What Is a Systematic Literature Review?

A systematic literature review is a rigorous, replicable, and transparent method for identifying, evaluating, and synthesising all available evidence on a specific research question. Unlike a traditional narrative review, a systematic review follows a pre-specified protocol. This protocol defines the research question, search strategy, inclusion criteria, quality appraisal methods, and synthesis approach before the review begins. By minimising bias, a systematic review provides the most reliable possible answer to a focused question.

For postgraduate students in Dubai, conducting a systematic review demonstrates advanced research competence. Many universities, particularly in health sciences, psychology, education, and social policy, now require systematic reviews for doctoral theses and some master’s dissertations. A well conducted systematic review can also serve as a publishable standalone paper.

When Is a Systematic Review the Right Choice?

A systematic review is appropriate when you need a definitive answer to a clearly formulated question.

  • Your research question is narrow and specific, such as "Does cognitive behavioural therapy reduce anxiety symptoms in university students compared to waitlist control?
  • You want to summarise the best available evidence to inform practice or policy recommendations.
  • You intend to conduct a meta analysis to pool numerical data from multiple studies.
  • Your dissertation committee explicitly requires a systematic review methodology.
  • You plan to publish your review in a peer reviewed journal that follows PRISMA guidelines.
  • You need to demonstrate that your review is free from bias and fully reproducible.

The Core Principles of a Systematic Review

All credible systematic reviews adhere to several foundational principles.

  • Rigour Every decision is made according to a pre-specified protocol. No post hoc changes are allowed without justification.
  • Reproducibility Another researcher should be able to replicate your search, screening, and synthesis steps exactly.
  • Transparency All methods are documented in full, including search strategies, excluded studies with reasons, and quality assessment results.
  • Bias Minimisation Steps such as dual independent screening, comprehensive searching, and quality appraisal reduce the risk of systematic error.

Our Systematic Review Methodology

We follow the most authoritative guidelines in the field. These include the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, the PRISMA 2020 statement, and the Institute of Medicine standards. Our process consists of ten numbered steps.

The Ten Steps of Our Systematic Review Service
1
Formulating the Research QuestionWe help you refine your question using a recognised framework. For clinical questions, we use PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome). For qualitative questions, we use SPIDER (Sample, Phenomenon of Interest, Design, Evaluation, Research type). For questions about prevalence or risk factors, we use appropriate alternatives.
2
Registering a ProtocolWe draft a comprehensive review protocol. We can register this on PROSPERO for health related reviews or on the Open Science Framework for other disciplines. Registration prevents duplication and demonstrates academic rigour.
3
Developing a Comprehensive Search StrategyWe work with an information specialist to design a search strategy that maximises sensitivity and specificity. We use a combination of keywords, subject headings (MeSH or Emtree), and Boolean operators. We translate the strategy for each database.
4
Searching Multiple DatabasesWe search at least three major bibliographic databases. Typical sources include MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We also search grey literature sources, trial registries, and reference lists of included studies.
5
Selecting Studies Using Dual ScreeningTwo independent reviewers screen titles and abstracts against your inclusion criteria. We retrieve the full text of all potentially eligible articles. The same two reviewers independently screen the full texts. We record reasons for exclusion at the full text stage. A third reviewer resolves disagreements.
6
Assessing Methodological QualityWe evaluate the internal validity of each included study using validated quality appraisal tools. For randomised trials, we use the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool. For non randomised studies, we use ROBINS I or the Newcastle Ottawa Scale. For qualitative studies, we use CASP or JBI checklists. For cross sectional studies, we use the AXIS tool.
7
Extracting Data Using a Standardised FormWe pilot a data extraction form before use. Two reviewers independently extract data. The form captures study characteristics, participant details, intervention or exposure details, comparator details, outcome measures, effect sizes, and confidence intervals. We resolve discrepancies by consensus.
8
Synthesising the FindingsWe decide whether meta analysis is appropriate based on clinical and methodological homogeneity. If meta analysis is possible, we conduct it using random effects models in RevMan or JASP. We present results as forest plots with heterogeneity statistics (I², Tau², and Chi² tests). If meta analysis is not appropriate, we produce a narrative synthesis structured around the characteristics of the included studies.
9
Assessing Certainty of the EvidenceFor reviews that include a meta analysis, we assess the overall certainty of the evidence using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. This results in a rating of high, moderate, low, or very low certainty.
10
Reporting According to PRISMA 2020We structure the final report according to the PRISMA 2020 checklist. We include a PRISMA flow diagram, a characteristics of included studies table, a risk of bias summary figure, forest plots where applicable, and a GRADE summary of findings table.

What You Receive in Your Systematic Review Report

Your completed systematic review is a comprehensive, submission ready document.

PRISMA Checklist

Complete PRISMA 2020 checklist ensuring full compliance with reporting standards.

Flow Diagram

PRISMA flow diagram showing records identified, screened, and included.

Title Page

Includes author details, institution, and submission date.

Structured Abstract

Prepared according to PRISMA for Abstracts guidelines.

Introduction

Clear rationale, objectives, and well-defined review question.

Methods Section

Includes eligibility criteria, search strategy, data collection, and bias assessment.

Results Section

Study selection, characteristics, bias results, and synthesis findings.

Discussion

Interpretation, limitations, and final conclusions of the study.

Funding & Registration

Details of funding sources and registration information.

References

Fully formatted reference list in your required citation style.

Appendices

Search strategies, extraction forms, quality appraisal, and supporting materials.

Systematic Review versus Scoping Review: A Detailed Comparison

Many students struggle to choose between these two methods. The following comparison will help you decide.

CriterionSystematic ReviewScoping Review
Primary purposeTo answer a specific question by synthesising high quality evidenceTo map the existing literature and identify gaps
Research questionNarrow and focusedBroad and exploratory
Protocol registrationMandatory (PROSPERO or OSF)Recommended but not always required
Quality appraisalAlways performed and reportedUsually not performed
Synthesis methodMeta analysis or narrative synthesisNarrative or thematic summary
Typical number of studies10 to 100+20 to 200+
Time required8 to 16 weeks4 to 8 weeks
Publication potentialHigh (many journals accept systematic reviews)Moderate (specialist scoping review journals)
Best forWell researched topics with existing high quality studiesEmerging topics or heterogeneous evidence bases

Quality Assurance Measures

We take systematic review methodology seriously. The following quality assurance measures are embedded in every project.

Our Quality Assurance Protocols
01

Dual independent screening for title, abstract, and full text stages. No single researcher makes inclusion or exclusion decisions alone.

02

Piloting of all forms including the screening form, data extraction form, and quality appraisal checklist.

03

Calibration exercises before screening begins to ensure consistent application of eligibility criteria.

04

Third reviewer adjudication for all disagreements that cannot be resolved through discussion.

05

Documentation of all decisions including a list of excluded full text studies with reasons for exclusion.

06

Independent verification of all data extraction and effect size calculations by a second reviewer.

07

Use of reference management software (EndNote, Covidence, or Rayyan) to track all records.

08

Final editorial review by a senior methodologist before delivery to the client.

Pricing, Timeline, and Delivery

Systematic reviews require more time and resources than scoping reviews due to the dual screening, quality appraisal, and meta analysis steps.

Small systematic review

undergraduate or small master’s project

8 to 10 weeks

Typically 10 to 30 included studies

No meta analysis.

Standard systematic review

typical master’s or early doctoral project

10 to 14 weeks

Typically 30 to 70 included studies

Meta analysis possible

Extensive systematic review

doctoral thesis or Cochrane style review

14 to 18 weeks

Typically 70+ included studies

Meta analysis and GRADE assessment

All timelines are estimates. We provide a fixed timeline in writing before you place your order. Rush orders may be possible for an additional fee

Frequently Asked Questions

We offer distinct advantages that set us apart from other academic support services in the UAE.

Registration is strongly recommended and is a requirement for many universities. We can register your protocol on PROSPERO or OSF as part of our service.

Yes. If your included studies are sufficiently homogeneous in terms of population, intervention, comparator, and outcome, we can conduct a random effects meta analysis using RevMan or JASP. We will also assess statistical heterogeneity using I² and Tau².

In that case, we will produce a narrative synthesis. We will clearly justify why meta analysis was inappropriate and structure the narrative synthesis around key themes or study characteristics.

Yes. For meta analyses that include at least 10 studies, we will construct a funnel plot and conduct Egger’s regression test to assess for small study effects and publication bias.

Yes. We offer a separate journal publication support service. We will help you select a target journal, rewrite the review in the journal’s required format, and prepare a submission package.

We offer a full refund if we fail to deliver on the agreed date without a valid reason. Partial refunds are available for significant quality issues that cannot be resolved through revisions.

Request a Free Consultation

Do not risk your degree on a poorly conducted systematic review. A single flaw in your search strategy or quality appraisal can lead to rejection by your supervisor or examiners.

Contact Dissertation Dubai today.

Send us your research question, a brief description of your topic, and your university’s guidelines. We will respond within 24 hours with a free assessment, a fixed price quote, and a proposed timeline.

Let us help you produce a systematic review that you can be proud of.