What do we mean by ‘systematic’ in health education systematic reviews and why it matters!

Abstract

For anyone who reads the health education literature regularly, journal sections that focus on “reviews” are common, yet the use of the term “systematic” to describe these reviews is sporadic. Further, we believe this term is used in a manner in the field that does not accurately reflect the methodological implications of the term in this context. There are examples of “systematic” works that simply don’t describe themselves in that way, despite a clear alignment with many of the principles of “systematic reviewing”. Conversely, there are reviews that are clearly not systematic, yet describe themselves as such. In this piece, we discuss how this difficulty with methodological nomenclature has occurred and the distinct and important meaning of the term “systematic” in relation to health education reviews.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this article.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Morris Gordon

Morris Gordon, MBChB, PHD, MMed, is a Professor of Systematic review and evidence synthesis, University of Central Lancashire, Preston, UK.

Michelle Daniel

Michelle Daniel, MD, MHPE, is Assistant Dean for Curriculum, and Associate Professor of Emergency Medicine and Learning Health Sciences at the University of Michigan Medical School in Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.

Madalena Patricio

Madalena Patricio, PhD, is Director of the Department of Medical Education at the Faculdade de Medicina da Universidade de Lisboa, Portugal.