Research "value"

[Guest]

From reading on the old forums, I could gather that basic science > case series > case reports. Where would systematic reviews fall in terms of research value?  

Thanks!

[Guest]

More than a case report, lower than original science.

You won't be able to please everyone with a systematic review, lots of old school folks scoff at that kind of publication. But, it is better than nothing, and, it does add value when you focus it on something of timeliness to the field.

[Guest]

How does one define basic science "neurosurgery" publications? It seems that most papers are either basic neuroscience or cancer biology, if translational, could be as equally deemed a "neurology" publication or a "radiology" publication, etc . Obviously clinical research is easy to define. So does it really matter? Or is it about connections made?