Systematic reviews are essential scientific activities that help integrate existing information and support rational decision-making in healthcare. They assess the consistency and generalizability of scientific findings across populations, settings, and treatment variations. Meta-analyses, a type of systematic review, enhance the power and precision of treatment effect estimates. Systematic reviews reduce bias and improve the reliability and accuracy of conclusions. Systematic reviews are needed to manage the vast amount of biomedical literature, which includes over two million articles published annually. They help identify and separate significant studies from less relevant ones. Decision-makers, including clinicians, researchers, and policymakers, use systematic reviews to integrate information, refine hypotheses, and guide practice. Systematic reviews are an efficient scientific technique. They are quicker and less costly than new studies and can prevent redundant research. Continuous updates, such as the Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials, help shorten the time between research discoveries and clinical implementation. A landmark example is the cumulative meta-analysis of streptokinase trials, which showed its effectiveness long before regulatory approval. Systematic reviews enhance generalisability by considering diverse study designs and populations. They assess the consistency of relationships and can identify inconsistencies in data. Quantitative systematic reviews increase statistical power and precision in estimating effects and risks. They also improve accuracy by reducing bias through explicit methods. Traditional reviews are often criticized for being haphazard and biased. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses use explicit principles to reduce errors. They allow replication of results and understanding of why conclusions differ. Traditional recommendations may lag behind updated meta-analyses. In conclusion, systematic reviews are vital for integrating information, improving accuracy, and guiding healthcare decisions. They help manage the vast amount of biomedical literature and ensure reliable, evidence-based practices.Systematic reviews are essential scientific activities that help integrate existing information and support rational decision-making in healthcare. They assess the consistency and generalizability of scientific findings across populations, settings, and treatment variations. Meta-analyses, a type of systematic review, enhance the power and precision of treatment effect estimates. Systematic reviews reduce bias and improve the reliability and accuracy of conclusions. Systematic reviews are needed to manage the vast amount of biomedical literature, which includes over two million articles published annually. They help identify and separate significant studies from less relevant ones. Decision-makers, including clinicians, researchers, and policymakers, use systematic reviews to integrate information, refine hypotheses, and guide practice. Systematic reviews are an efficient scientific technique. They are quicker and less costly than new studies and can prevent redundant research. Continuous updates, such as the Oxford Database of Perinatal Trials, help shorten the time between research discoveries and clinical implementation. A landmark example is the cumulative meta-analysis of streptokinase trials, which showed its effectiveness long before regulatory approval. Systematic reviews enhance generalisability by considering diverse study designs and populations. They assess the consistency of relationships and can identify inconsistencies in data. Quantitative systematic reviews increase statistical power and precision in estimating effects and risks. They also improve accuracy by reducing bias through explicit methods. Traditional reviews are often criticized for being haphazard and biased. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses use explicit principles to reduce errors. They allow replication of results and understanding of why conclusions differ. Traditional recommendations may lag behind updated meta-analyses. In conclusion, systematic reviews are vital for integrating information, improving accuracy, and guiding healthcare decisions. They help manage the vast amount of biomedical literature and ensure reliable, evidence-based practices.