Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
83 lines (67 loc) · 9.71 KB

session4b.md

File metadata and controls

83 lines (67 loc) · 9.71 KB

Stars Badge Forks Badge Pull Requests Badge Issues Badge GitHub contributors Visitors

Session 4b: Mentoring Session - Search and screen for Literature

Student info

No. Student Name Supervisor Name
1 AYEMOWA MATTHEW OJO PROF. ROLLIANA IBRAHIM
2 CUI CUI PROF DR. MOHD SHAHRIZAL BIN SUNAR
3 DARMAWAN SATYANANDA TS. DR. SARINA BINTI SULAIMAN
4 ZHANJINGCHUN DR. GOH EG SU
5 JUNIARDI NUR FADILA TS. DR. NUR HALIZA ABDUL WAHAB
6 SAIDU ABUBAKAR PROF. KAMARULNIZAM BIN ABU BAKAR
7 MUHAMMAD HARISQ PROF AZLAN MOHD ZAIN
8 MUHAMMAD ANWAR BIN AHMAD DR. NORHAIDA MOHD SUAIB
9 MUHAMMAD ANWAR HUSSAIN DR. SARINA SULAIMAN
10 MIHRAN ABDULRAHIM MUHAMMED DR. AIDA BINTI ALI
11 NUR ATIQAH BINTI MOHD FUA'AD DR. JOHANNA BINTI AHMAD
12 NUR IRDINA BINTI AHMAD RIFDI PROF DR MOHD SHAHRIZAL BIN SUNAR
13 NURHAFIYAH HAZWANI BINTI HARIS FADZILLAH DR. NUR ZURAIFAH SYAZRAH BINTI OTHMAN
14 NUR SHAHIRAH BINTI JAILANI PROF. MADYA. DR. MOHD. MURTADHA BIN MOHAMAD
15 SITI ZALEHA BINTI HARUN PM. DR. NORAFIDA BTE ITHNIN
16 SIMON CHONG KAI YUEN TS. DR. GOH EG SU
17 MUHAMMAD FARIS FAISAL BIN AHMAD RADDI ASSOC. PROF. ROHAYANTI BINTI HASSAN
18 APRI JUNAIDI DR CHAN WENG HOWE AND ASSOC. PROF. DR. SITI ZAITON

Activities

  1. Assess Study Quality:

    • Validity and Reliability: Assessing the quality of studies involves evaluating their methodological soundness and the trustworthiness of their findings.
    • Quality Assessment Tools: Use standardized tools to grade each study, such as the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool for randomized controlled trials.
    • Bias Identification: Identify various types of bias, such as selection, performance, detection, and reporting biases, and assess their impact on the study's results.

  2. Extract Data:

    • Data Collection: Skim the full text of included articles to collect information in a structured format, often using a data extraction table.
    • Information Selection: Decide on the types of information to extract from each study, which may include study characteristics, outcomes, methodologies, and results.
    • Accuracy: Ensure accuracy by having two or more people extract data from each study, and review the collected data for errors.

  3. Synthesize Data:

    • Integration and Analysis: Combine the data from the selected studies, which may involve statistical techniques like meta-analysis, thematic analysis, or narrative synthesis.
    • Drawing Conclusions: Use the synthesized data to draw meaningful conclusions, identify patterns, or explore variations in the evidence.
    • Reporting Findings: Present the findings in an organized and transparent manner, often including tables, figures, or narrative summaries.

These steps are integral to the SLR process, ensuring that the review is comprehensive, objective, and provides a clear synthesis of the available evidence.

Learning Materials

No Title File
1. Systematic Literature Review Template
2. Li, J., Othman, M. S., Chen, H., & Yusuf, L. M. (2024). A critical review of feature selection methods for machine learning in IoT security. International Journal of Communication Networks and Distributed Systems, 30(3), 264-312.
3. Bauer, A., Coppola, R., Alégroth, E., & Gorschek, T. (2023). Code review guidelines for GUI-based testing artifacts. Information and Software Technology, 163, 107299.
4. De la Torre-López, J., Ramírez, A., & Romero, J. R. (2023). Artificial intelligence to automate the systematic review of scientific literature. Computing, 105(10), 2171–2194.
5. Carbonell-Alcocer, A., Romero-Luis, J., Gertrudix, M., & Wuebben, D. (2023). Datasets on the assessment of the scientific publication’s corpora in circular economy and bioenergy approached from education and communication. Data in Brief, 47, 108958.
6. Marcos Dib, Carlos Alberto Alvares Rocha, Li Weigang, & Allan V. A. Faria. (2022). Systematic Literature Review about Text Classification (Version 1) [Data set]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7017720
7. Juan Cruz-Benito (2016). Systematic Literature Review & Mapping
8. Busse, C., August, E. (2021). How to Write and Publish a Research Paper for a Peer-Reviewed Journal. J Canc Educ 36, 909–913 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-020-01751-z
9. Google Scholar Metrics
10. LaPlaca, P. J., Lindgreen, A., & Vanhamme, J. (2018). How to Write Really Good Articles for Premier Academic Journals. Industrial Marketing Management, 68, 202-209.
11. Kofod-Petersen, A. (2018). How to Do a Structured Literature Review in Computer Science. NTNU
12. Mengist, W., Soromessa, T., & Legese, G. (2020). Method for conducting systematic literature review and meta-analysis for environmental science research. MethodsX, 7.
13. Silva, R. L. S., & Weidt Neiva, F. (2016). Systematic Literature Review in Computer Science - A Practical Guide. Report number: 002/2016. Federal University of Juiz de Fora
14. Carrera-Rivera, A., Ochoa, W., Larrinaga, F., & Lasa, G. (2022). How to conduct a systematic literature review: A quick guide for computer science research. MethodsX, 9, 101895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2022.101895

Contribution 🛠️

Please create an Issue for any improvements, suggestions or errors in the content.

You can also contact me using Linkedin for any other queries or feedback.

Visitors