How to Write a Systematic Literature Review for Dissertations, Essays and Assignments: Protocols and Examples

January 23, 2026 Chris

A systematic literature review (SLR) is a structured, transparent, and reproducible method for identifying, appraising and synthesising all relevant evidence on a focused question. For dissertations, essays and assignments, an SLR strengthens credibility, reduces bias and produces a defensible evidence base. This guide gives a practical protocol, templates and examples you can adapt.

Why choose a systematic literature review?

Rigour: pre-defined methods reduce selection bias.
Reproducibility: others can follow and verify your steps.
Transparency: documented decisions and flowcharts (e.g., PRISMA) support assessment.
Use cases: dissertations, standalone essays, coursework literature reviews, and capstone projects.

Quick overview: Standard SLR protocol (steps)

Define the review question (PICO/PEO or equivalent).
Develop and register a protocol (aims, methods, timelines).
Design comprehensive search strategy.
Screen records (title/abstract, full text) with inclusion/exclusion criteria.
Extract data with a standard template.
Appraise study quality / risk of bias.
Synthesize results (quantitative meta-analysis or qualitative synthesis).
Report using PRISMA guidelines and document limitations.

Tip: Register your protocol on PROSPERO when applicable to increase transparency.

1. Define a focused review question

Use frameworks:

PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcome) — for interventions.
PEO (Population, Exposure, Outcome) — for observational questions.
SPIDER — for qualitative evidence.

Example question:

“What are the effects of mobile learning interventions on undergraduate student engagement in South Africa (2010–2024)?”

2. Protocol: what to include

A clear protocol saves time and avoids bias. Include:

Background and objectives
Eligibility criteria (population, study designs, outcomes, date/language limits)
Search strategy (databases, grey literature sources)
Screening and selection process (number of reviewers, conflict resolution)
Data extraction fields and pilot procedures
Quality appraisal tools (e.g., CASP, Cochrane Risk of Bias)
Synthesis approach (meta-analysis, thematic synthesis, narrative)
Timeline and dissemination plan

Example protocol outline:

Title, review question, rationale
Methods: search, selection, extraction, appraisal, synthesis
Appendices: sample search strings, data extraction form, PRISMA flow template

3. Search strategy: construct and document

Use keywords + controlled vocabulary (MeSH, Emtree).
Combine terms with Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT).
Document databases searched, dates, and full search strings.

Sample search string (education example):
("mobile learning" OR m-learning OR "mobile device*") AND ("student engagement" OR "academic engagement") AND (undergraduate OR "higher education")

Record results in a spreadsheet and export to reference management software (Zotero, EndNote, Mendeley).

4. Screening and study selection

Two reviewers independently screen titles/abstracts, then full texts.
Use a screening tool (Rayyan, Covidence).
Resolve disagreements via consensus or a third reviewer.
Report numbers with a PRISMA flow diagram.

Example PRISMA stage counts (illustrative):

Records identified: 1,560
After duplicates removed: 1,320
Screened: 1,320
Full-text assessed: 120
Included: 24

5. Data extraction: standardise fields

Create a reproducible extraction form. Example table:

Study ID	Country	Design	Sample	Intervention / Exposure	Outcomes Measured	Key Findings	Quality Rating
Smith et al. (2019)	SA	RCT	n=120	Mobile app quizzes	Engagement, grades	↑ engagement, small grade increase	High

Piloting the form on 2–3 studies helps refine items.

6. Quality appraisal and risk of bias

Use appropriate tools: CASP (qualitative), Cochrane RoB (RCTs), ROBINS-I (non-randomised), AMSTAR (systematic reviews).
Report assessments and consider sensitivity analysis—exclude low-quality studies to test robustness.

7. Synthesis: quantitative and qualitative options

Meta-analysis: pool effect sizes when studies are sufficiently homogenous. Report heterogeneity (I²).
Thematic / narrative synthesis: group findings, code themes, develop conceptual models.
Mixed-methods synthesis: integrate quantitative and qualitative evidence.

Example thematic synthesis steps:

Code results text line-by-line.
Group codes into descriptive themes.
Generate analytical themes that answer your question.

For techniques and conceptual diagrams see: Using Conceptual Model Diagrams to Strengthen Your Dissertation, Essay and Assignment Literature Review.

8. Reporting: structure and transparency

Follow PRISMA for reporting:

Title/abstract: indicate systematic review.
Methods: detailed search, selection, extraction and appraisal processes.
Results: PRISMA flowchart, characteristics table, synthesis.
Discussion: strengths, limitations, implications, and research gaps.

Compare review types:

Feature	Systematic Review	Traditional Narrative Review
Search transparency	High	Often limited
Reproducibility	High	Low
Risk of bias control	Explicit	Variable
Best for	Focused questions	Broad overviews

Common pitfalls and practical tips

Pitfall: overly broad question → fix by narrowing population/outcome/timeframe.
Pitfall: poor documentation → save all search histories and decisions.
Tip: keep a living spreadsheet of included/excluded studies with reasons.
Tip: use multiple databases and include grey literature to reduce publication bias.
Tip: pilot screening to align reviewers’ decisions.

Example mini-protocol (quick template)

Title: Effects of X on Y (2010–2024)
Question: PICO/PEO statement
Databases: Scopus, Web of Science, ERIC, PubMed; Google Scholar for grey literature
Inclusion: English; primary studies; undergrad populations
Exclusion: case reports; conference abstracts without data
Screening: two reviewers, Rayyan
Extraction fields: see table above
Appraisal: CASP / Cochrane RoB
Synthesis: random-effects meta-analysis OR thematic synthesis

For more on building frameworks, see: Building a Conceptual Framework for Your Dissertation, Essay or Assignment: Stepwise Approach.

Contact us

If you need help with writing, structuring, or proofreading your systematic literature review for a dissertation, essay or assignment, contact us:

Click the WhatsApp icon on the page to message us directly
Email: info@mzansiwriters.co.za
Or use the Contact Us page accessed via the main menu on MzansiWriters

We offer protocol drafting, search strategy support, data extraction templates, synthesis coaching and full writing/proofreading services.

Good luck — a clear protocol is half the review done.

Mzansi Writers