Title: Literature Review vs.
Meta Analysis: Understanding the Differences
When embarking on academic research, understanding the nuances between a literature review and a
meta-analysis is crucial. Both methodologies serve distinct purposes in the realm of scholarly inquiry,
yet they often get conflated. In this article, we elucidate the disparities between a literature review
and a meta-analysis to aid researchers in employing the most suitable approach for their study.
Literature Review:
A literature review entails a comprehensive survey and synthesis of existing scholarly literature
pertaining to a specific topic or research question. It involves scrutinizing a wide array of academic
sources, including books, journal articles, conference proceedings, and dissertations. The primary
objectives of a literature review are to:
1. Identify gaps, inconsistencies, or contradictions in the existing literature.
2. Provide a theoretical framework for understanding the topic under investigation.
3. Offer context and background information to orient readers within the field.
4. Highlight key findings and methodologies employed by previous studies.
Conducting a literature review demands meticulousness and analytical prowess. Researchers must
critically evaluate the credibility, relevance, and methodological rigor of each source while
synthesizing the information to derive meaningful insights.
Meta Analysis:
On the other hand, a meta-analysis is a statistical technique used to synthesize the findings from
multiple independent studies on a particular topic. Unlike a literature review, which primarily focuses
on qualitative synthesis, a meta-analysis quantitatively combines data from various studies to produce
a more robust and generalizable conclusion. The key objectives of a meta-analysis include:
1. Pooling data from diverse studies to calculate an overall effect size.
2. Assessing the consistency and heterogeneity of results across studies.
3. Identifying potential moderators or factors influencing the observed effects.
4. Enhancing statistical power by increasing sample size.
Conducting a meta-analysis requires proficiency in statistical methods and a meticulous approach to
data extraction and analysis. Researchers must adhere to rigorous standards to ensure the validity
and reliability of their findings.
Difficulty in Writing:
Both literature reviews and meta-analyses present unique challenges to researchers. Crafting a
comprehensive literature review demands extensive reading, critical thinking, and synthesis of
complex information. Researchers must navigate through a vast body of literature while discerning
relevant insights and identifying gaps in existing knowledge.
Similarly, conducting a meta-analysis entails meticulous data collection, statistical analysis, and
interpretation. Researchers encounter challenges such as publication bias, heterogeneity among
studies, and methodological variations, which necessitate careful consideration and sensitivity to
nuances.
Conclusion:
In conclusion, while literature reviews and meta-analyses serve distinct purposes in academic
research, both methodologies require considerable effort, expertise, and attention to detail. Whether
you opt for a literature review or a meta-analysis depends on the nature of your research question,
available data, and research objectives.
For assistance in crafting a meticulous literature review or conducting a rigorous meta-analysis,
consider seeking professional support from experts in academic writing and statistical analysis. ⇒
StudyHub.vip ⇔ offers specialized services to assist researchers in navigating the complexities of
literature reviews and meta-analyses, ensuring the highest standards of academic excellence and
integrity. Reach out to our team of experienced professionals to elevate the quality and impact of
your research endeavors.
Thus, allocating more time on protocol and following the analytic way of thinking before starting the
systematic review is often preferred for proper utilization of time. This is done by calculating a
weighted average of the effect estimates from the individual studies (for example, estimates of the
effect of the intervention from randomised clinical trials, or estimates of the magnitude of
association from epidemiological studies). DATA SYNTHESIS-- The relative risk (RR) or odds ratio
(OR) of TB used to provide the measure of vaccine efficacy that we analyzed. However this would
not be appropriate, because larger studies contribute more information than smaller studies, and this
should be accounted for in the weighting scheme. A patient had a malignant transformation of
calcaneal region OC and another patient at clavicle (Tables 2 and 3 ). A meta analysis of the
literature or a literature review. Team members independently evaluate the studies being considered
for inclusion in the review and compare results, adjudicating any differences of opinion. Google
Scholar Adler DD, Carson PL, Rubin JM, Quinn-Reid D. If you only want to read and view the
course content, you can audit the course for free. A summary of clinical, pathological, and molecular
information is described in Table 1. There are many different research methods you can use to collect
data on your subject. This tab focuses on the latter--how to design and organize a research paper in
the social sciences that analyzes a specific case. By Publication Order your sources by publication
chronology, then, only if the order demonstrates a more important trend. More information can be
found at: Systematic Review Data repository: PROSPERO: In addition, many journals also publish
systematic reviews, and some journals will additionally publish systematic review protocols, there
are even now dedicated journals for systematic reviews ( ). Meta-analysis adds value because it can
produce a more precise estimate of the effect of a treatment than considering each study individually.
Review not just what scholars are saying, but how are they saying it. We recommend one of the
following options to access Coursera: Google Chrome Microsoft Edge Mozilla Firefox Have
questions. What they all have in common is the use of transparent and reproducible methods that are
defined before the search begins. It is not unusual to exclude large numbers of studies retrieved from
the original search once the inclusion and exclusion criteria are fully considered. But this is not the
case as there are distinct differences despite the apparent overlap between the two. The data is also
analyzed for heterogeneity (variation within outcomes), and generalizability (similarities between
outcomes) within the individual studies, which facilitates more effective clinical decision making.
Find Models Use the exercise of reviewing the literature to examine how authors in your discipline
or area of interest have composed their literature review sections. Every author or researcher is
required to cohere to the given standards of reporting and conducting (META-EVIDENCE BLOG,
2018). Case Study Methodology of Qualitative Research: Key Attributes and 1. Have a language
expert improve your writing Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations
for free. You can either browse this journal or use the Search within this publication feature. The
exclusion criteria were review articles, irrelevant or duplicate papers, and papers without full text
available. Meta-analysis. Department of Education, University of Oxford. Please see our Privacy
Policy for more information. Not applicable. Competing interests The authors declare that they have
no competing interests.
The methods of an OSR are similar to those of a systematic review with the exception that where
systematic reviews focus on primary research studies, OoRs evaluate and combine information from
systematic reviews. Regardless of this commonality, both types of review vary significantly. Review
purpose of a Systematic Review Types of systematic review Best question for each study type
Process of designing a systematic review. Although meta-analysis is not always conducted in the
framework of systematic reviews, it most often is used in systematic reviews that involve combining
studies with numerical results. Other available databases have specific focuses: the exact databases,
and number of databases, that should be searched is dependent upon the review question. Here’s
Three Tips to Steer Clear of Potential Issues. This has greatly benefited research scholars, students,
and professionals across the globe. A patient had a malignant transformation of calcaneal region OC
and another patient at clavicle (Tables 2 and 3 ). Summary In summary, systematic reviews (if well-
conducted) can be an invaluable resource for providing an up-to-date and systematic summary of the
current evidence for particular interventions. A value of “0” for the MD or SMD indicates that the
effects of the new treatment method and the existing treatment method are the same. Periosteal
chondrosarcoma in a 9-year-old girl with osteochondromatosis. Secondly, even if a systematic
review has been well-conducted it might have identified significant limitations or gaps in the current
evidence base, and rightly recommend that its findings are interpreted with caution (although this is
a good rationale for conducting some new research!). When performing a systematic literature
review or meta-analysis, if the quality of studies is not properly evaluated or if proper methodology
is not strictly applied, the results can be biased and the outcomes can be incorrect. You have patients
that are sick with a new disease. These can be particularly useful for informing policy decisions
about which interventions are most effective. Disease-free survival from histological report. 1A:
Graphical Disease-Free Survival for the entire follow up period. 1B: Detailed data at 5 and 10 years
of follow up from histological reports At the latest follow-up (December 2020), 97 patients were
alive (66 males and all 31 females), while 8 patients died, 3 of them due to the disease. Interpreting
results Prone to emulative systematic biases and. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to
assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Examining the heterogeneity of effect
estimates within the primary studies is perhaps the most important task in a meta-analysis. Selecting
studies for inclusion is a two-stage process. Abbreviations juxtaglomerular cell tumor computed
tomography Duan X, Bruneval P, Hammadeh R, Fresco R, Eble JN, Clark JI, Vigneswaran WT,
Flanigan RC. Picken MM.Metastatic juxtaglomerular cell tumor in a 52-year-old man. This approach
helps highlight ethical issues which you should be aware of and consider as you go through your
own study. A case study is an appropriate research design when you want to gain concrete,
contextual, in-depth knowledge about a specific real-world subject. By Carol Hollier on 07-Jan-2020
12:42:03 For those not immersed in systematic reviews, understanding the difference between a
systematic review and a systematic literature review can be confusing. Although identical data were
being analyzed, as shown in Fig. 3, the significant result in the fixed-effect model was no longer
significant in the random-effect model. For instance, in the humanities, authors might include more
overt argumentation and interpretation of source material in their literature reviews, whereas in the
sciences, authors are more likely to report study designs and results in their literature reviews; these
differences reflect these disciplines’ purposes and conventions in scholarship. In conclusion, that
knowledge is crucial to better define the optimal screening type for MO patients, nevertheless further
studies will be recommended. On the other hand if you opt for a synthesis by considering the
interventions and populations which are not similar. If the endpoint is binary (for example, disease
versus no disease, or dead versus alive) then risk ratios, odds ratios or risk differences may be
calculated. Doppler ultrasound color flow imaging in the study of breast cancer: preliminary findings.
Surgery and histopathological examinations Surgeries were performed after the completion of
necessary examinations. The purpose is to place research in a historical context to show familiarity
with state-of-the-art developments and to identify the likely directions for future research. 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. Hypothermia to reduce neurological damage
following coronary artery bypass surgery. 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. They are ideally expected to register their preferred
review label with Campbell or any identical form. Narrative synthesis should not be confused with
narrative review, which is a term sometimes used for a non-systematic review of the literature (for
example in a textbook chapter) where there is no systematic attempt to address issues of bias. A
systematic review is generally conducted by a team including an information professional for
searches and a statistician for meta-analysis, along with subject experts. How many patients does
case series should have In comparison to case reports. Collect data, integrate the findings and
perspectives from different studies and add your own analysis of its feasibility. While conducting a
review of the literature, maximize the time you devote to writing this part of your paper by thinking
broadly about what you should be looking for and evaluating. Forest plots The results of a
systematic review and meta-analysis should be displayed in a forest plot. The general application of
systematic review is high in healthcare industries, as it where the review originated. If you choose
this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. The QUOROM
guidelines for reporting a meta-analysis requests that. The theoretical literature review helps to
establish what theories already exist, the relationships between them, to what degree the existing
theories have been investigated, and to develop new hypotheses to be tested. A random-effect model
assumes heterogeneity between the studies being combined, and these models are used when the
studies are assumed different, even if a heterogeneity test does not show a significant result. Ideally,
the results of the quality assessment should be incorporated into the review for example by
stratifying analyses according to summary risk of bias or restricting inclusion in the review or
primary analysis to studies judged to be at low risk of bias for all or specified criteria. Consider
Whether Your Sources are Current Some disciplines require that you use information that is as
current as possible. The clinical, laboratory, ultrasound, computed tomography (CT), surgical, and.
Characterization and management of Juxtaglomerular Cell Tumor: analysis of 9 cases and literature
review. Objectivity -- is the author's perspective even-handed or prejudicial. It is easy to understand
how this well-documented tendency can skew a review’s findings, but someone conducting a
systematic literature review in the loose sense of the phrase might, for lack of resource or capacity,
forgo that step. For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes
can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women. Trials,
systematic reviews and meta-analysis. “Does the new treatment confer significant benefits compared
with conventional treatment?” Often several trials asking the same question. Black circles: inputted
comparisons using the trim-and-fill method. In addition, they are normally collated and appraised by
an independent panel of experts in the field. Thinking interdisciplinarily about a research problem
can be a rewarding exercise in applying new ideas, theories, or concepts to an old problem. Later
when he wrote further text urging health practitioners to organize knowledge into a useable and
reliable format and practice evidence-based medicine, others took up this challenge. Dynamic
contrast-enhanced CT showed nine mild enhancement, and two moderate enhancement in
parenchymal phase.
For ease of interpretation, the numerical data are also written in a table beside the forest plot. What
methodology you choose can make or break your work getting out into the world, so let’s take a look
at two main types: systematic review and meta-analysis. Result Presentation When reporting the
results of a systematic review or meta-analysis, the analytical content and methods should be
described in detail. A literature review can be a part of a research paper or scholarly article, usually
falling after the introduction and before the research methods sections. Evidence-Based Research:
Levels of Evidence Pyramid The pyramid includes a variety of evidence types and levels. JBI EBP
Database (formerly Joanna Briggs Institute EBP Database) This database includes systematic
reviews, evidence summaries, and best practice information sheets. 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. Sometimes
you may need to quote certain terminology that was coined by the author, is not common
knowledge, or taken directly from the study. Step 4: Perform the search in the desired area of study.
Quality assessment of identified studies Usually all identified studies are included. An Overview.
What is a Systematic Review?. “A review that is conducted according to clearly stated, scientific
research methods, and is designed to minimize biases and errors inherent to traditional, narrative
reviews.”. In the subset of patients with molecular analysis, no strong genotype-phenotype
correlation can be made, in particular on SPC, mainly due to the limited number of cases. Five out of
six had a grade 2 SPC, while one developed grade 3 tumor. We conducted a retrospective cohort
study in SPC cases diagnosed at the IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli from 1960 to 2019. Clinical
Governance and Risk Management: Achieving safe, effective patient-focused care and services.
Overviews of systematic reviews are also useful because they provide summaries of groups of
related systematic reviews (e.g., summarizing the evidence of the effectiveness of a number of
different interventions for a certain outcome or disease). Sometimes a case study will also collect
quantitative data. While these meta-analyses are frequently published in literature, they are
considered suboptimal to those involving RCTs. By Carol Hollier on 07-Jan-2020 12:42:03 For those
not immersed in systematic reviews, understanding the difference between a systematic review and a
systematic literature review can be confusing. Ideally, the results of the quality assessment should be
incorporated into the review for example by stratifying analyses according to summary risk of bias
or restricting inclusion in the review or primary analysis to studies judged to be at low risk of bias for
all or specified criteria. The GRADE approach provides guidelines for making recommendations
based on research evidence, which you may find help you to consider how to interpret the findings
of systematic reviews (see and for further guidance). The FSTA thesaurus will surface results that
would be missed with keyword searching alone. Thereafter, the data are reviewed qualitatively and
quantitatively. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination. Later
when he wrote further text urging health practitioners to organize knowledge into a useable and
reliable format and practice evidence-based medicine, others took up this challenge. Overall, 888
OCs that underwent to surgical intervention at IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli were screened,
among them 215 where chondrosarcomas arising from solitary osteochondromas, while 105 (11.82%)
were diagnosed as SPC in MO. The data is also analyzed for heterogeneity (variation within
outcomes), and generalizability (similarities between outcomes) within the individual studies, which
facilitates more effective clinical decision making. Summarizing involves taking large sections of text
and reducing them into shorter, concise passages. For example, you may include survey
questionnaire and results in the appendix. It specifies the writing and citation styles for use in the
journals published by the American Medical Association.
