Regardless of approach used to conduct a literature review, there are several essential steps and decisions that must be made to produce a review that meets standard for publication. Table 3 provides specific consideration for each step. The process of producing a literature review can be broken down in four keys phases: 1 designing in review, 2. conducting the review, 3. analyzing the findings and 4. writing up the reviews.
In the first phase, designing the review, researchers must outline their objectives, define the scope, and select the relevant database, or sources. Next during the second phase, conducting the review, they systematically search, collect, assess relevant literature. The third phase involves analyzing and synthesizing the findings from the reviewed literature, identifyin patterns, gaps and key themes. Finally in the fourth phase researchers write up the review, ensuring clarity, coherence, and adherence to publication standards.
This structured approach to literature reviews is based on practical experiences and synthesizes various guidelines and standards, providing a comprehensive framework for developing high-quality literature reviews that contribute meaningfully to academic discourse.
Designing The Review
The first question to consider when conducting a literature review is whether it is necessary and valuable. Is there a real need for a review in this area, and what type would offer has most benefit? Additionally, understanding the potential audience is essential, as it influences both the likelihood of publication and the impact on the research community. A through scan of existing literature helps assess whether similar reviews exists, the number of studies available, and how to clearly defines the review’s purpose ,scope, and research question.
The research question guides the choice of approach whether a systematic, narrative, or integrative review is most suitable. Once the question is defines .developing a self-strategy is key. This involves selecting appropriate search terms database, and deciding on inclusion criteria. The selection of search terms and criteria is critical for ensuring the rigor and quality of the review, as it influences what studies are included or excluded.
It is important to document all the decisions to ensure transparency and allow readers to understand how literature was identifies, analyzed, and synthesized. Careful consideration of these steps helps avoid biases and ensures the review’s integrity.
Conducting The Review
After determining the purpose, research questions, and type of approach, the next step is to begin conducing literature review. It is recommended to conduct a pilot test of the review process and protocol by testing the search terms and inclusion criteria on a small sample. This allows for adjustments to be made before finalizing the sample, and using two reviewers is advisable to ensure the quality and reliability of search process protocol.
The sample selection can vary depending on the scope of the review and the number of articles generation. In some cases, reviewers may read all articles in full though this is time-consuming. Another option is to focus on specific sections like research methods and findings, or to review the literature In stages-reading abstracts first, then the full texts. Once the initial articles are selected, they would be careened to make sure they meet the inclusion criteria. Additionally, references from selected articles can be reviewed to identify other relevant works, although this may not be suitable for systematic reviews, which follow a stricter protocol. Throughout the process, decisions about including or excluding articles should be thoroughly documented.
Analysis The Review
After conducting the review finalizing the sample, it is essential to determine how the selected articles will be analyzed standardized approach foe extracting relevant information from each article should be employed. This data could include descriptive details such as authors, publication dates, topics, and study types, or more specific elements like effect, findings, or theoretical perspectives. The form of data extraction should align with the reviews purpose and search question, and may vary depending on the reviews focus.
If multiple reviews are involved, they should be trained to ensure consistency in coding and data abstraction, and the process should be closely monitored to maintain quality and reliability. For academic publication, a detailed description of the process or a measure of reliability between reviewers is often required, particularly when extracting complex information like themes or historical timeline.
Different analysis methods may be more appropriate depending on the review‘s purpose. For example, a meta-analysis is suitable for evaluating the effect of loyalty programs while developing a theoretical model for customer experience may requires a method batter suited to integrated reviews. Regardless of the method, it is crucial that the chosen analysis technique effectively address the research question.
Writing The Review
When writing the literature review, it is crucial to clearly communicate the motivation and need for review. Depending on the chosen approach, the structure and level of detail in the final review may vary. Several established standards and guidelines outline how literature reviews should be reported such as PRISMA for systematic reviews and meta-analysis, RAMSES for systematic narrative reviews, and guideline for integrative reviews.
Although review articles can be organized in different ways, authors must follow established conventions for reporting how the review was conducted. This includes transparently describing the process of designing the review, the method used for collecting and analyzing literature, and how the findings were synthesized and reported. Proper communication allows readers to assess the quality and reliability of the review’s conclusion.
The contribution of literature review can be vary depending on factors such as the maturity of the research field and the current state of knowledge. Possible contributions might include providing historical analysis of the field’s development, setting an agenda for future research, developing a conceptual model or categorization, or presenting evidence of a specific effect. These contributions should align with the review’s goals and need of the research community.
By
Dr. Abid Hussain Nawaz, Ph.D. & Post Doc.
Shakeela Riaz, Educationist
Your critical analysis of existing research effectively identifies gaps and areas for further investigation