When searching for evidence-based information, one should select the highest level of evidence possible. Systematic reviews and meta analyses are considered to be the gold standard for healthcare decision-making as they are known to include the best available evidence to answer health research questions. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses, have all gone through an evaluation process: they have been "filtered." Information that has not been critically appraised is considered "unfiltered." When searching for evidence-based practice articles in the AU Libraries' databases, you will be able to select articles that focus on the specific type of EBP study design (such as a systematic review) that you need for your research.
Morton, S.C. (2013). Introduction to systematic review and meta-analysis: A health care perspective [PowerPoint slides]. Department of Biostatistics. University of Pittsburgh. https://cdn1.sph.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/1273/2013/10/Introa-Morton-slides.pdf
A short video explaining systematic reviews from The Cochrane Library:
Meta Analysis is a specialized subset of systematic reviews. Meta-analysis is the use of statistical techniques in a systematic review to integrate the results of included studies to conduct statistical inference. Not all systematic reviews include meta-analysis, but all meta-analyses are found in systematic reviews. A systematic review refers to the entire process of selecting, evaluating, and synthesizing all available evidence, while the term meta-analysis refers to the statistical approach to combining the data derived from a systematic-review. Conclusions produced by meta-analysis are statistically stronger than the analysis of any single study, due to increased numbers of subjects, greater diversity among subjects, or accumulated effects and results.
Source: North Central University Library