Within the pyramid of evidence, systematic reviews are at the top. Systematic review articles must be carefully crafted if they are to convey the broad range of research activities effectively and briefly. This necessitates close consideration of methodological and statistical components. The Abstract section should provide a concise and organized summary, enabling editorial authorities, peer reviewers, and the audience to quickly understand basic systematic review facets. It is essential to accurately assess internal and external validity quickly and wisely. The Abstract must be self-sufficient, providing a thorough and standalone summary without the need to read the entire document. Systematic reviews and several other types of research manuscripts can be structurally organized using the traditional IMRaD (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion) framework. For systematic reviewers, navigating the restrictions of word limits imposed by journals may be a difficult and unfair task. The abundance of supplemental online appendices, however, offers the chance to discuss methodological paradigms, empirical findings, and other pertinent aspects, enabling the creation of condensed printed or PDF-rendered articles. Contrary to the task of writing a lengthy exposition, the creation of a concise manuscript requires increased effort and academic rigor. The main goal of the current review is to provide advice to inexperienced systematic reviewers regarding the explicit and implicit standards that support scholarly composition. By incorporating these outlined recommendations, reviewers’ scholarly output will be of higher quality, which will advance the field of medicine.