When it comes to academic writing, one of the most daunting tasks for many students and

researchers is crafting a comprehensive literature review. This essential component of scholarly work
requires meticulous research, critical analysis, and adept synthesis of existing literature on a particular
topic. The literature review serves as the foundation for understanding the current state of knowledge
in a field, identifying gaps, and establishing the rationale for new research.

A literature review involves systematically examining and evaluating a wide range of scholarly
sources, including peer-reviewed journal articles, books, conference proceedings, and other relevant
publications. Researchers must sift through vast amounts of information, discerning key findings,
methodologies, and theoretical frameworks while also assessing the credibility and reliability of each
source.

One of the challenges of writing a literature review is the sheer volume of material to review and
organize. With the exponential growth of academic literature in virtually every field, keeping abreast
of the latest research findings can be overwhelming. Additionally, synthesizing diverse perspectives
and conflicting viewpoints requires critical thinking skills and a nuanced understanding of the
subject matter.

Moreover, crafting a literature review that is both comprehensive and coherent demands effective
writing and organizational skills. Researchers must not only summarize existing literature but also
contextualize it within the broader theoretical and methodological frameworks relevant to their
study. This requires clarity of expression, logical structure, and seamless integration of ideas from
multiple sources.

While some may attempt to navigate the challenges of writing a literature review independently,
many find it beneficial to seek assistance from professional academic writing services. ⇒
StudyHub.vip ⇔ offers expert guidance and support to students and researchers grappling with the
complexities of literature review writing. With a team of experienced writers and researchers, ⇒
StudyHub.vip ⇔ provides customized assistance tailored to the specific needs of each client.

By entrusting your literature review to ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔, you can alleviate the stress and
uncertainty associated with this demanding task. Our skilled writers will conduct thorough research,
critically evaluate relevant literature, and craft a well-organized, compelling review that meets the
highest academic standards. Whether you need assistance with structuring your literature review,
synthesizing key findings, or refining your writing style, ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔ is here to help.

In conclusion, while writing a literature review can be challenging, it is a crucial aspect of academic
scholarship. By enlisting the support of ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔, you can streamline the process and
ensure the quality and integrity of your literature review. Trust ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔ for expert
assistance with your literature review needs.
A review is an overview of the research that’s already been completed on a topic. These are mostly
used in the health and medical field, but they are not rare in fields such as social sciences and
environmental science. Corresponding author Correspondence to Robert David Smith. The search
was limited to studies in human subjects and English language in peer-reviewed journals from 1966
to June 2011. If the answer was Yes, the item got 1 point, and if the answer was No or Unclear, the
item got 0 points. Team members screen the search results and sort them according to these criteria,
beginning with titles and abstract reviews and moving to full-text reviews later. Only articles
published from January 1, 2018 to December 25, 2022 were retrieved. 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. Sensitivity of between-study
heterogeneity in meta-analysis: proposed metrics and empirical evaluation. This evidence generation
process typically involves some form of systematic literature review (SLR). The documentation
contains an excellent rationale for completing a protocol, too. However, in the other reviews, there is
only one reviewer. They address the entire systematic review process, from locating, screening, and
selecting studies for the review, to synthesizing the findings (including meta-analysis) and assessing
the overall quality of the body of evidence, to producing the final review report. Synthesize the
extracted data and place them in relevant spots. For an overview of project planning, see the guide:
Project Planning for the Beginner: Home. It may also be, however, that the inclusion criteria do cover
these but no relevant studies have yet been conducted. 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). Analysis of
seroepidemiological survey of hepatitis B among people aged 0-79 years in Zhengzhou from 2019 to
2021. It is not available electronically, but we have print copies in the library and they have a very
useful online resource to supplement learning. To know more about how to write a systematic review,
you can read our article; previously linked. Heterogeneity complicates the interpretation of a meta-
analysis; it signals that we might be comparing apples and oranges. Comprehensive and versatile
register of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled clinical trials (CCTs). Arthroscopic
surgery for degenerative knee arthritis and meniscal tears: a clinical practice guideline. BMJ.
2017;357:j1982. Brignardello-Petersen R, Guyatt GH, Buchbinder R, Poolman RW, Schandelmaier
S, Chang Y, et al. Usually, another team does the screening process using the inclusion and exclusion
criteria. We can also suggest resources to help with the other steps. Covidence helps researchers
complete systematic review quickly and easily. A systematic review of published evidence maps and
their definitions, methods, and products. Meta-analysis is a specialised type of systematic review
which is quantitative and rigorous, often comparing data and results across multiple similar studies.
Share This Book Main Navigation Menu Systematic reviews. The perspectives of those involved in
the care for people with cardiovascular disease can be different to those of other health care
professionals.
In nursing, systematic reviews summarize healthcare studies and controlled trials to provide evidence
about the effectiveness of healthcare interventions. Both are used to summarize information, data,
research, or literature that already exists. In the literature review, you get an overview or an idea
about a particular topic that an author has decided to write about. A literature review can also use
biased sources to gather information. Characteristics of systematic review vs literature review.
Systematic reviews strive to be as thorough and rigorous as possible to minimise the bias that would
result from cherry-picking studies in a non-systematic way. If you’re doing a systematic review on
your own (e.g., for a research paper or thesis ), you should take appropriate measures to ensure the
validity and reliability of your research. They also have their place in the scientific literature with
different advantages and disadvantages. It explains the function of a literature review and provides
guidance on how to write one. Request a consultation with one of our team members and start
empowering your researchers: By using our site you consent to our use of cookies to measure and
improve our site’s performance. Most notably, network meta-analysis is a key technique for
evaluating comparative evidence using indirect statistical methods. Remember: All meta-analyses
involve a systematic review, but not all systematic reviews involve a meta-analysis. LibGuides:
Systematic Reviews: Types of Systematic Reviews Meta-analysis is a statistical method that can be
applied during a systematic review to extract and combine the results from multiple studies. The type
of review you select will depend on why you are conducting the research (Research purpose,
problem, and scope). Read an analysis of the 14 review types and a recent follow up article
characterising health related reviews by type grouping them into review families. Pre-specified
eligibility criteria, to decide which articles will be included or discarded from the review. 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. The methods of an OSR are similar to those of a
systematic review with the exception that where systematic reviews focus on primary research
studies, OoRs evaluate and combine information from systematic reviews. Arthroscopic surgery for
degenerative tears of the meniscus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. The objective of this
article is to introduce the primary care physicians about the concept of systematic reviews and meta-
analysis, outlining why they are important, describing their methods and terminologies used, and
thereby helping them with the skills to recognize and understand a reliable review which will be
helpful for their day-to-day clinical practice and research activities. The inclusion criteria were
restricted to original research articles written in English or Chinese. Evidence thus becomes more
accessible to not only health care providers but also their users, that is, patients and their families.
Although meta-analysis is a subset of systematic reviews, a systematic review may or may not
include a meta-analysis. Not every study is designed or implemented equally, however, so review
authors must also evaluate the potential for bias in each study to help the reader make sense of the
findings. Language Editing Plus With Elsevier’s Language Editing Plus services, you can relax with
our complete language review of your systematic literature review or literature review, or any other
type of manuscript or scientific presentation. Replicability ensures that there is a greater degree of
confidence in the research. 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). An
audit trail is kept of the number of studies screened and excluded at each stage, and reasons for
excluding studies which appeared relevant. Screening, data extraction and quality assessment
Articles were screened independently by the primary reviewer and at least one secondary reviewer,
with all conflicting decisions agreed up between reviewers.
For example, you might place more confidence in results that are based on randomized controlled
trials at a low risk of bias than those at a high risk of bias or other study designs such as controlled
before and after studies. Investigation on the status of hepatitis B virus infection and the vaccination
situation among primary school students in Yunnan province. Ganeshkumar Healthcare decisions for
individual patients and for public health policies should be informed by the best available research
evidence. Supplementary Information Additional file 1.. Search Term Additional file 2: Table S1. In
a recent review of 300 systematic reviews, few authors reported assessing possible publication bias
even though there is overwhelming evidence both for its existence and its impact on the results of
systematic reviews. Like meta-analysis, subgroup analysis and meta-regression are advisable only in
certain circumstances. Gough D, Oliver S, Thomas J (2012) Introducing Systematic Reviews, p 6-7.
Now, they also include any evidence-based research questions. Characteristics of systematic review
vs literature review. Where your product and evidence will be used in such a dynamic setting, a
living review can be an excellent option. This is followed by an extensive search of the literature and
a critical analysis of the search results. Is it a systematic literature review or a standard literature
review. What they all have in common is the use of transparent and reproducible methods that are
defined before the search begins. This work was supported by the internal grant of the Faculty of
Health Sciences, University of Macau. The quantitative analysis of empirical evidence can use a
meta-analysis as the statistical approach. Some of the researchers just end up creating descriptive
reviews. Different Types of Reviews Conducting a Review Develop a research question and protocol
Searching process. A good appendix is a treasure trove of information. Each term refers to research
about research, but there are important differences. The core methodology behind a living review can
be that of a full SLR or a rapid review. Since there is careful evaluation and critical summarization,
one can draw a clear picture of the chosen topic. Not every systematic review contains a meta-
analysis. To increase inter-rater reliability, ensure that everyone thoroughly understands the selection
criteria before you begin. Take note that if this happens, it can have serious consequences. Given that
most clinicians and public health professionals do not have the time to track down all the original
articles, critically read them, and obtain the evidence they need for their questions, systematic
reviews and clinical practice guidelines may be their best source of evidence. This short video from
the National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools explains the types of reviews and what
kind are needed. This involves extensive planning, and a deliberately designed search strategy that is
in tune with the specific research question. The perspectives of those involved in the care for people
with cardiovascular disease can be different to those of other health care professionals. Systematic
Literature Review or Literature Review Systematic Literature Review vs Meta Analysis. An
advantage of meta-analysis is that it has the ability to be completely objective in evaluating the
research parameter.
Systematic reviews can also demonstrate where knowledge is lacking. The Community Guide
provides a set of evidence-based recommendations for public health action to improve community
health. Asking the right question: specifying your study question. Systematic review. What is it?.
Traditional reviews. Two of you will independently read the studies and decide which to include in
your review based on the selection criteria you established in your protocol. Note Generative AI
tools like ChatGPT can be useful at various stages of the writing and research process and can help
you to write your systematic review. Unlike a systematic review, the literature review does not use
any pre-specified protocol or plan. MOOSE Guidelines Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in
Epidemiology checklist contains specifications for reporting of meta-analyses of observational
studies in epidemiology. To conduct a systematic review, you will need, among other things: A
specific research question, usually in the form of a PICO question. 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. Sensitivity of between-study heterogeneity in meta-analysis:
proposed metrics and empirical evaluation. 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. The second column relates to the intervention groups and the third column
to the control groups. Time Needed to Complete Review Usually takes months or even years to
reach a dependable conclusion. However, they do support requests for timely evidence synthesis,
including urgent, emergent, and high priority health issues. Quantitative: Use statistical methods to
summarize and compare data from different studies. 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. However, in the subgroup analysis by different regions and age
groups, the prevalence of HBV showed significant differences, especially among populations in rural
areas and people aged ?18?years old, where the prevalence of HBV was higher. As such the
organization you choose to work with, or your own team or reviewers, should have strong input
from relevant groups with appropriate expertise that can provide you with peer review and team
members in order to achieve your review. A systematic review is best deployed to test a specific
hypothesis about a healthcare or public health intervention or exposure. Preferred reporting items for
systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. A meta-analysis, on the other hand, is
a statistical method that is used to pool results from various independent studies, to generate an
overall estimate of the studied phenomenon. They address the entire systematic review process, from
locating, screening, and selecting studies for the review, to synthesizing the findings (including meta-
analysis) and assessing the overall quality of the body of evidence, to producing the final review
report. Is my research topic appropriate for systematic review methods. The systematic review may
also include a quantitative pooling of data, called a meta-analysis. Federal government websites often
end in.gov or.mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government
site. Google does not filter the evidence in this manner. Thus, after the analysis, if changing makes
little or no difference to the overall results, the reviewer's conclusions are robust. 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). In a traditional Literature Review conducted by experts.
For this reason, most systematic reviews are conducted by teams, given the large scope of the data
initially collected for most research topics. Reviews that are usually registered with organizations
like Cochrane and Campbell are highly reliable. The graphical output of meta-analysis is a forest plot
which provides information on individual studies and the pooled effect. This is found to be much
helpful to understand the existing evidence about the topic more easily by the reader. PRISMA-P is a
17-item checklist for elements considered essential in protocol for a systematic review or meta-
analysis. Sensitivity of between-study heterogeneity in meta-analysis: proposed metrics and empirical
evaluation. Therefore, understanding the differences can help you determine the appropriate review
for your research. It focuses on work that has been previously published. There is generally a total
sample size for control and intervention groups. Nicki Jackson Senior Training and Support Officer
Cochrane Health Promotion and Public Health Field. Overview. Background to systematic reviews
International systematic review initiatives Resources required. 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. Based on the full texts: Download the articles that weren’t
excluded during the first phase. Boyle and Tang read through the articles to decide if any more
studies needed to be excluded based on the selection criteria. Databases: EMBASE, PsycINFO,
AMED, LILACS, and ISI Web of Science Handsearch: Conference proceedings and reference lists
of articles Gray literature: The Cochrane Library, the metaRegister of Controlled Trials, and the
Ongoing Skin Trials Register Experts: Authors of unpublished registered trials, pharmaceutical
companies, and manufacturers of probiotics Step 4: Apply the selection criteria Applying the
selection criteria is a three-person job. In our meta-analysis, the age group with higher prevalence was
people aged ?18?years old, while the age group with lower prevalence was those aged Over the past
30?years, numerous strategies addressing HBV have been implemented within China and the
prevalence of HBV has been declining during this period. Only articles published from January 1,
2018 to December 25, 2022 were retrieved. Of retrieved articles, 2026 (61%) articles were removed
after title and abstract screening, and further 31 articles were removed during the full text screening.
Meta-analysis produces a more precise estimate of treatment effect. You need to build a team of
researchers that are familiar with the topic that you must review. These reviews determine the
summary of research on a particular topic. Usually, they are based on randomized controlled trials,
though not always. Hence, narrower CIs allow us to be more confident that the estimated effect size
is close to the true effect size. The prevalence of female (3, 95%CI: 2, 4%) was similar to male (3,
95%CI: 2, 5%). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA
statement. The Guide explores different approaches and methods for expedited synthesis of health
policy and systems research, and highlights key challenges for this emerging field, including its
application in low- and middle-income countries. Answerable questions EFFECTIVENESS A
description of the populations P An identified interventionI An explicit comparison C Relevant
outcomes O A PICO question Time-consuming question: What is the best strategy to prevent
smoking in young people. For more information on each of these organizations including access to
resources and support offered, please refer to Table 2. Given the explosion of medical literature, and
the fact that time is always scarce, review articles play a vital role in decision making in evidence-
based medical practice. That way one’s opinion is not influenced by the other.
Each study’s point estimate of the relative risk is plotted around a line of “no effect.” A risk of 1
means that there is no difference between the intervention and control groups. If there’s no previous
research, there’s nothing to review. Examining the evidence in anesthesia literature: a critical
appraisal of systematic reviews. The next step is selecting the eligible studies based on similar study
designs, year of publication, language, choice among multiple articles, sample size or follow-up
issues, similarity of exposure, and or treatment and completeness of information. Systematic reviews
should be carried out according to a predefined protocol that sets out the scope of the systematic
review and details of the methodology to be used throughout the review. 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. Meta-analysis of observational studies in
epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. The main reason is that the observational studies may entail
an increased risk of biases and high levels of heterogeneity. A recent development is the emergence
of Overviews of Reviews (OoRs). As such the organization you choose to work with, or your own
team or reviewers, should have strong input from relevant groups with appropriate expertise that can
provide you with peer review and team members in order to achieve your review. A review of a
clearly formulated question that uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select, and
critically appraise relevant research, and to collect and analyse data from the studies that are included
in the review. It is therefore an approach for systematically combining pertinent qualitative and
quantitative study data from several included studies to establish a single conclusion that has
significant statistical power. A review team searches for studies to answer the question using a highly
sensitive search strategy. Cite this Scribbr article If you want to cite this source, you can copy and
paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our
free Citation Generator. Turney, S. (2023, November 20). 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). For a systematic review to be deemed “systematic,” it needs to follow a set protocol, in
order to be replicable, transparent, and (as much as possible) free from bias. Clinicians read them to
keep up-to-date with their field and they are often used as a starting point for developing clinical
practice guidelines. All our papers are 100% original, human-written, and error-free. Simply put,
studies with weaker research designs, such as this one, have less weight in the pooled analysis. This
is found to be much helpful to understand the existing evidence about the topic more easily by the
reader. Morag Heirs. Research Fellow Centre for Reviews and Dissemination University of York. In
the Conclusion, the authors frame the overall results in terms of their implications for practice and
research. Calculate the outcome measures of each study and combine them We need a standard
measure of outcome which can be applied to each study on the basis of its effect size. Is it a
systematic literature review or a standard literature review. Analysis: Explain what information you’ll
collect from the studies and how you’ll synthesize the data. The documentation provides a clear
overview of scoping reviews. Although, there are advantages associated with the process it is often
very time consuming. The JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis should be used in conjunction with
the support and tutorials offered at the JBI SUMARI Knowledge Base. In addition, all the research
materials are collected from multiple databases and sources, including government reports,
pharmaceutical companies, conference proceedings, and so much more. Meta-analysis can improve
the precision of an effect estimate.
Not every systematic review contains a meta-analysis. Handsearching: In addition to searching the
primary sources using databases, you’ll also need to search manually. This search is comprehensively
conducted but is not exhaustive. What Is the Difference Between a Systematic Review and a Meta-
analysis 17 Citations Abstract Distinguishing between a systematic review and meta-analysis is
essential to understand the role each plays in presenting and analysing data and estimates of
treatment effects. This then calls for the need to use a systematic approach. Systematic searches of
literature from January 1, 2018 to December 25, 2022 were conducted in four international databases
(Medline, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews) and three Chinese
databases (CNKI, CBM, and WanFang data). Understanding and Evaluating Systematic Reviews
and Meta-analyses A systematic review is a summary of existing evidence that answers a specific
clinical question, contains a thorough, unbiased search of the relevant literature, explicit criteria for
assessing studies and structured presentation of the results. It uses explicit, systematic methods that
are selected with a view to minimizing bias, thus providing more reliable findings from which
conclusions can be drawn and decisions made (Antman 1992, Oxman 1993). Literature review is a
discussion of published material in a certain subject area. The JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis
should be used in conjunction with the support and tutorials offered at the JBI SUMARI Knowledge
Base. The Process of Systematic Reviews Here is how you would get a systematic review started,
described in steps. In contrast, our meta-analysis included 99,816 individuals across 25 studies, all of
which were local or regional studies and none were conducted at the national level. With this said
you would establish parameters for inclusion before the project and apply them consistently in your
search results. They address the entire systematic review process, from locating, screening, and
selecting studies for the review, to synthesizing the findings (including meta-analysis) and assessing
the overall quality of the body of evidence, to producing the final review report. McLellan MS,RD
Medical University of South Carolina. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. (n.d.).
Systematic Reviews. Systematic reviews have influenced various types of reviews, including
literature reviews. In a meta-analysis, the main objective is to provide more precise estimates of the
effects of a treatment or of a risk factor for a disease, than any of the individual studies included in
the pooled analysis. Both this meta-analysis and the previous meta-analysis reported a higher
prevalence in rural areas compared to urban areas. Each study’s point estimate of the relative risk is
plotted around a line of “no effect.” A risk of 1 means that there is no difference between the
intervention and control groups. By application of scientific strategies, it is possible to minimize error
and bias to provide a more reliable and precise estimate of an intervention’s effectiveness.
Systematic reviews are currently considered as one of the highest forms of research evidence and it
can be tempting to view a systematic review as providing “the definitive answer” to a clinical
question. Meta-analysis showed no statistical difference between groups in hospitalization and
mortality. OSF Preregistration Initiative This page explains the motivation behind preregistrations
and best practices for doing so. Protocols.io A secure platform for developing and sharing
reproducible methods, including protocols for systematic reviews. They provide reliable information
that has a real impact on society. Getting Started with Systematic Reviews What is a Systematic
Review and Meta-Analysis Differences between systematic and literature reviews. Finding a good
review can save you hours of searching and will give you a ready-made search strategy to update or
modify. Find out why over 350 of the world’s leading institutions are seeing a surge in publications
since using Covidence. A systematic review is a type of review that uses repeatable methods to find,
select, and synthesize all available evidence. Step 1: Formulate a research question Formulating the
research question is probably the most important step of a systematic review.