• If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!



Page history last edited by Andrew Booth 9 years, 3 months ago

Theory in Reviews

This wiki resource identifies theories, frameworks and other models that can be used in the systematic review process (particularly in systematic reviews of complex interventions). A list of included tools is given under each stage of the review process. Links to full text records, or to abstracts where full text is not openly available, are given within the individual wiki pages. 


Planning your review

BeHEMoTh Procedure

Effectiveness plus

Effectiveness plus with parallel review modules

GRADE framework for developing guidelines

Normalisation process theory

PaPaS author and referee guidance


Formulating the review question

BeHEMoTh (Behaviour of interest, Health context, Exclusions, Models or Theories)


PICOS (Patient, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Study types)

PECO (patient, exposure, comparison, outcomes, context)

PICOC (patient, intervention, comparison, outcome)

ProPheT (problem, phenomenon, time)

SPICE (setting, perspective, intervention, comparison, evaluation)

SPIDER (sample, phenomenon of interest, design, evaluation, research type)



Data Extraction

Quality appraisal

Describing, classifying, grouping interventions

Data analysis

Using programme theory and logic models in your review

Using psychological models in a review

Assessing heterogeneity

Examining Equity

Summarising findings

Synthesising evidence

Reporting systematic reviews

Applicability of review findings

Assessing the certainty of review findings

Knowledge translation / Implementation


This wiki resource is made available for educational and training purposes. The original source list was originally compiled under the MICCI Project supported by the Cochrane Collaboration's Methodological Innovations Fund.

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.