What is a key characteristic of systematic reviews?

A key characteristic of systematic reviews is that they are typically peer-reviewed. This process ensures that the findings and methodologies involved in the review have been evaluated by experts in the field before being published. Peer-review adds a layer of credibility and rigor, as it helps identify any biases or weaknesses in the study that may affect the validity of the results.

Systematic reviews aim to synthesize existing research on a particular topic, ensuring that the review is comprehensive, transparent, and replicable. They follow a structured methodology that includes defining a clear research question, developing a protocol, conducting a thorough literature search, selecting studies based on predefined criteria, and assessing the quality of the studies included. This thoroughness is vital, as it contributes to the reliability of conclusions drawn from the gathered evidence.

While other choices may have some relevance in different contexts, they do not capture the essence of systematic reviews as effectively as the fact that they are peer-reviewed. For example, summarizing initial opinions and integrating clinical experiences do not reflect the systematic and evidence-based nature of these reviews, and unstructured data does not align with the rigorous approach that systematic reviews typically embody, which is grounded in structured and systematic evidence collection and analysis.