Research Paper Guidelines

 
 
Letter To Editor Randomize control Trial Observational Study Case Study Meta Analysis
 

GUIDELINES FOR WRITING METANALYSIS/ REVIEW

A meta-analysis involves detailed scrutiny and analysis of a huge mass of literature available in the field of Physiotherapy. Metanalysis is considered as level one evidence. Thus, the author needs to follow a transparent process for his work to be efficient and effective. 

The author, who is writing a systematic literature review, should be familiar with the PRISMA statement (http://www.prisma-statement.org/PRISMAStatement/Default.aspx). The PRISMA Statement is a document that consists of a 27-item checklist and a flow diagram and aims to guide authors on how to develop a systematic review protocol. PRISMA aims to help authors improve the reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses

A systematic review article follows the same structure as that of an original research article. It typically includes a title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, and references.  

Title: The title should accurately reflect the topic under review. The title must include design “a systematic review” to make the nature of the study clear.

Abstract: A systematic review usually has a structured Abstract, with a short paragraph which includes: background, methods, results, conclusion and keywords

Introduction: The Introduction summarizes the topic and explains why the systematic review was conducted. There might have been gaps in the existing knowledge or a disagreement in the physiotherapy literature that necessitated a review. The introduction should also state the purpose and aims of the review.

Methods: The Methods section is the most crucial part of a systematic review article. The following components should be discussed in detail:

  • Inclusion and exclusion criteria
  • Identification of studies
  • Study selection
  • Data extraction
  • Quality assessment
  • Data analysis
  • Results: The author can begin by describing the search results and then move on to the study range and characteristics, study quality, and finally discuss the effect of the intervention on the outcome. Add flow diagram showing the number of articles found and finally how many articles analysed. Refer PRISMA Flow chart (http://www.prisma-statement.org/documents/PRISMA%202009%20flow%20diagram.pdf)
  • Discussion: The Discussion should summarize the main findings from the review and then move on to discuss the limitations of the study and the reliability of the results. Finally, the review's strengths and weaknesses should be discussed, and implications for current practice are suggested.
  • References: The author should include all articles searched and included in the reference section. Follow Vancouver style for writing the references. 

Reference for additional reading:  Kakoli Majumder, A young researcher's guide to a systematic review. https://www.editage.com/insights/a-young-researchers-guide-to-a-systematic-review?refer=scroll-to-1-article&refer-type=article.