Research Support
Systematic Reviews
A protocol first, then searching. Doing it the other way round shows.
A systematic review is defined by its protocol, not its length. If the criteria were decided after seeing the results, the review is a narrative one with extra steps, and a marker who knows the field will say so. We write the protocol first — databases, strings, criteria, appraisal tool — then run it, and the PRISMA numbers come out of the process instead of being reverse-engineered.
What you get
- A search strategy that another person could repeat
- Inclusion and exclusion criteria fixed in advance
- A PRISMA flow with real numbers at every stage
- Quality appraisal using a recognised tool
- Synthesis tables that answer your question
Related reading
Referencing
APA 7th Edition
The details that cost marks: capitals, italics, ampersands and DOIs.
Read more →
Thesis & Dissertation
Discussion Chapter
Where your results stop being numbers and become findings.
Read more →