See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/325378194

DEMYSTIFYING THE LITERATURE REVIEW AS BASIS FOR SCIENTIFIC

WRITING: SSF METHOD

Article · January 2016

CITATIONS READS

5 220

2 authors:

Helio Aisenberg Ferenhof Roberto Fabiano Fernandes

Federal University of Santa Catarina Federal University of Santa Catarina
110 PUBLICATIONS   377 CITATIONS    25 PUBLICATIONS   104 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Scientific Writing and Research Methods View project

Business Ecosystem Concept View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Helio Aisenberg Ferenhof on 26 May 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 DEMYSTIFYING THE LITERATURE REVIEW AS BASIS FOR SCIENTIFIC
WRITING: SSF METHOD

Helio Aisenberg Ferenhof, Dr.

Roberto Fabiano Fernandes, Dr.

Abstract: In order to demystify the literature review process, this research had two objectives, the first is to
extoll the literature review as the foundation for scientific writing, the second, to present a method that points
out a systematical way of make searches in the literature, which can aid in systematic and integrative reviews.
To do so, this work was founded on exploratory literature searchers on methods of literature review, resulting
in definitions of the literature revision types, as well as in the Systematic Search Flow (SSF) method
proposition. This method has been shown to be useful for both systematic reviews and systematic searches. The
conceptualization of review types was essential to demystify the process.

Keywords: Literature Review. SSF Method. Systematic Review. Integrative Review. Narrative Review.

1 INTRODUCTION

It is notorious that literature review is the basis for scientific writing. It is in the review
that the researcher becomes familiar with the works, identifies the authors who have been
writing about the problem researched. It is also essential when you do not have a research
problem formulated yet. According to Echer (2001) the literature review serves to recognize
the unity and the interpretative diversity existing in the thematic in which the problem under
study is inserted, to broaden, to branch the interpretative analysis, as well as to compose the
abstractions and syntheses that any research requires, collaborating for coherence in the
researcher's arguments.
There are some different ways to perform a literature review, such as narrative
(CORDEIRO et al., 2007), systematic(HIGGINS e SALLY, 2011) andintegrative (ERCOLE,
MELO, ALCOFORDA, 2014). Each of these has its peculiarities, related to the objective,
resources, form, among others. Numerous times, they go unnoticed by inattentive glances,
causing researchers/authors to make misunderstandings and flaws.
Aiming to assist researchers to avoid these misunderstandings, this paper presents its
first objective, in exposing and demystifying the concepts related to the types of literature
review. In addition to the misconceptions regarding literature review concepts, it is noticed
that there is a gap as to how to implement literature review.Some authors such as Levy and
Ellis (2006), Biolchini et al. (2007) andConforto, Amaral and Silva (2011), proposed models
to direct the way of the how-to implement. However, the models studied did not present
clearly, if they can help the researcher do both: systematic literature review and integrative
review. Therefore, the second objective is evidenced, in presenting a method to do systematic
literature searches, which can aid in systematic and integrative reviews.

2 TYPES OF LITERATURE REVIEW

550

The literature review is the basis for the identification of current scientific knowledge.
Based on it, it is possible to identify gaps to be explored, and also having a better
Página

comprehension of the study object/theme. However, there are several forms of revision:
narrative, systematic and integrative.
Revista ACB: Biblioteconomia em Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC: v. 21, n. 3, p. 550-563, ago./nov., 2016.
 Narrative revision is considered the traditional or exploratory revision, where there is
no definition of explicit criteria, and the selection of articles is made arbitrarily, not following
a systematic, where the author can include documents according to their bias, there is no
concern to exhaust the sources of information (CORDEIRO et al., 2007). The way in which
the documents are collected is commonly called exploratory search and can be used to
complement systematic searches.
On the other hand, the systematic review is a method of scientific investigation with a
rigorous and explicit process to identify, select, collect data, analyze and describe the relevant
contributions to research. It is a review done with planning and gathering original studies,
synthesizing the results of multiple primary investigations through strategies that limit bias
and random errors (COOK, MULROW e HAYNES, 1997; CORDEIRO et al., 2007).
It should be noted that the systematic review starts from/take basses on systematic
search(es), but the analysis of the documents returned has its peculiarities, being: there is a
need for two or more researchers; all must read all the articles and discuss which articles they
enter or not in the bibliographic portfolio, following, therefore, a research protocol (HIGGINS
e SALLY, 2011). In conclusion, it is a rigorous synthesis of all research related to a specific
question/question (ERCOLE, MELO, ALCOFORDA, 2014).
Finally, the integrative review is a method whose purpose is to gather and synthesize
research results on a delimited topic or issue, in a systematic and orderly and comprehensive
manner, contributing to the deepening of the knowledge of the subject under investigation
(ROMAN e FRIEDLANDER, 1998; ERCOLE, MELO, ALCOFORDA, 2014).
It should be highlighted that for all three forms of review presented. There is in
common the search activity. However, it is emphasized that it is carried out in a differentiated
way and, mainly, that the systematic review is different from systematic search.
The systematic search is a method of scientific investigation which aims to eliminate
biases using the planning and systematization of search (es) in a scientific database for
original studies, synthesizing the results in a bibliographic portfolio. It can be performed both
by the systematic review and the integrative review. Nevertheless, it is necessary to follow the
rules and procedures of each type of review.Also, strategies are established, which defines
criteria for inclusion and exclusion of data in a prior, transparent and objective way.When
used for integrative review, it can be done by only one researcher, when there are more than
one, the documents found can be divided between them, for reading and analysis, as long as it
is clearly described in the strategy (FERENHOF E FERNANDES, 2014).

3 ANALYSIS OF MODELS FOR LITERATURE REVIEW

There are in the literature some models that present the form of how to carry out the
process of a literature review. Some follow the bias of systematic review, others of an
integrative review. In the sequence, three models will be presented, coming from a narrative
review based on the study ofConforto, Amaral, and Silva (2011), which represent the process
of literature review, as well as the analysis of the advantages and disadvantages of each
551

model:
1) Levy and Ellis (2006) describe the systematic review as a process. The input is
composed of the preliminary processing information. In the processing, there is a
Página

set of steps that describe how the Systematic Literature Review (SLR) will be
conducted, that is, the SLR protocol. Which is a document that describes the
Revista ACB: Biblioteconomia em Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC: v. 21, n. 3, p. 550-563, ago./nov., 2016.
 process, tools, and techniques that will be used. Finally, there are the "outputs,"
where the results report and synthesis are presented.

Figure 1 - Systematic Review Phases proposed by Levy and Ellis

Source: Levy and Ellis (2006)

This model has as advantages:

a) Processing is detailed in six steps;
b) As knowledge about the subject increases, cycles are performed more efficiently
(CONFORTO, AMARAL and SILVA, 2011);
c) The cycle is repeated as many times as necessary until the bibliographic research
objectives are reached (CONFORTO, AMARAL and SILVA, 2011);
Disadvantages:
a) The detailed description of each step that composes the protocol is missing;
b) Does not mention its use in integrative review;

2) Biolchini et al. (2007),describe the process of conducting the systematic review

composed of the following phases: planning, execution and results analysis. The authors do
not emphasize the need to conduct the bibliographic review in iterative cycles (CONFORTO,
AMARAL and SILVA, 2011). In the planning phase, a protocol is developed based on the
review objectives. In it, there is a brief description of how the search should be performed,
presenting the central question of search, objectives, keywords, search strings, and the method
of execution. It is in the execution that the articles are identified, selected and evaluated
according to the protocol. Finally, the results analysis is executed, where the extraction and
compilation are made.
552
Página

Revista ACB: Biblioteconomia em Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC: v. 21, n. 3, p. 550-563, ago./nov., 2016.
Figure 2 - Systematic process for bibliographic review

Source: Biolchiniet al. (2007)

These model advantages are:
a) Definition of a protocol, which specifies the central research question, objectives
and keywords;
b) There is an evaluation point after the first and second phase. The results should
be evaluated and, if disapproved, must return to the execution phase.
Disadvantages:
a) The model does not make explicit the need of performing iterative cycles of
search, analysis, and comprehension. Neglecting the researcher's learning and
not reusing the knowledge acquired during document searches, reading and text
comprehension (CONFORTO, AMARAL E SILVA, 2011).
b) Does not mention its use in an integrative review.
3) Conforto, Amaral and Silva (2011) proposed a roadmap for conducting the
systematic review. This roadmap presents a process overview, consisting of three phases and
15 stages.
In the first phase, the input is defined the research problem, which is the starting point,
objectives, and the primary sources, which can be periodical articles or databases. The query
strings are also defined (data extraction process), which is composed of the keywords and
terms referring to the search. Next, the inclusion and qualification criteria are defined,
followed by the methods and tools and finally by the definition of a schedule for the execution
of the research. Figure 3 represents the Conforto, Amaral and Silva (2011) model.
553
Página

Revista ACB: Biblioteconomia em Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC: v. 21, n. 3, p. 550-563, ago./nov., 2016.
Figure 3 - General process for bibliographic review

Source: Conforto, Amaral and Silva (2011)

Regarding how to process it,Conforto, Amaral and Silva (2011) describe the execution
in more detail, representing it by an iterative process, as can be observed in Figure 4.

Figure 4 - Processing Phase Representation

Source: Conforto, Amaral and Silva (2011)

In the processing, it is emphasized that it is initiated by the search for the periodical in
an individual way, which demands the need to define an initial list of journals, which are
relevant to the researched topic. Filtering is performed up to the selected documents, which
can be archived in management software, which is indicated by the author being Mendeley®.
Finally, in the exit phase occurs the alerts creation of the leading journals identified,
the storage and sharing of references, the synthesis and results, and the reports are created.
554

Ending with theoretical models and hypotheses definition which is the final review outcome.
Advantages:
Página

a) There is a precise definition of how the processing steps are, also, presents
forms for data analysis;
Revista ACB: Biblioteconomia em Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC: v. 21, n. 3, p. 550-563, ago./nov., 2016.
 b) Filters Definition;
c) Alerts Definition;
Disadvantages:
a) Researcher bias regarding the periodicals chosen;
b) Definition of more than one question for the systematic review.It is a
misconception about the systematic review procedure,according toErcole,
Melo andAlcoforda (2014);
c) Does not detail the use of logical operators;
d) Definition of alerts limited to periodicals;
e) Does not mention its use in an integrative review;
According to the models' analysis presented here, it can be seen that the three models
made a macro description of how-to proceed a systematic literature review. However, none of
them mentions how-to deal with an integrative review, although it is understood that they are
possible to apply, depending on the suitability.
The gaps observed refer to the lack of detail, mainly, regarding the flow of how to
perform a search. This detailing couldassist in making the method agile and practical. These
needs can be met by joining the advantages and mitigating/eliminating the disadvantages of
each model.With this focus, this paper proposes a pragmatic model that presents in details
"how" the search for systematic and integrative reviews should be carried out. The proposed
model can be used: according to the type of revision chosen; by a single researcher, or by a
research group. Besides, it is emphasized suggestions of tools, techniques, and ways of using
scientific databases.
The following topic presents the Systematic Search Flow method, as a proposition
which meets the characteristics mentioned above.

4 SYSTEMATIC SEARCH FLOW (SSF) METHOD

It should be emphasized that this article authors not be deluded in saying that this is
the only method to do a literature review, as well as analyze the results. The questions,
inquiries, and requests for help from students, colleagues, researchers, and business partners
have been taken as an inspiration to provide a way to guide them in a possible path to
scientific research be more practical and agile.
The SSF Method – SystematicSearchFlow was developed based on the analysis of
several courses, articles, methods, frameworks, systematics and best practices that deal with
literature review and their result.However, the six principles of systematic review proposed
byJesson, Matheson and Lacey (2011), served as the foundation for structuring the SSF
method, being these: 1) Field mapping, through a scoping review; 2) Comprehensive
research; 3) Quality assessment, which comprises the reading and selection of the papers; 4)
Data Extraction, which refers to the collection and capture of relevant data in a pre-designed
555

worksheet; 5) Synthesis, which comprises synthesizing extracted data to show what is known
and provides the basis for establishing the unknown; 6) Write-up. The structuring can be seen
Página

in Table 1.

Revista ACB: Biblioteconomia em Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC: v. 21, n. 3, p. 550-563, ago./nov., 2016.
Table 1 SSF Method Structuring
SSF Method Structure Jesson; Matheson and Lacey (2011) Principles
Strategy Mapping the Field through a Scope Review
Database searching/ Database query Comprehensive search
Organize bibliographies, standardize the selection Quality assessment, which includes the reading and
of the documents selection of documents
Document portfolio composition, data Data extraction, which refers to the collection and
consolidation capture of relevant data in a pre-designed worksheet.
Synthesis, which comprises synthesizing extracted
Synthesis and Reporting data to show what is known and provides the basis
for establishing the unknown
Write Write-up
Source: Authors
At this point, it is worth to mention that the SSF method was developed aiming to
systematize the search process into a scientific database to guarantee repeatability and avoid
researcher bias. Thus, it serves for both, the systematic review and the integrative review. It
depends only on the strategy definition used.
TheSSFMethod comprises of 4 phases and 8 activities, as can be seen in figure 5.

Figure 5 - Systematic Search Flow Method Representation

SSF Systematic Search Flow

Research Protocol Analysis Synthesis Write
Search Database Documents Documents Selection Portfolio
Strategy Query Composition Data Consolidation Synthesize and build reports Write
Management And Standardization

Review

Source: Authors.

For a better understanding, in the following, each phase and their activities, are
detailed, as well the guidelines for implementation.

4.1 Research Protocol Definition - Phase 1

Phase 1 is devoted to the Research Protocol Definition, covering the elaboration of a

set of rules and parameters to configure the research process, determining the characteristics
according to research need.
556

This phase is composed of five activities: 1) Search strategy; 2) Database Query; 3)

Documents Management; 4) Documents selection standardization; and 5) Portfolio
Página

Composition, described below.

Activity 1 consists of the search strategy, encompassing a set of procedures that define

Revista ACB: Biblioteconomia em Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC: v. 21, n. 3, p. 550-563, ago./nov., 2016.
the mechanisms to research and retrieval information from the databases. Another strategy
important detail, which must be considered by the researcher, is the proper use of logical and
relational operators. They search to return more or less assertive results.
The main logical operators are:
 AND – (Logical AND) - returns only documents that contain both searched
terms. i.e.: (systematic) AND (bibliometrics).
 OR – (Logical OR) - returns documents which containoneof the two
expressions. i.e.: (systematic) OR (bibliometrics).
 NOT – (Logical Negation) - Returns the expression counter value.i.e.:
(systematic) NOT (bibliometrics) - It will return documents containing the term
systematic, which do not have bibliometrics on it.

It is emphasized at this point that logical operators should be typed capitalized

(uppercase). It was noted that in some scientific databases there is a difference between the
number of documents returned when it was entered in lowercase, the result is lower.
Regarding the relational operators, the main are:
 <Less than;
 >Greater than;
 <= Less than or equal to;
 >= Greater than or equal to;
 = Equal to;
 <>Not equal to;
 (!=) Not equal to;
 BETWEEN – Used to specify a range of values;
 LIKE – Used in the comparison of a model and to specify records in a
database. "Like" + expression % - means fetching all results with the same start
of expression;
 IN - Used to check if the search value is within a list. I.e.: value IN (1,2,3,4).

It is worth mentioning that the use of quotes (“”) makes the database interpreter treat
the term as being one, for instance, the search for “systematic review” is different from the
search for systematic AND review, which will occur if you type systematic review without
the quotation marks. The first will return documents that contain precisely the term
systematic review. On the other hand, the second search will return documents containing
both terms anywhere in the text, not necessarily the typical expression.
The use of special characters also can make the difference in the results and should be
thought and included in the search strategy. For instance, the use of the characters * and ?.
The asterisk (*)is used when the researcher intends to retrieve any document that
begins with a specific word and may have different endings.For example, the researcher has
an interest in documents that measure something. Therefore, instead of putting word
variations of measure using the logical operator OR (measure OR measurement OR
557

measuring), the researcher can use the unique asterisk character: measur*.
The question mark (?) Is used when is wanted to change only one character. For
Página

instance, the word organizations in English can be spelled with both "s" and "z", organisation
British and organization American. In this case, the researcher needs to place the word

Revista ACB: Biblioteconomia em Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC: v. 21, n. 3, p. 550-563, ago./nov., 2016.
organi?ation in the search query, which will consider both spellings.
Another relevant factor in establishing the search strategy is the definition of some
delimitations, associated to the search query, such as the delimitation of the type of document
(article, revision article), document language (English, Portuguese, Spanish).If the researcher
uses one of these filters, should be aware that the same filter must exist in all the databases
that are searching in.
Inactivity 2 – Database query - The researcher, using a computational interface,
following the strategy formulated, parameterizes the search query and executes it in the bases
previously selected.
For this activity, it is recommended that the researcher, if he does not know the
databases of the area to be searched, access CAPES portal (http://periodicos.capes.gov.br/),
which describe many scientific databases, to be able to understand and choose the databases
to be researched. It should be noted that each database has its peculiarity, concentration area,
and focus. The researcher should read the bases description and choose the most relevant to
their topic and research area.
Exemplifying activity 2, in the Scopus® database, enter the search query (1), time
range (2) and type of document (3), as can be seen in figure 6,

Figure 6 - Parameterization of a search

Source: authors.

It is recommended that for each database searched, the researcher activates

an alert for new publications referring to the search query used. This will make the
search update easier. Another important recommendation is to record the date the
research was done, as it should be mentioned in the manuscript. Different date,
different results. More documents can enter in the database.
In turn, activity 3 is designed to organize the bibliographies, separating each searches
result, through software that organizes bibliographies and references. It automates and
558

streamlines the process of searching, filtering, counting, storing, entering text as a citation and
as a bibliographic reference.May be used: EndNote®, Mendeley®, Zotero®, BookEnds®,
among others. The bibliographic organizer choice is the researcher and/or his research
Página

institution responsibility.
Activity 4 - Documents selection standardization - is the process applying the selected
Revista ACB: Biblioteconomia em Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC: v. 21, n. 3, p. 550-563, ago./nov., 2016.
filters. In this phase, the titles, abstracts, and keywords of each document are read, leading to
the selection of those that are aligned with the search theme. Other filters, such as language
and concentration area, can be applied as long as the pre-established strategy is aligned.
Finally, in activity 5 the article portfolio composition is carried out. This activity
involves full reading all documents, allowing to comprehend the subject researched,
collecting data storing into a spreadsheet. At this moment, another filter is executed, exclude
documents that do not demonstrate adherence to the subject under investigation. It usually has
some remaining documents that have the term in the keyword, or in the title, or in the abstract
that refers to the searched topic but is not aligned.

Figure 7 represents the activities3, 4 e 5 execution.

Figure 7 – Bibliographic portfolio using EndNote®

Source: authors.

Once the bibliographic portfolio was composed, the analysis phase starts.

4.2 Analysis – Phase 2

Phase 2 intended to consolidate the data (activity 6). In this phase, the data is
combined, such as articles, journals and most cited document, the year in which there were
more publications on the subject of research, studied constructs definition, weak and strong
points about the object of study, among others. It is recommended after the article portfolio is
created, the use of some computational tool (spreadsheet) that allows the data collected
combination and grouping.
It is at this stage that the researcher is enabled to interpret the data and has the
possibility to raise existing knowledge gaps and suggest guidelines for future research on the
subject of his interest (GANONG, 1987; MENDES; SILVEIRA; GALVÃO, 2008;
559

BOTELHO; CUNHA; MACEDO, 2011), as well as to obtain the bibliometric data.It is

indicated the use of an analysis and synthesis matrix, called knowledge matrix (FERENHOF
and FERNANDES, 2014).
Página

One of the analyzes considered pertinent by several authors is the bibliometric

analysis, which refers to the general research data, such as the number of publications found
Revista ACB: Biblioteconomia em Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC: v. 21, n. 3, p. 550-563, ago./nov., 2016.
in each database, the number of publications available for download and the total number of
publications that composed the portfolio of articles analyzed. Pilkington and Meredith (2009)
state that using bibliometrics, the researchers, canexamine the growth in citations over the
period, also the bibliography distribution in a specific field of knowledge. It can generate
many different perspectives represented in tables, graphics, and figures.
It should be noted that the graphics and figures can be beautiful visually, but what is
the value of these?In what they contribute to the manuscript purpose? What analysis was done
on these graphs, figures and tables originated from bibliometrics? The focus should be on
value. Bibliometrics by bibliometry, without purpose, should be avoided. However, when a
purpose and an analysis are describing the numbers, graphs, figures, and tables can add value
to the work. In this case yes, it should be used. In conclusion, the analyzes help to establish
relationships and significance between the search terms, systematically identifying a set of
factors relevant to the research.

4.3 Synthesis - Phase 3

In this penultimate phase, called Synthesis (activity 7), the lessons about the theme are
constructed and then condensed into reports. The data synthesis allows the generation of new
knowledge, based on the results presented by the previous researchers (MENDES;
SILVEIRA; GALVÃO, 2008; BENEFIELD, 2003; POLIT; BECK, 2006).
It is used as a base,the Knowledge Matrix, a tool developed by Ferenhof e Fernandes
(2014)which is intended to extract and organize the data coming from the documents analysis.
The matrix contains information on aspects related to the research topic, assisting in the
interpretation and construction of the essay and integrative review for researchers
(KLOPPER; LUBBE; RUGBEER, 2007; BOTELHO; CUNHA; MACEDO, 2011).

4.3.1 Knowledge Matrix

There is no standard model for developing a knowledge matrix, the combination of
data and analysis way is left to the creativity and interpretation of each researcher.It should
remember that the focus is the search problem/aim.
However, some points of observation are highlighted, being: Keywords; Year of
publication; Author; Journal; Database; Type of article (empirical, theoretical, theoretical and
empirical); References (articles to be read, referenced in this article); Construct Definition -
Whatever they are; Gaps; Positive/negative points; Quotations.
Figure 8 shows an example of a synthetic matrix with the combination of some data.
560
Página

Revista ACB: Biblioteconomia em Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC: v. 21, n. 3, p. 550-563, ago./nov., 2016.
Figure 8 – Knowledge Matrix Example

Source: authors.

4.4 Write - Phase 4

Phase 4 is intended to consolidate the results through scientific writing. To achieve
this aim, the literature review objective, as well as the analysis and synthesis result, should be
retrieved, through the matrix of knowledge and reports, to base the writing. The act of writing,
activity 8, should take into consideration beyond the research objective, the recipient,
meaning where the resulting work will be published. The researcher should investigate the
journal or event to which it will submit; verify if it is aligned with the study objective; comply
with the rules of submission; check the language style, passive or active voice; prepare all
documents for submission according to standards; create the article presentation letter to the
editor; remove any mention of authorship from the manuscript to ensure blind review. Finally,
ensure that the resulting document is following the language in which the document was
written grammar rules.

5 FINAL THOUGHTS

This work was originated to assist researchers to understand better the concepts related
to the types of literature review and support their choice of which type to use according to the
purpose of their research.
Also, is presented a method that contributes with a systematicalway for searching the
561

literature, which can aid in systematic and integrative reviews.

The SSF method assists researchers, teachers, undergraduate and postgraduate
students assist in the mapping of documents related to the researched topic, resulting in a
Página

bibliographic portfolio. Also, it provides the systematization of scientific knowledge, making

Revista ACB: Biblioteconomia em Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC: v. 21, n. 3, p. 550-563, ago./nov., 2016.
it possible to be replicated. Another factor that justifies the SSF method is based on its
ability to enable the analysis and synthesis of existing knowledge in the scientific
literature, allowing the obtainment of information that will enable the readers to
evaluate the procedures used in the elaboration of scientific production.

DESMISTIFICANDO A REVISÃO DE LITERATURA COMO BASE PARA

REDAÇÃO CIENTÍFICA: MÉTODO SSF

Resumo: Com intuito de desmistificar o processo de revisão de literatura, a pesquisa teve dois objetivos, o
primeiro é apresentar a revisão de literatura como o alicerce para a redação científica, o segundo, apresentar um
método que aponte uma forma de como fazer buscas de forma sistemática na literatura, que podem auxiliar em
revisões sistemáticas e integrativas. Para tanto tomou-se como base buscas exploratórias sobre métodos de
revisão de literatura, resultando na apresentação de definições dos tipos de revisão, bem como na proposição do
método SystematicSearchFlow (SSF). Este método demonstrou-se ser efetivo tanto para revisões, quanto buscas
sistemáticas. A conceituação dos tipos de revisão foiessencial para desmistificar o processo.

Palavras-chave: Revisão de Literatura. Método SSF. Revisão Sistemática. Revisão Integrativa. Revisão
Narrativa.

REFERENCES

BENEFIELD, L. E. Implementing evidence-based practice in home care. Home Healthcare

Nurse, Baltimore, v. 21, n. 12, p. 804-811, Dec. 2003.

BIOLCHINI, J. C. A. et al. Scientific research ontology to support systematic review in

software engineering. Advanced Engineering Informatics, v. 21, n. 2, p. 133-151, 2007.

BOTELHO, L. L. R.; CUNHA, C; MACEDO, M. O método da revisão integrativa nos

estudos organizacionais. Gestão e Sociedade. Belo Horizonte, Vol. 5, N. 11, P. 121-136
Maio/Ago., 2011.

CONFORTO, Edivandro Carlos; AMARAL, Daniel Capaldo; SILVA, SL DA. Roteiro para
revisão bibliográfica sistemática: aplicação no desenvolvimento de produtos e gerenciamento
de projetos. In: 8º Congresso Brasileiro de Gestão de Desenvolvimento de Produto. Anais do
8º CBGDP. 2011.

COOK, Deborah J.; MULROW, Cynthia D.; HAYNES, R. Brian. Systematic reviews:
synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Annals of internal medicine, v. 126, n. 5, p.
376-380, 1997.

CORDEIRO, Alexander Magno et al. Revisão sistemática: uma revisão narrativa. Rev. Col.
562

Bras. Cir, v. 34, n. 6, p. 428-431, 2007.

ECHER, Isabel Cristina. A revisão de literatura na construção do trabalho científico. Revista

Página

gaúcha de enfermagem. Porto Alegre. Vol. 22, n. 2 (jul. 2001), p. 5-20, 2001.

Revista ACB: Biblioteconomia em Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC: v. 21, n. 3, p. 550-563, ago./nov., 2016.
 ERCOLE, Flávia Falci; MELO, Laís Samara de; ALCOFORADO, Carla Lúcia Goulart
Constant. Revisão integrativa versus revisão sistemática. Revista Mineira de Enfermagem,
v. 18, n. 1, p. 9-12, 2014.

FERENHOF, H. A; FERNANDES, R.F,.Passos para construção da Revisão Sistemática e

Bibliometria. V. 3.02 Disponível em:
<https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261322764_Passo-a-
passo_para_construcao_da_Revisao_Sistematica_e_Bibliometria_Utilizando_a_ferramenta_E
ndnoteR> Acesso em: 11/07/2016. DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.1937.2401/1, Abril 2014.

GANONG, L. H. Integrative reviews of nursing research. Research in Nursing & Health,

Hoboken, v. 10, n. 1, p. 1-11, Mar. 1987.

HIGGINS, JULIAN; GREEN, SALLY (Ed.). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews
of interventions. V. 5.1.0 [Atualizado em Março 2011] The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.
Disponível em: www.handbook.cochrane.org.

JESSON, J.K., MATHESON, L. LACEY, F.M. (2011), Doing Your Literature Review:
traditional and systematic techniques, Sage, Los Angeles, LA.

KLOPPER, R.; LUBBE, S.; RUGBEER, H. The matrix method of literature review.
Alternation, Cape Town, v. 14, n. 1, p. 262-276, 2007.

LEVY, Yair; ELLIS, Timothy J. A systems approach to conduct an effective literature review
in support of information systems research. Informing Science: international journal of an
emerging transdiscipline, v. 9, n. 1, p. 181-212, 2006.

MENDES, K. D. S.; SILVEIRA, R. C. C. P.; GALVÃO, C.M. Revisão integrativa: método de

pesquisa para a incorporação de evidências na saúde e na enfermagem. Texto Contexto
Enfermagem, Florianópolis, v. 17, n. 4, p. 758-764, out/dez. 2008.

PILKINGTON, A; MEREDITH, J. The evolution of the intellectual structure of

operations management—1980–2006: A citation/co-citation analysis. Journal of Operations
Management, v. 27, n. 3, p. 185-202, 2009.

POLIT, D. F; BECK, C. T. Using research in evidence-based nursing practice. In: POLIT, D.

F.; BECK, C. T. (Ed.). Essentials of nursing research. Methods, appraisal and utilization.
Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2006.

ROMAN, Arlete Regina; FRIEDLANDER, Maria Romana. Revisão integrativa de pesquisa

aplicada à enfermagem. Cogitare Enfermagem, v. 3, n. 2, 1998.
563

SCOPUS. Disponível em: http://www.scopus.com Acesso em: 08Maio 2018.

Página

Revista ACB: Biblioteconomia em Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC: v. 21, n. 3, p. 550-563, ago./nov., 2016.

View publication stats