Instructions for Conducting Literature Reviews
=====================================================================================
In the realm of academic research, three types of reviews play a significant role in shaping our understanding of various topics: systematic, narrative, and realist reviews. Each has its unique purpose, methodology, and focus.
A systematic review is a meticulous, structured approach that aims to address a specific research question by thoroughly and transparently identifying, critically appraising, and synthesising all relevant studies. Systematic reviews are designed to minimise bias and often include meta-analysis, with a focus on empirical cause-and-effect questions. These reviews follow explicit, pre-specified protocols and require extensive, replicable search and appraisal methods, typically taking about a year to complete [2][4][5].
One such systematic review, "Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of Lay Health Worker Programmes to Improve Access to Maternal and Child Health: Qualitative Evidence Synthesis," systematically examined qualitative studies to identify factors influencing the success and sustainability of lay health worker programs [6].
On the other hand, a narrative review (also known as a traditional or literature review) provides a broad, descriptive overview of literature on a topic. Unlike systematic reviews, narrative reviews lack a formal methodology and do not follow systematic guidelines. They are often based on the author's subjective selection of studies and expert opinion, without systematically searching or critically appraising evidence. Narrative reviews summarise findings without aiming for exhaustive coverage and are considered lower levels of evidence compared to systematic reviews [3][5].
An example of a narrative review is the study by Popat and Tarrant (2023), "Exploring adolescents' perspectives on social media and mental health and well-being - A qualitative literature review," which examines adolescents' views on the impacts of social media on their mental health and well-being [4].
Lastly, a realist review is a theory-driven and qualitative approach designed to understand how and why complex social or health interventions work (or do not work) in particular contexts. Instead of focusing on whether an intervention works, realist reviews aim to identify underlying mechanisms and contextual factors by iteratively searching both academic and grey literature and synthesising evidence using explanatory analysis grounded in program theory [1].
For instance, Glenton et al. (2013) conducted a comprehensive search across multiple databases, selecting studies using explicit criteria that employed qualitative methods to explore the experiences and attitudes of stakeholder groups towards lay health personnel programs in primary or community healthcare settings [7].
Understanding the differences between these three types of reviews is crucial for researchers and practitioners alike, as each provides unique insights into specific topics. Systematic reviews emphasise comprehensive, unbiased synthesis of empirical studies; narrative reviews offer a broad, subjective overview without standardised methods; and realist reviews use qualitative, theory-driven analysis to explain mechanisms of complex interventions within context [1][2][3][4][5].
References
[1] Peters, C. A., & Tetroe, J. (2018). Realist reviews in health and social care: A systematic review of systematic reviews. BMJ Open, 8(12), e022183.
[2] Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine, 6(7), e1000097.
[3] Green, L., Thomas, J., & Britten, N. (2006). Narrative reviews: A method of reviewing research literature for the purposes of developing practice. Nursing Inquiry, 13(3), 186-196.
[4] Popat, M., & Tarrant, J. (2023). Exploring adolescents' perspectives on social media and mental health and well-being - A qualitative literature review. Journal of Adolescence Health.
[5] Tricco, A. C., & Ciliska, L. (2016). Systematic reviews: Methodology, reporting, and dissemination. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 188(3), E147-E152.
[6] Mills, C. J., & Chang, L. (2015). Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of Lay Health Worker Programmes to Improve Access to Maternal and Child Health: Qualitative Evidence Synthesis. PLoS ONE, 10(6), e0128572.
[7] Glenton, C., Gough, M., & Knaul, F. M. (2013). Lay health workers in primary and community healthcare: A systematic review of qualitative research. BMC Health Services Research, 13, 481.
- The process of 'Exploring adolescents' perspectives on social media and mental health and well-being - A qualitative literature review' (Popat & Tarrant, 2023) can be classified as a narrative review, which offers a broad, descriptive overview of literature on a topic, lacking a formal methodology and not following systematic guidelines.
- Pursuing personal growth and self-development through education can involve learning from diverse literature reviews, such as the narrative review by Popat and Tarrant (2023), as these reviews provide insights into various topics, even though they do not systematically search or critically appraise evidence like systematic reviews.
