I've been having problems all day and am quite stressed and worried now. I have to write a systematic review paper for publication, based on my literature review, and I'm getting nowhere with it. My lit review is incredibly detailed and complex and I don't know how to turn it into a paper for a systematic review for a general readership without making it too long and complicated. There are 11 questionnaires that I have reviewed, about half are based on one set of development procedures and the other half on another set of development procedures. In both cases, I have needed to critique them in completely different ways introducing and explaining complex concepts in the process so that readers can follow. The problem is I am going to need to do this in the systematic review and that's going to take up a lot of words. The results of the procedures used also are population dependent, and that means that I have to describe the samples used - but again that's going to add even more words and make it even more complicated.
The review is also supposed to lead the way for my research, so in turn, I also need to bring in even more new concepts and ideas at the end of the review - and that will add even more words and complexity. So, I don't know what to do and I'm really stuck. I've tried to find similar examples of systematic reviews in the literature, but the way they have done it is very different from how I have written the chapter for my thesis, which is about 100 pages. I don't know how I can cut it down without losing all the meaning or making it difficult to understand.:-(

Oooch, that does not sound easy.

I've never had to do a systematic review, but I've had to do similar things - though not for publication. I sympathize, really. What's always worked for me is to get sheets of A3 paper stuck to my wall, and draw plans. Like, for you I would list the 11 questionnaires, and under each one just a few lines (key words really) listing the concepts introduced, the population concerned, the results found and any problems arising. Hopefully, it would help make the whole thing clear as far as the progression of your argument goes (-it's easier to see what makes sense when you can see the whole picture in one glance), and perhaps avoid repeating things (e.g. you might realise it would save a lot of words if you introduced concept 3 before concept 2 and so on).

But then again I don't know if it would help at all for you, it depends a lot on your exact formal requirements, and obviously on the nature of your research.

Good luck in any case ;-)

Hi Walminskipeas...

I've had a systematic review published which is essentially a summarised version of one of my lit review chapters...

At the end of your chapter have you brought everything together and basically summed it all up? If you have it might be easier touse this as your starting point. Alternatively, instead of seeing your 11 questionnaires as separate entities, each needing individual attention, could you not perhaps look for the main similarities and differences and draw on them instead? You could still discuss them in terms of the different developmental procedures they represent, but rather than going into the in-depth complexities of it, give an overview.

I'm not sure if that makes sense.

Hey there! I have had very similar difficulties to you with my systematic literature review. I had to include both quantitative and qualitative studies, which were all based on vastly different concepts and models, and all with their own strengths and weaknesses to discuss. I think the main thing to think about is the structure, and how you can best structure it so that it is broken down into different sections which are headed accordingly. Maybe break it down into which set of development procedures you are talking about, and then within each of these sections to break it down further to the specific questionnaire, explaining the concepts as you introduce each one, followed by the critique. You could also have introduction and summary sections before and after each set of development procedures to ensure that the paper is structured in a logical way that is easy for the reader to follow. One thing that I had to do with mine was to limit the words that I spent explaining each model/concept. I had to do this to some extent so that the reader could understand the methodologies and results of the papers, but I tried to keep it quite brief and included references for if the reader wanted to read more about that particular concept/model. (I am actually now writing a second paper about the concepts/models in more depth!). And find a journal that will let you have a lengthy paper...mine was over 10,000 words excluding references and a huge table and it has been accepted for a journal which is specifically a review journal. Good luck with it :) KB

======= Date Modified 30 Oct 2009 13:13:40 =======
Sorry- I seem to have posted it several times and I can't get rid of it!! KB

Hi walminskipeasucker

I am currently doing the same thing as you - trying to create a review of the state-of-the-art in my area and I have approx 50 papers to include - firstly when you say that half are based on one set of developmental procedures then this could be your first division - there may be more within each group - I have divided my papers by the various dimensions that they deal with and summarised this in a number of tables - would it be possible for you to cut down on the complexity of the descriptions by doing something similar?

When you say it is a general readership if there are certain terms that are only applicable in your area then you could have a section to specifically explain these.

How long are you allowed for the review paper?

Try doing a skeleton outline of the paper and include only the topics of most importance - from what you have written the dataset / population, the questionnaires and the dimensions that make them different or similar, the terms that need explained for the general readership, and the developmental procedures.

A picture says a thousand words so if you can sum up anything in a graph or diagram then that would cut your word count.

These are just a few ideas - and I hope they help - sometimes shortening one paragraph at a time can help then try piecing it all together at the end.

Good Luck
JenNorth

Thanks very much for the advice guys! I've tried to follow some of the advice you've given so far, using table to summarise the questionnaires included - I've divided them up thematically, and the results section deals with the thematically organised groups of instruments/questionnaires in turn. The problem is, they involve psychometric theory, which has so many awkward and confusing definitions. JenNorth, I thought about doing a table featuring the definitions of these terms, but I think it would be too big for the review, because there are so many concepts.
One of the big problems is, the workers who have designed these questionnaires have made a lot of mistakes in the implementation of the techniques. I really want to discuss why they are wrong, but they are wrong in so many different ways, using so many different techniques that, but for a thesis chapter, it's ridiculously difficult to start talking about why, without turning it into a book. So, I've decided just to focus on what thy have done right as evidence for the quality of the questionnaires and ignore what they have done wrong, because that is not evidence.
I've found an example of a systematic review that has done something similar to me. The problem with the review I have found, I think, is that it just launches into to a descriptive blurb, almost assuming that the readership are psychometricians. My readership aren't; they're healthcare workers interested in research.
I don't know about anyone else, but of all the papers you can write, by far, the most complicated are systematic literature reviews - oh, and meta-analyses!
Thank you for the input.

Hi Walminski,

sometimes the problem is, if you have written a lot, especially about complex issues, that it is very hard to keep an overview (not seeing the wood through the trees). What my professor suggested and which I have used, is to "throw away what you have written" and start with a blank piece of paper. Then from memory write the overview in a simple way, trying to include what you think are the main issues. Often you have a to juggle a bit (often quite a bit!) but eventually you may get a logical, to the point, piece of writing. Then, and only then, one can go back to the original writing to "paste" in details regarding certain subject.

And, in my opinion, health care workers want something to the point, easy to read and concise! I am fairly certain that they would not struggle through a complex text, they would prefer something practical and what is relevant to them.:-)