A systematic, tool-supported method for conducting literature reviews in information systems

While the importance of literature studies in the IS discipline is well recognized, little attention has been paid to the underlying structure and method of conducting effective literature reviews. Despite the fact that literature is often used to refine the research context and direct the pathways for successful research outcomes, there is very little evidence of the use of resource management tools to support the literature review process. In this paper we want to contribute to advancing the way in which literature studies in Information Systems are conducted, by proposing a systematic, pre-defined and tool-supported method to extract, analyse and report literature. This paper presents how to best identify relevant IS papers to review within a feasible and justifiable scope, how to extract relevant content from identified papers, how to synthesise and analyse the findings of a literature review and what are ways to effectively write and present the results of a literature review. The paper is specifically targeted towards novice IS researchers, who would seek to conduct a systematic detailed literature review in a focused domain. Specific contributions of our method are extensive tool support, the identification of appropriate papers including primary and secondary paper sets and a pre-codification scheme. We use a literature study on shared services as an illustrative example to present the proposed approach.

Teaching assistants and pupils' academic and social engagement in mainstream schools: insights from systematic literature reviews

The last 20 years have seen a huge expansion in the additional adults working in classrooms in the UK, USA, and other countries. This paper presents the findings of a series of systematic literature reviews about teaching assistants. The first two reviews focused on stakeholder perceptions of teaching assistant contributions to academic and social engagement. Stakeholders were pupils, teachers, TAs, headteachers and parents. Perceptions focused on four principal contributions that teaching assistants contribute to: pupils’ academic and socio-academic engagement; inclusion; maintenance of stakeholder relations; and support for the teacher. The third review explored training. Against a background of patchy training provision both in the UK and the USA, strong claims are made for the benefits to TAs of training provided, particularly in building confidence and skills. The conclusions include implications for further training and the need for further research to gain an in-depth understanding as to precisely the manner in which TAs engage with children.

Examining the use of terms "Conservation" "Restoration" and "Preservation" between Natural Resource Professionals and Literature Reviews

ABSTRACT This thesis will determine if there is a discrepancy between how literature defines conservation, preservation, and restoration, and how natural resource professionals define these terms. Interviews were conducted with six professionals from six different agencies that deal with natural resources. These agencies consisted of both government and non-government groups. In addition to interviewing these professionals regarding how they define the terms, they were asked where their work fits into the context of these terms. The interviewees’ responses were then compared with the literature to determine inconsistencies with the use of these terms in the literature and real world settings. The literature and the interviewees have agreed on the term conservation. There are some different points of view about preservation, some see it as ‘no management’ and some others see it as keeping things the same or ‘static.’ Restoration was the term where both the literature and professionals thought of moving an ecosystem from one point of succession or community, to another point on a continuum. The only thing in which they disagree on is the final goal of a restoration project. The literature would suggest restoring the ecosystem to a past historic condition, where the interviewees said to restore it to the best of their abilities and to a functioning ecosystem.

Quantitative Determination of the Relationship between Internal Validity and Bias in Software Engineering Experiments: Consequences for Systematic Literature Reviews

Quality assessment is one of the activities performed as part of systematic literature reviews. It is commonly accepted that a good quality experiment is bias free. Bias is considered to be related to internal validity (e.g., how adequately the experiment is planned, executed and analysed). Quality assessment is usually conducted using checklists and quality scales. It has not yet been proven;however, that quality is related to experimental bias. Aim: Identify whether there is a relationship between internal validity and bias in software engineering experiments. Method: We built a quality scale to determine the quality of the studies, which we applied to 28 experiments included in two systematic literature reviews. We proposed an objective indicator of experimental bias, which we applied to the same 28 experiments. Finally, we analysed the correlations between the quality scores and the proposed measure of bias. Results: We failed to find a relationship between the global quality score (resulting from the quality scale) and bias; however, we did identify interesting correlations between bias and some particular aspects of internal validity measured by the instrument. Conclusions: There is an empirically provable relationship between internal validity and bias. It is feasible to apply quality assessment in systematic literature reviews, subject to limits on the internal validity aspects for consideration.

Clarifying the abstracts of systematic literature reviews*

Background: There is a small body of research on improving the clarity of abstracts in general that is relevant to improving the clarity of abstracts of systematic reviews.

Research students' early experiences of the dissertation literature review

The phenomenon of a dissertation literature review is explored from a "second-order" perspective. Written responses from 41 neophyte research scholars from various disciplines in an Australian university were gathered in response to two questions: "What do you mean when you use the words "literature review"?" and "What is the meaning of a literature review for your research?" A phenomenographic analysis identified six conceptions, or ways of experiencing, literature reviews: literature review as a list, literature review as a search, literature review as a survey, literature review as a vehicle for learning, literature review as a research facilitator, and literature review as a report. The conceptions represent differing relations between student researchers and the literature. The range of conceptions suggests that the supervisors of postgraduates and other teachers interested in the literature review process need to accept literature reviews as a problem area for students and develop strategies to help them.

Models of survivorship care provision in adult patients with haematological cancer : an integrative literature review

Purpose: Increasing numbers of haematology cancer survivors warrants identification of the most effective model of survivorship care to survivors from a diverse range of haematological cancers with aggressive treatment regimens. This review aimed to identify models of survivorship care to support the needs of haematology cancer survivors. Methods: An integrative literature review method utilised a search of electronic databases (CINAHL, Medline, PsycInfo, PubMed, EMBASE, PsycArticles, Cochrane Library) for eligible articles (up to July 2014). Articles were included if they proposed or reported the use of a model of care for haematology cancer survivors. Results: Fourteen articles were included in this review. Eight articles proposed and described models of care and six reported the use of a range of survivorship models of care in haematology cancer survivors. No randomised controlled trials or literature reviews were found to have been undertaken specifically with this cohort of cancer survivors. There was variation in the models described and who provided the survivorship care. Conclusion: Due to the lack of studies evaluating the effectiveness of models of care, it is difficult to determine the best model of care for haematology cancer survivors. Many different models of care are being put into practice before robust research is conducted. Therefore well-designed high quality pragmatic randomised controlled trials are required to inform clinical practice.

Importance of literature profiling: An archival analysis with illustrative examples for IS researchers

The importance of a thorough and systematic literature review has long been recognised across academic domains as critical to the foundation of new knowledge and theory evolution. Driven by an exponentially growing body of knowledge in the IS discipline, there has been a recent influx of guidance on how to conduct a literature review. As literature reviews are emerging as a standalone research method in itself, increasingly these method focused guidelines are of great interest, receiving acceptance at top tier IS publication outlets. Nevertheless, the finer details which offer justification for the selected content, and the effective presentation of supporting data has not been widely discussed in these method papers to date. This paper addresses this gap by exploring the concept of ‘literature profiling’ while arguing that it is a key aspect of a comprehensive literature review. The study establishes the importance of profiling for managing aspects such as quality assurance, transparency and the mitigation of selection bias. And then discusses how profiling can provide a valid basis for data analysis based on the attributes of selected literature. In essence, this study has conducted an archival analysis of literature (predominately from the IS domain) to present its main argument; the value for literature profiling, with supporting exemplary illustrations.

Evidence-based practice: the relevance of systematic reviews.

Aim:
To demonstrate how systematic reviews provide robust evidence to inform clinical decision making in practice.

Background
Systematic reviews collate findings from a number of research studies in order to provide a comprehensive and reliable summary of the best available evidence. The use of systematic reviews to inform practice based decisions has increased as a result of the overwhelming amount of research literature available, poor quality of research evidence and the need to ensure practice is based upon the best available evidence. Systematic reviews are an efficient way of coping with large volumes of data to answer focused research questions. They differ from traditional literature reviews as they adhere to an explicit scientific process. The use of explicit and rigorous methods to identify, appraise and synthesise relevant studies minimises bias and provides a reliable basis for decision making. As a result systematic reviews provide clear evidence on the effectiveness of a healthcare intervention to inform policy and decision making across healthcare systems. An example of how the findings from systematic reviews can provide reliable evidence to inform healthcare decisions will be provided in this presentation1. This will demonstrate how focused clinical questions can be answered by systematic reviews and translated into practice.

Reference:
1. McGaughey J, Alderdice F, Fowler R, Kapila A, Moutray M. (2007) Outreach and Early Warning Systems (EWS) for the prevention of Intensive Care admission admission and death of critically ill adult patients on general hospital wards (REVIEW). The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 3. art no CD005529