2. Professor of Information Management at University of the
Punjab
Post-doctoral research fellow at University of California, Loss
Angeles, USA
150+ publications
Supervised many doctoral, M.Phil. and master theses
Worked for various research journals as editor, reviewer and
editorial board member
Conducted many trainings on research writing and publishing
About me
2
3. Acknowledgment
I have prepared this presentation with the help of
many books, presentations and Websites.
I pay my sincere gratitude to all authors,
professors and experts for their efforts and
contributions.
3
4. 4
Literature review
The general term for all attempts to
synthesize the results and conclusions of
two or more publications on a given topic.
A review may or may not be systematic.
5. Narrative review
Traditional expert review; usually subjective in nature
Systematic 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 analyze data from the
studies that are included in the review
Meta-analysis
Quantitative evidence
Use of statistical methods to combine the results of various
independent, similar studies
More precise calculation of one estimate of treatment effect than
could be achieved by any of the individual, contributing studies
5
Levels of literature review
6. Systematic review – history
1
1
1
272
334
371
323
386
429
482
596
639
741
849
948
1079
1289
1594
2063
2335
2596
2778
3239
3930
4850
6538
8113
7096
526
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
Astronomers claim to be the
first users of this method
Explosion of SRs in health
sciences in mid 1980s
Term “systematic review” was
coined by health care
researchers
SR became a significant tool
for “evidence-based medicine”
or “evidence-based practice”
6
Growth of SRs
in health
sciences
7. SR – another definition
A systematic review “attempts
to collate all empirical evidence that fits pre-
specified eligibility criteria
in order to answer a specific research question.
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.”
7
9. Characteristics of an SR
Clearly stated set of objectives with pre-defined
eligibility criteria for studies
Explicit, reproducible methodology
Systematic search that attempts to identify all
studies that would meet the eligibility criteria
Assessment of the validity of the findings of the
included studies
Systematic presentation, and synthesis, of the
characteristics and findings of the included
studies
9
10. Steps in an SR
Build a review team
Develop a protocol or plan
Formulate review question
Define inclusion and exclusion criteria
Locate studies
Select studies
Assess study quality
Extract data
Analysis/summary and synthesis of relevant studies
Present results
Interpret results/determining the applicability of results
10
11. Review team
Normally a team work
Key skills:
Managing research projects
Leading, coordinating
Expertise in the topic
Methodological expertise
Planning, searching, managing information, coding,
analyzing, synthesizing, writing
11
12. Protocol
What is the title?
What is the context and what are the conceptual
issues?
What is the aim?
What is the research question?
What is the search strategy?
What are the inclusion / exclusion criteria?
How will the data be extracted and analyzed?
How will the quality of studies be assessed?
12
13. PICO – question components
in medicine
P – Population
Patients (Demographic factors, socioeconomic
factors, setting, etc.)
I – Intervention
Drug, procedure, etc.
C – Comparison
Alternative to compare with intervention (placebo or
active)
O – Outcome
Improvement, effect, measure, etc.
13
15. Sample questions
In undergraduate medical education, does the
use of clicker technology in the classroom
improve learning outcomes?
Are antiseptic washes more effective than non
antiseptic washes at preventing nosocomial
infections in patients undergoing surgery?
Are mass media (or school-based or community-
based) interventions effective in preventing
smoking in young people?
15
17. Searching literature
Identifying major concepts
Keywords, synonyms, controlled vocabulary
Combination of concepts
Boolean operators, string, truncation, proximity, etc.
Identifying where to search
Search strategy
Varies in different databases
Export citations to a reference management software
EndNote, etc.
Documenting your search
Database name, date of searching, number of results
17
18. Sources of literature
Electronic databases
General vs. subject
Grey literature
Conference proceedings, theses, reports,
Websites
Browsing issues of topical journals
Backward and forward citations of the most
relevant articles
Conversation with experts in the field
18
22. Study selection
An initial assessment that occurs following the search
It addresses the question “should the paper be
retrieved?”
It is essential to use two assessors in both the selection
and critical appraisal processes to limit the risk of error
Select only those studies that address the review
question and that match the inclusion criteria
Scan titles and abstracts
If uncertain? - Retrieve - scan full text
22
25. Study quality assessment
Choose appropriate checklist
related to study design
It is better to use more reviewers
Inter-reviewer reliability
25
31. Data synthesis
Will results be pooled? How?
How will differences between studies be
taken into account?
Can subgroups of data be made?
How will results be displayed?
31