I was doing a systematic literature review about the acceptance of Adaptive cruise control (ACC). The topic of ACC began in the 1990s. I want to select peer-reviewed articles and I believe that the recent studies should be included in the study. However, I don't know the year I should begin to filter the literature review works. Are there any scholarly-based decision criteria for selecting the year range I should take to perform the systematic review analysis?
#systematic #literature #review#ACC# ADAS #year range
Don't choose an arbitrary date range, such as 'last 10 years'. The date range should be meaningful to the topic so that anything published before then would not be relevant, eg anything published after a change in practice.
Dear Abdul Razzaque Nohri,
Thank you for your advice. Conducting relevant studies is highly important. However, if there are too many papers to review within the given timeframe, some compromises may need to be made. Do you believe that compromising on some work due to time constraints is a feasible solution? are there any mechanisms that support optimization of time vs relevant studies volume, please?
Compromising due to time constraints can be necessary, but it's essential to prioritize the most relevant studies. Mechanisms like systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and using advanced search tools can help optimize time by focusing on key findings and filtering out less pertinent research. Additionally, collaborating with peers or utilizing machine learning algorithms can aid in efficiently sifting through large volumes of literature. Balancing time constraints with the need for thoroughness is key.
I agree with Abdul Razzaque Nohri
You should not pick an arbitrary date range, such as the last 10 years.
If you need to limit the number of studies for reasons of time, you could limit it to the most recent studies. But a better way to limit the studies would be to pick either the largest studies or best designed studies.
Well said Joseph Whittaker
However, the best-designed studies require certain decision criteria, such as the use of a certain number of citations or the relevance of the topics. By doing so, I believe it's possible to narrow down the options. However, this approach could lead to disagreements and compromises during reviews. In your experience, have you used any methods that could assist in selecting the best-designed studies?
Do not use citations as a metric for study design, as it is not, and this will likely produce a highly biased review.
In bio-medical sciences, you could limit to only to randomised-controlled trials, with sample sizes of at least 400 per group.
I am not familar with your field, but perhaps the largest studies as measured by number of participants would be the place to start.
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Mathematics
- Statistics
- Statistical Techniques
- Meta-Analysis