Context: I am writing a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) as part of my master's thesis project. After initially screening the titles and abstracts of 338 papers from four selected databases, I identified 138 papers that matched my inclusion criteria. During the full-text review phase, I encountered difficulty obtaining 3 papers out of the 138. I couldn't access these 3 papers because our university wasn't subscribed to these journals, and the Science Hub Mutual Aid community couldn't help either.
Questions:
(1) Is this acceptable to reviewers in reputable journals?
(2) How should I address this in my SLR?
(3) Is it appropriate to email the authors for copies of their papers?
Hello Evon,
When I am peer-reviewing I would expect efforts to contact authors by email for their papers, stressing to them the importance of adding to the body of evidence via a review. It is a recognised and standard step in systetmatic reviews to do this. When you complete the PRISMA flow chart (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) you will be able to chart reports selected for retrieval (n) versus reports retrieved and not retreived (n).
Evon Shahriar,
Well, when handling unavailable papers in a systematic literature review, it is essential to adopt a structured approach to ensure the integrity and comprehensiveness of the review. First, document the search strategies used, including databases searched and keywords applied, to demonstrate thoroughness. Attempt alternative methods to access the papers, such as inter-library loans, contacting the authors directly for copies, or using institutional access resources. If the papers remain inaccessible, clearly note these gaps in the methodology section of the review, specifying the number and nature of the unavailable sources.Finally, assess the potential impact of these missing studies on the review’s findings and discuss this limitation transparently in the discussion or limitations section, ensuring that readers are aware of any potential biases or incomplete data that might influence the review’s conclusions.
I wish you good-luck!
In my experience, this is almost inevitable, and your proportion of unallocated sources is small, so I would just report it your PRISMA diagram or equivalent and move on.
You can write the authors of those papers requesting copies, use an interlibrary loan request, or contact friends in other universities to search for those papers. If all these prove fruitless, exclude those papers and capturethat in your prisma dlowmap.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Mathematics
- Statistics
- Sampling Design
- Sample Size