Which of the following methods is associated with reporting the results of systematic reviews?

The association of reporting results from systematic reviews with both statistical summarization and narrative synthesis is rooted in the diverse ways that findings can be conveyed to effectively communicate the research outcomes.

Statistical summarization involves the use of meta-analysis, where quantitative data from multiple studies are aggregated to produce a summary statistic, often providing a more precise estimate of the effect size for a given intervention or variable. This method is particularly beneficial when studies are homogeneous and suitable for pooling data, as it allows for a stronger inference regarding the overall impact.

On the other hand, narrative synthesis is a qualitative method that organizes findings in a descriptive manner, summarizing the themes and insights gleaned from the reviewed studies without numerical aggregation. This approach is vital when studies included in the review are heterogeneous and cannot be statistically combined, as it allows for an exploration of context, variations, and subtleties in the data that might be lost in a purely quantitative analysis.

Thus, the combination of both statistical summarization and narrative synthesis provides a comprehensive framework for systematically reporting results, ensuring clarity and depth in understanding the outcomes of the comprehensive review process. This dual methodology is crucial in the systematic review discipline, as it accommodates a wide range of study designs and contributes to a more holistic picture of research findings