Writing a literature review can be a daunting task, requiring a deep understanding of the subject

matter and the ability to synthesize complex information from various sources. It involves not just
summarizing existing literature but also analyzing and critiquing it to provide a comprehensive
overview of the topic. This process can be time-consuming and challenging, especially for those who
are new to academic writing or unfamiliar with the subject area.

On the other hand, a systematic review is a more structured and rigorous approach to reviewing
literature. It involves a systematic search of the literature, followed by a thorough analysis and
synthesis of the findings. Systematic reviews are often used in evidence-based medicine and other
fields where a rigorous approach to reviewing literature is required.

For those who find writing a literature review challenging, there is help available. Websites like ⇒
StudyHub.vip ⇔ offer professional writing services that can help you with your literature review.
Their team of experienced writers can assist you in crafting a high-quality literature review that
meets the requirements of your assignment or research project. By ordering from ⇒ StudyHub.vip
⇔, you can save time and ensure that your literature review is well-written and well-researched.
Reprints and permissions About this article Cite this article. Gnoli, M., Gambarotti, M., Righi, A. et
al. Secondary peripheral chondrosarcoma in multiple osteochondromas: a retrospective single-
institution case series. The natural history of hereditary multiple exostoses. An introduction to
conducting a systematic literature review for social scien. Diagnosis should be suspected in case of
secondary hypertension, particularly in young women, if no renal vascular cause was found. The
black diamond represents the OR and 95% confidence interval calculated across all the included
studies. Regardless of this commonality, both types of review vary significantly. Step 3: Screen the
Research All the research that the teams select must be screened thoroughly to see relevancy and
usefulness; this is where you decide whether or not the studies are eligible to be used in the review.
When Review Manager software (The Cochrane Collaboration, UK) is used for the analysis, two
types of P values are given. For ease of interpretation, the numerical data are also written in a table
beside the forest plot. The exclusion criteria were review articles, irrelevant or duplicate papers, and
papers without full text available. For all effects represented by absolute differences (e.g., mean
differences), it is placed at 0. Among methods for weighted estimation in a random-effect model, the
DerSimonian and Laird method 6) is mostly used for dichotomous variables, as the simplest method,
while inverse variance-weighted estimation is used for continuous variables, as with fixed-effect
models. A good case study should have the potential to: Provide new or unexpected insights into the
subject Challenge or complicate existing assumptions and theories Propose practical courses of action
to resolve a problem Open up new directions for future research TipIf your research is more practical
in nature and aims to simultaneously investigate an issue as you solve it, consider conducting action
research instead. There are a number of different situations where you might write a literature review,
each with slightly different expectations; different disciplines, too, have field-specific expectations
for what a literature review is and does. Forest plot analyzed by two different models using the same
data. (A) Fixed-effect model. (B) Random-effect model. Ethics declarations Ethics approval and
consent to participate, consent for publication. What are some strategies or tips I can use while
writing my lit review. The age at diagnosis of SPC ranges from 13 to 63, with median age at
diagnosis of 34 years. In contrast, a systematic literature review might be conducted by one person.
For more information on each of these organizations including access to resources and support
offered, please refer to Table 2. A systematic review is a research study of research studies. Selection
Methods: Criteria you used to select (and perhaps exclude) sources in your literature review. When
you begin to write your literature review section, you'll be glad you dug deeper into how the research
was designed and constructed because it establishes a means for developing more substantial analysis
and interpretation of the research problem. Thereafter, the data are reviewed qualitatively and
quantitatively. It’s best if this part is done by two independent people. Please take a moment and use
the link to the right to download and skim through the article. However, there is a distinct difference
between the two. She participated in drafting and in critical revision of the manuscript. A value less
than 25% is considered to show strong homogeneity, a value of 50% is average, and a value greater
than 75% indicates strong heterogeneity. For full interpretation of data, there are a whole raft of
factors that should be considered together (not simply the statistical answer to your question); these
issues are incorporated into the GRADE approach (Grading of Recommendations Assessment,
Development and Evaluation) for assessing the evidence (15).
As shown in Table 1, the study limitations are evaluated using the “risk of bias” method proposed by
Cochrane 2). As with screening, the independent assessment by two review authors is a method to
reduce bias in this process. This finding highlights the need of a personalization of follow-up
management for young borderline cases. Louis Region The Opportunity Trust Chromatography-Gas
chromatography-Principle Chromatography-Gas chromatography-Principle blessipriyanka Dr. NN
Chavan Keynote address on ADNEXAL MASS- APPROACH TO MANAGEMENT in the. One
thing that you will see in a narrative review is a thorough discussion. Furthermore, systematic
reviews provide an unbiased and balanced summary of findings, and these reviews are designed to
provide a summary of current evidence related to a research question. In order to maintain
transparency and objectivity throughout this process, study selection is conducted independently by
at least two investigators. Recapitulate important features of a research study, but then synthesize it
by rephrasing the study's significance and relating it to your own work and the work of others.
Development of the Literature Review Four Basic Stages of Writing 1. Hence for final analysis, only
about 10% of the original selection of articles made it through the entire screening process. Gilgun
Qualitative Research and Family Psychology by Jane F. The images or other third party material in
this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a
credit line to the material. Systematic review of published literature (databases) 2.Basic review of
grey literature (web) 3. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( ) applies to the
data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. LW and ML
collected and analyzed the data, then wrote the manuscript; SJ, YO, FW, and KL provided
professional opinions about JGCT and ultrasound manifestations; JL and YJ revised the manuscript;
HL and QZ designed and supervised the study. What are some strategies or tips I can use while
writing my lit review. There is generally a total sample size for control and intervention groups.
Mutation screening of EXT1 and EXT2 by direct sequence analysis and MLPA in patients with
multiple osteochondromas: splice site mutations and exonic deletions account for more than half of
the mutations. A manual search for relevant clinical studies from references of the screened articles
was additionally carried out. We caught up with some of the winners to discover the impact of their
work and find out more about their experiences. Importance of a Good Literature Review A
literature review may consist of simply a summary of key sources, but in the social sciences, a
literature review usually has an organizational pattern and combines both summary and synthesis,
often within specific conceptual categories. Interacting with experts in the field will ensure the best
approach and will help foster new collaborations in your area. Characteristics of systematic review vs
literature review. The perspectives of those involved in the care for people with cardiovascular
disease can be different to those of other health care professionals. All authors revised the paper
critically for intellectual content and then approved the final version. As a researcher, you will
probably want the opportunity to communicate and exchange ideas with people from a broad range
of disciplines, and some review organizations provide seminars, conferences and online discussion
rooms so creating a hub for a community. When combining data for dichotomous variables, the OR,
risk ratio (RR), or risk difference (RD) can be used. Consider Whether Your Sources are Current
Some disciplines require that you use information that is as current as possible. Secondary peripheral
chondrosarcoma in multiple osteochondromas: a According to literature, the most common sites
were pelvis and proximal femur, even if in this series we observed scapula involvement in only 5%
versus 12% reported in medical literature and spine was the site of malignant transformation in 6%
of cases versus 8.6% in the literature review. Case study An in-depth, detailed examination of
specific cases within a real-world context.
Step 5: Present Data All the data that you have extracted now has to be presented in order. Am J
Hum Genet. 1999.. Francannet C, Cohen-Tanugi A, Le Merrer M, Munnich A, Bonaventure J,
Legeai-Mallet L. Table of contents When to do a case study, step 1: select a case, step 2: build a
theoretical framework, step 3: collect your data, step 4: describe and analyze the case, other
interesting articles. The types of questions systematic reviews aim to answer can vary significantly
and the diverse nature of the available evidence demands the use of appropriate methodology to
describe and synthesize these different types of evidence. If you begin to see the same researchers
cited again and again, then this is often an indication that no new ideas have been generated to
address the research problem. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses usually proceed according to
the flowchart presented in Fig. 2. We explain each of the stages below. In the forest plot, as shown
in Fig. 4, greater overlap between the confidence intervals indicates greater homogeneity. Black
circles: inputted comparisons using the trim-and-fill method. There are others from the same area that
are not infected. Click on each section heading to learn more about it. We strictly follow the
principles of academic integrity and accurately quote and identify all materials and sources in the
text to respect the principles of intellectual property rights and knowledge sharing. Survey - find out
if similar surveys have been done before and what did they find. As we move forward in the book,
we’ll consider why a study like Villegas et al. ( 2007 ) was judged to have a low risk of bias across
all dimensions, where as a study like Cot et al. ( 1995 ) was classified as having a high risk of bias
and flagged for not providing enough information. This small study effect can be controlled for by
using a sensitivity analysis, which is performed to examine the contribution of each of the included
studies to the final meta-analysis result. Most studies account for this within their results. Often, the
literature review is where you can establish your research as filling a particular gap or as relevant in a
particular way. The histological grade was confirmed or re-assessed as follow: the diagnosis of grade
1 peripheral chondrosarcoma was made according to the criteria described in the last WHO (2020).
Filtered Resources: Critically-Appraised Topics Critically-appraised individual articles Authors of
critically-appraised individual articles evaluate and synopsize individual research studies. In a
scenario in which a battle between the two arises, which one should you go for. Narrow the Topic
The narrower your topic, the easier it will be to limit the number of sources you need to read in order
to obtain a good survey of relevant resources. A literature review is a document or section of a
document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each
other (also called synthesis ). EP performed all molecular analyses, assessed the interpretation of the
resulting variants, and participated to all the steps of drafting process. What to consider when
critically appraising a systematic review. Literature search -- finding materials relevant to the subject
being explored. 3. Data evaluation -- determining which literature makes a significant contribution to
the understanding of the topic. 4. Analysis and interpretation -- discussing the findings and
conclusions of pertinent literature. So now it is time to extract all the information that is of actual use
to your review. There is generally a total sample size for control and intervention groups. The rows
represent each study included in the review, and the columns indicate the review authors’
determination about potential bias in each study. One way to organize the different types of evidence
involved in evidence-based practice research is the levels of evidence pyramid. A protocol will be
required to set out the types of research studies to be included in the review, and anything that does
not meet these criteria will be excluded, based on the prespecified research question and a sound
rationale. All patients underwent preoperative ultrasound examination.
Chondrosarcoma transformation in hereditary multiple exostoses: a systematic review and clinical
and cost-effectiveness of a proposed screening model. Clinical Inquiries deliver best evidence for
point-of-care use. It provides easy collaboration across teams and a clear overview of task status,
helping you to efficiently complete your review. Sometimes when people talk about a “systematic
literature review”, they are using the phrase interchangeably with “systematic review”. The grayscale
and Color Doppler images of each patient were acquired and saved by radiologists with more than 5
years of experience in ultrasound examination. Heterogeneity Homogeneity test is a method whether
the degree of heterogeneity is greater than would be expected to occur naturally when the effect size
calculated from several studies is higher than the sampling error. A multicenter study and more in-
depth prospective studies should be conducted in the future to provide a more comprehensive
information of this rare tumor. 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). A summary is a recap of the important information of the source, but a synthesis is a re-
organization, or a reshuffling, of that information in a way that informs how you are planning to
investigate a research problem. There are several types of effect size and the most suitable type is
chosen by the review team based on the type of outcomes and interventions under investigation.
Sometimes you may need to quote certain terminology that was coined by the author, is not common
knowledge, or taken directly from the study. A systematic review is also a type of a literature review.
You will often see the terms “the research,” “the scholarship,” and “the literature” used mostly
interchangeably. At the same time, I would like to thank the experts who helped complete the
literature screening and coding. They often, in fact, identify lack of evidence or knowledge
limitations, and consequently recommend further study, if needed. Literature review The literature
search was conducted in Pub Medline and Embase with the keyword string “juxtaglomerular cell
tumor ultrasound”. Many first time reviewers, whether they are independent researchers or
undertaking the review as part of a PhD or Professional Doctorate, feel that they benefit from
attending workshops and accessing online training resources offered by some review organizations.
For example, a book surveying the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict may include a chapter on
the role Egypt has played in mediating the conflict, or look in the index for the pages where Egypt is
mentioned in the text. During the systematic review process, the quality of studies is evaluated, and
a statistical meta-analysis of the study results is conducted on the basis of their quality. I 2,
calculated as shown above, returns a value between 0 and 100%. For instance, the intervention may
work differently in different contexts, and the included studies were gathered from all over the
world. All systematic reviews, including those that use meta-analysis, are likely to contain an element
of narrative synthesis by summarising in words the evidence included in the review. A case study is a
detailed study of a specific subject, such as a person, group, place, event, organization, or
phenomenon. Data availability The data and material can be provided if asked on a basis of good
reasons. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use
is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain
permission directly from the copyright holder. The diagnosis of JGCT was confirmed by the
postoperative pathology Of the 4 tumors missed by ultrasound, the longest diameter was 1.0 cm, 1.2
cm, 1.5 cm, and 1.2 cm respectively. All of them located in the renal cortex with no protrusion
outward. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice. The statistical result for
the intervention effect, which is generally considered the most important result in meta-analyses, is
the z-test P value. Integrative Review Considered a form of research that reviews, critiques, and
synthesizes representative literature on a topic in an integrated way such that new frameworks and
perspectives on the topic are generated. This study retrospectively summarized the clinical,
laboratory, ultrasound and computed tomography (CT) characteristics of 15 JGCT patients and
reviewed the literature to study the value of ultrasound in the diagnosis of JGCT.
Gough D, Oliver S, Thomas J (2012) Introducing Systematic Reviews, p 8-9. Standards: Description
of the way in which you present your information. If there is reason to believe that the intervention
would work differently in subgroups of the sample (e.g., populations at high or low risk), then
subgroup analyses should also be conducted. One method of evaluating the quality of evidence in
non-randomized studies is the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, provided by the Ottawa Hospital Research
Institute 1). They keep your project focused and manageable when you don’t have the time or
resources to do large-scale research. Case studies are good for describing, comparing, evaluating and
understanding different aspects of a research problem. Black circles: inputted comparisons using the
trim-and-fill method. Shapley Tech Talk - SHAP and Shapley Discussion Shapley Tech Talk - SHAP
and Shapley Discussion 2023 MAP Data Analysis - St. Breast imaging atlas. 5th ed. edn. Reston,
VA: American College of Radiology; 2013. Here are several strategies you can utilize to assess
whether you've thoroughly reviewed the literature: Look for repeating patterns in the research
findings. This information can benefit information professionals and biomedical researchers. A meta-
analysis can help iron out any inconsistencies in data, as long as the studies are similar. Among 105
patients, 32 (26 males and 6 females) were under 30 years (30%); in 18 of them the pelvis region or
the proximal femur were involved and 16 developed grade 2 chondrosarcomas. In fact, case studies
often deliberately focus on unusual, neglected, or outlying cases which may shed new light on the
research problem. Jie Tang, MD.Clinical Application of Ultrasound in the diagnosis and treatment of
Reninoma. Literature reviews don’t have to follow such rigid methods or make the methods explicit.
All authors agree to be accountable for the work and to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the
paper. Supplementary Information Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material. The
location and size of the tumors were recorded during surgeries. Values greater than 75% may indicate
that a change in the meta-analysis method (random vs fixed effects) is needed. Taken together,
contrast enhanced CT should be considered in all cases of JGCT. Characteristics of systematic
review vs literature review. Note: This resource contains both expert opinion and evidence-based
practice articles. For the Q statistic, when the P value of the chi-squared test, calculated from the
forest plot in Fig. 4, is less than 0.1, it is considered to show statistical heterogeneity and a random-
effect can be used. Of the 4 lesions missed by ultrasound, two tumors located in the cortex, with the
size of 1.0 and 1.2 cm respectively, showed similar density with the cortex on non-contrast enhanced
CT and mild enhancement during parenchymal phase on contrast enhanced CT. The results of a
meta-analysis are displayed using a forest plot like the one in figure 3. Other Sections of Your
Literature Review Once you've decided on the organizational method for your literature review, the
sections you need to include in the paper should be easy to figure out because they arise from your
organizational strategy. Benign renal neoplasms in adults: cross-sectional imaging findings. JBI EBP
Database (formerly Joanna Briggs Institute EBP Database) To find critically-appraised topics in JBI,
click on Limits and then select Evidence Summaries from the Publication Types box. Even when the
data cannot be shown to be homogeneous, a fixed-effect model can be used, ignoring the
heterogeneity, and all the study results can be presented individually, without combining them.
Acknowledgement. PREN. Garth Reid, Laura Wyness, Lakshmi Mandava. Overview. Evidence
based public health. The serum potassium was normal in these three patients. One hundred five of the
screened cases were included in the present study. Hereditary multiple exostoses (EXT): mutational
studies of familial EXT1 cases and EXT-associated malignancies. If you choose this strategy, be
careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. Springer Nature remains neutral
with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Historical Review
Few things rest in isolation from historical precedent. Another difference might be in who is doing
the research for the review. A Systematic Review is a review of a clearly formulated question that
uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select and critically appraise relevant research.
Many student writers struggle to synthesize because they feel they don’t have anything to add to the
scholars they are citing; here are some strategies to help you: It often helps to remember that the point
of these kinds of syntheses is to show your readers how you understand your research, to help them
read the rest of your paper. When combining data for dichotomous variables, the OR, risk ratio (RR),
or risk difference (RD) can be used. For the data involving personal privacy, we have adopted
anonymization process, and only present it in the form of statistical data or summary in this article to
protect the privacy of the participants. In fact, case studies often deliberately focus on unusual,
neglected, or outlying cases which may shed new light on the research problem. We strictly follow
the principles of academic integrity and accurately quote and identify all materials and sources in the
text to respect the principles of intellectual property rights and knowledge sharing. By going through
these steps, a systematic review provides a broad evidence base on which to make decisions about
medical interventions, regulatory policy, safety, or whatever question is analysed. Given this, while
literature reviews are designed to provide an overview and synthesis of pertinent sources you have
explored, there are a number of approaches you could adopt depending upon the type of analysis
underpinning your study. It provides easy collaboration across teams and a clear overview of task
status, helping you to efficiently complete your review. Consult with a librarian about identifying
research databases in other disciplines; almost every field of study has at least one comprehensive
database devoted to indexing its research literature. Systematic reviews attempt to summarize all
past research to address a specific clinical question (or questions) using a systematic approach with
methods that have been preplanned and documented in a systematic review protocol (2, 3). A
system for the surgical staging of musculoskeletal sarcoma. Start your free trial Arrange a trial for
your organisation and discover why FSTA is the leading database for reliable research on the sciences
of food and health. Or, you can decide to explore a different research method (perhaps more
qualitative). Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check. In writing up the case study, you need to bring
together all the relevant aspects to give as complete a picture as possible of the subject.
Supplementary Information Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material. Starting with
a systematic review pays off almost every time one is available. Dynamic contrast-enhanced CT
showed nine mild enhancement, and two moderate enhancement in parenchymal phase. Qualitative
versus quantitative research Empirical versus theoretical scholarship Divide the research by
sociological, historical, or cultural sources Theoretical: In many humanities articles, the literature
review is the foundation for the theoretical framework. The number of events may also be used (e.g.,
number of cardiac arrests) and can be summarized using a rate ratio (for rare events), or mean
difference (for common events). Here’s Three Tips to Steer Clear of Potential Issues. All 15 JGCTs
were solitary tumors, including seven in the right kidney and eight in the left kidney.
All authors read and approved the final manuscript. When there is a inconsistency in opinions,
intervention is required via debate or by a third reviewer. Systematic Approaches to a Successful
Literature Review. Text alternative for Levels of Evidence Pyramid diagram EBM Pyramid and
EBM Page Generator, copyright 2006 Trustees of Dartmouth College and Yale University. When
combining data for dichotomous variables, the OR, risk ratio (RR), or risk difference (RD) can be
used. In addition, almost 60 cases underwent surgical treatment before 1990’s, so clinical, imaging
and follow-data were collected with different criteria, nevertheless all available pathological samples
have been revised by expert pathologists. Basically, a systematic review answers the focused
research question. There is generally a total sample size for control and intervention groups. The rows
represent each study included in the review, and the columns indicate the review authors’
determination about potential bias in each study. The critical evaluation of each work should
consider: Provenance -- what are the author's credentials. An audit trail is kept of the number of
studies screened and excluded at each stage, and reasons for excluding studies which appeared
relevant. Literature Review Literature reviews are mostly used to review books or published articles.
Hence, wherever a systematic review has been published, it is important to critically appraise it
before using it to inform practice. The histological grade was confirmed or re-assessed as follow: the
diagnosis of grade 1 peripheral chondrosarcoma was made according to the criteria described in the
last WHO (2020). The perspectives of those involved in the care for people with cardiovascular
disease can be different to those of other health care professionals. You can choose the intellectual
lineage you would like to be part of and whose definitions matter most to your thinking (mostly
humanities-specific, but this goes for sciences as well). In the forest plot, as shown in Fig. 4, greater
overlap between the confidence intervals indicates greater homogeneity. Clin Orthop Relat Res.
2015.. Kivioja A, Ervasti H, Kinnunen J, Kaitila I, Wolf M, Bohling T. A review organized in this
manner would shift between time periods within each section according to the point being made.
Searching through the literature for relevant sources; Evaluating the findings from your search;
Synthesizing these findings; and Presenting the results. We strictly follow the principles of academic
integrity and accurately quote and identify all materials and sources in the text to respect the
principles of intellectual property rights and knowledge sharing. On the Ovid platform using the
multi-field search option, the search would look like this: reviews.sh. AND cassava.af. In 2011 FSTA
introduced the descriptor META-ANALYSIS, making it easy to search specifically for systematic
reviews that include a meta-analysis published from that year onwards. Do the confidence intervals
from each study form a vertical column, even if the point estimates shift between them. It helps to
realise that a “systematic review” is a clearly defined thing, but ambiguity creeps in around the phrase
“systematic literature review” because people can and do use it in a variety of ways. Even when
paraphrasing an author’s work, you still must provide a citation to that work. V. Common Mistakes
to Avoid These are the most common mistakes made in reviewing social science research literature.
Historical Review Few things rest in isolation from historical precedent. Unlike a systematic review,
the literature review does not use any pre-specified protocol or plan. It is crucial to predefine criteria
for study selection and data analysis to ensure transparency and reproducibility while generating an
effective and meaningful systematic review. This makes it possible to test whether the effect size
calculated from several studies is the same. Conclusion: Summarize the key findings you have taken
from the literature and emphasize their significance Connect it back to your primary research
question How should I organize my lit review.