Crafting a comprehensive literature review can be a daunting task, especially when it comes to

identifying and discussing the limitations of existing research. Delving into the nuances of various
studies, analyzing their methodologies, and critically evaluating their findings requires both time and
expertise. For many students and researchers, this process can be overwhelming, leading to
frustration and stress.

One particular area that demands careful attention is the limitations of a systematic literature review.
Identifying the boundaries and constraints within which previous studies have operated is crucial for
understanding the scope and implications of their findings. However, navigating through a multitude
of sources, each with its own set of limitations, can be a challenging endeavor.

Fortunately, help is at hand. At ⇒ StudyHub.vip ⇔, we specialize in assisting students and

researchers in navigating the complexities of academic writing. Our team of experienced writers is
well-versed in conducting systematic literature reviews and adept at identifying and analyzing the
limitations of existing research. By entrusting your literature review to us, you can ensure that your
work is thorough, well-structured, and backed by scholarly rigor.

Don't let the daunting task of writing a literature review hold you back. Order now at ⇒
StudyHub.vip ⇔ and let us help you navigate the intricacies of academic research with ease.
Effect of hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin on the mortality of coronavirus disease
2019 (COVID-19) patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. A prospective, randomized,
open-label trial of early versus late favipiravir therapy in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.
Evidence-based interventions that employ race, ethnic, and gender specific modalities need further
development (Miller, 2006). Clearly state the criteria you will use to determine whether or not a
study will be included in your search. If there are more outcomes in the review, review authors will
need to omit the less important outcomes from the table, and the decision selecting which outcomes
are critical or important to the review should be made during protocol development (see Chapter 3 ).
It has long been assumed in epidemiology that relative measures of effect are more consistent than
absolute measures of effect from one scenario to another. Lee L, Kim MJ. A critical review of Smart
residential environments for older adults with a focus on pleasurable experience. Next, Boyle and
colleagues found the full texts for each of the remaining studies. Overview, strengths, and limitations
of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Of this literature review, five are based on systematic
literature reviews. In recent years, there has been growing interest in the use of computer-assisted
technology for early detection of skin cancer through the analysis of dermatoscopic images. An
evaluation study of sleep monitors and communicative robots at a residential care home in Japan. For
example, if only sicker patients receive an experimental intervention or exposure, yet they still fare
better, it is likely that the actual intervention or exposure effect is larger than the data suggest. When
you’ve answered the main questions and achieved the set goals, sharing your thoughts is a wise
solution, especially if you disagree with something and need to support any points of view.
Technologies for an aging society: a systematic review of smart home applications. Note Generative
AI tools like ChatGPT can be useful at various stages of the writing and research process and can
help you to write your systematic review. University spinoffs, for Hayter ( 2016 ), are an important
vehicle for generating productivity, job creation and prosperity for regional economies. Sens (Basel),
2017. 17(11). Sanchez VG, Pfeiffer CF, Skeie N-O. Systematic literature reviews can be utilized in
various contexts, but they’re often relied on in clinical or healthcare settings. Information sources
and search strategy We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Sciences (WOS) databases from
inception to January 1, 2022, for the keywords COVID-19, “SARS-CoV-2,” “novel coronavirus,”
“systematic review,” OR limitation in the title, abstract, or main text of the published article. The
data produced in this user-centric attempt to organize the current knowledge on SHHTs will prove
informative to inform policy, improve user-acceptance, and serve as an additional resource for those
who care for older persons. The second sub-cluster analyses the dynamics of knowledge ecosystems,
namely, the role of HEIs for value creation in a given context. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE.
“The systematic identification, location, scrutiny and summary of written materials that pertain to a
research problem”. Method: We conduct a systematic review of the literature on UCASD. There
were suggestions for more interactive feedback from the devices to guide users, such as those to
indicate the completion of a task or a physiological reading. Researchers have used mixed methods,
both qualitative and quantitative data collection techniques to address the complexity of the
phenomenon. Heshmat MD; PhD candidate Multiple (duplicate) publication bias The multiple or
singular publication of research finding, depending on the nature and direction of the results R. From
the numbers, we deduce that there is no balance of methods in EE and HEI studies and literature
reviews are the least frequent type of publication. The main limitations of the included studies were
categorized in 10 domains: sample size, heterogeneity, follow-up, treatment, including studies,
design, definitions, synthesis, quality, and search. The review protocol was developed in cooperation
with the ?rst.
Try to find what existing researchers say about future. Your strategy will depend on your field and
your research question, but sources generally fall into these four categories: Databases: Search
multiple databases of peer-reviewed literature, such as PubMed or Scopus. A broader study could be
undertaken, from a mixed approach, to establish mechanisms to collect appropriate data and to
establish the different levels of success of EE outcomes, by the HEI (cluster 3). In this paper, we
present an overview of modern frequent pattern mining techniques using data mining algorithms.
Frequent pattern mining in data mining takes a lot of data base scans. A meta-analysis is a technique
to synthesize results from multiple studies. Chapter 13 provides a detailed discussion of reporting
biases, including publication bias, and how it may be tackled in a Cochrane Review. This increment
in the interest of EE results from the fact that this concept has assumed a global and
multidisciplinary dimension recognized and associated with innovation by the various economic and
social actors. There are two main approaches to synthesizing the data: Narrative ( qualitative ):
Summarize the information in words. In cluster 3 it is evident that the challenge of the third mission
that academia encompass emphasizes entrepreneurship and the corresponding emergence of the
entrepreneurial university. Psychometric reviews assess the quality of health measurement tools so
that the best instrument can be selected for use. Report a problem. Steps to conducting a systematic
review Review the steps as outlined in the UMD HSHSL Guide or watch their tutorial. Adapted
from Santesso et al (2016) 14.2 Assessing the certainty or quality of a body of evidence 14.2.1 the
grade approach. Kuratko ( 2005 ), in his study, notes that younger people have become the most
entrepreneurial generation since the Industrial Revolution. They confirm that EE research has mostly
focused on academic entrepreneurship, innovation and regional development, among others. Ten
electronic databases were reviewed for empirical peer-reviewed literature published from 01.01.2000
to 31.12.2021 in English, German, and French reporting on experimental, qualitative, quantitative,
and other empirical study designs were included. What is the difference between a literature review
and a systematic review. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and
your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will
need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. Richard et al. performed a systematic
review to evaluate the methodological quality of currently available COVID-19 studies compared to
historical controls. GRADE: assessing the quality of evidence for diagnostic recommendations. The
data were analysed using the author’s keywords and cut-off points in the years 2014, 2018 and
2020. Participants Eligible participants were the corresponding authors of clinical trials published
between January 2010 and June 2013 and indexed in PubMed Core Clinical Journals, with an email
address available on PubMed. The composition of clusters groups generated research points. Second,
information about frameworks and methods enables review authors and readers to judge the quality
of the research, which allows for discerning the strengths and limitations of the article. Grasping
objects from the floor in Assistive Robotics: Real World implications and lessons learned. It’s best to
formulate a detailed plan for how you’ll present your systematic review results. Inference was based
on restricted maximum likelihood. Boissy P, et al. A qualitative study of in-home robotic
telepresence for home care of community-living elderly subjects. Introduction The new research on
the “entrepreneurship ecosystem” (EE) limits the acceptance of a single definition. This absolute risk
with the (experimental) intervention will usually be derived from the meta-analysis result presented
in the relative effect column (see Section 14.1.6.6 ). Formulae are provided in Section 14.1.5. Review
authors should present the absolute effect in the same format as the risks with comparator
intervention (see Section 14.1.6.3 ), for example as the number of people experiencing the event per
1000 people. Page ME, McKenzie J, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al.
Introduction The new research on the “entrepreneurship ecosystem” (EE) limits the acceptance of a
single definition. For permission to re-use material from the Handbook (either academic or
commercial), please see here for full details. CL178200001. The study is registered in
ClinicalTrials.gov (no. NCT01848782). Characteristics of participants Among the 4,807 potential
participants who were invited by e-mail to participate in the survey between May 1 and June 30,
2013, 394 logged onto the study site; 89 were excluded because they were not clinicians and 5 did
not complete the survey. We then conducted a content analysis and prepared a narrative summary of
the limitations. Heshmat MD; PhD candidate Time lag bias The rapid or delayed publication of
research finding, depending on the nature and direction of the results R. The most common
quantitative approach is a meta-analysis, which allows you to combine results from multiple studies
into a summary result. Many studies have suffered from a lack of randomization, placebo, blinding,
and comparator arm. To obtain absolute effects for time-to-event outcomes measured as event-free
survival, the summary HR can be used in conjunction with an assumed proportion of patients who
are event-free in the comparator group (Tierney et al 2007). This latter year and 2022 standing out
with the highest number of published articles. In 2022, the number reached 24 articles in the last year
of the period. Boyle and Tang read through the articles to decide if any more studies needed to be
excluded based on the selection criteria. Steps of a Systematic Review Framing a Research Question
Developing a Search Strategy Searching the Literature Managing the Process Publishing your
Systematic Review Forms and templates Image: David Parmenter's Shop. The production growth
rate is 33.5%. According to the average number of citations, per year, the articles written in 2022
were those with a higher number (9.79) followed by articles from the years 2011, 2018 and 2019.
Selection process After the search was completed, all retrieved records were imported in EndNote,
version X7, and duplicate removed. The results reveal a thematic evolution of the conceptual
frameworks from 2011 to 2022. As the aging process is dynamic and requires continuous adaptations
from both caregivers and older persons, it is important that SHHTs are designed to interoperate with
the end-users’ existing routines and home environment. Ninety one percent of the included studies
scored as strong quality and the remaining (9%) as moderate quality. Only 29.7% of the included
systematic reviews have a registered protocol. 26% of the included studies mentioned a funding
statement. The case study technique, inserted in this approach, focuses on 25 articles, meaning that
its weighting is 42% in relation to the total number of articles that use qualitative methodologies. The
number of studies in the included systematic reviews ranged from 2 to 136. Acknowledgement.
PREN. Garth Reid, Laura Wyness, Lakshmi Mandava. Overview. Evidence based public health.
Potential limitations in systematic review studies assessing the effect These limitations were
attributed to the included systematic reviews or due to primary studies in these systematic reviews.
The absolute and relative magnitude of effect measured for each (if both are appropriate). Despite
using various templates for critical appraisal, authors often do not provide detailed information about
each reviewed article’s strengths and limitations. From the numbers, we deduce that there is no
balance of methods in EE and HEI studies and literature reviews are the least frequent type of
publication. One could imagine a situation in which randomized trials were available, but all or
virtually all of these limitations would be present, and in serious form. Heterogeneity across the
studies may affect the study results ( 65 ). Workshop Overview. Explain elements of the systematic
review process. A systematic review of the smart home literature: a user perspective. The above leads
us to propose as possible future research directions. Promotes independence or independent living for
older persons: This category was discussed across 67 articles.
Outcomes measures The primary outcome was readers’ confidence in the results of the systematic
review as stated in the abstract (i.e., How confident are you in the results of the systematic review?)
assessed on a Likert scale, from 0 “not at all confident” to 10 “very confident”. Table 6 presents the
five authors and journals that have contributed for research’s development. Enables continuous
monitoring of the older person: This category is mentioned in 115 articles, which represented more
than two-third of all articles. Uncertainties in baseline risk estimates and confidence in treatment
effects. Authors of the included systematic reviews used the Cochrane or a modified Cochrane
Collaboration tool in 10 abstracts (33%), the Jadad scale or modified Jadad scale in 5 (17%), the
PEDro scale or modified PEDro scale in 3 (10%), and other tools in 4 (13%); the scale was not
specified in 6 (20%). Secondly, this study strengthens the credibility of the AEE theoretical
frameworks in lending support to the importance of analysing the specific contributions of HEIs to
the development of an EE. Improvement to user-friendliness could also improve access to the
technologies and prevent the exacerbation of the digital divide. In total, 150 participants per group
were included in the final analysis (Figure 1 ). One possible bias relates to different disease severity
in patients in the two hospital types. For example, 14 studies of flavanoids in patients with
haemorrhoids have shown apparent large benefits, but enrolled a total of only 1432 patients (i.e. each
study enrolled relatively few patients) (Alonso-Coello et al 2006). This is an important step because
having a plan allows you to work more efficiently and reduces bias. Construction of abstracts with
and without a limitations section For each of the 30 selected abstracts, we obtained 1 abstract
without a limitations section (i.e., the original abstract) and 1 with a limitations section (i.e., the
original abstract plus the constructed limitations section). This systematic review was performed to
investigate the effect of exercise therapy on BDNF levels and clinical outcomes in human PD and to
discuss mechanisms proposed by authors. Though the data extraction document with pre-existing
themes was prepared in advance, the organization of final themes was dynamic, where we
continuously discussed among authors on the best way to understand and subsequently portray the
data as objectively and comprehensively as possible. The authors refer that this responsibility can be
assigned to the university to contribute to developing the regional networks. Systematic Reviews8 1
com Steps to conducting a systematic review: PIECES P: Planning - the methods of the systematic
review are generally decided before conducting it. Two independent reviewers (HA, MM) screened
the records based on the title, abstract, and full text. Sometimes individuals must meet them
adequately, understand the difficulties and determine their main priorities, deciding what to examine
and how to start writing. The work of Schaeffer and Matt ( 2016 ) showed that universities cannot
replicate the mechanisms that lead to the success of an EE but rather adapt their strategies to the
specificities of each regional context. Identifying the best journal to submit your research to can be a
difficult process. Adapted from A Guide to Conducting Systematic Reviews: Steps in a Systematic
Review by Cornell University Library. All this fact enhances the importance of the sets of themes in
the article. Cochrane, in collaboration with others, has developed guidance for review authors to
support their decision about when to look for and include non-randomized studies (Schunemann et
al 2013). A bibliometric analysis was developed to analyse a final sample of 110 articles published
between 2011 and 2022. There are two types of information you need to collect from each study:
Information about the study’s methods and results. Gianluigi Savarese, MD, FESC, ACC FIT
Department of Advanced Biomedical Sciences, Federico II University, Naples, Italy Department of
Medicine, Solna, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. However, if there are some points that
need clarification or are missing from the overall context, they should be mentioned. As pointed by
Fini et al. ( 2011 ) and Vohora et al. ( 2004 ), since university faculty have limited entrepreneurial
experience, networks with outside contacts are crucial to motivate the creation of entrepreneurial
activities as well as their success. The author also mentions that spinoffs are a window through which
the contributions of universities can be examined. The data were analysed using the author’s
keywords and cut-off points in the years 2014, 2018 and 2020.