Literature Review Toolkit

Welcome to the RSS Hub Leicester and Partners Literature Review Toolkit Toolkit. The Toolkit has been developed to assist researchers decide what type of literature review they need for their project.

What type of literature review do I need?

The type of literature review undertaken by a researcher is usually determined by the following considerations:

What literature and evidence do you have already?

• Are you aware of any systematic reviews or guidelines on the topic?
• Is it a priority for research? Check:
  • James Lind Alliance: https://www.jla.nihr.ac.uk/ for a priority setting partnership (PSP) on the topic and read through the top 10 and other prioritised questions for research.
  • Department of Health website for topics of national importance: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/department-of-health-areas-of-research-interest/department-of-health-areas-of-research-interest
  • NICE Guidelines, look within a specific guideline for recommendations for research: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance

What time/resources do you have?

Generally, literature reviews are completed by a team of people. A systematic review which can take up to a year to complete, usually comprises of a team of people that would include an information specialist, clinical expert(s) methodological expertise, and if quantitative papers are being included, a statistician. Quite commonly now a patient/public representative with an interest in the topic is an active team member:
Involve guide (2012) Public involvement in systematic reviews https://www.invo.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/INVOLVEPublicInvolvementSystematicReviews2012.pdf

What does the proposed funder say about literature/evidence?

From NIHR RfPB guidance: https://www.nihr.ac.uk/documents/research-for-patient-benefit-programme-guidance-for-stage-1-applications/20154:

Applicants should be aware of ongoing research in this area and comment on any other research which might be deemed to overlap with the contents of the proposal. Applicants are advised to use both PubMed Central https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/and Europe PubMed Central https://europepmc.org/grantfinder for recent material on the relevant topic area(s).
Any applications that include primary research should include reference to the existing evidence and explain how this evidence has informed the proposed research. Where a systematic review already exists that summarises the available evidence, this should be referenced, along with any relevant literature published subsequent to that systematic review. Where no such systematic review exists, it is expected that the applicants will undertake an appropriate review of the currently available and relevant evidence (using as appropriate a predetermined and described methodology that systematically identifies, critically appraises and then synthesises the available evidence) and then summarise this in their proposal. All applicants must also include reference to relevant ongoing studies, e.g., from trial registries such as the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number (ISRCTN) registry, ClinicalTrials.gov and the European Union Clinical Trials Register.

By understanding the different types of literature review, researchers can select the most appropriate method for generating and synthesising evidence and answering their specific research questions. Note that the terminology of review types can be used interchangeably and inconsistently. For example, literature reviews are often called narrative reviews; systematic reviews and evidence synthesis essentially use the same methodology. Increasingly authors put the type of review in the title or subtitle which helps in retrieval and screening of references. The description of the methodology, in the abstract or main body of text, should be checked to determine exactly how the review was conducted and to help decide on the relevance and quality of a particular study. 

Protocols and reporting guidelines/checklists

Definitions: 

• Protocol – This is a pre-defined plan or road map of the research study that sets out the ‘question’ and details of the background, objectives, methodology, data collection and analysis and conduct of the research.
• Reporting guidelines -  Are structured tools of recommendations for how to clearly and transparently report research findings. They give a minimum set of information that must be included in an article. Equator network defn.: “A reporting guideline is a simple, structured tool for health researchers to use while writing manuscripts. A reporting guideline provides a minimum list of information needed to ensure a manuscript can be, for example:

• • • Understood by a reader,
    • Replicated by a researcher,
    • Used by a doctor to make a clinical decision, and
    • Included in a systematic review.

Whether presented as structured text, flow diagram or a checklist, a reporting guideline:

• • • presents a clear list of reporting items that should appear in a paper and
    • explains how the list was developed”

Journals usually request that reviews are reported using specific guidelines which may come with a checklist

To ensure clarity and transparency the researcher should clearly state and reference the guidance that they are following

• Use the EQUATOR network as the most comprehensive, up to date source for reporting guidelines
• The Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) is another reputable source with guidance for protocols and reporting of systematic reviews, scoping reviews and umbrella reviews
• The Cochrane Library is a leading resource for peer-reviewed systematic reviews and protocols 

In practice there is a range of guidance potentially better suited to specific populations, settings or research designs with new resources to improve the reporting of different types of study always emerging

• For journal publication, as a general rule, your potential submission should state the reporting guideline that you have used. You may then need to modify your article as needed to fit the particular journal publishing ‘style’. Commonly researchers/writers will target specific journals for potential publication and follow the guidelines recommended or mandated
• The Good reports checklist may help you plan, write or review medical research

Acknowledgments

This toolkit was produced by Christine Keen, RSS Hub Leicester and Partners

Created: November 2024