Systematic literature review methods
State-of-the-art review Tend to address more current matters in contrast to other combined retrospective and current approaches. The problem of duplicate systematic reviews.
Scoping review Preliminary assessment of potential size and scope of available research literature. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. May be graphical and tabular. As in any academic discipline, rigorous knowledge syntheses are becoming indispensable in keeping up with an exponentially growing eHealth literature, assisting practitioners, academics, and graduate students in finding, evaluating, and synthesizing the contents of many empirical and conceptual papers.
Systematic literature review methods
Presenting results in summary of findings tables. Having said that, we realize that the methodological rigour of any review — be it qualitative, quantitative or mixed — is a critical aspect that should be considered seriously by prospective authors. First, exhaustive coverage means an effort is made to be as comprehensive as possible in order to ensure that all relevant studies, published and unpublished, are included in the review and, thus, conclusions are based on this all-inclusive knowledge base. Oxford Review of Education. Annals of Internal Medicine. Ascribing quality scores to each primary study or considering through domain-based evaluations which study components have or have not been designed and executed appropriately makes it possible to reflect on the extent to which the selected study addresses possible biases and maximizes validity Shea et al. The main procedures of a systematic review involve: Formulating a review question and developing a search strategy based on explicit inclusion criteria for the identification of eligible studies usually described in the context of a detailed review protocol. Systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of location and citation counts. An inventory of evaluation studies of information technology in health care. Moher D. Connect the information reported by different sources and do not just summarize the results. Attempts to evaluate according to contribution. Place in the research article: Results.
Some reviews are exploratory in nature e. Recently, there have been several efforts to introduce more rigour in narrative reviews that will elucidate common pitfalls and bring changes into their publication standards.
This exercise requires a significant investment on the part of researchers, who must ensure enhanced objectivity and avoid biases or mistakes. Summary Table 9. A literature review a defines a specific issue, concept, theory, phenomena; b compiles published literature on a topic; c summarises critical points of current knowledge about the problem and d suggests next steps in addressing it.
Cochrane Database System Review. The medical review article: state of the science.
Systematic literature review example paper
All in all, articles met the criteria and their data were extracted manually into a database. If the information is missing in some specific paper, always register it in your reports. Significant component: seeks to identify conceptual contribution to embody existing or derive new theory. Their model follows the systematic data processing approach comprised of three steps, namely: a literature search and screening; b data extraction and analysis; and c writing the literature review. They proposed several solutions, including limiting studies in meta-analyses and reviews to registered clinical trials, requiring that original data be made available for statistical checking, paying greater attention to sample size estimates, and eliminating dependence on only published data. Systematic reviews with discordant findings can cause great confusion and make it difficult for decision-makers to interpret the review-level evidence Moher, This exercise requires a significant investment on the part of researchers, who must ensure enhanced objectivity and avoid biases or mistakes. Literature reviews can take two major forms. However, there are situations in which it is neither reasonable nor appropriate to pool studies together using meta-analytic methods simply because there is extensive clinical heterogeneity between the included studies or variation in measurement tools, comparisons, or outcomes of interest. Introduction Literature reviews play a critical role in scholarship because science remains, first and foremost, a cumulative endeavour vom Brocke et al. As mentioned earlier, when rigorously conducted review articles represent powerful information sources for eHealth scholars and practitioners looking for state-of-the-art evidence. May employ selective or purposive sampling. What remains unknown; uncertainty around findings, recommendations for future research.
based on 109 review