Systematic Review
A rigorous review of all available research on a specific question using pre-defined methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise studies. Systematic reviews are among the highest levels of evidence and help clinicians understand the overall evidence for a peptide compound.
Technical Context
Systematic review methodology (PRISMA guidelines): (1) formulate answerable question (PICO format — Patient, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome), (2) develop search strategy (comprehensive, reproducible search across multiple databases — PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, Web of Science), (3) screen titles/abstracts and full texts against pre-specified inclusion/exclusion criteria (typically performed independently by two reviewers with disagreement resolution), (4) extract data using standardised forms, (5) assess risk of bias in included studies (using validated tools — Cochrane RoB 2 for RCTs, ROBINS-I for observational studies), (6) synthesise results (narrative or quantitative/meta-analysis), and (7) assess certainty of evidence (GRADE framework — rating confidence as high, moderate, low, or very low). Systematic reviews of GLP-1 RA efficacy and safety synthesise data from dozens of RCTs and provide the most reliable overall effect estimates.