literature-review-planner

What this skill does

# Literature Review Planner

Comprehensive frameworks for planning, conducting, and synthesizing literature reviews across academic and professional research contexts.

## Review Types

| Type | Purpose | Scope | Methodology Rigor | Best For |
|------|---------|-------|-------------------|----------|
| **Narrative** | Broad overview of a topic | Wide, flexible | Low-Medium | Background sections, introductions |
| **Systematic** | Answer a specific research question | Narrow, predefined | High | Evidence-based decisions, clinical practice |
| **Scoping** | Map available evidence on a topic | Wide, structured | Medium | Emerging fields, identifying gaps |
| **Meta-Analysis** | Quantitative synthesis of findings | Narrow, statistical | Highest | Combining effect sizes, treatment efficacy |
| **Rapid** | Timely evidence synthesis | Focused, abbreviated | Medium | Policy decisions, time-constrained contexts |
| **Umbrella** | Review of existing reviews | Reviews only | High | Overarching evidence synthesis |
| **Integrative** | Synthesize diverse methodologies | Wide, mixed methods | Medium | Combining qualitative and quantitative |

### Choosing the Right Review Type

```
Do you need to answer a specific, focused question?
  YES --> Is quantitative synthesis of effect sizes needed?
    YES --> Meta-Analysis
    NO  --> Systematic Review
  NO --> Do you need to map the breadth of evidence?
    YES --> Is the field well-established?
      YES --> Umbrella Review (review of reviews)
      NO  --> Scoping Review
    NO --> Do you need to combine qualitative and quantitative?
      YES --> Integrative Review
      NO --> Is time constrained (< 3 months)?
        YES --> Rapid Review
        NO  --> Narrative Review
```

## Search Strategy Development

### PICO/PEO Framework

Use structured frameworks to define your research question:

| Framework | Element | Description | Example |
|-----------|---------|-------------|---------|
| **PICO** | Population | Who is being studied | Adults with Type 2 diabetes |
| | Intervention | What treatment/exposure | Telemedicine consultations |
| | Comparison | Alternative to intervention | In-person consultations |
| | Outcome | What is measured | HbA1c levels, patient satisfaction |
| **PEO** | Population | Who is being studied | Software engineering teams |
| | Exposure | Phenomenon of interest | Agile methodology adoption |
| | Outcome | What is measured | Productivity, code quality |

### Database Selection

| Database | Coverage | Best For |
|----------|----------|----------|
| **PubMed/MEDLINE** | Biomedical, life sciences | Clinical, medical, health research |
| **Scopus** | Multidisciplinary, broadest | Cross-disciplinary reviews |
| **Web of Science** | Multidisciplinary, citation data | Citation analysis, impact tracking |
| **IEEE Xplore** | Engineering, computer science | Technical and computing research |
| **PsycINFO** | Psychology, behavioral science | Mental health, cognition research |
| **ERIC** | Education | Teaching, learning, education policy |
| **CINAHL** | Nursing, allied health | Nursing and health professions |
| **Cochrane Library** | Systematic reviews, trials | Clinical intervention evidence |
| **Google Scholar** | Broad, grey literature | Supplementary searching, snowballing |
| **Preprint servers** | arXiv, bioRxiv, SSRN | Cutting-edge, unpublished work |

### Keyword and Boolean Strategy

```
BUILDING A SEARCH STRING:

Step 1: Identify key concepts from PICO/PEO
  Concept 1: "telemedicine" OR "telehealth" OR "remote consultation" OR "virtual care"
  Concept 2: "diabetes" OR "type 2 diabetes" OR "T2DM" OR "diabetes mellitus"
  Concept 3: "glycemic control" OR "HbA1c" OR "blood glucose" OR "patient outcomes"

Step 2: Combine with Boolean operators
  (Concept 1) AND (Concept 2) AND (Concept 3)

Step 3: Apply filters
  - Date range: 2015-2025
  - Language: English
  - Study type: RCT, cohort, systematic review
  - Peer-reviewed only

ADVANCED OPERATORS:
  "exact phrase"      - Exact match
  *                   - Truncation (therap* = therapy, therapies, therapeutic)
  MeSH terms          - Controlled vocabulary (PubMed)
  NEAR/3              - Proximity (terms within 3 words)
  ti,ab               - Title and abstract search
```

### Search Documentation Template

```
SEARCH LOG:

Database: [Name]
Date Searched: [Date]
Search String: [Full query]
Filters Applied: [Date, language, study type]
Results Retrieved: [Count]
Results After Deduplication: [Count]
Notes: [Any issues, modifications needed]
```

## PRISMA Flow Diagram

```
IDENTIFICATION
  Records identified through database searching: n = ___
  Records identified through other sources: n = ___
  |
  v
  Records after duplicates removed: n = ___
  |
SCREENING
  v
  Records screened (title/abstract): n = ___
  Records excluded: n = ___
  |
  v
  Full-text articles assessed for eligibility: n = ___
  Full-text articles excluded (with reasons): n = ___
    - Reason 1: n = ___
    - Reason 2: n = ___
    - Reason 3: n = ___
  |
INCLUDED
  v
  Studies included in qualitative synthesis: n = ___
  Studies included in quantitative synthesis (meta-analysis): n = ___
```

### Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria

| Criterion | Include | Exclude |
|-----------|---------|---------|
| **Population** | [Define target population] | [Define excluded populations] |
| **Intervention/Exposure** | [Define relevant interventions] | [Define excluded interventions] |
| **Outcome** | [Define relevant outcomes] | [Outcomes not of interest] |
| **Study Design** | [Accepted study types] | [Excluded study types] |
| **Date Range** | [Start year] to [End year] | Outside date range |
| **Language** | [Accepted languages] | Other languages |
| **Publication Type** | Peer-reviewed journals | Editorials, letters, conference abstracts |

## Source Evaluation

### Critical Appraisal Tools by Study Design

| Study Design | Appraisal Tool | Key Domains |
|-------------|---------------|-------------|
| **RCTs** | Cochrane Risk of Bias (RoB 2) | Randomization, blinding, attrition, reporting |
| **Cohort Studies** | Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) | Selection, comparability, outcome assessment |
| **Case-Control** | Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) | Selection, comparability, exposure assessment |
| **Qualitative** | CASP Qualitative Checklist | Aims, methodology, recruitment, data, analysis, ethics |
| **Cross-Sectional** | JBI Critical Appraisal | Inclusion, measurement, confounders, analysis |
| **Diagnostic** | QUADAS-2 | Patient selection, index test, reference standard, flow |
| **Mixed Methods** | MMAT | Qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods criteria |

### Source Quality Assessment Framework

```
QUALITY SCORING (rate each 1-5):

RELEVANCE:
  - Directly addresses research question? ___
  - Population matches target? ___
  - Outcomes align with review objectives? ___

METHODOLOGICAL RIGOR:
  - Study design appropriate? ___
  - Sample size adequate? ___
  - Bias minimized? ___
  - Statistical analysis appropriate? ___

CREDIBILITY:
  - Published in peer-reviewed journal? ___
  - Authors have relevant expertise? ___
  - Funding sources declared? ___
  - Conflicts of interest addressed? ___

RECENCY:
  - Published within target date range? ___
  - Findings still applicable? ___
  - Not superseded by newer evidence? ___

TOTAL SCORE: ___ / 60
  High quality: 48-60
  Medium quality: 36-47
  Low quality: < 36
```

### Hierarchy of Evidence

```
EVIDENCE PYRAMID (highest to lowest):

Level 1: Systematic Reviews & Meta-Analyses
Level 2: Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs)
Level 3: Cohort Studies (prospective)
Level 4: Case-Control Studies
Level 5: Cross-Sectional Studies / Case Series
Level 6: Expert Opinion / Editorials
Level 7: Anecdotal / Narrative Reports
```

## Citation Management

### Workflow

```
CITATION MANAGEMENT PROCESS:

1. COLLECT
   - Export references from databases (RIS, BibTeX, EndNote XML)
   - Import into reference manager (Zotero, Mendeley, EndNote)
   - Attach PDFs w