|
 |
| LETTER TO THE EDITOR |
|
| Year : 2019 | Volume
: 24
| Issue : 4 | Page : 314 |
|
A response to “A critical appraisal of the review study to improve its reporting quality”
Mohammad Akbari1, Mousa Alavi1, Alireza Irajpour2, Jahangir Maghsoudi1
1 Mental Health Nursing Department, Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
2 Critical Care Nursing Department, Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran
| Date of Web Publication | 27-Jun-2019 |
Correspondence Address:
Dr. Mousa Alavi
Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, Mental Health Nursing Department, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan
Iran
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | Check |
DOI: 10.4103/ijnmr.IJNMR_40_19
How to cite this article:
Akbari M, Alavi M, Irajpour A, Maghsoudi J. A response to “A critical appraisal of the review study to improve its reporting quality”. Iranian J Nursing Midwifery Res 2019;24:314 |
How to cite this URL:
Akbari M, Alavi M, Irajpour A, Maghsoudi J. A response to “A critical appraisal of the review study to improve its reporting quality”. Iranian J Nursing Midwifery Res [serial online] 2019 [cited 2023 Mar 26];24:314. Available from: https://www.ijnmrjournal.net/text.asp?2019/24/4/314/261608 |
Dear Editor,
Our paper on “Challenges of Family Caregivers of Patients with Mental Disorders in Iran: A Narrative Review”[1] has recently been published in the Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research. This is a response to concerns raised about methodology of our paper.
In the context of the first concern of the appropriateness of using the term of “systematic review” for our study, it is worth noting that the first point of distinction between systematic and traditional narrative review goes back to the research question. A systematic literature review starts with a well-formulated research question that helps researcher to decide and determine which articles to include in the review. Another point of differences is about data analysis in which included studies are grouped together based on their methodological similarities [2] and concerns about measuring the strength of the relationship between two variables and the magnitude of the intervention effect.[3] Nonetheless, in our study, we have been mainly concerned with whether the included studies focused on the challenge or problem in Iranian family caregivers of mental health disorders rather than focusing on methodological similarities or not.
The second point is about the “search period.” There is no rule of thumb in this regard. Regarding the author's point about the analysis and synthesis method, we first refer to the meaning of matrix approach as a means to organize the review, to ensure that a review is not a subjective process that supports one's point of view, while ignoring contrary views.[4] Steps of review through adopting matrix pattern has already been shown in [Figure 1] the published paper. Concerning the fourth point on the method of quality appraisal, it is noteworthy emphasizing on the differences between systematic and narrative review such that in narrative review quality assessment is included in studies that are presented implicitly. However, in systematic review critical appraisal is applied explicitly using specific quality criteria and tools.[5] The fifth recommendation by the author (s) is based on their taste, which is respected. The sixth concern about systematically covering all accessible databases is consistent with the systematic review rather than narrative one.[5] Although the narrative review is also a review, it is different from the systematic review, especially in terms of goals and overall process.{Figure 1}
Financial support and sponsorship
Nil.
Conflicts of interest
Nothing to declare.
| References | |  |
| 1. | Akbari M, Alavi M, Irajpour A, Maghsoudi J. Challenges of family caregivers of patients with mental disorders in Iran: A narrative review. Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res 2018;23:329-37.  |
| 2. | Rother ET. Systematic literature review X narrative review. Acta Paulista de Enfermagem 2007;20:v-vi. |
| 3. | Uman LS. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses. J Can Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry 2011;20:57-9. |
| 4. | Coughlan M, Cronin P. Doing a Literature Review in Nursing, Health and Social Care. London: Sage; 2016. |
| 5. | Pae CU. Why systematic review rather than narrative review? Psychiatry Invest 2015;12:417-9. |
|
Search Pubmed for