The DOI matches its Crossref record; 78 of the 78 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Guidelines for Bibliometric‐Systematic Literature Reviews: 10 steps to combine analysis, synthesis and theory development
Open accessAbstract
The steady increase in academic production has been paralleled by a surge in the number of bibliometric and systematic literature reviews (SLRs) published. Over the years, scholars began to combine bibliometric analyses with SLRs. However, such combined approaches relied on fragmented methodological suggestions without clear guiding frameworks. This article introduces integrated guidelines for undertaking multi‐method literature reviews, combining bibliometric analyses with SLRs and theory development, which we call ‘Bibliometric‐Systematic Literature Review’ (B‐SLR). In doing so, we develop a 10‐step process on how to apply the B‐SLR. In each of the proposed steps, we discuss critical decisions and best practices to support researchers while crafting meaningful and theoretically relevant literature reviews. The B‐SLR is intended as a flexible toolbox designed to accommodate diverse research objectives in the miner–prospector continuum, spanning from reviewing, theorising, tracing future roadmaps or creating bridges among different topics. The B‐SLR incorporates the pillars of critical analysis, timeliness, coverage, rigour, coherence and originality of contribution, also emphasising the need for a novel and relevant theoretical contribution. The B‐SLR is supported by a companion website, providing additional resources to assist researchers in this 10‐step process: https://www.b‐slr.org.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews
Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2021) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.n71 · Cited by 108,283
Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping
van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010) · Scientometrics · doi:10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3 · Cited by 21,484
Basics of Qualitative Research
Ozanne, J. L., Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1992) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.2307/3172751 · Cited by 17,850
bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis
Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017) · Journal of Informetrics · doi:10.1016/j.joi.2017.08.007 · Cited by 16,064 · cited 2×
“We acknowledge that researchers have been provided with different software to perform bibliometric analyses, such as Bibliometrix (Aria & Cuccurullo, 2017), CitNetEx-plorer (van Eck & Waltman, 2014), CiteSpace (Chen, 2006), VisualBib (Dattolo & Corbatto, 2019) and VOSviewer (van Eck & Waltman,…”
Content Analysis: An Introduction to Its Methodology
Krippendorff, K. (2019) · doi:10.4135/9781071878781 · Cited by 15,448
Tranfield, D., Denyer, D., & Smart, P. (2003) · British Journal of Management · doi:10.1111/1467-8551.00375 · Cited by 15,386
How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines
Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021) · Journal of Business Research · doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070 · Cited by 14,329
Page, M. J., Moher, D., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E. A., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2021) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.n160 · Cited by 13,262 · cited 1×
“Researchers are encouraged to visually represent their search and selection process using a flow diagram, as illustrated by Page et al. (2021b, p. 19).”
Shea, B. J., Reeves, B. C., Wells, G., Thuku, M., Hamel, C., Moran, J., Moher, D., Tugwell, P., Welch, V., Kristjansson, E., et al. (2017) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.j4008 · Cited by 10,636 · cited 7×
“First, the researchers start by performing an initial literature scan, functional to identify a research gap, subsequently refined in a specific research question (Page et al., 2021a; Shea et al., 2017).”
InfluentialChen, C. (2006) · Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology · doi:10.1002/asi.20317 · Cited by 6,433
Cited by
Mustafa, F., Smolarski, J., & Elamer, A. A. (2025) · Business Strategy and the Environment · doi:10.1002/bse.70090 · Cited by 51
Vlachos, I., & Graham, G. (2025) · International Journal of Production Research · doi:10.1080/00207543.2025.2553824 · Cited by 12
Younes, R. S., Ziade, C., Moukarzel, C., & Abboud Mzawak, M. (2026) · Social Sciences · doi:10.3390/socsci15080497 · Cited by 1
Lai, H., & Li, Y. (2026) · Telematics and Informatics · doi:10.1016/j.tele.2026.102447
Metadata
- Authors
- Marzi, G., Balzano, M., Caputo, A., & Pellegrini, M. M.
- Venue
- International Journal of Management Reviews
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2024-10-07
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 81-103
- ISSN
- 1460-8545 (ISSN-L)
- 1468-2370
- OpenAlex
- W4403236901
- Cited by
- 577
- References
- 78
- FWCI
- 79.16
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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: Guidelines for Bibliometric‐Systematic Literature Reviews: 10 steps to combine analysis, synthesis and theory development. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/ijmr.12381
- The paper
- Marzi, G., Balzano, M., Caputo, A., & Pellegrini, M. M. (2025). Guidelines for Bibliometric‐Systematic Literature Reviews: 10 steps to combine analysis, synthesis and theory development. International Journal of Management Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12381
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.
