Women's Decision-Making And Factors Affecting Their Choice Of ...

considered. Primary research designs and study characteristics are evaluated, data
are blended and results interpreted.
There are two types of systematic reviews, qualitative and quantitative
(meta-analysis). In a qualitative systematic review, results of primary studies are
summarised but not statistically combined, whereas a meta-analysis uses
statistical methods to combine results of two or more studies. Systematic review
results are used to develop evidence-based practice guidelines, which are
appropriately tailored to local circumstances (Cook, Greengold, Ellrodt et al
1997). On the other hand, traditional literature reviews usually address a broad
range of issues related to a given topic as opposed to dealing with a particular
topic in-depth (Mulrow 1987). For example, a review about control of labour
pain in a textbook (Mander 1997) would cover a number of aspects of pain
control, such as, pharmacological and non-pharmacological methods. The
traditional literature review therefore is useful for providing a broad perspective
on a topic.
Differences between systematic and narrative reviews
Literature reviews, whether systematic or traditional, are retrospective
observational research studies, and for that reason are liable to systematic and
random error (Cook, Greengold, Ellrodt et al 1997). The quality and worth of the
review is dependent upon the extent to which scientific review methods are
employed to reduce error and bias. This is the main differentiating feature
between traditional literature reviews and systematic reviews. The following
table, adapted from Cook, Mulrow and Haynes (1997), presents a comparison of
features of a traditional and a systerhatic review.
48