Title: Unveiling the Complexity of Writing a Literature Review on Evidence in Software

Architecture: A Systematic Approach

Welcome to our comprehensive exploration of the intricate process of crafting a literature review on
evidence in software architecture. As the digital landscape continues to evolve, the demand for
robust and reliable software architecture becomes increasingly imperative. In this context,
understanding the existing evidence and research becomes paramount.

Embarking on a literature review journey is not merely about summarizing existing literature; it's
about delving deep into a vast sea of information, critically analyzing studies, synthesizing findings,
and identifying gaps in knowledge. However, this task is far from simple; it's a nuanced process that
demands meticulous attention to detail and a profound understanding of the subject matter.

When it comes to evidence in software architecture, the complexity is amplified. With the dynamic
nature of technology and the constant influx of new research, navigating through the plethora of
literature poses significant challenges. Researchers must sift through numerous studies, ranging from
empirical research to theoretical frameworks, to grasp the current state of knowledge
comprehensively.

Moreover, synthesizing disparate findings and reconciling conflicting perspectives is a daunting task.
It requires a discerning eye to identify patterns, trends, and discrepancies within the literature,
ultimately aiming to provide a coherent narrative that contributes to the existing body of knowledge.

To mitigate the challenges associated with crafting a literature review on evidence in software
architecture, it's essential to adopt a systematic approach. This involves meticulously defining
research questions, establishing inclusion and exclusion criteria, conducting thorough searches across
multiple databases, and rigorously assessing the quality of selected studies.

However, even with a systematic approach, the process can be overwhelming for many researchers.
Time constraints, lack of expertise, and competing priorities often hinder individuals from
conducting a comprehensive literature review that meets the highest academic standards.

That's where ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔ comes in. Our platform offers a lifeline to researchers grappling
with the daunting task of writing a literature review on evidence in software architecture. With a
team of experienced writers well-versed in the intricacies of academic writing, we provide
customized assistance tailored to your specific needs.

By entrusting your literature review to ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔, you can rest assured that your project
will be in capable hands. Our writers meticulously navigate through the vast landscape of literature,
synthesizing key findings, and crafting a cohesive narrative that aligns with your research objectives.
Whether you need assistance with structuring your literature review, synthesizing complex concepts,
or refining your writing style, we're here to help.

Don't let the complexity of writing a literature review on evidence in software architecture
overwhelm you. Take advantage of our expertise and streamline your research process with ⇒
StudyHub.vip ⇔. Reach out to us today and embark on a journey towards academic excellence.
The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int J Surg.
2021;88:105906. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. We thank the following contributors
who provided feedback on a preliminary version of the PRISMA 2020 checklist: Jo Abbott, Fionn
Buttner, Patricia Correia-Santos, Victoria Freeman, Emily A Hennessy, Rakibul Islam, Amalia
(Emily) Karahalios, Kasper Krommes, Andreas Lundh, Dafne Port Nascimento, Davina Robson,
Catherine Schenck-Yglesias, Mary M Scott, Sarah Tanveer and Pavel Zhelnov. Enter the number of
records removed as duplicates in the second box on your PRISMA template. Be sure to capture the
number of articles from your database searches before any duplicates are removed. In order to
encourage its wide dissemination this article is freely accessible on BMJ, PLOS Medicine, Journal of
Clinical Epidemiology and International Journal of Surgery journal websites. Tetzlaff Clinical
Research Institute, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon; Department of Health Research
Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada Elie A. PRISMA
Group Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.
BMJ. 2009;339:b2535.. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Complete the boxes
documenting your database searches, Identification of studies via databases and registers, according
to the PRISMA flow diagram instructions. You can commence the selection of relevant studies based
on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. A meta-analysis combines data from different studies,
effectively creating a larger sample size to improve the quality of information. BMJ Glob Health.
2019;4(Suppl 1):e000858.. Campbell M, McKenzie JE, Sowden A, et al. After obtaining his Bachelor
of Science in Genetics, he earned a Master of Science in Microbiology from the Michael DeGroote
Institute of Infectious Disease Research at McMaster University. Each table contains a PRISMA
checklist item that should be written about in that section, the matching PRISMA Item number, and
a box where authors can indicate if an item has been completed. Using statistical methods for the
interpretation of the results implies a systematic review containing meta-analysis ( 6 ). Supplying
readers with a clear understanding of empirical software engineering best practices, it provides up-to-
date guidance on how to conduct secondary studies in software engineering—replacing the existing
2004 and 2007 technical reports. The graphic below shows the growing importance of RWE from
discovery to post approval. Once text has been added, delete any remaining instructions and the
PRISMA checklist tables from the end of each section. Applying clinical decision support design
best practices with the practical robust implementation and sustainability model versus reliance on
commercially available clinical decision support tools: randomized controlled trial. DistillerSR makes
any project, large or small, simpler to manage and configure so that an individual or organization can
produce transparent, audit-ready, and compliant literature reviews. Preferred reporting items for
systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. COSMOS-E: guidance on
conducting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies of etiology. PLoS Med.
2019;16:e1002742.. Cooper H, Hedges LV, Valentine JV. A systematic review will extensively scan
all reports published on the subject to find the answers to a clearly defined research question, and to
that end will use various inclusion and exclusion criteria to identify the reports to be included in the
review, and then synthesize the findings. DistillerSR made us more confident in our accuracy, and it
made our quality control simpler.”. PRISMA Links The PRISMA Flow Diagram is a tool that can be
used to record different stages of the literature search process--across multiple resources--and clearly
show how a researcher went from, 'These are the databases I searched for my terms', to, 'These are
the papers I'm going to talk about'. Understanding the types of information nurses need in direct care
and leadership roles, what information is available, and limitations to existing information sources is
needed to evaluate interventions to support decision-making. PRISMA 2020 Checklists Download
the 2020 PRISMA Checklists in Word or PDF formats or download the expanded checklist (PDF).
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews The PRISMA
2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that reflects
advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. User experiences of the tool
Rayyan Article: Faster title and abstract screening. Remember to use Article Finder and Interlibrary
Loan to locate articles in which we have a subscription and to request articles from other libraries
before automatically excluding them. There is also a PowerPoint version of the document but the file
size is too large to upload here.
Prisma Flow Diagram This link will take you to downloadable Word and PDF copies of the flow
diagram. In such cases, if the relevant information for some items already appears in a publicly
accessible review protocol, referring to the protocol may suffice. All authors except for TCH, JMT,
EAA, SEB, and LAM attended the development meeting. Implementation strategies describe the
specific interventions chosen to facilitate change. Implementation science training and resources for
nurses and nurse scientists. Factors such as increasing patient acuity, escalating evidence base, and
global pandemics have led to increased complexity in nurse decision-making across roles. Guidance
for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLoS Med. 2010;7:e1000217.. Simera I,
Moher D, Hirst A, Hoey J, Schulz KF, Altman DG. We thank the following contributors who
provided feedback on a preliminary version of the PRISMA 2020 checklist: Jo Abbott, Fionn
Buttner, Patricia Correia-Santos, Victoria Freeman, Emily A Hennessy, Rakibul Islam, Amalia
(Emily) Karahalios, Kasper Krommes, Andreas Lundh, Dafne Port Nascimento, Davina Robson,
Catherine Schenck-Yglesias, Mary M Scott, Sarah Tanveer and Pavel Zhelnov. PRISMA Links The
PRISMA Flow Diagram is a tool that can be used to record different stages of the literature search
process--across multiple resources--and clearly show how a researcher went from, 'These are the
databases I searched for my terms', to, 'These are the papers I'm going to talk about'. Records that
refer to the same report (such as the same journal article) are “duplicates”; however, records that refer
to reports that are merely similar (such as a similar abstract submitted to two different conferences)
should be considered unique. Across settings and nursing roles, effective decision-making is
fundamental to excellent nursing and patient care. This distinction was introduced in the PRISMA
2020 flow diagram based on our observation that the jump from the number of reports assessed for
eligibility to the number of studies included in the review (as was prompted in the original PRISMA
flow diagram) sometimes resulted in some reports not being accounted for. Enter the number of
records removed as duplicates in the second box on your PRISMA template. Write an Abstract
describing your study and a Conclusion summarizing your paper.? Cite the studies included in your
systematic review and any other articles you may have used in your paper.? If you wish to publish
your work, choose a target journal for your article. Each slide that has notes has a callout icon on the
top right of the page which can be toggled on or off to make the notes visible. MJP and JEM took
and consolidated notes from the development meeting. The graphic below shows the growing
importance of RWE from discovery to post approval. HIMSS; 2009. Dunn Lopez K, Gephart SM,
Raszewski R, Sousa V, Shehorn LE, Abraham J. Decision rules or logic may be developed using
literature and current practice (knowledge-based) or artificial intelligence (non-knowledge-based).
Welch Centre for Journalology, Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute,
Ottawa, Canada; School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of
Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada David Moher You can also search for this author in PubMed Google
Scholar Contributions JEM and DM are joint senior authors. Covidence does not include the number
of results from each database, so you will need to keep track of that number yourself. Information
needs and information-seeking behaviour analysis of primary care physicians and nurses: a literature
review. TL is supported by funding from the National Eye Institute (UG1EY020522), National
Institutes of Health, United States. Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer
reviewed. In general, CDS is composed of three key parts. 24 Data management: clinical data and
decision rules or logic. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols
(PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;350:g7647.. Hutton B, Salanti G,
Caldwell DM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement has been designed primarily for systematic
reviews of studies that evaluate the efects of health interventions, irrespective of the design of the
included studies. There are a number of tools that can be used to ensure compliance with reporting
guidelines. Feedback was received from 15 individuals and considered by the first author, and any
revisions deemed necessary were incorporated before the final version was approved and endorsed
by all co-authors. Presenting and summarising characteristics of studies contributing to a synthesis
allows healthcare providers and policy makers to evaluate the applicability of the findings to their
setting.
Click to view the step-by-step explanation of review update portion of the PRISMA flow diagram
Step 1: Preparation Download the flow diagram template version 2 PRISMA 2020 flow diagram for
updated systematic reviews which included searches of databases and registers only or the version 2
PRISMA 2020 flow diagram for updated systematic reviews which included searches of databases,
registers and other sources. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of
interventions. BMJ. 2016;355:i4919.. Whiting P, Savovic J, Higgins JP, ROBIS group, et al. This
will also significantly increase the citability of the report. If you have identified articles through other
sources than databases (such as manual searches through reference lists of articles you have found or
search engines like Google Scholar), enter the total number of records from each source type in the
box on the top right of the flow diagram. Systematic literature reviews are thus essential for multiple
stages through development and commercialization. PRISMA stands for Preferred Reporting
Instrument for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis. The series of videos from Yale are
particularly helpful for both types of reviews. The PRISMA Checklist will help you report the details
of your systematic review. The PRISMA Flow Diagram can be downloaded in Word files. The
funders had no role in considering the study design or in the collection, analysis, interpretation of
data, writing of the report, or decision to submit the article for publication. Numbers of articles are
recorded at the different stages. Transparent and accurate reporting increases reliability, utility, and
impact of your research: reporting guidelines and the EQUATOR Network. BMC Med. 2010;8:24..
Speich B, Schroter S, Briel M, et al. Remember to use Article Finder and Interlibrary Loan to locate
articles in which we have a subscription and to request articles from other libraries before
automatically excluding them. A checklist for journal and conference abstracts for systematic reviews
is included in PRISMA 2020. Use of PRISMA 2020 has the potential to benefit many stakeholders.
There is a checklist outlining the sections to include in your report, and a flow diagram to record the
number of records retained at each step in the review process. Related, is the concept of context, or
the unique local factors (e.g., unit culture, work environment, resources) that influence how or why
implementation is achieved. 34 In partnership with implementation scientists, nurse leaders can
identify unique barriers and facilitators to implementation in the local environment and then match
the needs to implementation strategies. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for
reporting systematic reviews. Int J Surg. 2021;88:105906. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et
al. Evidence-Based Software Engineering and Systematic Reviews provides a clear introduction to
the use of an evidence-based model for software engineering research and practice. Yearb Med
Inform. 2000;9(01):65-70. Khan S, Chambers D, Neta G. Leveraging User-Centered Design View
Figure 1 as pdf Considering the unique needs of users, or user-centered design, is a concept central
to implementation science and CDS design (Figure 1). In April 2020, we invited 22 systematic
reviewers who had expressed interest in providing feedback on the PRISMA 2020 checklist to share
their views (via an online survey) on the layout and terminology used in a preliminary version of the
checklist. The PRISMA checklist and flow diagram provide a model to step you through the process
and assist you in writing your manuscript. FYI Google Scholar should be documented following the
next section about Documenting Other Sources. Refer to the PRISMA checklist for more
information. Different templates are available depending on the type of review (new or updated) and
sources used to identify studies. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews.
PLoS Med. 2007;4:e78.. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. All authors were involved in
revising the article critically for important intellectual content. Information is a fundamental
component of the decision-making process and is generated from diverse sources.
We discussed proposed content and wording of the PRISMA 2020 statement, as informed by the
review and survey results, at a 21-member, two-day, in-person meeting in September 2018 in
Edinburgh, Scotland. Those reading an article should pay attention to inclusion and exclusion
criteria, and how authors determined articles for inclusion in their final research. A recent review of
nursing management information systems found that nursing leaders use information systems to
manage human resources, determine nursing workload (nurse to patient ratio) and control costs. 22
These systems are largely based on two sources of data: patient classification measures and hospital
resource measurement. The electronic health record (EHR) is the primary source of patient data,
however substantial documentation demands have significantly impacted nurse workload and
workflows for finding relevant information. RWE COEs are focused on developing ecosystems of
evidence generation, data collection and quality standards, strategic and methodologic study
execution, and enterprise platforms for data management. A robust systematic literature review
platform for literature management is an essential part of a high-quality evidence ecosystem.
Quantifying and visualizing nursing flowsheet documentation burden in acute and critical care. The
PRISMA 2020 statement replaces the 2009 statement and includes new reporting guidance that
reflects advances in methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. Future research
might explore barriers and facilitators to the use of PRISMA 2020 by authors, editors, and peer
reviewers, designing interventions that address the identified barriers, and evaluating those
interventions using randomised trials. We thank Edoardo Aromataris, Stephanie Chang, Toby
Lasserson and David Schriger for their helpful peer review comments on the PRISMA 2020 papers.
Tools for writing your review RevMan (Cochrane Training) Methods Wizard (Systematic Review
Accelerator) The Methods Wizard is part of the Systematic Review Accelerator created by Bond
University and the Institute for Evidence-Based Healthcare. There is a checklist outlining the
sections to include in your report, and a flow diagram to record the number of records retained at
each step in the review process. This is an example of how you could fill in the PRISMA flow
diagram when conducting a new review. Different templates are available depending on the type of
review (new or updated) and sources used to identify studies. (PDF) A Guide for Systematic
Reviews: PRISMA. Abstract Technology, such as clinical decision support, can play a role in
supporting nurses’ decision making, but understanding the complexity and current challenges in nurse
decision-making is needed to guide the implementation of technology interventions focused on
supporting effective decision-making in practice and leadership. Data abstraction will involve pulling
data elements from the individual studies. Federal government websites often end in.gov or.mil.
Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site. According to
the common opinion, a review type article is the interpretation, synthesis and assessment of the
scientific reports and studies printed in scientific publications by authors experienced in the area ( 5
). Aligning implementation and user-centered design strategies to enhance the impact of health
services: results from a concept mapping study. The PRISMA 2020 statement has been designed
primarily for systematic reviews of studies that evaluate the effects of health interventions,
irrespective of the design of the included studies. They can provide syntheses of the state of
knowledge in a field, from which future research priorities can be identified; they can address
questions that otherwise could not be answered by individual studies; they can identify problems in
primary research that should be rectified in future studies; and they can generate or evaluate theories
about how or why phenomena occur. MD Anderson faculty and staff can also request a one-on-one
consultation with a librarian or scientific editor. All authors except for TCH, JMT, EAA, SEB, and
LAM attended the development meeting. To capture these advances in the reporting of systematic
reviews necessitated an update to the PRISMA 2009 statement. Information needs and information-
seeking behaviour analysis of primary care physicians and nurses: a literature review. Use of
PRISMA 2020 has the potential to benefit many stakeholders. By Barbara Ann Kitchenham, David
Budgen, Pearl Brereton. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses
of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration. BMJ.
2009;339:b2700.. Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, et al. You can provide the numbers in the data
entry section of the 'Create flow diagram' tab (click on the button at the top of the page). Systematic
Reviews: Step 8: Write the Review You will: Review the reporting standards you will use, such as
PRISMA.
The PRISMA flow diagram The PRISMA Flow Diagram visually depicts the flow of studies
through each phase of the review process. The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews
and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration.
The electronic health record (EHR) is the primary source of patient data, however substantial
documentation demands have significantly impacted nurse workload and workflows for finding
relevant information. It consists of a checklist and a flow diagram, and is intended to be
accompanied by the PRISMA 2020 Explanation and Elaboration document. The second part
examines the different elements that provide inputs to a systematic review (usually considered as
forming a secondary study), especially the main forms of primary empirical study currently used in
software engineering. Review the full text for these items to assess their eligibility for inclusion in
your paper. Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: reporting guideline.
BMJ. 2020;368:l6890.. Sterne JAC, Savovic J, Page MJ, et al. You have now completed your
PRISMA flow diagram, unless you have also performed searches in non-database sources. Res
Integr Peer Rev. 2019;4:12.. Blanco D, Altman D, Moher D, Boutron I, Kirkham JJ, Cobo E.
Therefore, tools which filter relevant patient data and apply logic to determine a recommendation
are needed. This study was presented at the A to Z Scientific Study Planning, Writing and
Publishing Processes Meeting in Health Sciences, January 9 2019, Sivas, Turkey. Processing: applies
the knowledge or algorithms with patient data User interface: the part of the system that
communicates a recommendation and is the point the user interacts with (e.g., computer display,
mouse). MJP is supported by an Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Researcher
Award (DE200101618) and was previously supported by an Australian National Health and Medical
Research Council (NHMRC) Early Career Fellowship (1088535) during the conduct of this research.
Narrative synthesis Guidance from the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination for creating a textual
summary of the relevant studies and analysing their robustness. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items
for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) Current PRISMA flow diagram A new version of the
PRISMA guidelines and flow diagram was published in 2021. When you're excluding articles at the
full-text stage, it is important to include the reasons for exclusion. The flow diagram describes the
identification, screening, eligibility and inclusion criteria of the reports that fall under the scope of a
review. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLoS Med.
2010;7:e1000217.. Simera I, Moher D, Hirst A, Hoey J, Schulz KF, Altman DG. Numbers of articles
are recorded at the different stages. FYI Google Scholar should be documented following the next
section about Documenting Other Sources. The book explains the roles of primary studies
(experiments, surveys, case studies) as elements of an over-arching evidence model, rather than as
disjointed elements in the empirical spectrum. Nurses' sources of information to inform clinical
practice: An integrative review to guide evidence-based practice. PRISMA 2020 explanation and
elaboration: updated guidance and exemplars for reporting systematic reviews. Bmj. 2021;372:n160.
Radua J. PRISMA 2020 - An updated checklist for systematic reviews and meta-analyses. PRISMA
Flow Diagram PRISMA is an evidence-based minimum set of items for reporting in systematic
reviews and meta-analyses. The structure and presentation of the items have been modified to
facilitate implementation. Dissemination and implementation research in health: translating science to
practice. APU does not have a subscription for this however you can sign up for a free trial here.
Check journal guidelines: Your journal may have specific guidelines about the format of your plain
language summary and when you can publish it. Clinical intuition in the nursing process and
decision-making-A mixed-studies review. Reporting your review with PRISMA To write your
review, you will need the data from your PRISMA flow diagram.
Tetzlaff Clinical Research Institute, American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon; Department of
Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Elie A. Federal government websites often end in.gov or.mil. Before sharing sensitive information,
make sure you’re on a federal government site. The structure and presentation of the items have been
modified to facilitate implementation. BMJ Glob Health. 2019;4(Suppl 1):e000858.. Campbell M,
McKenzie JE, Sowden A, et al. The PRISMA checklist and flow diagram provide a model to step
you through the process and assist you in writing your manuscript. The first part discusses the nature
of evidence and the evidence-based practices centered on a systematic review, both in general and as
applying to software engineering. Moreover, consolidated insights from published RWE increase the
comprehensiveness and relevance of market access evidence packages for key stakeholders. A
checklist for journal and conference abstracts for systematic reviews is included in PRISMA 2020.
At the same time, these tools ensure the rigor and transparency of key tactics like systematic
literature reviews so that evidence packages stand up to payer scrutiny for market access. PRISMA
2020 flow diagram for updated systematic reviews- databases and registers only PRISMA 2020 flow
diagram for updated systematic reviews- databases, registers and other sources When referring to
PRISMA 2020, The Equator Network recommends using journal article citations (such as those in
our References below) rather than referring to the PRISMA website. Data extraction tools PRISMA
(Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) provides a structured
approach to reporting systematic reviews (and meta-analyses). Mapping of reporting guidance for
systematic reviews and meta-analyses generated a comprehensive item bank for future reporting
guidelines. The PRISMA 2020 statement has been designed primarily for systematic reviews of
studies that evaluate the efects of health interventions, irrespective of the design of the included
studies. C-suite and bedside clinicians alike increasingly view RWE as strategically important in
healthcare decision making. Any articles that appear to help you provide an answer to your research
question should be included. It is not a hard and fast rule but it should give you an idea of how you
can use it. Rights and permissions Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and
reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s)
and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made.
Following my instructions, many published their systematic literature reviews in top t. Accuracy in
detecting inadequate research reporting by early career peer reviewers using an online CONSORT-
based peer-review tool (COBPeer) versus the usual peer-review process: a cross-sectional diagnostic
study. BMC Med. 2019;17:205.. Wayant C, Page MJ, Vassar M. In such cases, if the relevant
information for some items already appears in a publicly accessible review protocol, referring to the
protocol may suffice. Check journal guidelines: Your journal may have specific guidelines about the
format of your plain language summary and when you can publish it. Click to view the step-by-step
explanation of the PRISMA flow diagram Step 1: Preparation Download the flow diagram template
version 1 PRISMA 2020 flow diagram for new systematic reviews which included searches of
databases and registers only or the version 2 PRISMA 2020 flow diagram for updated systematic
reviews which included searches of databases and registers only. Criteria may include factors
relating to the population, the intervention, the type of study and the outcome. We discussed
proposed content and wording of the PRISMA 2020 statement, as informed by the review and
survey results, at a 21-member, two-day, in-person meeting in September 2018 in Edinburgh,
Scotland. Approaches which consider both how CDS is designed for nurse users and how CDS is
used and implemented across health systems is needed to support effective decision-making for
driving change in nursing practice and leadership settings. There is a checklist outlining the sections
to include in your report, and a flow diagram to record the number of records retained at each step in
the review process. Note that a “report” could be a journal article, preprint, conference abstract,
study register entry, clinical study report, dissertation, unpublished manuscript, government report or
any other document providing relevant information We recommend authors refer to PRISMA 2020
early in the writing process, because prospective consideration of the items may help to ensure that
all the items are addressed. If you are using automation tools to help evaluate the relevance of
citations in your results, you would also enter that number here. Alternatively, placing detailed
descriptions of the methods used or additional results (such as for less critical outcomes) in
supplementary files is recommended. Review the full text for these articles to assess their eligibility
for inclusion in your paper.
HIMSS; 2009. Dunn Lopez K, Gephart SM, Raszewski R, Sousa V, Shehorn LE, Abraham J.
Understanding the types of information nurses need in direct care and leadership roles, what
information is available, and limitations to existing information sources is needed to evaluate
interventions to support decision-making. Version 2 includes additional sections for elaborating on
other sources that you have located, such as searches on websites (like Google Scholar) or in citation
lists. Clinical intuition in the nursing process and decision-making-A mixed-studies review. If you are
using automation tools to help evaluate the relevance of citations in your results, you would also
enter that number here. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( ) applies to the
data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. We discussed
proposed content and wording of the PRISMA 2020 statement, as informed by the review and
survey results, at a 21-member, two-day, in-person meeting in September 2018 in Edinburgh,
Scotland. We encourage journal editors and publishers to raise awareness of PRISMA 2020 (for
example, by referring to it in journal “Instructions to authors”), endorsing its use, advising editors
and peer reviewers to evaluate submitted systematic reviews against the PRISMA 2020 checklists,
and making changes to journal policies to accommodate the new reporting recommendations. None
of these authors were involved in the peer review process or decision to publish. When there is
disagreement between reviewers then discussion can occur to decide outcomes. Related, is the
concept of context, or the unique local factors (e.g., unit culture, work environment, resources) that
influence how or why implementation is achieved. 34 In partnership with implementation scientists,
nurse leaders can identify unique barriers and facilitators to implementation in the local environment
and then match the needs to implementation strategies. Revisiting time to translation:
implementation of evidence-based practices (EBPs) in cancer control. User involvement in the design
and development of patient decision aids and other personal health tools: a systematic review. For
more information about updating your systematic review, see the box Updating Your Review. They
can provide syntheses of the state of knowledge in a field, from which future research priorities can
be identified; they can address questions that otherwise could not be answered by individual studies;
they can identify problems in primary research that should be rectified in future studies; and they can
generate or evaluate theories about how or why phenomena occur. Including meta-analysis in a
review will carry the publication to the highest level of evidence. Tetzlaff Clinical Research Institute,
American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence,
and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada Elie A. Google Scholar Moher D,
Shamseer L, Clarke M, PRISMA-P Group, et al. This is the number of articles you obtain in
preparation for full text screening. COSMOS-E: guidance on conducting systematic reviews and
meta-analyses of observational studies of etiology. PLoS Med. 2019;16:e1002742.. Cooper H,
Hedges LV, Valentine JV. The PRISMA checklist can be downloaded in PDF or Word files. In April
2020, we invited 22 systematic reviewers who had expressed interest in providing feedback on the
PRISMA 2020 checklist to share their views (via an online survey) on the layout and terminology
used in a preliminary version of the checklist. Michael’s Hospital, Unity Health Toronto, Toronto,
Canada; Epidemiology Division of the Dalla Lana School of Public Health and the Institute of
Health Management, Policy, and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada; Queen’s
Collaboration for Health Care Quality Joanna Briggs Institute Centre of Excellence, Queen’s
University, Kingston, Canada Andrea C. The checklist includes a 27-item recommendation list on
topics such as title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion and financing. Preferred
reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Syst
Rev. 2015;4:1.. Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, PRISMA-P Group, et al. Cost analyses of
prosthetic devices: A systematic review. Updating guidance for reporting systematic reviews:
development of the PRISMA 2020 statement. Once you have completed your searches and used a
reference manager (such as EndNote or Mendeley) to export your results, you can then begin
screening your results. DM is supported in part by a University Research Chair, University of
Ottawa. Systematic and scoping reviews should be reproducible, so it is important that your written
manuscript be clear about your research question, what you chose to include and exclude, and how
you went about searching for articles.