Gibson D. Lewis Library Libguides
Step One is expected to take approximately 4 weeks, or around 160 hours, to complete. Be sure to factor this into your planning, this time estimate assumes all team members are working exclusively on this project.
(UNC, 2025)
Good planning is crucial for creating any high-quality evidence synthesis. When starting a systematic review, rapid review, or any other type, it's important to begin with a clear plan. This involves creating a focused research question, assembling the right team, and clearly defining the scope and goals of the review. Systematic reviews often need a detailed approach and are usually done by a team with various skills. The team typically includes subject experts, a librarian or someone experienced in literature searching, a statistician, and sometimes a project manager to keep everything on track.Key components of planning include:
The research question is the foundation of your review. A well-defined question helps determine the direction of the search, the inclusion criteria, and the type of evidence needed. It should be specific, focused, and structured in a way that allows for systematic investigation. Using a framework—such as PICO, PICOT, or PEO—can help you break down your question into key components and ensure it’s answerable with existing evidence.
See the frameworks below for help in structuring your question based on your review type.
When looking at topics that surround clinical interventions, PICO is a mnemonic that helps organize a case scenario or research topic into a focused clinical research question. PICO stands for: Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome.
To explore questions that are more focused on experiences, perception, or social phenomena rather than on clinical interventions, other structures can help create a concise and answerable research question. These structures are especially helpful with qualitative or mixed-methods research when context and perspective are the most salient.
PICo is a commonly used framework for developing qualitative research questions, especially those exploring experiences, perceptions, or views. It stands for Population, Interest, and Context. This structure helps researchers create focused, answerable questions by identifying the group being studied, the phenomena or issue of interest, and the setting or context in which it occurs.
Framework often used for qualitative research and focuses on understanding experiences, perceptions, or phenomena. It stands for Population, Exposure, and Outcome, allowing researchers to explore how a certain exposure or experience affects a specific group and what the resulting outcomes are.
SPICE is a framework commonly used in evaluating service delivery, interventions, or policy questions. It stands for Setting, Perspective, Intervention, Comparison, and Evaluation. This tool helps structure questions around how services or interventions are experienced or perceived in real-world contexts.
SPIDER is tailored for qualitative and mixed-methods research. It stands for Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, and Research type. SPIDER helps researchers frame questions to capture more subjective outcomes like attitudes, experiences, or processes.
A good review depends on putting together the right team. At minimum, a systematic review should include at least two reviewers to reduce bias. Depending on the review type and complexity, your team may also include a subject matter expert, a librarian or information specialist for developing and running the search strategy, and a statistician for data analysis. In some cases, a project manager can help coordinate tasks and timelines. Clearly define each team member’s role early in the process to ensure efficiency, accountability, and consistent communication throughout the review.
Lead Reviewer / Principal Investigator – Oversees the entire review process and ensures methodological integrity
Co-Reviewers – Screen studies, extract data, assess quality, and help resolve disagreements
Subject Matter Expert – Offers subject-matter knowledge to direct the formulation of questions and guides the interpretation of findings
Librarian / Information Specialist/ Skilled Searcher – Creates and runs comprehensive search strategies across multiple databases
Statistician / Data Analyst – Assists with data analysis, meta-analysis, and the interpretation of statistical results
Project Manager – Coordinates timelines, tracks progress, and ensures the team stays on schedule
Methodologist – Provides guidance on review procedures, such as inclusion/exclusion standards and tools for evaluating quality
Setting clear rules for your review helps keep the project organized and focused. Follow these steps to help your team discuss what the review will cover, what you want to achieve, and the time frame.
Define the scope
Decide what the review will include and exclude (e.g., population, interventions, outcomes, study types)
Establish clear objectives
Clearly outline what you want to accomplish. This might be summarizing evidence, finding research gaps, or helping with clinical guidelines
Develop a timeline
Plan the time needed for each part of the review, from protocol development to final synthesis
Consider team's availability, potential delays, and important deadlines
Align the team on goals and expectations
Ensure everyone knows the scope, main goals, and timeline before starting
Before you spend a lot of effort and time on a review, you should explore what as already been accomplished in the research. This helps you refine your question, assess feasibility, and ensure your review adds value to the field.
Prevents unnecessary duplication of existing reviews
Allows you to contribute to what is already known rather than reproducing it
Refines your question and search strategy by identifying gaps or saturation in the literature
Scan recent literature in databases like PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, or Scopus to see what has already been published
Review key journals in your subject area to find related reviews or studies
Consult subject experts or librarians for insights into the research landscape
Check whether a systematic review or similar project has already been started by searching established protocol registries:
PROSPERO: Most widely used international database of registered systematic review protocols
Cochrane Library Reviews: Collection of protocols for systematic reviews
OSF Registries (Open Science Framework): Repository of of study plans, designs, data, and outcomes
Joanna Briggs Institute Systematic Review Register: Registry of protocols that follow JBI's mission for evidence-based practice
Apply appropriate keywords and filters to check if an overlapping review is already registered or published. If a review with similarity is identified, consider whether yours will provide a different perspective, newer evidence, or a different population or intervention focus.
