Are you struggling with writing a literature review? You're not alone.

Crafting a comprehensive
literature review can be a daunting task for many students and researchers alike. It requires extensive
research, critical analysis, and the ability to synthesize information from various sources.

One common challenge is distinguishing between different types of reviews, such as systematic
reviews and literature reviews. While both involve reviewing existing literature, they serve different
purposes and follow distinct methodologies.

A literature review provides an overview and synthesis of existing research on a particular topic. It
aims to summarize the current state of knowledge, identify gaps, and suggest areas for further
research. In contrast, a systematic review follows a structured process to identify, evaluate, and
synthesize all available evidence on a specific research question. It often involves a comprehensive
search strategy and rigorous criteria for selecting studies.

Navigating these differences and effectively conducting a literature review requires time, patience,
and expertise. That's where ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔ comes in. Our team of experienced writers
specializes in crafting high-quality literature reviews tailored to your specific needs. Whether you're
a student working on a thesis or a researcher preparing a manuscript, we can help you save time and
ensure the quality of your literature review.

By entrusting your literature review to ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔, you can:

1. Save time: Focus on other aspects of your research while our experts handle the literature
review.
2. Ensure quality: Receive a well-researched, carefully written literature review that meets
academic standards.
3. Gain insights: Benefit from our writers' expertise and gain valuable insights into your chosen
topic.

Don't let the challenges of writing a literature review hold you back. Order from ⇒ StudyHub.vip
⇔ today and take the first step toward a successful research project.
For this reason, most systematic reviews are conducted by teams, given the large scope of the data
initially collected for most research topics. Google does not filter the evidence in this manner.
They’re both highly regarded as generally resulting in reliable findings, though there are differences,
which we’ll discuss below. Preregistration gives other researchers confidence that the team is not
selectively choosing advantageous results at the end to make an interesting paper. Using the above
example, this systematic review might be included in a broader OoR which examines a range of
interventions to reduce neurological damage following coronary artery bypass surgery (Figure 1). For
the data involving personal privacy, we have adopted anonymization process, and only present it in
the form of statistical data or summary in this article to protect the privacy of the participants.
Except for the nanoparticles of some noble elements (e.g. Ag, Au, Pt), metals in the body are never
found in their metallic form, but as cations, bound in salts (e.g. sulfides, phosphates, etc.), oxides or
complexes, and this is what we will refer to, when generically speaking of metals. Elsevier offers a
number of services that aim to help researchers achieve excellence in written text, suggesting the
necessary amendments to fit them into a targeted format. A well-conducted systematic review might
(for a number of reasons) have only included studies on participants very dissimilar to the patient(s)
the clinician has in mind. Unlike traditional reviews, systematic reviews are very comprehensive and
don’t rely on a single author’s point of view, thus avoiding bias. There are many challenges and skills
required for producing a systematic review. Remember, working on a systematic reviews is a team
sport. The risk of antenatal parasitemia is 286 events per every 1,000 people. It helps to realise that a
“systematic review” is a clearly defined thing, but ambiguity creeps in around the phrase “systematic
literature review” because people can and do use it in a variety of ways. To do this, you can either
use meta-analysis or narrative synthesis. Statistical methods for questionnaire development:
Questionnaire reliability. CRD’s Guidance for those Carrying out or Commissioning Reviews. This
can be done either through conducting the review via an organization such as the Cochrane
Collaboration, or Campbell Collaboration, by registering the protocol in a dedicated database such as
PROSPERO (see link above), or through publishing with a journal. It’s best if this part is done by
two independent people. Step 1: Set Protocol To start things off, you get to set a plan or protocol.
Importantly, both inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria must be clearly outlined when a systematic
review is undertaken. Common Topics Topics that have clear conclusions can be reached through the
support of data and statistics. Since systematic reviews, by definition, collect information from
previous research, the pitfalls of new primary studies is avoided. An extensive search strategy was
devised to ensure relevant literature could be identified, with the PECO framework being adopted to
facilitate this and identify key search terms. As evidenced in this review, there is substantial data to
support the hypothesis that heavy metals influence tumor development and progression. Many first
time reviewers, whether they are independent researchers or undertaking the review as part of a PhD
or Professional Doctorate, feel that they benefit from attending workshops and accessing online
training resources offered by some review organizations. When this interval crosses the line of no
effect, the effect could be null or could even run in the opposite direction. Reprints and permissions
About this article Cite this article Hu, L. It goes back to 1969 for farm to fork research, and back to
the late 1990s for food-related human nutrition literature—systematic reviews (and any literature
review) should include not just the latest research but all relevant research on a question. Systematic
reviews sit at the top of the evidence hierarchy because it is widely agreed that studies with rigorous
methods are those best able to minimise the risk of bias on the results of the study. The life-saving
potential of a systematic review conducted to examine infant sleeping position and sudden infant
death syndrome.
Informationist Victoria Goode: Difference Between Literature Review. Using a topical approach,
precision is never on top of the list when conducting this sort of analysis. The rows of the forest plot
represent the individual studies included for that comparison and outcome. The Process of
Systematic Reviews Here is how you would get a systematic review started, described in steps. In
contrast, a systematic literature review might be conducted by one person. A good appendix is a
treasure trove of information. Next, the reviewers extract the relevant data and assess the quality of
the included studies. If you look at the diamond at the bottom of the plot, the middle of the diamond
is the point estimate of the effect size and the widest points of the diamond represent the CIs. If
material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not
permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission
directly from the copyright holder. These elements of the research question will be further set out
through the eligibility criteria for the review. This is sometimes referred to as being like combining
apples and oranges (10). Systematic reviews present the ideal opportunity to undertake in-depth
assessments of evidence relevant to your practice and have the potential to influence national
guidelines in your area. In a scenario in which a battle between the two arises, which one should you
go for. Those conducted under the auspices of the Cochrane Collaboration are held in particularly
high regard (7) but on a general note, there are a number of reasons as to why caution is required in
the interpretation and application of the findings of a systematic review. Writers often express their
takes on the subject matter. Basically, if a study is repeated 100 times, the effect size is expected to
be within this interval 95% of the time. Google does not filter the evidence in this manner. Here’s
Three Tips to Steer Clear of Potential Issues. If so, you might consider proposing a collaboration or
modifying your aims. Your second move should be to consult a clinical librarian or someone with
experience conducting a systematic review for tips on setting up your project. CRD’s Guidance for
those Carrying out or Commissioning Reviews. By going through these steps, a systematic review
provides a broad evidence base on which to make decisions about medical interventions, regulatory
policy, safety, or whatever question is analysed. You need to build a team of researchers that are
familiar with the topic that you must review. Statistical methods for questionnaire development:
Questionnaire reliability. Emphasis on how systematic reviews support evidence-based practice. In
the second group, 28 patients with a confirmed NSCLC, including adenocarcinoma, squamous cell
carcinoma, or large cell carcinoma, and nine noncancer benign lung tissue samples were evaluated.
All systematic reviews, including those that use meta-analysis, are likely to contain an element of
narrative synthesis by summarising in words the evidence included in the review. However, all good
research should begin and end with a systematic review and all available studies should be assessed,
even if an apparently “definitive” trial is available. What to consider when critically appraising a
systematic review. In this case, the result is considered not “statistically significant.”. Similarly, a
well-conducted systematic review might not have been recently updated and its findings might not
therefore be based on current primary research.
Figure 3.3: Malaria chemoprevention for pregnant women living in endemic areas. Literature
reviews, on the other hand, do not follow such rigid or explicit methods. Systematic reviews can
therefore provide the clinician with high-quality and timely research evidence to provide an answer
to a focused clinical question (or questions). Next, the reviewers extract the relevant data and assess
the quality of the included studies. In a scenario in which a battle between the two arises, which one
should you go for. Overviews of systematic reviews are also useful because they provide summaries
of groups of related systematic reviews (e.g., summarizing the evidence of the effectiveness of a
number of different interventions for a certain outcome or disease). Systematic reviews have a
necessarily narrow focus (e.g., “hypothermia to reduce neurological damage following coronary
artery bypass surgery,” Ref. 5); however it may be more informative for clinicians to be able to
access a summary of evidence from a range of related systematic reviews. The results and discussion
of this review will, therefore, comprise research on heavy metals in the biological samples of lung,
breast, prostate and gastric cancer patients. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess
the methodological quality of systematic reviews. More information can be found at: Systematic
Review Data repository: PROSPERO: In addition, many journals also publish systematic reviews,
and some journals will additionally publish systematic review protocols, there are even now
dedicated journals for systematic reviews ( ). Relevant research that can be brought to the table for
this review is then found, assessed, and selected in this way. These preregistration plans include a
specific search strategy using specific search terms for individual scholarly databases so other
researchers can recreate the search. Seminario biologia molecular-Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana.
Most studies account for this within their results. This could add soundness to the conclusion drawn
from the collection of these data. Some of them (i.e. arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), chromium (Cr),
lead (Pb), mercury (Hg) and nickel (Ni)) have been defined as carcinogens, increasing the
susceptibility of tumor development and progression in humans. There is also no set way or method
that you need to follow for the review. By going through these steps, a systematic review provides a
broad evidence base on which to make decisions about medical interventions, regulatory policy,
safety, or whatever question is analysed. This registration informs other researchers that a group is
working on a certain area of study, which can discourage duplicate research efforts that may,
therefore, fail to be published. On the other hand, Cd was the most prevalent heavy metal identified,
and As was observed in moderate amounts. Bias is a systematic deviation from the truth; it may
overestimate or underestimate the true effect, and it may be large or small. Risk of bias assessment
should be done, when possible, using a predetermined, validated tool (or equivalent for qualitative
studies if included) (9). They’re both highly regarded as generally resulting in reliable findings,
though there are differences, which we’ll discuss below. These can be particularly useful for
informing policy decisions about which interventions are most effective. Evidence thus becomes
more accessible to not only health care providers but also their users, that is, patients and their
families. Webinar 50 shades of review eahil cpd pilot program. A systematic review is a piece of
work that asks a research question and then answers it by summarising the evidence that meets a set
of pre-specified criteria. As we continue to explore the complex network of connections between
heavy metals and cancer, we hope that these discoveries will ultimately lead to more effective
preventive measures, earlier detection, and improved treatment strategies for individuals affected by
these devastating diseases. The perspectives of those involved in the care for people with
cardiovascular disease can be different to those of other health care professionals. We encourage
researchers to explore this field in order to help understand such delicate aspect.
Similarly, a well-conducted systematic review might not have been recently updated and its findings
might not therefore be based on current primary research. But it can also be misleading if it is
performed with data that are not sufficiently similar, or with data whose methodological quality is
poor (for example, because the study participants were not properly randomized). University of
Connecticut. Nomi, T. (2009). The effects of within-class ability grouping on academic achievement
in early elementary years. When used properly, they can add a lot of value to your research. 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. Studies are not created equal, and the weight parameter lets researchers account for these
differences in the analysis. This is what differentiates a systematic review from a descriptive review
that might be based on, for example, a subset of the literature that the author is familiar with at the
time of writing. Reviews as such have a comprehensive but not exhaustive approach. They serve as a
public repository of data and have a searchable archive of key questions addressed by systematic
reviews. At the same time, I would like to thank the experts who helped complete the literature
screening and coding. Like any other aspect of research, however, systematic reviews must define
and follow a method that can be replicated. National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum
(NCAC). Difference between a systematic review and a literature review. Systematic Review Vs
Literature Review: The Comparison Table To better understand the two types of reviews, we thought
it would be better to use a side-by-side comparison. Starting with a systematic review pays off
almost every time one is available. CRD’s Guidance for those Carrying out or Commissioning
Reviews. A meta-analysis can help iron out any inconsistencies in data, as long as the studies are
similar. Key Differences Between Light Cream And Heavy Cream Posted in Education Search for.
You can either pursue the idea of comparing such different material, at the risk of findings that don’t
really answer the review question. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Please
take a moment and use the link to the right to download and skim through the article. In addition,
they are normally collated and appraised by an independent panel of experts in the field. On the
other hand, Cd was the most prevalent heavy metal identified, and As was observed in moderate
amounts. Exclusion criteria were (a) healthy persons used as controls, (b) patients following heart
transplantation, (c) absence of quantitative description of end points, (d) lack of clear and
reproducible results, and (e) trials in the abstract form without a published manuscript in a peer-
reviewed journal. As a researcher, you will probably want the opportunity to communicate and
exchange ideas with people from a broad range of disciplines, and some review organizations
provide seminars, conferences and online discussion rooms so creating a hub for a community. In the
literature review, you get an overview or an idea about a particular topic that an author has decided
to write about. Non-essential metals such as Cd, Hg, Ni, and Pb, can be harmful mainly, but not
only, because they interfere with metabolic processes by substituting essential divalent cations (e.g.
Ca, Mg, Fe and Zn) in enzymes, proteins and hard structures, such as bones or teeth. Some
systematic reviews include a meta-analysis, which is quantitative technique for combining the results
of multiple studies to estimate a pooled effect size that takes variations in study size and quality into
consideration. Unluckily the number of papers dealing with the determination of metals directly in
samples from cancer tissues is still rather limited, so we decided to expand the scope of this review
also to analyses carried out on other biological samples, as urine, plasma, hair, nail, etc. The inclusion
of more recent studies has the potential to change the findings of the systematic review (12).
Common Topics Topics that have clear conclusions can be reached through the support of data and
statistics. Those conducted under the auspices of the Cochrane Collaboration are held in particularly
high regard (7) but on a general note, there are a number of reasons as to why caution is required in
the interpretation and application of the findings of a systematic review. Additionally, As was
observed in moderate amounts in NSCLC patients, whilst both Hg and Pb amounts were negligible.
To review or answer this question in a way, the review pattern uses reproducible, and as the name
suggests, systematic methods. A recent development is the emergence of Overviews of Reviews
(OoRs). Integrative review VS systematic review? - ResearchGate. Since systematic reviews, by
definition, collect information from previous research, the pitfalls of new primary studies is avoided.
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. An audit trail is kept of the
number of studies screened and excluded at each stage, and reasons for excluding studies which
appeared relevant. Reprints and permissions About this article Cite this article Hu, L. These insights
hold the promise of improving our understanding of cancer etiology and potentially influencing
public health measures to mitigate heavy metal exposure and reduce cancer risk. Home - Literature
Review vs Systematic Review - SJSU Research. Armed with a BA degree in English and a knack for
digital marketing, she explores her passions for literature, history, culture, and food through her
engaging and informative writing. Some of them (i.e. arsenic (As), cadmium (Cd), chromium (Cr),
lead (Pb), mercury (Hg) and nickel (Ni)) have been defined as carcinogens, increasing the
susceptibility of tumor development and progression in humans. Acknowledgments The authors
would like to thank Dr. Rebecca Stores and Dr. Chris Markham for their support and useful
comments on the manuscript. Related Posts: The Differences Between Pottery and Ceramics What
Are The Differences Between Dumplings and Wontons. Using a topical approach, precision is never
on top of the list when conducting this sort of analysis. The search was limited to studies in human
subjects and English language in peer-reviewed journals from 1966 to June 2011. However, people
can also use the phrase systematic literature review to refer to a literature review that is done in a
fairly systematic way, but without the full rigor of a systematic review. An extensive search strategy
was devised to ensure relevant literature could be identified, with the PECO framework being
adopted to facilitate this and identify key search terms. As evidenced in this review, there is
substantial data to support the hypothesis that heavy metals influence tumor development and
progression. It is worth checking that, based on issues around risk of bias, you agree with the
conclusions made by the systematic review authors. Systematic reviews on the other hand are far
superior in that they adhere to a strict scientific design based on explicit, prespecified and
reproducible methods (Table 1). There is also no set way or method that you need to follow for the
review. This example shows a specific type of effect size: relative risk. Hopefully, this systematic
review vs literature review was able to help you understand where they are applicable. In the
Conclusion, the authors frame the overall results in terms of their implications for practice and
research. The results and discussion of this review will, therefore, comprise research on heavy metals
in the biological samples of lung, breast, prostate and gastric cancer patients. Step 1: Set Protocol To
start things off, you get to set a plan or protocol. Informationist Victoria Goode: Difference Between
Literature Review. Writers often express their takes on the subject matter.