10 Steps to Write a Systematic Review Paper
10 Steps to Write a Systematic Review Paper
The definition of a Systematic Review is "a well-synchronized and step-by-step analysis of many studies to derive an answer to the identified research question." As you are inclined to write a systematic review, you must find an answer to a question that has not been answered comprehensively and effectively. Simply, you need to read lots of journal paper books, theses, official declarations, etc., to bring an effective answer to a research question. This is more like any research paper, yet there is a simple deviation. In a systematic review paper, you need to create criteria for selecting evidence that will support your answers. Systematic review undergoes the whole process of inclusion/exclusion of information. The purpose of considering new criteria and the process of inclusion/exclusion is to avoid any kind of biased derivations. The objective remains strictly about the validity and reliability of the review.
In this article, we are going to find a way – How to write a systematic review paper.
The approach will be structured under 10 effective steps that will add great research-based relevance to the review paper. The 10 most effective steps are noted below.
Step 1: Identify a Research Field
The selection of the research field depends on the stream of knowledge that you are involved in. The field of research must be very familiar to you. The reviewer must understand that the target of a systematic review is to critically analyze and evaluate a former literary work that has been already published.
Step 2: Generate a Research Question
Since the systematic review is recognized as a peer-reviewed article, the reviewer should not aim to offer any new ideas or original reports. The selected research question must remain connected to the former publication. However, the reviewer must understand that the review -
-
Should add value to the research field
-
Must appeal to international researchers and readers
Step 3: Create a Protocol
The process of creating a protocol for a systematic review is a stage that comes when the reviewer is on the way to proposing or leading the research approach. It comes at a stage when the reviewer has not begun with the final process of extracting data. The scope of the review paper must follow the guidelines suggested by the respective journal where you want your article to get published. Framework, approach, and registration regulations must be followed within the determined protocol. The basic protocols to be noted are –
-
The last line of the abstract must declare the Registration no. with the sub-heading 'Registration'.
-
In case you do not have the Registration no., add 'submitted' with the protocol date for registration.
The reviewer must remain aware of the fact that the created protocol is subject to undergo the following process-
Step 4: Evaluate Relevant Literature
The process of evaluating former publications for a review paper is noted to be more critical than any other literature review. Kindly note that while evaluating the relevant literature always quote it with direct reference to the problem, instead of referring to the textbook. There is a need to remain critically absorbed in the selected literary works and experiments. It is therefore suggested that the team for per-reviewed must have a senior experienced researcher.
Step 5: Investigate Sources for Answers
The process of investigating the identified relevant literature begins with the efforts of evaluating each of them in this approach the reviewer needs to investigate all the sources. At every step, the reviewer must remain focused on the Research Question. Any sort of deviation from the Research Question will make the paper tagged as invalid. As the points get collected the following aspects must be noted in particular-
-
For reliability of the review paper-
-
Keep records of every development of the article
-
Use the latest studies from the databases
-
Keep the declarations simple and systematic
-
Be strategic in concluding.
Step 6: Collect Data as per Protocol
In a review paper, the basic attempt is to collect data from existing sources in specific relation to the research topic. The data collection process should be initiated to gain answers to the Research Question. The process of data collection must adhere to the regulations set by the Protocol. The most common regulations instruct the reviewer to collect all the data from relevant sources. Every data must be extracted from a specified study and about the purpose of the article.
The collected data can be expressed in the form of tables and figures. Graphs are also accepted under the norms of Journal protocols.
Step 7: Data Extraction
Data extraction follows the stage after the modification of the piloted phase of collecting data. Characteristics of data extraction must include clear declarations on methods considered for data collection, details about the participants and the intervention groups, and a clear elaborative report on the attained outcomes. As such the extraction of the data for a systematic review paper must be maintained as per structured templates. The two very basic ways of extracting data are-
Step 8: Critical Analysis of Results
The critical analysis of the collected relevant data is the soul of the systematic review paper. At this stage, the reviewer needs to remain completely focused on delivering the most critically acclaimed evaluations and elaborations. It is suggested that the reviewer consider creating tables, figures, and graphs for comprehensive knowledge about the review. The process of critical analysis of the data must remain heterogeneous and without any biases. Every declaration should be supported by logic and reasoning. Running the means of meta-analysis is very effective in generating valid and authentic results in the process of evaluating the collected data.
The reviewer can also enlist the points that are not included in the study, for advanced research works in the future.
Step 9: Interpreting Derivations
The process of writing a systematic review paper must follow the norms of being an interpretive approach to derivations. The collected data needs to be ssynchronizedin accordance with specific declarations made through - hypothesis, research rationale, and adapted methodological process. The reviewer must declare the limitations as well as the biases in the paper. Explanations related to the identified strength, empirical approaches, practical applicability, and effects on sociological/ scientific/ or economic domains must be expressed clearly. In a way, the reviewer must also offer a vision of the future analytical practices led by the current review.
Step 10: Concluding Statements
This is a stage where the reviewer needs to check and recheck the paper. The reviewer must offer a systematically structured conclusion to the paper. Offering answers to the research question is the most important task to be met.
To avoid rejection from publication by the editors of the Journal, all kinds of necessary inclusions and exclusions must be checked. The protocol must be rechecked at every stage.
The ultimate checklist before the submission of a systematic review paper has been provided here for a quick look-
Read More: Understanding the Key Differences Between a Review Paper and a Research Paper
