have an account?【sign in】Evidence-Based Decision Making: Comparing Targeted and Systematic Literature Reviews in Research Methodology
bartauthorEvidence-based decision making is a crucial aspect of research and development in various fields, including healthcare, education, and business. It involves using the best available evidence to make informed decisions, which can lead to improved outcomes and increased efficiency. Two main methods of conducting literature reviews, targeted and systematic reviews, are often used to gather and analyze evidence. This article compares the strengths and weaknesses of these two methods and discusses their applicability in different research scenarios.
Targeted Literature Reviews
Targeted literature reviews involve a focused search for relevant studies, often driven by specific research questions or hypotheses. They can be time-efficient and cost-effective, as they do not require extensive database searching or multi-disciplinary screening. However, their limited scope may lead to a lack of generalizability and may miss important or previously unpublished studies. Additionally, targeted reviews are more likely to be biased by the researcher's preconceptions or existing knowledge.
Systematic Literature Reviews
Systematic literature reviews follow a more structured and reproducible approach, involving pre-defined search strategies, screening criteria, and data extraction forms. They are more comprehensive in scope and provide a more complete overview of the available evidence. However, their high level of rigor and planning can be challenging and time-consuming, especially when dealing with large or complex research questions. Furthermore, systematic reviews may be prone to biases due to their comprehensive nature and the need for multiple reviewers to assess the evidence.
Comparing Targeted and Systematic Literature Reviews
While targeted reviews are more flexible and adaptable, systematic reviews provide a more comprehensive and unbiased overview of the available evidence. This trade-off between adaptability and comprehensiveness depends on the research questions and available resources. In situations where flexibility and adaptability are key, targeted reviews may be more appropriate. However, in cases where comprehensive evidence is required to make informed decisions, systematic reviews should be favored.
Additionally, targeted reviews may be more suitable for smaller research questions or focused topics, while systematic reviews are better suited for large-scale or multifaceted research projects. In some cases, it may be necessary to combine elements of both targeted and systematic reviews to address the complexities of a particular research question.
Evidence-based decision making is a crucial aspect of research and development, and the choice between targeted and systematic literature reviews depends on the research questions, available resources, and the needs of the project. By understanding the strengths and weaknesses of both methods, researchers and decision-makers can make informed choices when planning and executing research projects. Ultimately, the most appropriate approach should be determined based on the specific needs of the project and the available resources.