Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,334

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The benefits of publishing systematic quantitative literature reviews for PhD candidates and other early-career researchers

Open access
Pickering, Catherine, Byrne, Jason·2014·Higher Education Research & Development

Abstract

Universities increasingly expect students to publish during a PhD candidature because it benefits the candidate, supervisor, institution, and wider community. Here, we describe a method successfully used by early-career researchers including PhD candidates to undertake and publish literature reviews – a challenge for researchers new to a field. Our method allows researchers new to a field to systematically analyse existing academic literature to produce a structured quantitative summary of the field. This method is a more straightforward and systematic approach than the traditional ‘narrative method’ common to many student theses. When published, this type of review can also complement existing narrative reviews produced by experts in a field by quantitatively assessing the literature, including identifying research gaps. The method can also be used as the initial step for further analysis, including identifying suitable datasets for meta-analysis. Students report that the method is enabling and rewarding.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/07294360.2013.841651

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 3 references

Cited by

See all 1,334

Metadata

Authors
Pickering, C., & Byrne, J.
Venue
Higher Education Research & Development
Published
2013-11-11
Volume
33
Issue
3
Pages
534-548
ISSN
  • 0729-4360 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8366
OpenAlex
W2012820235
Cited by
1,334
References
3
FWCI
17.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The benefits of publishing systematic quantitative literature reviews for PhD candidates and other early-career researchers. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/07294360.2013.841651
The paper
Pickering, C., & Byrne, J. (2014). The benefits of publishing systematic quantitative literature reviews for PhD candidates and other early-career researchers. Higher Education Research & Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.841651

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.