A systematic review is the highest level of evidence synthesis, combining all available research on a focused question using a reproducible, transparent methodology. A meta-analysis adds statistical pooling of results for quantitative synthesis.
Systematic reviews sit at the apex of the evidence pyramid above individual RCTs, cohort studies, and expert opinion. We help you produce research that shapes clinical guidelines, policy, and practice.
Protocol pre-registered on PROSPERO with PICO/PICOS framework, eligibility criteria, and planned analyses documented.
PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, Scopus, Web of Science, CINAHL, and grey literature searched with reproducible search strings.
Two independent reviewers screen all records using Covidence or Rayyan; conflicts resolved by a third reviewer.
Structured extraction forms used; risk of bias assessed per study type (Cochrane RoB 2, ROBINS-I, or NOS scale).
Pooled estimates (RR, OR, MD, SMD) calculated with random/fixed effects models; heterogeneity quantified via I².
Overall certainty of evidence graded per GRADE framework for each outcome reported in summary-of-findings tables.
Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome framework designed with your clinical/research question.
MeSH terms, Boolean operators, and database-specific syntax built for maximum sensitivity and specificity.
Structured extraction in PRISMA-compliant tables covering study characteristics, outcomes, and risk-of-bias items.
RevMan 5, R (meta, metafor), or STATA used for pooling. Sensitivity, subgroup, and meta-regression analyses available.
High-resolution forest plots, funnel plots, bubble plots, and PRISMA flow diagrams ready for journal submission.
We recommend the best-fit journal, format the manuscript accordingly, and manage the full submission process.
Everything you need to know about our systematic review service.