About Systematic Reviews
Understanding the Differences Between a Systematic Review vs Literature Review
Automate every stage of your literature review to produce evidence-based research faster and more accurately.
Let’s look at these differences in further detail.
Goal of the Review
The objective of a literature review is to provide context or background information about a topic of interest. Hence the methodology is less comprehensive and not exhaustive. The aim is to provide an overview of a subject as an introduction to a paper or report. This overview is obtained firstly through evaluation of existing research, theories, and evidence, and secondly through individual critical evaluation and discussion of this content.
A systematic review attempts to answer specific clinical questions (for example, the effectiveness of a drug in treating an illness). Answering such questions comes with a responsibility to be comprehensive and accurate. Failure to do so could have life-threatening consequences. The need to be precise then calls for a systematic approach. The aim of a systematic review is to establish authoritative findings from an account of existing evidence using objective, thorough, reliable, and reproducible research approaches, and frameworks.
Level of Planning Required
The methodology involved in a literature review is less complicated and requires a lower degree of planning. For a systematic review, the planning is extensive and requires defining robust pre-specified protocols. It first starts with formulating the research question and scope of the research. The PICO’s approach (population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes) is used in designing the research question. Planning also involves establishing strict eligibility criteria for inclusion and exclusion of the primary resources to be included in the study. Every stage of the systematic review methodology is pre-specified to the last detail, even before starting the review process. It is recommended to register the protocol of your systematic review to avoid duplication. Journal publishers now look for registration in order to ensure the reviews meet predefined criteria for conducting a systematic review [1].
Search Strategy for Sourcing Primary Resources
Learn more about distillersr.
(Article continues below)
Quality Assessment of the Collected Resources
A rigorous appraisal of collected resources for the quality and relevance of the data they provide is a crucial part of the systematic review methodology. A systematic review usually employs a dual independent review process, which involves two reviewers evaluating the collected resources based on pre-defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The idea is to limit bias in selecting the primary studies. Such a strict review system is generally not a part of a literature review.
Presentation of Results
Most literature reviews present their findings in narrative or discussion form. These are textual summaries of the results used to critique or analyze a body of literature about a topic serving as an introduction. Due to this reason, literature reviews are sometimes also called narrative reviews. To know more about the differences between narrative reviews and systematic reviews , click here.
A systematic review requires a higher level of rigor, transparency, and often peer-review. The results of a systematic review can be interpreted as numeric effect estimates using statistical methods or as a textual summary of all the evidence collected. Meta-analysis is employed to provide the necessary statistical support to evidence outcomes. They are usually conducted to examine the evidence present on a condition and treatment. The aims of a meta-analysis are to determine whether an effect exists, whether the effect is positive or negative, and establish a conclusive estimate of the effect [2].
Using statistical methods in generating the review results increases confidence in the review. Results of a systematic review are then used by clinicians to prescribe treatment or for pharmacovigilance purposes. The results of the review can also be presented as a qualitative assessment when the end goal is issuing recommendations or guidelines.
Risk of Bias
Literature reviews are mostly used by authors to provide background information with the intended purpose of introducing their own research later. Since the search for included primary resources is also less exhaustive, it is more prone to bias.
One of the main objectives for conducting a systematic review is to reduce bias in the evidence outcome. Extensive planning, strict eligibility criteria for inclusion and exclusion, and a statistical approach for computing the result reduce the risk of bias.
Intervention studies consider risk of bias as the “likelihood of inaccuracy in the estimate of causal effect in that study.” In systematic reviews, assessing the risk of bias is critical in providing accurate assessments of overall intervention effect [3].
With numerous review methods available for analyzing, synthesizing, and presenting existing scientific evidence, it is important for researchers to understand the differences between the review methods. Choosing the right method for a review is crucial in achieving the objectives of the research.
[1] “Systematic Review Protocols and Protocol Registries | NIH Library,” www.nihlibrary.nih.gov . https://www.nihlibrary.nih.gov/services/systematic-review-service/systematic-review-protocols-and-protocol-registries
[2] A. B. Haidich, “Meta-analysis in medical research,” Hippokratia , vol. 14, no. Suppl 1, pp. 29–37, Dec. 2010, [Online]. Available: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3049418/#:~:text=Meta%2Danalyses%20are%20conducted%20to
3 Reasons to Connect
Start your free trial
Arrange a trial for your organisation and discover why FSTA is the leading database for reliable research on the sciences of food and health.
REQUEST A FREE TRIAL
- Research Skills Blog
What is the difference between a systematic review and a systematic literature review?
By Carol Hollier on 07-Jan-2020 14:23:00
For those not immersed in systematic reviews, understanding the difference between a systematic review and a systematic literature review can be confusing. It helps to realise that a “systematic review” is a clearly defined thing, but ambiguity creeps in around the phrase “systematic literature review” because people can and do use it in a variety of ways.
A systematic review is a research study of research studies. To qualify as a systematic review, a review needs to adhere to standards of transparency and reproducibility. It will use explicit methods to identify, select, appraise, and synthesise empirical results from different but similar studies. The study will be done in stages:
- In stage one, the question, which must be answerable, is framed
- Stage two is a comprehensive literature search to identify relevant studies
- In stage three the identified literature’s quality is scrutinised and decisions made on whether or not to include each article in the review
- In stage four the evidence is summarised and, if the review includes a meta-analysis, the data extracted; in the final stage, findings are interpreted. [1]
Some reviews also state what degree of confidence can be placed on that answer, using the GRADE scale. By going through these steps, a systematic review provides a broad evidence base on which to make decisions about medical interventions, regulatory policy, safety, or whatever question is analysed. By documenting each step explicitly, the review is not only reproducible, but can be updated as more evidence on the question is generated.
Sometimes when people talk about a “systematic literature review”, they are using the phrase interchangeably with “systematic review”. However, people can also use the phrase systematic literature review to refer to a literature review that is done in a fairly systematic way, but without the full rigor of a systematic review.
For instance, for a systematic review, reviewers would strive to locate relevant unpublished studies in grey literature and possibly by contacting researchers directly. Doing this is important for combatting publication bias, which is the tendency for studies with positive results to be published at a higher rate than studies with null results. It is easy to understand how this well-documented tendency can skew a review’s findings, but someone conducting a systematic literature review in the loose sense of the phrase might, for lack of resource or capacity, forgo that step.
Another difference might be in who is doing the research for the review. A systematic review is generally conducted by a team including an information professional for searches and a statistician for meta-analysis, along with subject experts. Team members independently evaluate the studies being considered for inclusion in the review and compare results, adjudicating any differences of opinion. In contrast, a systematic literature review might be conducted by one person.
Overall, while a systematic review must comply with set standards, you would expect any review called a systematic literature review to strive to be quite comprehensive. A systematic literature review would contrast with what is sometimes called a narrative or journalistic literature review, where the reviewer’s search strategy is not made explicit, and evidence may be cherry-picked to support an argument.
FSTA is a key tool for systematic reviews and systematic literature reviews in the sciences of food and health.
The patents indexed help find results of research not otherwise publicly available because it has been done for commercial purposes.
The FSTA thesaurus will surface results that would be missed with keyword searching alone. Since the thesaurus is designed for the sciences of food and health, it is the most comprehensive for the field.
All indexing and abstracting in FSTA is in English, so you can do your searching in English yet pick up non-English language results, and get those results translated if they meet the criteria for inclusion in a systematic review.
FSTA includes grey literature (conference proceedings) which can be difficult to find, but is important to include in comprehensive searches.
FSTA content has a deep archive. It goes back to 1969 for farm to fork research, and back to the late 1990s for food-related human nutrition literature—systematic reviews (and any literature review) should include not just the latest research but all relevant research on a question.
You can also use FSTA to find literature reviews.
FSTA allows you to easily search for review articles (both narrative and systematic reviews) by using the subject heading or thesaurus term “REVIEWS" and an appropriate free-text keyword.
On the Web of Science or EBSCO platform, an FSTA search for reviews about cassava would look like this: DE "REVIEWS" AND cassava.
On the Ovid platform using the multi-field search option, the search would look like this: reviews.sh. AND cassava.af.
In 2011 FSTA introduced the descriptor META-ANALYSIS, making it easy to search specifically for systematic reviews that include a meta-analysis published from that year onwards.
On the EBSCO or Web of Science platform, an FSTA search for systematic reviews with meta-analyses about staphylococcus aureus would look like this: DE "META-ANALYSIS" AND staphylococcus aureus.
On the Ovid platform using the multi-field search option, the search would look like this: meta-analysis.sh. AND staphylococcus aureus.af.
Systematic reviews with meta-analyses published before 2011 are included in the REVIEWS controlled vocabulary term in the thesaurus.
An easy way to locate pre-2011 systematic reviews with meta-analyses is to search the subject heading or thesaurus term "REVIEWS" AND meta-analysis as a free-text keyword AND another appropriate free-text keyword.
On the Web of Science or EBSCO platform, the FSTA search would look like this: DE "REVIEWS" AND meta-analysis AND carbohydrate*
On the Ovid platform using the multi-field search option, the search would look like this: reviews .sh. AND meta-analysis.af. AND carbohydrate*.af.
Related resources:
- Literature Searching Best Practise Guide
- Predatory publishing: Investigating researchers’ knowledge & attitudes
- The IFIS Expert Guide to Journal Publishing
Library image by Paul Schafer , microscope image by Matthew Waring , via Unsplash.
- FSTA - Food Science & Technology Abstracts
- IFIS Collections
- Resources Hub
- Diversity Statement
- Sustainability Commitment
- Company news
- Frequently Asked Questions
- Privacy Policy
- Terms of Use for IFIS Collections
Ground Floor, 115 Wharfedale Road, Winnersh Triangle, Wokingham, Berkshire RG41 5RB
Get in touch with IFIS
© International Food Information Service (IFIS Publishing) operating as IFIS – All Rights Reserved | Charity Reg. No. 1068176 | Limited Company No. 3507902 | Designed by Blend
Covidence website will be inaccessible as we upgrading our platform on Monday 23rd August at 10am AEST, / 2am CEST/1am BST (Sunday, 15th August 8pm EDT/5pm PDT)
The difference between a systematic review and a literature review
- Best Practice
Home | Blog | Best Practice | The difference between a systematic review and a literature review
Covidence takes a look at the difference between the two
Most of us are familiar with the terms systematic review and literature review. Both review types synthesise evidence and provide summary information. So what are the differences? What does systematic mean? And which approach is best 🤔 ?
‘ Systematic ‘ describes the review’s methods. It means that they are transparent, reproducible and defined before the search gets underway. That’s important because it helps to minimise the bias that would result from cherry-picking studies in a non-systematic way.
This brings us to literature reviews. Literature reviews don’t usually apply the same rigour in their methods. That’s because, unlike systematic reviews, they don’t aim to produce an answer to a clinical question. Literature reviews can provide context or background information for a new piece of research. They can also stand alone as a general guide to what is already known about a particular topic.
Interest in systematic reviews has grown in recent years and the frequency of ‘systematic reviews’ in Google books has overtaken ‘literature reviews’ (with all the usual Ngram Viewer warnings – it searches around 6% of all books, no journals).
Let’s take a look at the two review types in more detail to highlight some key similarities and differences 👀.
🙋🏾♂️ What is a systematic review?
Systematic reviews ask a specific question about the effectiveness of a treatment and answer it by summarising evidence that meets a set of pre-specified criteria.
The process starts with a research question and a protocol or research plan. A review team searches for studies to answer the question using a highly sensitive search strategy. The retrieved studies are then screened for eligibility using the inclusion and exclusion criteria (this is done by at least two people working independently). Next, the reviewers extract the relevant data and assess the quality of the included studies. Finally, the review team synthesises the extracted study data and presents the results. The process is shown in figure 2 .
The results of a systematic review can be presented in many ways and the choice will depend on factors such as the type of data. Some reviews use meta-analysis to produce a statistical summary of effect estimates. Other reviews use narrative synthesis to present a textual summary.
Covidence accelerates the screening, data extraction, and quality assessment stages of your systematic review. It provides simple workflows and easy collaboration with colleagues around the world.
When is it appropriate to do a systematic review?
If you have a clinical question about the effectiveness of a particular treatment or treatments, you could answer it by conducting a systematic review. Systematic reviews in clinical medicine often follow the PICO framework, which stands for:
👦 Population (or patients)
💊 Intervention
💊 Comparison
Here’s a typical example of a systematic review title that uses the PICO framework: Alarms [intervention] versus drug treatments [comparison] for the prevention of nocturnal enuresis [outcome] in children [population]
Key attributes
- Systematic reviews follow prespecified methods
- The methods are explicit and replicable
- The review team assesses the quality of the evidence and attempts to minimise bias
- Results and conclusions are based on the evidence
🙋🏻♀️ What is a literature review?
Literature reviews provide an overview of what is known about a particular topic. They evaluate the material, rather than simply restating it, but the methods used to do this are not usually prespecified and they are not described in detail in the review. The search might be comprehensive but it does not aim to be exhaustive. Literature reviews are also referred to as narrative reviews.
Literature reviews use a topical approach and often take the form of a discussion. Precision and replicability are not the focus, rather the author seeks to demonstrate their understanding and perhaps also present their work in the context of what has come before. Often, this sort of synthesis does not attempt to control for the author’s own bias. The results or conclusion of a literature review is likely to be presented using words rather than statistical methods.
When is it appropriate to do a literature review?
We’ve all written some form of literature review: they are a central part of academic research ✍🏾. Literature reviews often form the introduction to a piece of writing, to provide the context. They can also be used to identify gaps in the literature and the need to fill them with new research 📚.
- Literature reviews take a thematic approach
- They do not specify inclusion or exclusion criteria
- They do not answer a clinical question
- The conclusions might be influenced by the author’s own views
🙋🏽 Ok, but what is a systematic literature review?
A quick internet search retrieves a cool 200 million hits for ‘systematic literature review’. What strange hybrid is this 🤯🤯 ?
Systematic review methodology has its roots in evidence-based medicine but it quickly gained traction in other areas – the social sciences for example – where researchers recognise the value of being methodical and minimising bias. Systematic review methods are increasingly applied to the more traditional types of review, including literature reviews, hence the proliferation of terms like ‘systematic literature review’ and many more.
Beware of the labels 🚨. The terminology used to describe review types can vary by discipline and changes over time. To really understand how any review was done you will need to examine the methods critically and make your own assessment of the quality and reliability of each synthesis 🤓.
Review methods are evolving constantly as researchers find new ways to meet the challenge of synthesising the evidence. Systematic review methods have influenced many other review types, including the traditional literature review.
Covidence is a web-based tool that saves you time at the screening, selection, data extraction and quality assessment stages of your systematic review. It supports easy collaboration across teams and provides a clear overview of task status.
Get a glimpse inside Covidence and how it works
Laura Mellor. Portsmouth, UK
Perhaps you'd also like....
Webinars from start to finish: Creating a Review
Creating a systematic review can be a complex process, but with the right resources, you can navigate it smoothly from start to finish. In the
Data Extraction Tip 5: Communicate Regularly
The Covidence Global Scholarship recipients are putting evidence-based research into practice. We caught up with some of the winners to discover the impact of their work and find out more about their experiences.
Data Extraction Tip 4: Extract the Right Amount of Data
Better systematic review management, head office, working for an institution or organisation.
Find out why over 350 of the world’s leading institutions are seeing a surge in publications since using Covidence!
Request a consultation with one of our team members and start empowering your researchers:
By using our site you consent to our use of cookies to measure and improve our site’s performance. Please see our Privacy Policy for more information.
Systematic reviews
Prof Helen Worthington, School of Dentistry.
A systemic review is a concise summary of all the best evidence on a specific question. Systematic reviews are scientific investigations in there own right and are frequently as demanding as conducting primary research. They synthesise the results of multiple primary investigations by using strategies that limit bias and random error.
These strategies include a comprehensive search of all potentially relevant articles and the use of explicit, reproducible criteria in the selection of articles for review. Primary research designs and study characteristics are appraised, data are synthesised, and results are interpreted.
So how are systematic reviews different from a normal (literature) review?
Traditional literature reviews are often one individual’s opinion of the current state of knowledge. It is always easy to find research articles to support your own point of view. This is inevitably limited and may be biased. Systematic review are undertaken with rigorous methodology to avoid this.
What can a systematic review offer?
Combining results can increase power and precision of estimates of effectiveness (see forest plot below). When few or no studies are found this can help to pinpoint crucial areas and questions that need further research.
Manchester expertise
Members of the Institute of Population Health belong to the Evidence Synthesis Research Network which is jointly run my University of Manchester and NICE.
- Evidence Synthesis Research Network
Two Cochrane review groups are based at Manchester:
- Cochrane Oral Health Group, School of Dentistry
- Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group
Key publications
- Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions
- Systematic Reviews in Health Care: Meta-Analysis in Context, edited by Matthias Egger, George Davey Smith, Douglas Altman
Download PDF slides of the presentation ' What is a systematic review? '
Home » Education » Difference Between Literature Review and Systematic Review
Difference Between Literature Review and Systematic Review
Main difference – literature review vs systematic review.
Literature review and systematic review are two scholarly texts that help to introduce new knowledge to various fields. A literature review, which reviews the existing research and information on a selected study area, is a crucial element of a research study. A systematic review is also a type of a literature review. The main difference between literature review and systematic review is their focus on the research question ; a systematic review is focused on a specific research question whereas a literature review is not.
This article highlights,
1. What is a Literature Review? – Definition, Features, Characteristics
2. What is a Systematic Review? – Definition, Features, Characteristics
What is a Literature Review
A literature review is an indispensable element of a research study. This is where the researcher shows his knowledge on the subject area he or she is researching on. A literature review is a discussion on the already existing material in the subject area. Thus, this will require a collection of published (in print or online) work concerning the selected research area. In simple terms, a literature is a review of the literature in the related subject area.
A good literature review is a critical discussion, displaying the writer’s knowledge on relevant theories and approaches and awareness of contrasting arguments. A literature review should have the following features (Caulley, 1992)
- Compare and contrast different researchers’ views
- Identify areas in which researchers are in disagreement
- Group researchers who have similar conclusions
- Criticize the methodology
- Highlight exemplary studies
- Highlight gaps in research
- Indicate the connection between your study and previous studies
- Indicate how your study will contribute to the literature in general
- Conclude by summarizing what the literature indicates
The structure of a literature review is similar to that of an article or essay, unlike an annotated bibliography . The information that is collected is integrated into paragraphs based on their relevance. Literature reviews help researchers to evaluate the existing literature, to identify a gap in the research area, to place their study in the existing research and identify future research.
What is a Systematic Review
A systematic review is a type of systematic review that is focused on a particular research question . The main purpose of this type of research is to identify, review, and summarize the best available research on a specific research question. Systematic reviews are used mainly because the review of existing studies is often more convenient than conducting a new study. These are mostly used in the health and medical field, but they are not rare in fields such as social sciences and environmental science. Given below are the main stages of a systematic review:
- Defining the research question and identifying an objective method
- Searching for relevant data that from existing research studies that meet certain criteria (research studies must be reliable and valid).
- Extracting data from the selected studies (data such as the participants, methods, outcomes, etc.
- Assessing the quality of information
- Analyzing and combining all the data which would give an overall result.
Literature Review is a critical evaluation of the existing published work in a selected research area.
Systematic Review is a type of literature review that is focused on a particular research question.
Literature Review aims to review the existing literature, identify the research gap, place the research study in relation to other studies, to evaluate promising research methods, and to suggest further research.
Systematic Review aims to identify, review, and summarize the best available research on a specific research question.
Research Question
In Literature Review, a r esearch question is formed after writing the literature review and identifying the research gap.
In Systematic Review, a research question is formed at the beginning of the systematic review.
Research Study
Literature Review is an essential component of a research study and is done at the beginning of the study.
Systematic Review is not followed by a separate research study.
Caulley, D. N. “Writing a critical review of the literature.” La Trobe University: Bundoora (1992).
“Animated Storyboard: What Are Systematic Reviews?” . cccrg.cochrane.org . Cochrane Consumers and Communication . Retrieved 1 June 2016.
Image Courtesy: Pixabay
About the Author: Hasa
Hasanthi is a seasoned content writer and editor with over 8 years of experience. Armed with a BA degree in English and a knack for digital marketing, she explores her passions for literature, history, culture, and food through her engaging and informative writing.
You May Also Like These
Leave a reply cancel reply.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
A systematic literature review would contrast with what is sometimes called a narrative or journalistic literature review, where the reviewer’s search strategy is not made explicit, and evidence may be cherry …
Most of us are familiar with the terms systematic review and literature review. Both review types synthesise evidence and provide summary information. So what are the differences? What does systematic mean? And which approach is …
Literature reviews usually answer broad and descriptive research questions. Systematic reviews are more comprehensive and precise because they seek to answer specific scientific questions …
Here’s why a systematic literature review might be suitable for you: It provides a more structured and comprehensive overview than a traditional review. It’s a valuable learning experience for familiarizing yourself with …
So how are systematic reviews different from a normal (literature) review? Traditional literature reviews are often one individual’s opinion of the current state of knowledge. It is …
The main difference between literature review and systematic review is their focus on the research question; a systematic review is focused on a specific research question whereas a literature review is not.
Systematic Review vs. Literature Review. It is common to confuse systematic and literature reviews as both are used to provide a summary of the existent literature or research …