systematic-review-protocol

name

systematic-review-protocol

description

A specialized skill providing PRISMA protocols and literature search strategies for systematic reviews. Used by the literature-searcher and critic-synthesizer agents when systematically searching, screening, and synthesizing academic literature. Automatically applied in contexts involving 'systematic review,' 'PRISMA,' 'literature search strategy,' 'inclusion/exclusion criteria,' or 'Boolean search.' Note: direct access to academic databases (Scopus, WoS) and meta-analysis statistical execution are outside the scope of this skill.

Systematic Review Protocol

A specialized skill that enhances the literature review capabilities of the literature-searcher and critic-synthesizer agents.

Target Agents

• literature-searcher — Search strategy, PRISMA flow diagram, inclusion/exclusion criteria
• critic-synthesizer — Critical appraisal, thematic synthesis, research gap identification

PRISMA 2020 Flow Diagram

Identification
├── Database search: n = [X]
├── Registry search: n = [Y]
└── Other sources: n = [Z]
         |
    After deduplication: n = [A]
         |
Screening
├── Title/Abstract screening: n = [A]
│   └── Excluded: n = [B] (classified by reason)
│
Eligibility
├── Full-text assessment: n = [C]
│   └── Excluded: n = [D]
│       ├── Reason 1: n = [d1]
│       ├── Reason 2: n = [d2]
│       └── Reason 3: n = [d3]
│
Included
└── Final included: n = [E]
    ├── Quantitative studies: n = [e1]
    └── Qualitative studies: n = [e2]

Search Strategy Design

PICO/PICo Framework

Quantitative Research (PICO):

Element	Definition	Example
P - Population	Target group	"University students," "Manufacturing workers"
I - Intervention	Intervention/exposure	"Flipped learning," "Remote work"
C - Comparison	Comparator	"Traditional lectures," "Office work"
O - Outcome	Outcome variable	"Academic achievement," "Productivity"

Qualitative Research (PICo):

Element	Definition
P - Population	Target group
I - Interest	Phenomenon of interest
Co - Context	Context/environment

Boolean Search Query Construction

("flipped learning" OR "flipped classroom" OR "inverted classroom")
AND
("motivation" OR "learning motivation" OR "academic motivation" OR "intrinsic motivation")
AND
("higher education" OR "university" OR "college" OR "undergraduate")

Search Query Design Principles

Principle	Method
Include synonyms	Connect with OR
Cross concepts	Connect with AND
Expanded search	Use truncation (): learn -> learning, learner, learned
Phrase search	Use quotation marks: "flipped classroom"
Limiters	Year, language, document type filters

Database-Specific Search Strategies

Database	Field	Characteristics
Google Scholar	General	Wide coverage, includes grey literature
PubMed	Medicine/Health	Leverage MeSH terms
Scopus	Multidisciplinary	Excellent citation analysis
Web of Science	Multidisciplinary	JCR Impact Factors
ERIC	Education	Education-specific thesaurus
IEEE Xplore	Engineering/IT	Includes conference papers
RISS	Korean Academic	Domestic papers/dissertations

Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria

### Inclusion Criteria

| Criterion | Details |
|-----------|---------|
| Publication period | 2015-2025 |
| Language | English, Korean |
| Study design | Experimental, quasi-experimental, survey |
| Population | University students |
| Intervention | Flipped learning application |
| Outcome variable | Includes learning motivation measurement |
| Publication type | Peer-reviewed journal |

### Exclusion Criteria

| Criterion | Details | Rationale |
|-----------|---------|-----------|
| Protocol only | No results | No data |
| Conference abstracts | Insufficient detail | Cannot verify methodology |
| K-12 population | Different context | Scope limitation |

Literature Quality Assessment Tools

Quantitative Study Quality Assessment (Simplified)

Criterion	High	Medium	Low
Sample size	Adequate (power analysis)	Moderate	Insufficient
Random assignment	Yes	Quasi-experimental	Non-experimental
Valid measurement tool	Validated instrument	Modified instrument	Self-developed
Statistical method appropriateness	Appropriate	Partially appropriate	Inappropriate
Attrition rate	< 10%	10-20%	> 20%

Qualitative Study Quality Assessment

Criterion	Guiding Question
Clarity of purpose	Is the research question clear?
Methodological appropriateness	Is the qualitative method suitable?
Research design	Is the design aligned with the purpose?
Data collection	Is the data sufficiently in-depth?
Analytical rigor	Is the analysis process transparent?
Researcher reflexivity	Has the researcher reflected on their influence?

Thematic Synthesis

3-Stage Synthesis Process

Stage 1: Coding (Line-by-line coding)
  -> Extract key findings from each study as codes

Stage 2: Descriptive Themes
  -> Group similar codes to form descriptive themes

Stage 3: Analytical Themes
  -> Derive interpretive insights that go beyond descriptive themes