Below are a few selected tools to help you throughout your project that you have access to either through Northeastern or for free.
For a more comprehensive list of tools (both free and paid) available to help with systematic reviews and other evidence syntheses, take a look at the Systematic Review Toolbox.
Use the links below to navigate to boxes, or scroll down to browse.
Tools for the beginning of your project
Tools to help manage independent screening
Tools for citation management and writing
Standards to guide your project
If you have any questions, or would like personalized recommendations for your project, please email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Before you begin your project, consider writing a review protocol with your team. Your protocol can describe the planning for the project, including a timeline, anticipated author contributions, and much more. You can find a template for systematic review protocols attached at the bottom of this box.
When creating a systematic review protocol, it can be useful to review PRISMA-P, the reporting standard for systematic review protocols.
Searching existing protocols and registering your own protocol:
PROSPERO is an international database of prospectively registered systematic reviews in health and social care, welfare, public health, education, crime, justice, and international development, where there is a health related outcome.
OSF Registries is a scholarly repository where you can find and deposit protocols for a wider range of advanced reviews and research projects. Deposits are not limited to systematic reviews, nor to reviews with health related outcomes.
Evidence synthesis projects, by their very nature, involve large numbers of citations. Using a citation management tool to save articles, format citations, and create bibliographies will save you a significant amount of time.
The Northeastern library supports EndNote, Mendeley, RefWorks and Zotero. We also support the use of BibTeX and LaTeX.
While citation managers generally have the same basic functions, each one offers some specific features.
Our citation manager comparison chart (below) can help you identify the features that will work best for you. See also our tutorial on choosing a citation manager.
There are a number of different standards that you can choose to follow. Which standard is best for your project is dependent on your discipline and the project you are completing. For more information on which is the best fit for your project, ask a librarian.
Standards for Systematic Reviews:
PRISMA Statement: Primarily used in the Health Sciences
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions: Primarily used in the Health Sciences and considered the 'Gold Standard' of systematic reviews
Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR): Primarily used in the Health Sciences and used in conjunction with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions.
Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer's Manual: Primarily used in the Health Sciences
Campbell Collaboration: Primarily used in the social sciences, Campbell Collaboration author guidelines are available under the Policies and Guidelines section of their Journal page. Campbell also has a page explaining what a systematic review is as well as additional information on Evidence and Gap Maps.
Collaboration for Environmental Evidence: Guidelines and Standards for Evidence Synthesis in Environmental Management
Standards for Scoping Reviews:
PRISMA Scoping Review Extension: Primarily used in the health sciences