GROUP 2

What is RRL?
RRL stand for Review of Related Literature. It is a summary of previous research on a topic or a detailed
overview about existing literature related to the topic of a researcher's study, thesis.

What is its purpose

• Give background information on research study.
• Describe gaps in earlier research
• Recognize current theories, viewpoints, and hypothesis in the field of inquiry.
• Describe how the study fits into the body existing knowledge.
• Assist in avoiding duplication in your own study and in identifying new issues.
• Accurate the study
• Dispel misunderstandings about earlier research

Guidelines in writing RRL(S):

• Define the topic in the audience -It is advised that you choose a topic that interests you and your group
members, one that is essential to the field so that many readers will be interested in the review and there
will be enough information to write it, and finally, a topic that is a clearly defined problem. You should also
choose a target audience.

•Search and Re-search the literature -As soon as you've decided on a topic and an audience, you should
verify the literature by searching and re-searching pertinent articles. Keep track of the items you search so
that your search can be reproduced, and identify early in the process what you're looking for. Construct a
set of criteria for the rejection of pointless manuscripts; the review can then describe these criteria to
clarify its scope.

• Keep the review focused, but make it at broad interest -Keeping it focused is a wise advice. The inclusion
of content merely for its own sake can easily result in reviews that are attempting to accomplish too many
task at once. For interdisciplinary reviews, where the goal is to bridge the gap across fields, the necessity to
maintain a review's focus might be troublesome.

• Be Critical and Consistent -A competent review evaluates the literature critically, points out
methodological issues, and highlights any research gaps in addition to summarizing it. After reading the
literature study, the reader ought to have a general concept of the major achievements in the sector under
examination, the primary points of contention, and the excellent research questions

• Take notes while reading -While reading, you should list down intriguing facts, ideas for organization, and
quotes that are relevant to your topic. These notes will serve as a draft that will need some rewriting and
rethinking to produce a text with a solid argument.

• Choose the type of review you wish to -You will have a general idea of the amount of information
available for the review once you have taken notes while reading the literature. There are four main
categories of related literature: traditional or narrative, systematic, meta-analysis, and meta-synthesis,
each of which focuses on a different type of information. For instance, descriptive reviews concentrate on
the methodology, results, and interpretation of each reviewed study.
• Include your own relevant research, but be objective -Reviewers of the literature frequently have
research that have been published that are significant to the review that they are writing. A review of the
literature shouldn't serve as a competitive act of self-denial or as a public relations tool. It should be easy
to be objective in reviewing one's own pertinent results if a reviewer is capable of crafting a structured,
methodical review that flows effectively and serves the reading.

• Be up-to date, but do not forget older studies -A literature review shouldn't point out a significant
research gap for a topic that has already been covered in a number of publications that are currently being
published. The information that will be used in your study will rely on whether the material useful to it is
new or old, however it is recommended that your research be something fresh because the world is
constantly changing.

• Find a logical Structure -A good review has a number of telling features: it is worth the reader's time,
timely, systematic, well written, focused, and critical. It also needs a good structure. With reviews, the
usual subdivision of research papers into introduction, methods, results, and discussion does not work or is
rarely used. It is generally helpful to draw a conceptual scheme of the review, e.g., with mind-mapping
techniques. Such diagrams can help recognize a logical way to order and link the various sections of a
review.

• Make use of Feedback -A review draft can be significantly improved by incorporating reviewers'
suggestions. Reviewers who have read the review from a new perspective may find errors, contradictions,
and ambiguities that the authors may not have caught after reviewing the typescript too many times. To
write a decent review, you must get feedback from several different coworkers.

Hunting Regulations Favors slow life histories in a large carnivore

RRL 1: Here, using more than 20 years of detailed data on survival and reproduction in a hunted large
carnivore population, we show that protecting females with dependent young, a widespread hunting
regulation, provides a survival benefit to females providing longer maternal care. This survival gain
compensates for the females' reduced reproductive output, especially at high hunting pressure, where the
fitness benefit of prolonged periods of maternal care outweighs that of shorter maternal care. (Joanie Van
de Walle et al. Nat Commun. 2018.)

RRL 2: Such effects have been linked to strong directional selection for specific phenotypic traits, such as
against large fish because of mesh sizes of closing nets (Jørgensen et al. 2007) or against large trophy males
because of hunter preference (Coltman et al. 2003; Garel et al. 2007).
Caffeine-Inducible gene switches controlling experimental Diabetes

RRL 1: Here, utilizing a caffeine-binding single-domain antibody we establish a caffeine-inducible protein

dimerization system, enabling synthetic transcription factors and cell-surface receptors that enable
transgene expression in response to physiologically relevant concentrations of caffeine generated by
routine intake of beverages such as tea and coffee. (Daniel Bojar et al. Nat Commun. 2018.)

RRL 2: Fused aCaffVHH to a range of receptors: a heterodimer between the Interleukin-4 receptor subunit
alpha and the Interleukin-13 receptor subunit alpha-1 resulting in the activation of STAT6; a homodimer of
Fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 resulting in the activation of the MAPK pathway; and finally a
homodimer of a fusion of Erythropoietin receptor and Interleukin-6 receptor subunit beta (EpoR-IL6ST)
resulting in the activation of STAT3 (Scheller et al., 2018).

RRL 3: Relying on a camelid single-domain antibody, which binds caffeine in the nanomolar range and
homodimerizes in the presence of caffeine (referred to as aCaffVHH) (Franco et al., 2010; Sonneson and
Horn, 2009)

Single-dose Testosterone administration increases men's preference for status good

RRL 1: Testosterone is one of the major steroid hormones produced in men and women (though in
different quantities) that modulates brain activity by binding to intracellular androgen receptors and
regulating gene expression via genomic and non-genomic effects (for a comprehensive review, see
Brinkmann, 2011).

RRL 2: Engaging in risky behaviors might be an evolutionary strategy to attain higher positions in social
hierarchies where status is important. It is therefore likely that testosterone also modulates risk-taking
behaviors and several studies reliably associated testosterone with social and economic decision-making
under high risk (Eisenegger et al., 2011; Apicella et al., 2014)

Sleep loss causes withdrawal ang loneliness

RRL 1: Here, we test the hypothesis that a lack of sleep leads individuals to enforce greater social
separation from others. Moreover, we examine whether the relationship between sleep loss and loneliness
is observed following very modest reductions in sleep quality, from one night to the next, in a micro-
longitudinal study. We further test the prediction that such a profile of social separation is instigated by
hypersensitivity of brain networks that warn of human approach, yet a converse reduction in activity
within prosocial networks associated with the comprehension of another’s intentions. Finally, we examine
whether this effect is bi-directional, such that people blind to the experimental context nevertheless rate
sleep-deprived individuals as being lonelier and less desirable to socially engage with. (Ben Simon et al. Nat
commun. 2018.)
RRL 2: showed that sleep quality was inversely associated with both social isolation and loneliness. After
demographic, health, cognitive factors, and depressive symptoms were controlled in multivariable analysis,
social isolation at the baseline still predicted poor sleep quality 6 years later (incident rate ratio, IRR 1.14;
95% CI 1.04-1.24; p < 0.01), while the association between loneliness and sleep quality was no longer
significant (IRR 1.08; 95% CI 0.94-1.23; p = 0.27). The results were unchanged when participants who had
poor sleep quality at the baseline were excluded from the analysis.(Yu B, Steptoe A, Niu K, Ku PW, Chen LJ.,
2017)

RRL 3: Loneliness feeling is frequent among adolescents and is associated with female gender, less social
and family support, intra-family violence and risk behaviors such as alcohol consumption and bullying.
Policies to promote physical and mental well-being in this age group, stimulating friendship and family
participation in the lives of adolescents should be made. Antunes JT, et al. J Pediatr (Rio J). 2022.