where does a literature review sit on kings college heirachy?

[baggysenior]

HI, i don't know if this is the right place to post this question but i'm trying to work out where a literature review sits on a level of heirachy( kings college london) Its a good article, written by a professor and dr reviewing 7 studies over 15 years to establish whether isolation for patients (to prevent the spread of pathogens) is good practice.It consists of some randomised controlled studies etc, but my opinion (and the authors opinion) is that there is no real hard evidence to conclude that isolation for patients is good. So both the authors are sitting on the fence and i don't know whether it ranks as a good piece of evidence or not! is anyone able to help. Many thanks

[boxtops]

I'm not sure what you mean by a level of hierarchy, but if this piece has been published, you could cite it as being an example of a piece of research which is inconclusive. IMO.

[bednobs]

for me it would depend on how many studies had been done over the 15 years. If they just reviewed 7 out of 700 then hmmm

[boxtops]

Good point bednobs, they might have cherrypicked.

[baggysenior]

thanks peeps, its quite hard to decide. Thanks for taking the time to reply to my question :)