A Review on Data Processing Approaches for Research Article Preparation
Keywords:
Collaborative platforms, Enhancing literature reviews, Integrating interdisciplinary, Literature review, Meta-analysis, Qualitative and Quantitative resultsAbstract
The research academic landscape has witnessed considerable development, where literature reviews can now be accomplished using novel modes. Traditional means fail to cater for the analysis and integration of huge and far-stretching aggregates of information. In the bid to fight back against such challenges, authors have utilized elaborate measures such as systematic mapping, visual analytics, and synthesis without meta-analysis. Systematic mapping organizes literature based on pre-defined criteria and allows for formal and comprehensive overview of research trends. Visual analytics applies visualization tools to identify patterns, relationships, and emerging themes, making it easier and more interpretable. Synthesis without meta-analysis, an alternative to statistical aggregation, combines qualitative and quantitative results to provide rich insights in interdisciplinary research. These new approaches increase efficiency, streamline the review process, and enable researchers to better detect gaps in research and emergent themes. By utilizing these cutting-edge methods, researchers are better able to contribute to their respective fields, foster vigorous academic discussion, and facilitate cross-disciplinary collaboration. Moreover, these methods provide transparency and reproducibility, making literature reviews more rigorous and impactful. As the body of academic knowledge increases, adopting such new methodologies will become crucial in terms of enhancing scholarly research towards quality and availability. This transition to new ways of conducting literature reviews not only enhances the process of research itself but also reinforces the foundation for further scientific advancements and theoretical elaboration in all fields.
References
K. Petersen, S. Vakkalanka, and L. Kuzniarz, “Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: An update,” Information and Software Technology, vol. 64, pp. 1–18, Aug. 2015, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2015.03.007.
M. J. Grant and A. Booth, “A Typology of reviews: an Analysis of 14 Review Types and Associated Methodologies,” Health Information & Libraries Journal, vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 91–108, May 2009, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x.
D. Gough, S. Oliver, and J. Thomas, “An Introduction to Systematic Reviews,” SAGE Publications Ltd, Jul. 30, 2019. https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/an-introduction-to-systematic-reviews/book245742
M. J. Page , J. E. McKenzie , P. M. Bossuyt , I. Boutron . “The PRISMA 2020 statement: an Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews,” British Medical Journal, vol. 372, no. 71, 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71.
Z. Munn, C. Stern, E. Aromataris, C. Lockwood, and Z. Jordan, “What Kind of Systematic Review Should I conduct? a Proposed Typology and Guidance for Systematic Reviewers in the Medical and Health Sciences,” BMC Medical Research Methodology, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 1–9, Jan. 2018, doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0468-4.
N. R. Haddaway, A. M. Collins, D. Coughlin, and S. Kirk, “The Role of Google Scholar in Evidence Reviews and Its Applicability to Grey Literature Searching,” PLOS ONE, vol. 10, no. 9, p. e0138237, Sep. 2015, Available: https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4574933/
D. Levac, H. Colquhoun, and K. K. O’Brien, “Scoping studies: Advancing the Methodology,” Implementation Science, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1–9, Sep. 2010, doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-69.
A. C. Tricco ,E. Lillie, W. Zarin, K. K. O'Brien, “PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation,” Annals of Internal Medicine, vol. 169, no. 7, pp. 467–473, Sep. 2018, doi: https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850.
T. Greenhalgh, S. Thorne, and K. Malterud, “Time to Challenge the Spurious Hierarchy of Systematic over Narrative reviews?,” European Journal of Clinical Investigation, vol. 48, no. 6, p. e12931, Apr. 2018, doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/eci.12931.
H. Cooper, “Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis: A Step-by-Step Approach,” SAGE Publications, Inc, 2017, doi: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071878644.