This chapter discusses systematic reviews as a cornerstone of evidence-based practice. Systematic reviews use explicit, reproducible methods to identify, appraise, and synthesise research evidence, thereby reducing bias compared to narrative reviews. The methodology is outlined step by step, including formulation of a research question, development of a protocol, comprehensive literature searching, study selection, data extraction, quality appraisal, and evidence synthesis. Quantitative synthesis through meta-analysis is explained, including the calculation of pooled estimates and assessment of heterogeneity. The importance of assessing publication bias and sensitivity analyses is highlighted. The chapter also considers qualitative synthesis and mixed-methods reviews, broadening the scope of systematic approaches beyond purely quantitative data. Strengths of systematic reviews include their transparency, reproducibility, and utility in informing guidelines and policy decisions. Limitations include potential bias in the underlying studies, the need for rigorous methods, and the time and expertise required. Practical examples illustrate their impact in shaping clinical practice, public health interventions, and resource allocation. The chapter concludes by underscoring the role of systematic reviews in consolidating knowledge, guiding practice, and identifying gaps for future research. This chapter maps to syllabus section 3.6.6, which requires understanding of systematic reviews, meta-analysis, and reporting standards such as QUORUM and PRISMA.