What is narrative reviews often confused with?

Narrative reviews are often confused with systematic reviews because both types of reviews aim to synthesize existing research on a given topic. However, the key distinction lies in their methodologies and rigor. Systematic reviews follow a transparent and structured process that includes defining a research question, establishing inclusion and exclusion criteria, conducting a comprehensive literature search, and employing explicit methods to evaluate and integrate findings from multiple studies.

In contrast, narrative reviews tend to offer a broader overview of a topic without a strict methodology. They may synthesize various studies and viewpoints but do not adhere to the same systematic approach that characterizes systematic reviews, which can lead to biases and a lack of reproducibility in their findings. This lack of methodological rigor often results in confusion, as readers may mistake the summarized insights from a narrative review for the comprehensive and detailed synthesis typically expected in systematic reviews. This distinction is crucial for understanding the reliability and applicability of the findings presented in both types of reviews.