6-Step Guide for Conducting a Systematic Literature Review

What is a systematic literature review?

A systematic literature review is a comprehensive and structured approach to identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing all relevant studies on a specific research question or topic. It involves a systematic search strategy to locate relevant literature, followed by a rigorous assessment of the studies’ quality and relevance.

The systematic review process includes defining a clear research question, specifying inclusion and exclusion criteria, conducting a systematic search in various databases, screening studies, extracting data, assessing study quality, and synthesizing findings through a meta-analysis or qualitative synthesis.

Systematic literature reviews are considered the gold standard for evidence-based research and decision-making in various fields, as they provide a transparent and replicable method for summarizing the existing body of knowledge on a particular topic, such as the outlined systematic literature review topics in this article. They are often used in health sciences, social sciences, and other disciplines to inform policy, practice, and future research directions.

6-step guide for conducting systematic literature review

Conducting a systematic literature review methodology is a rigorous and comprehensive process that involves several key steps. Here is a 6-step guide for conducting a systematic literature review, with each step explained in detail using the provided keywords:

Step 1: Define the Research Question and Objectives

• The first and most crucial step in conducting a systematic literature review is to clearly define the research question and objectives. The research question should be specific, focused, and relevant to the topic of interest. It is essential to have a well-defined research question as it will guide the entire systematic review process, including the literature search, study selection, and data synthesis.
• During this step, it is also important to determine the aim of the review and the specific aspects or components of the systematic literature review that will be covered. This may include identifying the types of studies to be included (e.g., randomized controlled trials, observational studies, qualitative studies), the populations or interventions of interest, and the outcomes or measures to be evaluated.

Step 2: Develop a Review Protocol

• Once the research question and objectives have been defined, the next step is to develop a comprehensive review protocol. The review protocol is a detailed plan that outlines the systematic review process, including the search strategy, study selection criteria, data extraction methods, quality assessment tools, and data synthesis approach.
• The review protocol should be developed a priori (before the review begins) and should be registered or published to promote transparency and minimize potential biases. It serves as a roadmap for the entire systematic review process and ensures that the review is conducted in a systematic and reproducible manner.

Step 3: Conduct a Comprehensive Literature Search

• The third step in conducting a systematic literature review is to perform a comprehensive and systematic search for relevant literature. This involves identifying appropriate databases and other sources (e.g., grey/gray literature, reference lists of included studies) and developing a comprehensive search strategy.
• The search strategy should be designed to capture all relevant studies related to the research question, using a combination of keywords, subject headings, and Boolean operators. It is crucial to document the search strategy in detail, including the databases searched, the search terms used, and the date ranges covered.

Step 4: Study Selection and Data Extraction

• After conducting the literature search, the next step is to screen the identified studies based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. This process typically involves two stages: an initial screening of titles and abstracts, followed by a full-text review of potentially relevant studies.
• During the study selection process, it is important to have at least two independent reviewers assess each study to minimize bias and ensure consistency. Any disagreements or discrepancies between the reviewers should be resolved through discussion or by involving a third reviewer.
• Once the relevant studies have been selected, the next step is to extract the necessary data from each included study. This may involve extracting information such as study characteristics, participant demographics, intervention details, outcome measures, and results. A standardized data extraction form or template should be used to ensure consistency and completeness of the extracted data.

Step 5: Quality Assessment and Risk of Bias Evaluation

• The fifth step in conducting a systematic literature review is to assess the quality and risk of bias of the included studies. This step is crucial as it helps to evaluate the validity and reliability of the findings and ensures that the review is based on high-quality evidence.
• Various quality assessment tools and checklists are available for different study designs, such as the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials or the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. The quality assessment should be conducted by at least two independent reviewers, and any disagreements should be resolved through discussion or by involving a third reviewer.

Step 6: Data Synthesis and Reporting

• The final step in conducting a systematic literature review is to synthesize and report the findings. The data synthesis process may involve a narrative synthesis, a qualitative synthesis, or a quantitative meta-analysis, depending on the nature of the included studies and the research question.
• A narrative synthesis provides a descriptive summary and critical analysis of the included studies, highlighting key findings, similarities, and differences across studies. A qualitative synthesis may involve techniques such as thematic analysis or meta-ethnography to synthesize and interpret qualitative data from the included studies.
• If the included studies are sufficiently homogeneous and report similar outcome measures, a quantitative meta-analysis may be conducted. Meta-analysis involves statistically combining the results from individual studies to provide an overall estimate of the effect size or outcome of interest.

Regardless of the synthesis method used, it is essential to report the systematic review findings in a clear, transparent, and comprehensive manner. This may involve adhering to established reporting guidelines, such as the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, which provides a checklist and guidance for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

The final report or publication of the systematic literature review should include a detailed description of the review process, including the search strategy, study selection criteria, quality assessment methods, and data synthesis approach. It should also provide a critical analysis of the findings, discuss the strengths and limitations of the review, and highlight potential implications for practice, policy, or future research.

Conducting a systematic literature review is a rigorous and comprehensive process that requires careful planning, execution, and reporting. By following this 6-step guide and adhering to established guidelines and best practices, researchers can ensure that their systematic review is of high quality, transparent, and provides a valuable synthesis of the existing literature on a particular topic.

Choosing the Right Research Methodology: A Guide for Researchers

When conducting a systematic literature review, selecting the appropriate research methodology is crucial. The type of literature review you choose should align with the purpose of the review and the research question. A systematic review of the literature is a rigorous and comprehensive approach that aims to synthesize all relevant studies on a specific topic using a systematic and replicable process. This type of review is suitable for answering focused research questions and informing evidence-based practice. 

Alternatively, a scoping review or an integrative review may be more appropriate if you aim to map the existing literature on a broader topic or explore a concept from various perspectives. The review process typically involves defining the research question, developing a comprehensive literature search strategy, screening and selecting relevant studies based on predefined criteria, extracting data, assessing study quality, and synthesizing the findings through meta-analysis or qualitative synthesis.

When writing a systematic literature review paper or conducting a systematic review, it is essential to follow established guidelines, such as the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), to ensure transparency and reproducibility. By choosing the right research methodology and following best practices, researchers can contribute to the knowledge base by means of systematic review and inform future research, practice, and policy decisions.

Writing a good systematic literature review

When writing a good systematic literature review article, the first step is searching the literature across multiple databases like Web of Science to find the appropriate and relevant literature. Different types of literature reviews like systematic reviews, narrative reviews, or critical reviews have different review methodologies and approaches. The actual review should follow established reporting guidelines like PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses).

A systematic review involves a systematic way of collecting and appraising the available literature to address a specific review question. The purpose of a systematic literature review is to synthesize all related literature on a topic, identify gaps in the literature, and inform practice or future research based on the review findings.

The systematic review process includes several key components: defining the review question and objectives, conducting the literature search using comprehensive search strategies, literature selection based on explicit criteria, data extraction from included studies, quality assessment of the selected literature using appropriate tools, and data synthesis through narrative, qualitative or quantitative (meta-analysis) methods.

Conducting the review rigorously is crucial, as the review must ensure transparency and minimize bias. This type of research aims to provide a comprehensive review of research in a specific area, while a traditional literature review may not be as exhaustive or systematic.

The number of literature pieces included and the specific type of review conducted depends on the review aims, the body of literature available, and the research question. The review approach should be clearly described, detailing all aspects of the systematic literature review methodology.

While systematic literature reviews originated in healthcare, they are now widely used across disciplines, including business research. The review findings present a synthesis of current literature regarding the topic and may identify gaps for future research. Based on the review, recommendations can be made to guide practice, policymaking, or highlight areas requiring further investigation.

The review should discuss strengths, limitations, and potential biases, both in the included studies and the review itself. Reporting systematic reviews according to established guidelines ensures rigor in literature reviews and enables replication.

By conducting the literature review systematically and transparently, researchers contribute towards a methodology for developing robust evidence summaries to inform decision-making in various fields.

Strengths and limitations of systematic literature reviews

Strengths of systematic literature review

1. Comprehensive Literature Search

• Systematic literature reviews excel in conducting a comprehensive search for literature, including both published research studies and unpublished grey/gray literature pieces.
• This systematic approach to searching for appropriate literature ensures a more complete representation of the available evidence and reduces the risk of bias when undertaking a literature review.
• The literature search strategies are clearly defined and documented, promoting transparency and replicability.

2. Rigorous Study Selection

• The literature selection process in systematic literature reviews follows explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria, minimizing the potential for cherry-picking studies that align with a particular viewpoint.
• This rigorous approach to identifying relevant pieces of literature is a crucial strength of the systematic review method, ensuring that the review draws upon the most appropriate literature available.

3. Critical Quality Assessment

• A critical component of systematic literature reviews is the quality assessment of the included studies. This step involves evaluating potential biases and limitations in the existing research, enabling a more informed interpretation of the review findings.
• The quality assessment ensures that the review results are based on high-quality and reliable literature, improving the validity and impact of the review.

4. Synthesis of Findings

• By synthesizing the results of multiple studies through meta-analysis or other appropriate methods, systematic literature reviews can provide a more precise and reliable estimate of the effect sizes or outcomes of interest, compared to individual studies.
• This ability to combine and analyze data across different literature types is a significant strength, enhancing the statistical power and generalizability of the review findings.

5. Identification of Knowledge Gaps

• Systematic literature reviews excel at identifying gaps in the existing literature and highlighting areas where knowledge is lacking.
• The review provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge on a particular topic, enabling researchers to pinpoint areas that require further investigation. This aspect is valuable for advancing knowledge and guiding future research directions.

6. Collaborative Approach

• Systematic literature reviews typically involve a team of researchers with diverse backgrounds and expertise, which can enhance the rigor and quality of the review process.
• This collaborative approach helps mitigate individual biases and ensures a more comprehensive evaluation of the available literature, resulting in a more robust and well-rounded review.

7. Adherence to Reporting Guidelines

• Systematic literature reviews adhere to established reporting guidelines, such as the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).
• These guidelines promote transparency, reproducibility, and comparability across different reviews, further enhancing the credibility and impact of systematic literature reviews within the scientific community.

8. Comprehensive Coverage

• Systematic literature reviews include a thorough and comprehensive literature review that covers all relevant aspects of the topic, providing an in-depth synthesis of the current state of knowledge.
• This breadth and depth of coverage is a strength that sets systematic reviews apart from traditional narrative reviews or other literature review types, ensuring a more comprehensive understanding of the subject matter.
• By leveraging these key strengths, systematic literature reviews offer a rigorous and valuable review method for synthesizing existing research and informing evidence-based practice, policymaking, and decision-making processes across various disciplines.

Limitations of systematic literature review

1. Time and Resource-Intensive Process

• Conducting a systematic literature review is a time and resource-intensive endeavor. The systematic review process involves a comprehensive and systematic search for literature, including both published research studies and grey/gray literature.
• This extensive search, along with the subsequent screening, data extraction, quality assessment, and synthesis stages, requires a significant investment of time and resources, often necessitating a team of researchers.

2. Publication Bias

• Systematic literature reviews may be subject to publication bias, where studies with positive or significant results are more likely to be published compared to those with negative or non-significant findings.
• Despite efforts to include unpublished literature (grey/gray literature) in the systematic search, there is a risk that some relevant studies may be missed or excluded from the review, potentially skewing the results of the review.

3. Quality and Availability of Included Studies

• The quality and completeness of the systematic review findings heavily rely on the quality and availability of the included studies.
• If the available literature on a particular topic is limited or of low quality, the conclusions drawn from the systematic review may be limited or biased.
• This limitation highlights the importance of critically appraising the included studies and acknowledging the potential limitations of the available evidence.

4. Heterogeneity Among Studies

• Systematic literature reviews often encounter heterogeneity among the included studies, which can pose a challenge in synthesizing and comparing results.
• Variations in study designs, populations, interventions, and outcome measures can make it difficult to combine and analyze data across different studies.
• While statistical methods, such as meta-analysis, can help account for some heterogeneity, significant variability can limit the generalizability and applicability of the review findings.

5. Narrow Focus and Limited Scope

• Systematic literature reviews often have a narrow focus and specific inclusion criteria, which can limit the breadth and applicability of the findings.
• While this specificity is necessary to ensure a focused and rigorous review, it may also result in the exclusion of potentially relevant studies or perspectives that do not meet the predefined criteria.

6. Potential for Bias in the Review Process

• Despite efforts to minimize bias through predefined protocols and quality assessment tools, there is always a risk of subjective judgments and interpretations influencing the selection, appraisal, and synthesis of studies in a systematic literature review.
• This emphasizes the importance of following established guidelines, such as the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), to promote transparency and reproducibility.

7. Temporal Limitations

• Systematic literature reviews provide a snapshot of the available evidence at a particular point in time. As new research emerges, the findings and conclusions of the review may become outdated or require updating.
• Regular updates or follow-up reviews may be necessary to maintain the relevance and applicability of the findings.
• While these limitations should be acknowledged and addressed through rigorous and transparent reporting, systematic literature reviews remain a valuable and widely accepted research methodology for synthesizing existing evidence and informing evidence-based practice, policymaking, and decision-making processes across various disciplines.

Frequently asked questions about systematic literature review