Principles for good scholarship in systematic reviews.

Area of Science:

• Evidence Synthesis
• Medical Research Methodology
• Scholarly Publishing

Background:

• Trustworthiness of systematic reviews is critical for patient care but is frequently jeopardized.
• Authors, peer reviewers, and editors share accountability for ensuring systematic review accuracy and reliability.
• Existing guidance on systematic review best practices is extensive and requires distillation.

Purpose of the Study:

• To distill current guidance on best tools and practices for systematic reviews.
• To address methodological conduct standards for key systematic review components.
• To contextualize these standards within principles of good scholarship for systematic review development.

Main Methods:

• This work is an invited review, complementing a recent co-publication on systematic review tools and practices.
• It synthesizes and distills existing guidance on systematic review methodology.
• Focuses on practical application of standards for systematic review components.

Main Results:

• Identifies key areas where trustworthiness is compromised in systematic reviews.
• Provides actionable guidance on meeting methodological standards for systematic review conduct.
• Highlights the importance of good scholarship principles in evidence synthesis.

Conclusions:

• Improving the trustworthiness of systematic reviews requires adherence to methodological standards and good scholarship.
• This review offers practical support for authors, peer reviewers, and editors to enhance systematic review quality.
• The findings aim to improve the reliability of evidence syntheses, particularly within developmental medicine literature.