I have heard that Systematic Literature Review (SLR) is one of the ways to do literature review that can help in writing and constructing in literature review chapter. However, I tried to look on the internet on how to start doing SLR but all of them showed different ways.
Starting a Systematic Literature Review (SLR) can seem daunting due to the many different guides available, but they all follow a similar core process. The main reason for the variations you see online is that the specific steps can be adapted based on the field of study (e.g., medicine, social sciences) and the type of research question. However, the fundamental, sequential steps remain the same.
The process begins with defining a clear, focused research question. This is arguably the most critical step, as it will guide the entire review. Next, you develop a protocol, which is essentially a detailed plan outlining the methodology. This protocol includes the eligibility criteria for studies (what you will include and what you will exclude), the specific databases you will search, and the keywords or search terms you'll use. Once the protocol is set, you conduct a comprehensive literature search across multiple databases, meticulously documenting your search strategy and the number of results found. After identifying potential studies, you screen the titles and abstracts to filter out irrelevant papers, followed by a full-text review of the remaining articles. You then extract relevant data from the selected studies using a pre-defined form and assess the quality of each study to identify any potential biases. Finally, you synthesize the findings and present your results to answer your initial research question.
Hi Caroline Eve Gembar, thanks for the question!
I’m not an expert, but I’ve completed 10+ systematic reviews, and here’s the simple workflow I use:
1. Define your search string – list the core keywords and their synonyms.
2. Choose your databases – e.g., Scopus, Web of Science (and others if needed).
3. Do an exploratory search to see how many results you get.
4. Refine if it’s too many – limit to journal articles and the last 5–10 years (adjust as needed).
5. Export the results—at least the paper titles (ideally titles + abstracts) to a spreadsheet.
6. Screen titles & abstracts and remove anything not truly related.
7. Full-text check the shortlisted papers; read conclusions (and methods/findings) to confirm relevance.
8. Extract the key info you need (e.g., aims, methods, context, findings).
9. Analyze according to your data; if it’s qualitative, thematic analysis usually works well.
10. Write the discussion based on the analysis.
This is just a simple guide. If you have any questions, feel free to reach me out.
Good luck with your systematic review and your master’s journey!
A systematic review is defined as a scholarly synthesis of evidence on a clearly presented topic. Generally you have to fulfill three tasks: collect, identify and critically analyze the available research studies. You will find these three steps in one or another form. Feel free to adopt them to your own preferences.
Caroline Eve Gembar, read the guidelines and will give you one random paper https://hal.science/hal-01574600/file/article.pdf
Once you have identified your sample papers, consider using the https://gracelitrev.com/ platform for seamless metadata extraction, synthesis, and graph generation. I am pleased to offer you complimentary full access for one month.
Charles Berg, Abdelrahman M. Farouk Gaurav H Tandon I extend the invitation to you too.
- Badges
- Science topic