Week 8 - Systematic Literature Reviews – Meta Analysis

1.1 Introduction
A literature review is an integral part of every academic research project. The literature
review will assist you in comprehending the theoretical foundations of your subject and will
act as the theoretical foundation for your research. In addition, it will assist you in developing
an in-depth understanding of current knowledge in your research topic's field, in framing your
topic, and in planning and conducting your study. Lastly, it will assist you in evaluating your
findings and contribution to current knowledge on the topic of your research. Through a
methodical procedure and meta-analysis, this week's notes will clarify the nature and purpose
of the literature review. The weekly notes will highlight the features and characteristics of a
critical literature review as well as the significance of doing a critical literature review.

1.2. Learning Outcomes

Upon the completion of this week of study you will be able to:
LO.4 Demonstrate a critical awareness of recent theory and processes required to
complete a practitioner led applied business project
LO.5 Evaluate and justify options related to the preparation of a practitioner led applied
business project

LJMU-7514-UNIMBA -"Transforming Organisations and Business Research" 1|Page

Table of Contents
1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1
1.2. Learning Outcomes................................................................................................................ 1
1.3 Systematic Literature Reviews – Meta Analysis .................................................................. 2
1.4 Evidence Pyramid ................................................................................................................... 7
1.5 Writing a critical literature review ....................................................................................... 8
References .................................................................................................................................... 10

1.3 Systematic Literature Reviews – Meta Analysis

According to Torraco (2005, p.356), a literature review "criticises and synthesises
representative literature on the issue in such a way as to produce new frameworks and views
on the topic." The literature review "should be a constructively critical examination that builds
a clear argument for what the available literature says is known and unknown about your
research subject" (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill, 2015, p.72, citing Wallace and Wray,
2011).
The purpose of the literature review is to help you develop an in-depth understanding of the
research topic area, to inform you of the current state of research in the field and of open
questions and issues related to the topic, as well as to provide the background and theoretical
justification for the research project (O'Gorman & MacIntosh, 2015). Your literature review
should present your research questions, contextualise your study, relate to your study's
purpose(s) and objectives, consider what is already known about the research issue, reflect on
current knowledge, and consider gaps and conflicts in the existing literature.
This implies that, for your literature review, you should not simply collect a number of
articles and summarise their contents. You should evaluate the substance and relevance of the
articles to your issue, synthesise the literature, constructively criticise and evaluate the
research methodologies and conclusions of diverse scholars, and build a complete evaluation
of what is known (and unknown) about your research topic (Scribbr, 2021).

LJMU-7514-UNIMBA -"Transforming Organisations and Business Research" 2|Page

 The majority of the sources you utilise for your literature review should
be scholarly. These include journal articles, academic conference proceedings and papers,
books, book chapters, and other reference materials, as well as other scholarly articles and
publications. But you may also utilise additional sources, such as government reports and
publications, industry and trade reports and publications, professional association
publications, etc., in your literature research.

A systematic review provides an answer to a predetermined research topic by gathering and

summarizing all empirical data that meets predetermined eligibility criteria. A meta-analysis
use statistical tools to summarize the findings of multiple investigations. Similar to other
research articles, systematic reviews can vary in quality (Ressing, Blettner, & Klug, 2009).
For Meta-Analysis we need to consider the following:

- Objectives clearly specified with set qualifying criteria for investigations

- Methodology that can be replicated
- A comprehensive search designed to discover all relevant research
- Evaluation of the validity of the included studies' findings (e.g. risk of bias)
- Systematic summary and presentation of the features and findings of the included studies
A Meta-analysis is not included in every systematic study. Meta-analysis is the application of
statistical methods to summarize the findings of multiple investigations. By incorporating data
from all relevant research, meta-analysis can produce more accurate estimates of the overall
effects than those derived from the individual studies included in a review.

Beyond critique and integration, a meta-analysis undertakes secondary statistical analysis on

the outcomes of similar investigations. It is a systematic review that synthesizes and
summarizes the results using quantitative methodologies (Tseng et al., 2008). An advantage of
meta-analysis is the capacity to evaluate study findings in a completely objective manner.
However, not all subjects have sufficient research evidence to do a meta-analysis. In such a
situation, an integrated review is the optimal technique.

LJMU-7514-UNIMBA -"Transforming Organisations and Business Research" 3|Page

 It is a common misunderstanding that meta-analysis and systematic reviews are synonymous,
and the phrases are frequently used interchangeably. While there is considerable overlap
between the two, they are not identical. A systematic review is a comprehensive, transparent,
and methodical approach to collecting, evaluating, and synthesising evidence to address a
well defined topic. A meta-analysis is a statistical technique that combines numerical data
from many research. Always do a meta-analysis within the framework of a systematic review.

Systematic reviews are distinguished by their efforts to eliminate bias at all stages of the
review process (Mulrow, 1994). Even if you intend to conduct a meta-analysis, it may not
always be practical. By establishing your strategy to meta-analysis beforehand, you can
decrease the likelihood of introducing bias and prevent making conclusions based on the
studies or results you uncover in retrospect. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses give
conclusions by combining and evaluating data from multiple studies on the same issue. In
recent years, systematic reviews and meta-analyses have been undertaken intensively in a
number of domains. However, the inclusion of studies with biases or inadequately assessed
evidence quality in systematic reviews and meta-analyses may provide misleading

LJMU-7514-UNIMBA -"Transforming Organisations and Business Research" 4|Page

 conclusions. In order to help standardise and improve the quality of
systematic reviews and meta-analyses, many guidelines have been proposed (Tseng et al.,
2008).

Meta-analyses and systematic reviews are easily confused. A systematic review is an

objective, reproducible process for answering a specific research issue by gathering and
assessing the data of all accessible papers on the topic. A meta-analysis varies from a
systematic review in that it combines estimates from two or more separate studies using
statistical methods. If it is not possible to generate a pooled estimate from the extracted data,
the systematic review can be published without a meta-analysis; if it is possible to construct a
pooled estimate from the extracted data, a meta-analysis can be undertaken (Tseng et al.,
2008). Typically, systematic reviews and meta-analyses follow the flowchart depicted in
Figure 2.

LJMU-7514-UNIMBA -"Transforming Organisations and Business Research" 5|Page

The purpose of a meta-analysis is to generate a conclusion with greater precision and power than
could be achieved by individual research. Therefore, it is essential to analyse the direction of
effect, the magnitude of effect, the homogeneity of effect across studies, and the level of
evidence prior to analysis (Tseng et al., 2008). The results are then analysed qualitatively and
quantitatively. If it is judged that diverse research outcomes cannot be integrated, the results and
characteristics of each individual study are displayed in a table or descriptive format; this is
known as a qualitative review.

When conducting a systematic literature review or meta-analysis, if the quality of research is not
correctly evaluated or if the correct technique is not consistently implemented, the results may be

LJMU-7514-UNIMBA -"Transforming Organisations and Business Research" 6|Page

biased and the conclusions may be inaccurate. However, when correctly
implemented, systematic reviews and meta-analyses can give powerful conclusions that are
typically only possible with large-scale, difficult-to-perform individual investigations. As our
comprehension of evidence-based medicine grows and its significance is more understood, the
number of systematic reviews and meta-analyses will continue to rise (Mulrow, 1994). However,
indiscriminate acceptance of the results of all of these meta-analyses can be harmful; thus, we
propose that their findings be evaluated cautiously based on a more precise understanding.

1.4 Evidence Pyramid

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses occupy the apex of the so-called "Evidence Pyramid" (see
figure below). As one ascends the pyramid, the quantity of available material on a specific topic
diminishes, while its relevance and quality improve (Mulrow, 1994). Systematic reviews and
meta-analyses are regarded as the highest quality research evidence because their study designs
minimise bias and generate more accurate results. However, you may not always be able to
locate the strongest evidence to answer your research topic, nor be required to do so. In the
absence of the strongest evidence, you must then move down the evidence pyramid.

(Adapted from Sackett et al., 2000)

LJMU-7514-UNIMBA -"Transforming Organisations and Business Research" 7|Page

A systematic review is an overview of primary research on a specific research issue that
systematically identifies, selects, analyses, and synthesises all high-quality research evidence
pertinent to answering that question. In other words, it provides a comprehensive synthesis of the
scholarly literature linked to a specific study topic or question. Often, a panel of experts writes a
systematic review after analysing the information from both published and unpublished
studies(Mulrow, 1994). The comprehensive scope of a systematic review distinguishes it from
traditional literature reviews, which evaluate a much narrower rangeof research material and report
it from the perspective of a single author.

1.5 Writing a critical literature review

As stated previously, your literature review should not be merely a collection of

paragraphs/summaries of articles/books/other sources you have reviewed; rather, it should
evaluate the content of the sources and assess their relevance to your topic, as well as provide a
synthesis and constructive critique of existing knowledge. In your literature review, you should
evaluate alternate perspectives, including conflicting perspectives (when relevant). In performing
your literature study, you should take a critical attitude, apply your judgement and knowledge,
analyse the sources with scepticism and a critical eye, and be willing to challenge what you read.
To do a critical literature review, you must be able to recognise the virtues and limitations of the
literature, as well as explain and demonstrate how these relate to your study in your review.
Leicester (2010) offers a helpful definition of critical thinking as the process of: • recognising
and challenging assumptions. According to Leicester (2010), critical writing involves: • critical
reading • examination of order and sequence • signposting • introducing • enhancing. Saunders,
Lewis, and Thornhill (2015) propose a suitable model of the literature review in the form of a
funnel (Figure 2.3), in which authors and themes are interwoven to provide a full theoretical
overview of the research issue. According to the authors, the following is a suitable method for
constructing the literature review:

LJMU-7514-UNIMBA -"Transforming Organisations and Business Research" 8|Page

1. start at a more basic level before focusing down to your specific
research question(s) and aims;
2. offer a quick summary of significant concepts and themes;
3. summarise, compare, and contrast the research conducted by prominent authors;
4. narrow down to highlight previous research work most relevant to your own research;
4. narrow down to highlight previous research work most relevant to your own research;
5. provide a detailed account of the findings of this research and show how they are related;
6. highlight those aspects where your own research will provide fresh insights;
7. lead the reader into subsequent sections of your project report, which explore these issues.

LJMU-7514-UNIMBA -"Transforming Organisations and Business Research" 9|Page

References
Leicester, M. (2010) Teaching critical thinking skills. Continuum International Publishing
Group. UK: London. Ch. 1.

Mulrow, C. D. (1994). Systematic reviews: rationale for systematic reviews. Bmj, 309(6954),
597-599.

O’Gorman, K. & MacIntosh (2015) Research Methods for Business & Management: A guide to
writing your dissertation. 2nd Ed. Goodfellow Publishers Limited. UK: Oxford. Ch. 3.

Ressing, M., Blettner, M., & Klug, S. J. (2009). Systematic literature reviews and meta-analyses:
part 6 of a series on evaluation of scientific publications. Deutsches ärzteblatt
international, 106(27), 456.

Saunders, M., Lewis, P. & Thornhill, A. (2015) Research Methods for Business Students. 17th
Ed. Pearson Education. England: Essex.

Sackett, D. L., Straus, S. E., Richardson, W. S., Rosenberg, W., Haynes, R., (2000).
Introduction to evidence-based medicine. Evidence-based medicine: how to practice and teach
EBM, 1, 12.

Scribbr (2021) How to write a literature review. Available at:

https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/ [accessed: 06/09/2021].

Torraco, R.J. (2005) Writing integrative literature reviews: Guidelines and examples. Human
Resource Development Review, 4(3), pp. 356-367.

Tseng, T. Y., Dahm, P., Poolman, R. W., Preminger, G. M., Canales, B. J., & Montori, V. M.
(2008). How to use a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. The Journal of
urology, 180(4), 1249-1256.

LJMU-7514-UNIMBA -"Transforming Organisations and Business Research" 10 | P a g e