literature review

1. How to do systematic review and how to
write papers based on thematic analysis ?
Popular Gentle, PhD
Adjunct Research Fellow/Environmental and Social Scientist
Charles Sturt University, Australia
pgentle@csu.edu.au

2. Literature review
• Literature review is a critical recap of what has already been researched on
the topic.
• Literature could be anything from a set of government document to scholarly
articles.
• Literature review could be a summary - a recap of the important information
of the source, or a synthesis - re-organization, or a reshuffling, of that
information.
• Review does not necessarily mean that your reader wants you to give your
personal opinion on whether or not you liked these sources.

3. Why to do literature review?
Literature review is important to:
• Demonstrate your familiarity with the current status of knowledge and
scholarly context,
• Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research,
• Position yourself in relation to other researchers and theorists,
• Ensure how your research addresses a gap or contributes to a debate,
• Ensure that you’re not just repeating what others have already done,
• Identify gaps in knowledge and unresolved problems that your research can
address

4. How to do literature review?
• Search for relevant literature on your topic (such as key word search in google scholar,
science direct etc)
• Evaluate and select sources
- scan an abstract to see whether the article is relevant or not
- review bibliography to see other references
- see citation count on google scholar – how authentic and recognized?
• Identify themes, debates and gaps
• Outline literature review structure
- Chronological (older to more recent publications)
- Thematic (organize around key themes)
- Methodological (different research methods applied across studies)
- Theoretical (using opposing theories and models)

5. How to do literature review?
• Narrower your topic, the easier it will be to limit the number of sources you need to read in
order to get a good survey of the material
• Consider whether your sources are current - use information that is as current as possible –
mostly on science
• if you are writing a review in the humanities, history, or social sciences - it is important how
perspectives have changed over time

6. How to organize your review?
• Introduction: Gives a quick idea of the topic of the literature review, such as the central theme
or organizational pattern.
• Body: Contains your discussion of sources and is organized either chronologically, thematically,
or methodologically.
• Conclusions/Recommendations: Discuss what you have drawn from reviewing literature so
far. Where might the discussion proceed?

7. How to organize your review?
• Researcher Name (2005) asked students to follow University style for citation and reference.
(Direct Quote = Authentic matter convey)
• However, the sociology department allows students to follow any scientific style they prefer
(Researcher Name, 2005).
Debate or argument
• Scientific evidence of climate change and predictions of potential serious impacts in the near
future on the world’s poor are often expressed in the literature (Adger et al., 2003; Agrawal
and Perrin, 2008; Hedger et al., 2008; IPCC, 2001a; Pounds et al., 1999).
(General facts given by many researchers
• More than 60% of the cultivated area in Nepal is fully reliant on monsoonal rainfall (CBS, 2006,
p. 63). (Data facts that may change over time )

8. Critical thinking
• Critical thinking is about questioning and learning with an open mind.
• Ability to think critically about the resources and information you use in your
work.
• Asking right questions when reading the work of others.
• Ability to weigh up different arguments and perspectives and use evidence to
help you form your own opinions.

9. Systematic Review
• Study of studies
• Attempts to collect all existing evidence on a specific
topic and a specific research question
• Criteria for deciding on which evidence is included or
excluded before starting the systematic review
• Clearly state objectives
• Make sure all studies that meet the eligibility criteria
through a detailed search strategy
• Assess the validity of the findings of the included
studies
• Synthesize the studies' findings in a systematic way

10. Systematic Review – steps and process
• Formulate a research question
• Develop research protocol - objective, method, process, eligibility criteria, analysis
tools and process
• Carry out literature search - databases, year, details of strategies used, search
terms
• Select studies following the protocol – screening based on titles –abstracts – full
text articles or studies – keep a log of excluded studies with reasons
• Review/appraise studies following the protocol – methodological quality, use
checklist to ensure whether studies meet the criteria
• Extract data
• Analyze results
• Interpret results

11. Systematic Review – Common Guides/Tools
RepOrting Standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses (ROSES)
• Important tool for environmental management
• Capable of guiding researchers through the process of accurately responding to research questions
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)
• Commonly applied in Environmental Science field
• Unique advantages
• defining clear research questions that permits a systematic research
• identifies inclusion and exclusion criteria
• attempts to examine large database of scientific literature in a defined time.

12. The review was guided by the PRISMA Statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews
and Meta-Analyses). PRISMA is often utilized within the environmental management field.

15. Searching
Records identified through database searching
(n = )
Records identified through other sources, listed
(n = )
Records after duplicates removed
(n = )
Screening
Records after title screening
(n = )
Records after abstract screening
(n = )
Articles retrieved at full text
(n = )
Articles after full text screening
(n = )
Duplicates
(n = )
Excluded titles
(n = )
Excluded abstracts
(n = )
Unretrievable full texts
(Not accessible, n = ; Not found, n = )
Excluded full texts, with reasons
(n = )
Excluded on:
•Population (n = )
•Intervention/exposure (n = )
•Comparator (n = )
•Outcome (n = )
•Study design (n = )
•etc.
Synthesis
May
be
combined
Studies included in the systematic
map database and narrative synthesis
(n = )
Pre-screened articles
from other sources (n = )
ROSES Flow Diagram for Systematic Maps. Version 1.0
Articles / Studies included after full
text screening
(n = / n = )
Articles
Studies

16. The study is based on the RepOrting Standards for
Systematic Evidence Syntheses (ROSES) review
protocol which is recognized as an important tool
for environmental management (Haddaway et al.,
2018; Mohamad Shaffril et al., 2020).

17. Supplementary document - CCA.pdf

18. Thematic categorization reviewed articles

19. Thematic presentation - Climate Change Adaptation
Climate
change
adaption
Spatial
(over space
such as
migration,
transhumant
pastoralism) Temporal
(over time
such as food
and water
storage)
Diversification
(such as
livelihoods,
agriculture)
Risk Transfer
(such as
financing and
insurance)
Blending
tradition and
science
(technology,
knowledge,
practices)
Common
pooling of
resources
(collective
actions/social
safety nets)

20. Thank you very much!

21. https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/basic-search
https://scholar.google.com/
https://www.scopus.com/search/form.uri?display=basic#basic

22. Group work
Research question - Identify research question and sub-questions (Population, Interest and
Context (PICo)
Define research protocol - objective, method, process, eligibility criteria, analysis tools and
process
Carry out literature search – Identify search engines, – Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar
Screening based on titles –abstracts – full text articles or studies – inclusion & exclusion - keep a
log of excluded studies with reasons
Define eligibility criteria – full text read and elimination + elimination of duplication
Extract data
Thematic analysis
Discussion
Conclusion