Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 11, 2026
Meta-Analysis of the Effectiveness and Safety of Shugan Jieyu Capsules for the Treatment of Insomnia
Published on: February 17, 2023
Determining the Conclusiveness of Systematic Review Evidence : A Scoping Review of Methodological Approaches
Jong-Wook Ban1, Troels Madsen2, Karen A Robinson3
1Section of Hospital Medicine, Department of Medicine, Biological Sciences Division, University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois (J.-W.B.).
Background:
Systematic reviews can inform research, funding, and guideline decisions. However, it can be challenging to know whether a systematic review has answered a research question conclusively, and it is unclear which methods exist for such assessments.
Purpose:
To map methods related to determining the conclusiveness of systematic reviews.
Data Sources:
Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and Web of Science until 26 September 2025.
Study Selection:
Any documents describing methods for determining the conclusiveness of systematic reviews.
Data Extraction:
Two reviewers independently extracted data from the primary references of the included methods. Forward citation searches of the primary references were then conducted to identify examples of application of the methods.
Data Synthesis:
Sixty-two methods related to assessing the conclusiveness of systematic review results were identified; 45 of these had at least 1 example of their application. The 62 methods were categorized into 3 approaches comprising 23 groups. Mathematical approaches for meta-analyses included 29 methods categorized into 9 groups, such as the fail-safe number, Barrowman's n, and the fragility index. Mathematical approaches for cumulative meta-analyses comprised 15 methods categorized into 7 groups, including trial sequential analyses, sequential meta-analyses, and the law of the iterated logarithm methods. Nonmathematical approaches included 18 methods across 7 groups, such as GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) frameworks, Ottawa methods, and the RAND method.
Limitations:
There was no assessment of which methods perform better. Not all methods strictly aimed to determine conclusiveness.
Conclusion:
This review identified various methods related to assessing the conclusiveness of systematic reviews to enhance their ability to guide research, funding, and clinical decisions.
Primary Funding Source:
Western Norway University of Applied Sciences. (Protocol registered in the Open Science Framework [https://osf.io/dthps]).
Related Concept Videos
01:18The Scientific Method in Nursing Process
When using research findings to change practice, one must understand the process used to guide a study. The scientific method is a systematic, step-by-step process that supports the data's validity, reliability, and generalizability. As a result, findings can be...
01:23Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
01:25Strategies for Assessing and Addressing Confounding
Confounding can be addressed at both the design phase of a study and through analytical methods after data...
01:28Criteria for Causality: Bradford Hill Criteria - II
01:15Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
01:26Introduction to Epidemiology