a table where you can process this information and other information related to your research will save time during the reporting phase.

In the process of generating findings, it is essential to extract relevant themes for qualitative reviews. Using a standardized theme generation form will facilitate the generation and consistent analysis and reporting of data relevant to the review. It is recommended that members of the research team code one or two studies to test the theming form before conducting the entire data analysis process (MacMillan et al., 2019). Although it takes time to create an organized database or spreadsheet to store the information generated for the review, it saves researchers time as it prevents confusion later. It will also make the process of reporting compiled information and creating summary information tables faster, easier, and more transparent.

Publishing a well-structured systematic review in a relevant venue ensures that your research reaches and influences the appropriate audience, maximizing its impact. A comprehensive report should meticulously detail every stage of the PRISMA protocol, including the introduction, methods, results, and other relevant sections (Page et al., 2021). It is crucial that each step in the report is clearly described and repeatable, bolstering the study’s accountability and transparency. Furthermore, the rigorous application of PRISMA helps in the synthesis of both quantitative and qualitative evidence, which is critical, especially in fields like health and social sciences, where evidence-based practices are prioritized. This adherence not only supports the formulation of robust health policies and practices but also ensures that research findings are accessible and actionable to policymakers and practitioners (Moher et al., 2015).

To enhance the impact of your research further, it is recommended that the systematic review includes a detailed description of the research process, such as the development of the protocol, the search strategy, screening of studies, assessment of the quality of included studies, and the synthesis of findings.       

Additionally, the final report should discuss the implications of the findings for future research and practice, ensuring that the systematic review contributes constructively to the existing body of knowledge and assists in addressing practical challenges in the field (Page et al., 2021).

By rigorously conducting systematic reviews, researchers can provide policymakers and practitioners with the most current and reliable evidence, supporting informed decision-making and effective practice. This methodical approach not only enhances the integrity and utility of the research but also ensures that it adheres to the highest standards of evidence synthesis, which is essential in the continual evolution of policy and practice in various fields.