Title: Crafting an Effective Literature Review Summary Table

Welcome to our guide on creating an impactful Literature Review Summary Table. As you delve into
academic research, you'll encounter the necessity of synthesizing vast amounts of information from
various sources. A literature review summary table serves as a valuable tool to organize and present
this wealth of information succinctly.

However, crafting such a table is no easy feat. It requires a meticulous approach, attention to detail,
and a keen understanding of the subject matter. Here's why writing a literature review summary table
can be challenging:

1. Information Overload: Sorting through numerous scholarly articles, books, and other
sources can be overwhelming. Identifying the most relevant information and condensing it
into a concise summary table requires time and effort.
2. Critical Analysis: It's not just about summarizing what each source says but also critically
evaluating its relevance, reliability, and significance to your research topic. This analytical
process demands a deep understanding of the subject matter and the ability to discern key
insights.
3. Synthesis and Organization: A literature review summary table isn't just a collection of
individual summaries; it's a coherent synthesis of ideas and findings from multiple sources.
Organizing this information in a clear and logical manner is essential for the table to
effectively communicate your research insights.
4. Formatting and Presentation: The visual presentation of your summary table is crucial for
readability and comprehension. Ensuring consistency in formatting, using appropriate
headings and subheadings, and incorporating visual aids such as graphs or charts can
enhance the table's effectiveness.

Given the challenges involved in creating a literature review summary table, it's understandable if
you seek assistance. That's where ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔ comes in. Our team of experienced academic
writers specializes in crafting literature reviews and summary tables that meet the highest standards
of quality and professionalism.

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

Thorough Research: Our writers conduct comprehensive research to gather relevant sources
and extract key information for your summary table.
Critical Analysis: We critically evaluate each source to ensure that only the most pertinent
and credible information is included in your summary table.
Clear Synthesis: We organize the information in your summary table in a clear and coherent
manner, highlighting the connections and insights derived from the literature.
Professional Formatting: Our experts pay meticulous attention to formatting and
presentation, ensuring that your summary table adheres to academic conventions and
enhances the readability of your research.

Don't let the challenges of writing a literature review summary table impede your academic progress.
Order now on ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔ and receive a meticulously crafted summary table that
strengthens your research and impresses your readers.
By way of example, if you want to send freelance writers a contributor arrangement, modifying a
standard contract template (rather than composing a new contract every time) guarantees you won’t
leave out the crucial clause regarding possessing the content as soon as you’ve paid for it. After
summarizing and evaluating your sources, arrange them in a matrix to help you see how they relate
to each other, and apply to each of your themes or variables. Making Literature Review Summary
Table Template is brisk and simple, and having uncommon marks made by you will manage to pay
for you an wonderful fulfillment. However, in most areas, terminology is variable, making it difficult
to compare the PICO of each included study to the PICO for each synthesis, or to compare PICO
elements across studies. If you are writing a narrative review to summarise information reported in a
small number of studies then you probably don't need to go to the trouble of coding the data
variables for computer analysis but instead summarize the information from the data extraction forms
for the included studies. No, that is a separate template, which you can download for free here.
Consider using transition phrases like the following, or borrow phrasing that you like from other
articles. (It's not plagiarism to use common phrases.). Review authors should, therefore, include the
philosophical stance in their literature summary for the particular article. Using the Research Table
This is an example of a research table, in which you provide a basic description of the most
important features of the studies, articles, and other items you discover in your research. Hughes RG,
editor. Patient Safety and Quality: An Evidence-Based Handbook for Nurses. Tip 1: provide detailed
information about frameworks and methods Literature summary tables are not only meant to provide
an overview of basic information (authors, country, purpose and findings) about included articles,
but they should also provide detailed information about the theoretical and conceptual frameworks
and the methods used in the included article. You can always check our plagiarism score before
submitting your work to help ease your mind. Steps of a Systematic Review Tools: Steps: PICO
template. 1. Id entify your research question. However, this is only one dimension of the template, so
it will still be useful if you are adopting a different structure. You would after that be able to fine-
tune it anyway you need. Tabulating the measurement tools and time frames as shown in Table 9.3.b
allows assessment of the potential for multiplicity (i.e. when multiple outcomes within a study and
outcome domain are available for inclusion ( Chapter 3, Section 3.2.4.3 )). In this example,
multiplicity arises in two ways. Note: This site will continue to evolve and develop through
community driven collaboration with information retrieval and evidence synthesis experts across
many disciplines. Standardizing the description of PICO elements across studies facilitates these
comparisons. Handwritten extraction is less popular now due to widespread electronic tools. PDF
Preparing Summary of Findings (SoF) Tables of this document is to provide instructions for authors
on preparing Summary of Findings (SoF) tables in reviews. Your research question tells you which
findings are of interest in your research, so work from your research question to decide what needs to
go in each Finding header, and how many findings are necessary. It might be possible to hire study
authors to collect missing data for data pooling (e.g., means, standard deviations). Most systematic
reviews are expected to have one summary of findings table. It’s also possible that translations will
be needed. Tabulating study characteristics is generally preferable to lengthy description in the text,
since the structure imposed by a table can make it easier and faster for readers to scan and identify
patterns in the information presented. Table 9.3.b illustrates one such approach. Excel may require
less time investment to create an extraction form, but it may take longer for you to match and
compare data between extractors. To admission it, right snap gate in the same way as and later than
select the product. Most Cochrane Reviews on the effects of interventions will include some type of
statistical synthesis. Dealing with effect size multiplicity in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Tip 5: create your personalised template for literature summaries Often templates are available for
data extraction and development of literature summary tables. If you want to post about it on your
blog or social media, all we ask is that you reference this page as your source. Planning
contingencies for anticipated scenarios is likely to lead to less post-hoc decision making ( Chapter 2
and Chapter 3 ); however, it is difficult to plan for all scenarios. It includes multiple pieces of data
derived from both quantitative and qualitative data analysis in systematic reviews. Strategic
Publishing Guide Strategic publishing guide by DVC-R and the Library Think Check Submit Think.
Check. Submit. helps researchers identify trusted journals for their research. The main intervention
strategy in each study was categorized into one of six groups: counselling, health education,
feedback, incentive-based interventions, social support, and exercise. It can help ensure that all main
components are decided upon before beginning the study. Cochrane Database of Systematic
Reviews 2017; 2: CD001055. While the template provides a general structure, you should adapt it to
fit the specific requirements and focus of your literature review. Imagine you are developing a
template of your own resume. As the review progresses, this detail may be replaced by standardized
description of PICO characteristics (e.g. the coding of counselling interventions presented in Table
9.3.a ). Table 9.3.b illustrates one approach to tabulating study characteristics to enable comparison
and analysis across studies. In this review, the authors pre-specified a set of decision rules for
selecting specific outcomes within the outcome domains. GRADE (Grading of Recommendations,
Assessment, Development and Evaluations) is a transparent framework for presenting summaries of
evidence. (PDF) Five tips for developing useful literature summary tables for Data were extracted
using the summary tables in Excel. Authors must, for example, choose their population age range,
circumstances, results, and type(s) of interventions and control groups a priori. Think of a synthesis
table as a tool for making comparisons, identifying trends, and locating gaps in the literature. The
PRISMA or Meta-analysis must be used to write up the systematic study and meta-analysis.
Systematic Review Software (Covidence) Most systematic review software tools have data
extraction functionality that can save you time and effort. It may help to consult other similar
systematic reviews to identify what data to collect or to think about your question in a framework
such as PICO. Keep in mind that the exact requirements for the literature review chapter will vary
between universities and degree programs. These are typically minor, but it’s always a good idea to
double-check your university’s requirements before you finalize your structure. Therefore, while
developing literature summary tables, think twice before using the predeveloped themes. This will
include synthesis of study characteristics and, potentially, statistical synthesis of study findings. We
refer to conceptual contribution as a description of how the article’s key results contribute towards
the development of potential codes, themes or subthemes, or emerging patterns that are reported as
the review findings. The literature review is not just a summary of the already published works. This
description should integrate information about key PICO characteristics across studies, and identify
any potentially important differences in characteristics that were pre-specified as possible effect
modifiers. Note: This site will continue to evolve and develop through community driven
collaboration with information retrieval and evidence synthesis experts across many disciplines.
However, this is only one dimension of the template, so it will still be useful if you are adopting a
different structure. Tabulation of extracted data from studies allows assessment of the number of
studies contributing to a particular meta-analysis, and helps determine what other statistical synthesis
methods might be used if meta-analysis is not possible. Patient Safety and Quality: An Evidence-
Based Handbook for Nurses. PDF Systematic review protocol This template is primarily intended to
help you plan your review in a systematic way. PDF Five tips for developing useful literature
summary tables for writing Literature summary tables are not only meant to provide an overview of
basic information (authors, country, purpose and findings) about included articles, but they should
also provide detailed information about the theo-retical and conceptual frameworks and the methods
used in the included article.
You should also, of course, be guided by what's actually present in the material your research turns
up. Systematic Reviews: Step 7: Extract Data from Included Studies In this step of the systematic
review, you will develop your evidence tables, which give detailed information for each study
(perhaps using a PICO framework as a guide), and summary tables, which give a high-level
overview of the findings of your review. Himmelfarb Library recommends using RefWorks to
manage your references. Tabulation of extracted data from studies allows assessment of the number
of studies contributing to a particular meta-analysis, and helps determine what other statistical
synthesis methods might be used if meta-analysis is not possible. Absolute and relative magnitude of
effect (if both are appropriate). Home - Systematic Reviews for Health - Subject Guides at. (Aiden
Lawson) As you read through the material you gather, look for common themes as they may provide
the structure for your literature review. You likewise have a few Literature Review Summary Table
Template to browse in the manner of open Office programming, still Microsoft Word gives a more
extensive choice. Your synthesis should show how various articles are linked. While there may be
good reasons for modifying the format of a 'Summary of findings' table for some reviews, a
standard format for them has been developed with the aim of ensuring consistency and ease of use
across reviews, inclusion of the most important information needed by decision makers, and optimal
presentation of this. Systematic Review Software (Covidence) Most systematic review software
tools have data extraction functionality that can save you time and effort. Review authors should,
therefore, include the philosophical stance in their literature summary for the particular article.
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2014; 1: CD008963. It can help ensure that all main
components are decided upon before beginning the study. The conceptual contribution of this
research article could be that experiential learning is one way to teach compassion to nursing
students, as supported by case studies and reflective logs. The number is up to you; again, you can
alter this table by adding or deleting columns to match what you're actually looking for in your
analysis. The tables included information about authors, country, purpose, study design, setting,
sample characteristics, sampling technique, method of. The template assumes a thematic structure (as
opposed to a chronological or methodological structure), as this is the most common approach.
Double-blinding, which is acceptable for clinical trials but not for psychological or non-
pharmacological treatments, significantly impacts this metric. Patient Safety and Quality: An
Evidence-Based Handbook for Nurses. Quality evidence-based practice initiatives and nursing care
and medicine are based on understanding and evaluating the resources and research available,
identifying gaps, and building a strong foundation for future work. A summary table helps you
record the main points of each source and document how sources relate to each other. This
standardization includes applying the labels and terminology used to articulate the PICO for each
synthesis ( Chapter 3 ), and structuring the description of PICO elements. They come together to
make a unified sound (synthesis). Data extraction FAQs Step 8: Write the Review Check our FAQ's
Email us Chat with us (during business hours) Call (919) 962-0800 Make an appointment with a
librarian Request a systematic or scoping review consultation In Step 7, you will skim the full text of
included articles to collect information about the studies in a table format (extract data), to
summarize the studies and make them easier to compare.?You will:? Make sure you have collected
the full text of any included articles. Reporting your review with PRISMA If you reach the data
extraction step and choose to exclude articles for any reason, update the number of included and
excluded studies in your PRISMA flow diagram. Provenance and peer review Not commissioned;
externally peer reviewed. Think of a synthesis table as a tool for making comparisons, identifying
trends, and locating gaps in the literature. Using a template, you understand the upgrade will always
have the formatting, design, and general arrangement. We provide a walkthrough of the template
and review an example of a high-quality literature research chapter here. The synthesis of study
characteristics is also needed for GRADE assessments, informing judgements about whether the
evidence applies directly to the review question (indirectness) and analyses conducted to examine
possible explanations for heterogeneity (inconsistency) (see Chapter 14 ).
Himmelfarb Library recommends using RefWorks to manage your references. Most Cochrane
Reviews on the effects of interventions will include some type of statistical synthesis. Develop a
search strategy and locate studies This is where a reference librarian can be particularly beneficial in
assisting with the creation and execution of electronic searches. How Do You Make A Summary Of
Findings Table For A Systematic Review. FAQs: Literature Review Template What format is the
template (doc, pdf, ppt, etc.). The literature review chapter template is provided as a Google Doc.
As a result, although narrative reviews are informative, they often include an element of selection
bias. Literature Review Table - Literature Review Summary Table. Software to help you create coded
data extraction forms from templates include: Covidence, DistillerSR (needs subscription), EPPI
Reviewer (subscription, free trial), or AHRQ's SRDR tool (free) which is web-based and has a
training environment, tutorials, and example templates of systematic review data extraction forms.
Good synthesis is about putting the data gathered, references read, and literature analyzed together
in a new way that shows connections and relationships. ( Shellenbarger, 2016 ). Using the Article
Summary Table template, you can neatly add a summary of each study to a table. Selection of
studies After retrieving and reviewing a detailed list of abstracts, any studies that tend to satisfy
inclusion requirements will be collected and thoroughly reviewed. Cochrane Database of Systematic
Reviews 2017; 2: CD001055. Use existing systematic reviews on your topic to identify what
information to collect if you are not sure what to do. In qualitative reviews (reviews synthesising
results of qualitative studies), this information is beneficial for readers to recognise the underlying
philosophical and paradigmatic stance of the authors of the included articles. Can I include literature
that contradicts my hypothesis. However, this is only one dimension of the template, so it will still
be useful if you are adopting a different structure. Here are some analogies to help with the concept
of synthesis. In conclusion, narrative or systematic reviews are almost always conducted as a part of
any educational project (thesis or dissertation) or academic or clinical research. Reporting your
review with PRISMA If you reach the data extraction step and choose to exclude articles for any
reason, update the number of included and excluded studies in your PRISMA flow diagram.
Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015
statement Strategic Publishing RV2 Checklist To help make informed decisions before publishing,
MQ has developed the RV2 checklist to assist with selecting appropriate peer-reviewed journals. The
PICO of the included studies (determined at the review stage) is what was actually investigated in
the included studies. Writers can easily summarize material but seem to struggle to adequately
synthesize knowledge about their topic and express that in their writing. You can record extracted
data in electronic tables or forms created in Microsoft Word or other word processing programs, but
this process may take longer than many of our previously listed methods. It is also vital that
methodological and conceptual limitations and strengths of the articles included in the review are
provided because not all review articles include empirical research papers. These can help provide
readers with more context about the review, and its conclusions. You can adapt examples to suit your
systematic review. How much of that is completely different from the job you have done. As soon as
you save a version of the template, just add, remove, or alter any info for that record, and you’ll have
the new work done in a fraction of this time. Rather some review synthesises the theoretical aspects
of articles. This is a crucial step, and one that review authors need to address carefully.
Extraction templates and approaches should be determined by the needs of the specific review.
Editing a template requires much less time than formatting some thing from scratch. A meta-analysis
aspect is often used in systematic reviews, which entails using statistical techniques to synthesise
data from several studies into a single quantitative estimation or summary effect size. Authors will
need to assess whether the measurement methods or tools used within each study provide an
appropriate assessment of the domains ( Chapter 3, Section 3.2.4 ). A next step is to group each
measure into the pre-specified time points. It also includes a grade of the quality of evidence; i.e., a
rating of its certainty. In some reviews, the labels and terminology used in each study are retained
when describing the PICO elements of the included studies. Tabulation of extracted data from
studies allows assessment of the number of studies contributing to a particular meta-analysis, and
helps determine what other statistical synthesis methods might be used if meta-analysis is not
possible. Most commonly this is the statistical combination of results from two or more separate
studies (henceforth referred to as meta-analysis) of effect estimates. We describe the preliminary
steps undertaken before performing the statistical synthesis. A close examination of study
characteristics will require detailed tables; for example, to identify differences in characteristics that
were pre-specified as potentially important modifiers of the intervention effects. Good synthesis is
about putting the data gathered, references read, and literature analyzed together in a new way that
shows connections and relationships. ( Shellenbarger, 2016 ). Software to help you create coded data
extraction forms from templates include: Covidence, DistillerSR (needs subscription), EPPI
Reviewer (subscription, free trial), or AHRQ's SRDR tool (free) which is web-based and has a
training environment, tutorials, and example templates of systematic review data extraction forms.
Building an Evidence Table The Basics: A standard evidence table has 10 columns. Standardizing the
description of PICO elements across studies facilitates these comparisons. Reviewers can use fillable
forms to collect and code data reported in the studies included in the review, the data can then be
uploaded to analytical computer software such as Excel or SPSS for statistical analysis. Each tab
above contains more detail about the respective topic. Planning contingencies for anticipated
scenarios is likely to lead to less post-hoc decision making ( Chapter 2 and Chapter 3 ); however, it is
difficult to plan for all scenarios. Cochrane RevMan 5.0 Download RevMan for Non-Cochrane
Reviews (Cochrane Training) Survey or Form Software (Qualtrics, Poll Everywhere) Survey or form
tools can help you create custom forms with many different question types, such as multiple choice,
drop downs, ranking, and more. Imagine you are developing a template of your own resume. Read
the advice for authors page on the journal website, or ask the journal editor to advise you on what
citation format the journal requires you to use. Can I include literature that contradicts my
hypothesis. This conceptual contribution of the article should be mentioned in the literature summary
table. It is the distinction between copying and pasting some text, or retyping it. This can be a new
and potentially challenging experience for students and researchers who are used to just repeating
what is already in the literature. A basic check is to ensure the same qualitative findings (e.g.
direction of effect and statistical significance) between the data as presented in the review and the
data as available from the original study. Guide Sections - Table of Contents If you're new to this
methodology, check out the video and resources below. Here are some analogies to help with the
concept of synthesis. It’s also possible that translations will be needed. Rockville (MD): Agency for
Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2008 Apr. You might like to include on the data extraction
form a field for grading the quality of the study, see the Screening for quality page for examples of
some of the quality scales you might choose to apply.
SB and RR’s positions are supported by the NHMRC Cochrane Collaboration Funding Program.
Relational databases (such as Microsoft Access) can help you extract information from different
categories like citation details, demographics, participant selection, intervention, outcomes, etc. A
service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health. Quality evidence-based
practice initiatives and nursing care and medicine are based on understanding and evaluating the
resources and research available, identifying gaps, and building a strong foundation for future work.
Use existing systematic reviews on your topic to identify what information to collect if you are not
sure what to do. It might be possible to hire study authors to collect missing data for data pooling
(e.g., means, standard deviations). You can always check our plagiarism score before submitting
your work to help ease your mind. Statistical methods ( meta-analysis ) may or may not be used to
analyse and summarise the results of the included studies. - Cochrane Collaboration Definition
Considerations before you start. Do not reinvent the wheel each time you start something new.
Absolute and relative magnitude of effect (if both are appropriate). After summarizing and
evaluating your sources, arrange them in a matrix to help you see how they relate to each other, and
apply to each of your themes or variables. Read the advice for authors page on the journal website, or
ask the journal editor to advise you on what citation format the journal requires you to use. The aim
of developing these literature summary tables is to provide the reader with the information at one
glance. As soon as you save a version of the template, just add, remove, or alter any info for that
record, and you’ll have the new work done in a fraction of this time. There are benefits and
limitations to each method of data extraction. The table was adapted from tables presented in a
review of self-management education programmes for osteoarthritis (Kroon et al 2014). The
Cochrane Review defines the “summary of findings table” as a structured tabular format in which
the primary findings of a review, particularly information related to the quality of evidence, the
magnitude of the effects of the studied interventions, and the aggregate of available data on the
main outcomes, are presented. After preliminary examination of the outcome data, the review
authors changed their planned intervention groups. Suppose the authors only collected qualitative
and quantitative data and did not state the intent and timing of integration. Rockville (MD): Agency
for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2008 Apr. We have outlined five tips that could enhance
the quality of the data extraction and synthesis process by developing useful literature summaries.
Analyse and Interpret results The Review Manager (RevMan) software, endorsed by the Cochrane
Collaboration, is one example of a statistical programme that can measure effect sizes for meta-
analysis. If you are conducting an analytical review with a meta-analysis to compare data outcomes
from several clinical trials you may wish to computerize the data collection and analysis processes.
Merely noting the quality score based on standardised critical appraisal templates is not adequate
because the readers should be able to identify the reasons for assigning a weak or moderate rating.
The Evidence for Evidence-Based Practice Implementation. Table: 1 outline for systemic review and
meta-analysis Assess study quality In recent years, there has been a push to improve the consistency
of each RCT included in systematic reviews. Therefore, while developing literature summary tables,
think twice before using the predeveloped themes. Can I include literature that contradicts my
hypothesis. Discuss any discrepancies in coding throughout the process. You’re also welcome to
convert it to whatever format works best for you, such as LaTeX or PDF.