OBJECTIVES: Systematic reviews have become increasingly important in recent years, particularly to inform the inclusion of patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments in clinical trials, as recommended in the FDA draft guidance for industry. A systematic review of PROs assures that the best available instrument is used to measure the preferred endpoint. As systematic reviews are scientific exercises, they require the same rigour as other aspects of research, yet current methods used to conduct systematic reviews remain variable, meaning that the quality and comparability of such reviews is not assured. Our aim was to explore the comprehensiveness, understandability, and adaptability of two widely used methodologies in conducting and modifying a standard search.METHODS: We compared the most common systematic review method (syntax search) and the Cochrane-collaboration recommended “Population-Intervention-Comparator-Outcome” (PICO) strategy. SCOPUS was searched using terms devised to answer the research question “which PROs have been used to date in islet cell transplantation?” The output resulting from each strategy was independently evaluated by two researchers and the methods critiqued.RESULTS: Both methods returned 6486 abstracts for review. Researchers were asked to identify ways in which to combine search terms to present a more manageable number for abstract screening. Both researchers agreed that PICO allowed for greater adaptability and targeted reviewing without compromising quality. Combining a priori search terms systematically according to [P and (I or C) and O], resulted in 359 abstracts.CONCLUSIONS: The quality of a review depends on the extent to which scientific review methods are used to minimise the risk of error and bias, but also the extent to which the search strategy is replicable and flexible. The PICO method is comparable to the standard syntax search, but offers the added benefits of being easy to implement, and sufficiently versatile to allow further targeting according to subtle changes in the research question as desired.