When it comes to academic writing, literature reviews and systematic reviews are two common types

of research papers that students encounter. While both serve the purpose of synthesizing existing
research, they differ significantly in their approach and scope.

A literature review involves a comprehensive analysis of all the available literature on a particular
topic. It aims to provide a summary, evaluation, and critical analysis of existing research studies,
theories, and methodologies related to the chosen subject. Writing a literature review requires
extensive research skills, critical thinking, and the ability to synthesize information from various
sources into a coherent narrative.

On the other hand, a systematic review follows a more structured and rigorous methodology. It
involves a systematic and exhaustive search of published literature following predefined criteria. The
goal is to identify, evaluate, and summarize all relevant studies to answer a specific research
question. Systematic reviews often adhere to strict guidelines to ensure transparency and
reproducibility.

Both types of reviews have their challenges. Writing a literature review can be daunting due to the
sheer volume of information available and the need to critically evaluate each source. It requires
careful organization and synthesis of ideas to present a coherent argument. On the other hand,
conducting a systematic review requires meticulous planning, adherence to strict methodologies, and
often involves a team of researchers to handle the workload.

Given the complexities involved in writing literature reviews and systematic reviews, many students
seek assistance to ensure high-quality work. ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔ offers professional writing services
tailored to meet the specific needs of students undertaking literature reviews or systematic reviews.
With experienced writers and researchers, ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔ provides comprehensive support to
help students navigate the intricacies of academic writing and produce outstanding review papers.

Whether you need assistance with conducting literature searches, synthesizing information, or
writing the final paper, ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔ is your trusted partner in academic success. Order now
and let our experts guide you through the process of writing a literature review or systematic review
that meets the highest standards of excellence.
Additionally, they both support conclusions based on expert reviews, case-controlled studies, data
analysis, etc., versus mere opinions and musings. Prevention of chronic hepatitis B after 3 decades of
escalating vaccination policy, China. This evidence generation process typically involves some form
of systematic literature review (SLR). Not every systematic review contains a meta-analysis. Chapter
6, Searching for Studies, is most helpful in planning your review. Acknowledgments The authors
would like to thank Dr. Rebecca Stores and Dr. Chris Markham for their support and useful
comments on the manuscript. There is always the possibility of conducting a meta-analysis, yet, for it
to throw the best possible results it should be performed when the studies included in the systematic
review are of good quality, similar designs, and have similar outcome measures. This is used to
identify relevant literature, often through searching subject-specific scientific databases. In their
report, Boyle and colleagues concluded that probiotics cannot be recommended for reducing eczema
symptoms or improving quality of life in patients with eczema. Although meta-analysis is a subset of
systematic reviews, a systematic review may or may not include a meta-analysis. The process is still
fully transparent, well documented, and reproducible to enable external scrutiny. Explore data
(heterogeneity) Synthesize the data descriptively and inferentially via meta-analysis if appropriate.
Whereas a meta-analysis is a quantitative, epidemiological study design used to assess the results of
articles included in a systematic-review. They minimize research bias by considering all available
evidence and evaluating each study for bias. Interacting with experts in the field will ensure the best
approach and will help foster new collaborations in your area. Individual studies are often not big
and powerful enough to provide reliable answers on their own. If the answer was Yes, the item got 1
point, and if the answer was No or Unclear, the item got 0 points. Results: Four studies were
included, allowing a meta-analysis of 8,041 patients. These are mostly used in the health and
medical field, but they are not rare in fields such as social sciences and environmental science. Both
this meta-analysis and the previous meta-analysis reported a higher prevalence in rural areas
compared to urban areas. The 95% confidence interval is very large and crosses 1. Thus, after the
analysis, if changing makes little or no difference to the overall results, the reviewer's conclusions are
robust. Other organizations with similar objectives have emerged, including the Australian-based
Joanna Briggs Institute (covering best evidence for global health care information), The Campbell
Collaboration (a sister organization to The Cochrane Collaboration) which provides systematic
evidence for issues of broader public policy, and the EPPI centre database providing well-designed
evaluations of interventions in the fields of education and social welfare. In a meta-analysis, studies
with narrower CIs are given more weight in the analysis, and those with wider CIs are given
relatively less weight; this is referred to as weighting according to the inverse of the variance. But
the information that practitioners and other researchers can glean from a systematic literature review
is, by its very nature, exceptionally valuable. Data Extraction Tip 4: Extract the Right Amount of
Data Data Extraction Tip 3: Pilot the Template Better systematic review management, head office,
working for an institution or organisation. The images or other third party material in this article are
included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the
material. Wenyu Liao conducted the data extraction and quality assessment. The fourth column
visually displays the study results. The prevalence of HBV infection was similar between males and
females (both 3%), while rural areas had a higher prevalence than urban areas (3% vs 2%).
Compared to the previous meta-analysis, it appears the prevalence rates of HBV in both men and
women have decreased. Cornell University Systematic Review Decision Tree This decision tree is
designed to assist researchers in choosing a review type. In a scenario in which a battle between the
two arises, which one should you go for. The systematic review process is accelerated by
streamlining specific methods and approaches to rapidly produce evidence in a resource-efficient
way. In this article, we’ll outline the purpose of a systematic literature review, the difference between
literature review and systematic review, and other important aspects of systematic literature reviews.
This is not to diminish the value of the standard literature review. Values greater than 75% may
indicate that a change in the meta-analysis method (random vs fixed effects) is needed. Or several
studies on the effects of a treatment might come to different conclusions. The skills required not only
include having an understanding of the disease process, interventions, relevant outcomes and the
patient experience; but also the ability to find and appraise all the relevant research, synthesize the
findings using advanced statistical or qualitative techniques, and publish your findings. Louis Region
The Opportunity Trust Cardiovascular Pathophysiology- Hypertension Cardiovascular
Pathophysiology- Hypertension VISHALJADHAV100 50 D. Analysis: Explain what information
you’ll collect from the studies and how you’ll synthesize the data. In: Chochrane handbook for
systematic reviews of interventions, version 5.1.0. The Cochrane Collaboration; 2011. p. 9.5.2. Sun
X, Ioannidis JPA, Agoritsas T, Alba AC, Guyatt G. Our most comprehensive editing package,
Language Editing Plus also includes any English-editing needs for up to 180 days. The information
at the bottom of the forest plot relates to the data that has been pooled from all the included studies.
North Am J Med Sci. 2011;4(1) World Health Organization. If an article isn’t available online or
through your library, you may need to contact the authors to ask for a copy. Using a topical
approach, precision is never on top of the list when conducting this sort of analysis. Is my research
topic appropriate for systematic review methods. Publication Recognition How to Make a
PowerPoint Presentation of Your Research Paper Manuscript Preparation What is and How to Write
a Good Hypothesis in Research. But, whereas a systematic review can include several research
studies to answer a specific question, typically a meta analysis includes a comparison of different
studies to suss out any. It should be noted, however, that the upper CI for ischemic and unidentified
stroke is very close to the line of no effect (0.99). When making decisions related to practice, it is
important to consider that should the true effect lie at this point, then this would mean that newer
anticoagulants only very marginally reduce the risk for a composite end point of stroke and systemic
embolism as compared with warfarin. Sex with partners met online: risky sexual behavior among
bachelors in rural China. PRISMA may also be useful for critical appraisal of published systematic
reviews, although it is not a quality assessment instrument to gauge the quality of a systematic
review. The graphical output of meta-analysis is a forest plot which provides information on
individual studies and the pooled effect. The inclusion criteria were restricted to original research
articles written in English or Chinese. The rows of the forest plot represent the individual studies
included for that comparison and outcome. In a traditional Literature Review conducted by experts.
Plans to analyse the data using these techniques should be described and justified before looking at
the data, ideally at the research plan or protocol stage, to avoid introducing bias. Source of Support:
Nil Conflict of Interest: None declared. These are some places where protocols for systematic
reviews might be published.
Rapid reviews to strengthen health policy and systems: a practical guide This guide from the World
Health Organization offers guidance on how to plan, conduct, and promote the use of rapid reviews
to strengthen health policy and systems decisions. We honour their enduring culture and knowledges
as vital to the self-determination, wellbeing and resilience of their communities, and to shaping a
just, inclusive and equitable Australian society. The National Collaborating Centre of Methods and
Tools (NCCMT) has developed a Rapid Review Guidebook that details each step in the rapid review
process, with notes on how to tailor the process given resource limitations. BMC Pub Health.
2023;23(1):256.. He L, Pan X, Yang J, Ma Q, Jiang J, Wang W, et al. A systematic review is best
deployed to test a specific hypothesis about a healthcare or public health intervention or exposure.
Workshop Overview. Explain elements of the systematic review process. Share This Book Main
Navigation Menu Systematic reviews. However, students could gain a reasonable idea from citations
and journal rankings (albeit rough). There are many challenges and skills required for producing a
systematic review. Sift the studies to select relevant ones To select the relevant studies from the
searches, we need to sift through the studies thus identified. This evidence generation process
typically involves some form of systematic literature review (SLR). You should collect this
information using forms. You can find sample forms in The Registry of Methods and Tools for
Evidence-Informed Decision Making and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment,
Development and Evaluations Working Group. Only articles published from January 1, 2018 to
December 25, 2022 were retrieved. The line that runs up the middle of the plot is called “the line of
no effect.” For all effects represented by “ratios” (e.g., odds, risk, or hazards ratios) the line of no
effect is placed at 1 on the horizontal axis. Most systematic reviews preregister the research plan,
meaning that the authors submit their planned methods to a registry like PROSPERO prior to
conducting the study. Introduction Evidence-based healthcare is the integration of best research
evidence with clinical expertise and patient values. They provide reliable information that has a real
impact on society. The prevalence of HBV infection was similar between males and females (both
3%), while rural areas had a higher prevalence than urban areas (3% vs 2%). Their methods are
transparent, so they can be scrutinized by others. Health Sci Rep. 2020;3(3):e178.. Page MJ, Sterne
JA, Higgins JP, Egger M. In a scenario in which a battle between the two arises, which one should
you go for. Device-assisted tensioning is associated with lower rates of graft failure when compared
to manual tensioning in ACL reconstruction. However, heterogeneity in the subgroup analysis did
not decrease substantially. Our summary of the authors’ indications for scoping vs. A literature
review is a type of review that uses a less systematic and formal approach than a systematic review.
Bias is a topic we will come to in a later chapter, but for now you can think of bias as anything that
systematically takes us away from the “truth”. The results of a meta-analysis are typically
summarized in a forest plot like the one shown in Figure 3.7. Let’s take a look at this helpful guide
from Ried ( 2006 ) that breaks it all down. For example, if the lower confidence interval of every
trial is below the upper of all the others, i.e., the lines all overlap to some extent, then the trials are
homogeneous. Delete Replies Reply Sam Young 17 May 2018 at 05:45 Thanks David. Gilgun
Qualitative Research and Family Psychology by Jane F.