"Understanding Literature Reviews from Narrative to Meta-Analysis: Frameworks, Typologies, and Writing Styles"
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract: A literature review is a critical intellectual activity that highlights gaps in knowledge, places new research in the perspective of what is already known, and guides future study. The objective, technique, advantages, and disadvantages of the main categories of literature reviews—narrative, systematic, and critical reviews—are examined in this essay. While systematic reviews adhere to strict, repeatable protocols to reduce bias, narrative reviews offer comprehensive, descriptive summaries of findings. By combining quantitative results using statistical methods, meta-analyses expand on systematic reviews and improve the validity and generalisability of findings. Finding methodological or conceptual flaws in earlier research is the main goal of critical reviews. Along with discussing writing styles such as contextual, variable-based, and methodological organisation, the study highlights the significance of summarising local, national, and worldwide research to show its applicability.
Downloads
References
Arksey, H., & O’Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32.https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616](https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616
Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 34(6), 3–15. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X034006003](https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X034006003
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to meta-analysis. Wiley.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5(10), 3–8. [https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X005010003](https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X005010003
Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108. [https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x](https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006). Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: Secrets of the trade. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 5(3), 101–117. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-3467(07)60142-6](https://doi.org/10.1016/S0899-3467%2807%2960142-6
Hart, C. (2018). Doing a literature review: Releasing the research imagination (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The PRISMA Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097. [https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097](https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
Ridley, D. (2012). The literature review: A step-by-step guide for students (2nd ed.). Sage Publications.
Webster, J., & Watson, R. T. (2002). Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. MIS Quarterly, 26(2), xiii–xxiii.
Brouard, F. (2020). NOTE ON LITERATURE REVIEW. Sprott School of Business, Carleton University .
Byrne, J. A. ( 2016). Improving the peer review of narrative literature reviews. (A. n. 12, Ed.) Research Integrity and Peer Review, , volume 1.
Cresswell. (2000). Research Design . Retrieved from QUANTITATIVE , QUALITATIVE, MIXED METHOD THEORY : https://www.ucg.ac.me/skladiste/blog_609332/objava_105202/fajlovi/Creswell.pdf
Introduction to PRISMA 2020 and implications for research synthesis methodologists. (n.d.).
Kang, A. E. (2018). Introduction to systematic review and meta-analysis. (Korean Journal of Anesthesiology, Ed.) Retrieved 71(2), 103–112., from Introduction to systematic review a: [https://doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2018.71.2.103](https://doi.org/10.4097/kjae.2018.71.2.103)
Kitsiou., G. P. (n.d.). Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach. Retrieved from Methods for Literature Reviews: Chapter 9: National Lbrery of Medicine : https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK481583/
Kwienk, M. (2020). Internationalists and locals: international research collaboration in a resource-poor system. (2020, Ed.) Springer Nature Link , Volume 124, pages 57–105.
Lim, W. M. (2022, February). Advancing knowledge through literature reviews: “what”, “why”, and “how to contribute”. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/358814968 Advancing knowledge through_literature_reviews_what_why_and_how_to_contribute
O’Malley, D. H. (2005). SCOPING STUDIES: TOWARDS A METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK. Social Policy Research Unit, University of York .
Page, M. J. (October 2021). Introduction to PRISMA 2020 and implications for research synthesis methodologists,Research Synthesis Methods 13(1). Retrieved from Research Gate: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355613756_Introduction_to_PRISMA_2020_and_implications_for_research_synthesis_methodologists
Rendolph, J. (2007, Feb, ). A Guide to Writing the Dissertation Literature Review. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251499995_A_Guide_to_Writing_the_Dissertation_Literature_Review
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
All articles published in our journal are licensed under CC-BY 4.0, which permits authors to retain copyright of their work. This license allows for unrestricted use, sharing, and reproduction of the articles, provided that proper credit is given to the original authors and the source.