Sistematic Review Article

<<Download template>>

It must contain the following elements:

TITLE: Must be short, concise, and clear, avoiding an excess of prepositions and articles. A maximum of 15 words is advised, excluding formulas, patented names, abbreviations, or acronyms.

AUTHOR | EMAIL | AFFILIATION | ORCID CODE: Are placed immediately below the research title and not in alphabetical order. Academic degrees and hierarchical positions are not included. The first author of the manuscript will be considered the main author.

ABSTRACT: Must be between 150 to 250 words and should be sufficiently succinct and informative to allow the reader to identify the content and interest of the work and decide on reading it. It must be written in the past tense and refer to the place and date of execution. In addition to containing summarized objectives, it includes the methodological procedure of the work, providing clues only to its main results and conclusions.

KEYWORDS: Typically include the studied taxa from most to least important. It should be 3 to 10 significant words that serve to label the article, separated by commas. All keywords must be registered in the Health Sciences Descriptors (DeCS) and Medical Subject Headings (MeSH).

INTRODUCTION: Describes the conceptual or theoretical stage of the research, allowing the reader to understand the general problem so they can comprehend and evaluate the study's results. It must always be a reasoned justification of the research and a formulation of the question in precise and understandable terms. It should be written to highlight the need for the study and stimulate the reader's curiosity. It must include the following key elements for this type of research: (a) the need for the systematic review, (b) the research problem, (c) the research question(s), (d) inclusion and exclusion criteria, (e) information search in scientific databases.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review requires a previously defined protocol that must be followed and applied during the review phases. Therefore, the methodological framework used as a reference for determining review search protocols, such as SALSA, PRISMA, or the Cochrane guide, must be clear. Considered bibliographic databases should be consulted, with a publication period not exceeding 5 years, as well as other sources related to the review topic. The following are the systematic implementation phases presented by García-Peñalvo (2022). It is essential to detail the statistical analysis to be applied.

RESULTS: To synthesize the results of the different studies included in a review, they must be presented clearly so they can be rigorously analyzed. They should be brief and written in the past tense, as they describe what was found in the research. This section includes tables, graphs, and figures. Tables must be interpretable without referring to the text; their design should be simple and the writing appropriate. Graphs should clearly convey the message and show the numerical values of the statistics. Their function is to present the most important results in relation to the study objectives. It is limited to describing the obtained data without interpreting them.

DISCUSSION: This section reflects the analysis and meaning of the results obtained in the research. It begins with the answer to the research objective and the initial question from the introduction, comparing the findings with other studies. It is important to analyze the results of the statistical tests applied in the study, which will allow for formulating conclusions, which are nothing more than the answer to the question(s) posed at the beginning of the research. It is written in the present tense, as the work's findings are now considered scientific evidence.

CONCLUSIONS: For drafting conclusions, consideration is given to the quantity and quality of the works extracted from the literature, the direction and magnitude of the effects or associations found, their confidence intervals (within what range of values the effect is truly expected to lie), the homogeneity of the studies, and the possibility of generalizing the results to other settings where patient conditions or the intervention might not be the same. It provides an answer to the research problem and the research question(s). Authors often add to these conclusions some recommendation on the practical application of the findings and how they could influence decision-making regarding the management of patients or the studied health problem.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: It must be ensured that the content is original and free of plagiarism, citing all sources correctly. Data must be real and presented clearly and honestly. If information from people is used, their consent must be obtained and their privacy protected. It must detail whether the study was evaluated by an ethics committee. If not, an explanation must be provided as to why the study was not evaluated by an ethics committee.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST: Possible conflicts of interest of the author with institutions or other authors, which emanate from the manuscript submitted for publication, must be stated.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: (Optional) applies to institutions or persons who supported the research. Any publication funded by the University of El Salvador must include a statement that says: “This research was carried out with the financial support of the University of El Salvador, Central America”.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES: Only references that have been directly cited in the manuscript are to be listed under this heading and must be formatted according to the Vancouver Style. At least 60% of the references used must be no older than 5 years.