en Medical Library and Information Sciences Medical Library and Information Sciences Systematic Review <div style="text-align: justify;"><span style="font-size:13pt"><span style="text-justify:kashida"><span style="text-kashida:0%"><span style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span style="font-style:italic"><b><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-style:normal">Background: </span></span></b><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-style:normal">According to the pyramid of evidence, systematic reviews hold the highest position among studies used in healthcare systems and policy-making. Avoiding systematic and methodological errors are demanding responsibility for authors. Clearly, erroneous studies can have irreparable consequences on health and treatment decisions. Therefore, this study aims to identify potential errors in systematic reviews within the field of health.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br> <span style="font-size:13pt"><span style="text-justify:kashida"><span style="text-kashida:0%"><span style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span style="font-style:italic"><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-style:normal">&nbsp;&nbsp; <b>Methods:</b> To systematically identify potential errors in systematic reviews, we conducted a comprehensive literature search using keywords such as &quot;Bias,&quot; &quot;Error,&quot; and &quot;Systematic Reviews&quot; across databases like PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, Embase, Cochrane Library, and ProQuest without any time restrictions. This yielded 2333 articles and 11 books initially.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br> <span style="font-size:13pt"><span style="text-justify:kashida"><span style="text-kashida:0%"><span style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span style="font-style:italic"><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-style:normal">After removing duplicates and unrelated sources based on predefined inclusion/exclusion criteria tailored for this study context (e.g., relevance to error identification in systematic reviews), we closely examined 88 relevant sources.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br> <span style="font-size:13pt"><span style="text-justify:kashida"><span style="text-kashida:0%"><span style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span style="font-style:italic"><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-style:normal">&nbsp;&nbsp; <b>Results:</b> Upon analyzing the full texts of these sources with strict adherence to our criteria, we identified 77 distinct types of errors that could occur either within or between studies. These findings highlight the complexity of maintaining accuracy in systematic review methodologies.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br> <span style="font-size:13pt"><span style="text-justify:kashida"><span style="text-kashida:0%"><span style="text-autospace:none"><span style="font-family:&quot;Times New Roman&quot;,serif"><span style="font-style:italic"><span style="font-size:9.0pt"><span style="font-style:normal">&nbsp;&nbsp; <b>Conclusion:</b> Given the critical role systemic reviews play in informing clinical decisions and health policies, ensuring their quality is paramount. Accurate methodology ensures validity; biased studies risk leading to suboptimal patient care outcomes. By pinpointing error sources&mdash;such as selection bias or information bias&mdash;and implementing strategies to mitigate them through rigorous methodologies like robust search protocols or transparent reporting standards (e.g., PRISMA guidelines), researchers can enhance review quality significantly.</span></span></span></span></span></span></span></span><br> &nbsp;</div> Bias, Publications, Publication Bias, Data Accuracy, Systematic Reviews as Topic, Health 509 527 http://mjiri.iums.ac.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-9028-1&slc_lang=en&sid=1 Roya Vesal Azad royavesal@yahoo.com 200319475328460091734 200319475328460091734 No Department of Knowledge and Information Science, Faculty of Psychology and Education, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran Nosrat Riahinia sara_purriahi@yahoo.com 200319475328460091735 200319475328460091735 No Department of Knowledge and Information Science, Faculty of Psychology and Education, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran Ali Azimi azimia@gmail.com 200319475328460091736 200319475328460091736 Yes Department of Knowledge and Information Science, Faculty of Psychology and Education, Kharazmi University, Tehran, Iran Hamid Baradaran baradaran98@gmail.com 200319475328460091737 200319475328460091737 No Center for Educational Research in Medical Sciences (CERMS), Department of Medical Education, School of Medicine, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran