Talk:Systematic review

WikiProject Statistics (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon
Portal icon Statistics portal

This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Statistics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of statistics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page or join the discussion.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
 
WikiProject Medicine (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon
Portal icon Medicine portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that this article follows the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and uses high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Assessment

IMO this article doesn't get a "high" importance rating because it's unlikely to attract very much attention from non-professionals. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:58, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

↑Jump back a section

Article content

Shouldn't it be mentioned that a systematic review is not only a review of biomedical research but many other types of healthcare related reserach?? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.41.105.161 (talk) 22:20, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Does this apply in other fields aside from healthcare as well? Certainly other fields do literature reviews; when those reviews are tightly focused around a particular question, is that not a systematic review? ImpIn | (t - c) 08:43, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
A systematic review is about more than a review being tightly focused around a particular question. That said, systematic reviews are used in contexts beyond healthcare, e.g. education. Bondegezou (talk) 16:22, 14 June 2008 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section

Mandatory for all professionals?

Either the universal qualifier should be removed or the set of individuals designated specified. Is this saying that RNs. physician assistants, EMTs, etc. for example, are either not medical professionals or should be capable of conducting a systematic review? 96.243.13.36 (talk) 19:30, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'm an american and it's common here to call just about anybody a professional. I didn't know until reading the professional article that the term might be restricted to doctoral graduates which usage would make (much more) sense although I still think the universal qualifier is overreaching. 96.243.13.36 (talk) 19:34, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
↑Jump back a section
Last modified on 17 February 2013, at 16:15