Smarter strategies for systematic literature reviews

By Rebecca Rozich

The ability to extract meaningful insights from the growing body of scientific literature is more critical than ever. Whether supporting regulatory submissions, informing clinical development strategies, or identifying treatment gaps, literature reviews are foundational to success. Conducting a high-quality, clinically relevant literature review can be challenging – it demands strategic thinking, methodological rigour and therapeutic expertise.

As a full-service medical communications agency, ICON has the deep industry experience and broad therapeutic area knowledge to deliver robust literature analysis solutions that meet the evolving needs of pharmaceutical and biotech companies. From early-stage development to post-launch education and commercialisation, ICON’s comprehensive, integrated approach ensures that every literature review is aligned with predetermined scientific and strategic goals.

Not all literature reviews are created equal. Our in-house experts tailor each literature review to specific strategic objectives, whether supporting regulatory submission, developing a value proposition, or identifying unmet needs in a therapeutic area.

ICON works closely with clients to determine the most appropriate methodology for their objectives, which can include:

1. Rapid literature reviews
2. Systematic literature reviews
3. Systematic literature review updates
4. Living systematic reviews
5. Scoping reviews.

Systematic literature reviews aim to generate evidence for a specific research question using a clear, predetermined system. They are protocol-driven searches that provide a summary of the available studies to identify, select and critically appraise primary research and includes a formal quality assessment of the evidence.

SLRs require a dedicated team consisting of three or more people, including two reviewers or analysts to perform the screening, extraction and critical appraisal steps, and a separate manager to provide oversight. SLRs follow prescribed procedures:

1. Initial planning – assemble a cross-functional team to define the research question, scope and objectives of the review and align with key stakeholders and timelines.
2. Protocol development – establish a detailed plan outlining methodology, inclusion/exclusion criteria, target databases, data scopes and screening processes.
3. Literature search – under the established protocol, conduct comprehensive searches across selected databases using predefined keywords and strategies to capture all relevant data.
4. Screening – at least two reviewers screen data, including titles and abstracts (and full texts when needed) to determine eligibility based on the protocol.
5. Data extraction – a specially trained team will extract, summarise and quality review relevant data using standardised forms and traceability procedures, to build a consistent, accurate database.
6. Synthesis – analyse and integrate the data to identify patterns, trends and complexities or nuances that may require additional exploration before presenting key findings.
7. Final report – the findings are summarised to provide a clear answer to the original research question and can be structured to meet specific end-user requirements.

A well-executed literature review is only valuable when the findings are interpreted and communicated in a clear and credible format. It takes expert medical writers to develop publication-quality manuscripts summarising findings that translate complex data into compelling insights.

Whether preparing a manuscript for a peer-reviewed journal, developing an internal report, or creating materials for stakeholder engagement, ICON ensures that every deliverable is accurate, transparent and aligned with the overall objectives. Reports moving to publication, for example, must follow the Preferred Reporting Items for systematic reviews and Meta Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines as well as those specific to the targeted journal.  The team’s familiarity with journal requirements, publication ethics and best practices in scientific writing ensures a smooth path from analysis to dissemination.

Literature reviews are complex. It is increasingly common to use commercial SLR software packages to facilitate the process. Tools within the SLR software offer the ability to conduct the search, automatically importing the initial list with reference information including article titles and abstracts, which are carefully screened by the reviewers, saving time and costs through efficiencies.

Artificial intelligence (AI) is also incorporated into SLR tools to increase efficiency – it is, after all, a process that involves combing information to identify patterns. As AI capabilities grow, we reap increased efficiencies and productivity. Although the human expertise remains essential, especially regarding study design, oversight and interpretation of findings.

SLRs can be a powerful alternative to generating new data. When approached holistically and systematically, they impart high-quality and trustworthy results with a lower time and cost commitment. ICON’s broad experience with literature analyses, including gap analyses, landscape analyses and scoping reviews, enables more tailored approaches to achieve targeted goals. Whether you’re preparing for a regulatory milestone, planning a publication, or exploring a new therapeutic area, ICON’s expert team is ready to help.