The systematized review represents an intermediate form of scientific review that incorporates several of the main characteristics of a systematic review, without fully claiming the rigor of the latter. Its purpose is to provide a more organized, objective, and evidence-based synthesis of existing literature, while maintaining flexibility and adaptability to the limited capacities of an individual researcher or a small research team. The systematized review seeks to deliver a coherent and comprehensible framework for understanding research knowledge, without requiring the full implementation of the strict procedures that define a systematic review.

Relationship with the Systematic Review

The systematized review shares many similarities with the systematic review, especially regarding the process of searching for and identifying research studies. The researcher follows specific protocols for data collection, using keywords, electronic databases, and predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. However, the main distinction lies in the phase of data analysis and synthesis, where the approach is not as strictly structured or standardized. While the systematic review aims for maximum objectivity and the minimization of all forms of bias, the systematized review acknowledges that quality assessment and the interpretation of results may be less standardized. Nevertheless, the methodological transparency and consistency in the process of collecting and presenting data ensure the validity and reliability of the research outcome.

Field of Application and Educational Usefulness

Systematized reviews are most often conducted within academic settings such as undergraduate or postgraduate studies, where researchers may not have the time, resources, or collaborative support required for a full systematic review. In this context, the systematized review functions as an educational tool and a practical exercise in the research process. Through this approach, students become familiar with the procedures of literature searching, selecting, and analyzing scientific sources, while developing critical thinking and organizational skills. Furthermore, this methodology helps them recognize the limits and biases that may influence research outcomes. Thus, the systematized review serves as a preparatory phase for more extensive research projects, such as doctoral dissertations, where more rigorous methodological standards are applied.

Advantages and Limitations

One of the major advantages of the systematized review is its accessibility and practicality. Researchers can conduct a well-documented and credible study even with limited resources, while still adhering to the principles of transparency and objectivity. The systematized review allows the exploration of specialized or smaller-scale research topics, for which a full systematic review would be excessively time-consuming or disproportionate to the study’s objectives. However, its main limitation lies in the higher potential for bias. Since the process of analysis and data evaluation does not always follow strictly defined protocols, there is a possibility that the interpretation of findings may be influenced by the researcher’s subjective judgment. Additionally, systematized reviews often lack the inclusion of meta-analysis, the quantitative synthesis of results, which reduces the statistical power and generalizability of their conclusions.

Methodological Structure

The systematized review follows a specific methodological framework adapted to the needs and constraints of the research context. Initially, the research question is defined clearly and precisely, establishing the purpose and objectives of the study. The next step involves searching for relevant literature through credible scientific databases, using appropriate keywords and logical operators. Following that, studies that meet the inclusion criteria are selected, while irrelevant or unreliable sources are excluded. Subsequently, the findings are analyzed—either descriptively or thematically—and finally synthesized in a coherent and comprehensive manner. Although this process resembles that of a full systematic review, in the systematized version it is applied with greater flexibility, allowing adaptation to the researcher’s available time and resources.

Conclusions

The systematized review is a valuable and practical tool for academic and scientific research. Despite its limitations, it significantly contributes to the development of organizational, analytical, and synthesis skills, providing a reliable method for mapping existing literature on a specific research topic. While it cannot replace the systematic review, it serves as a preparatory stage that helps researchers become familiar with systematic methodology and gain a clear overview of the existing scientific knowledge within their area of interest. Ultimately, the systematized review acts as a bridge between descriptive and systematic research approaches, combining methodological rigor with necessary flexibility, and offering a realistic and effective form of research inquiry that supports both educational and scientific advancement.