PENERAPAN SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW (SLR): TAHAPAN DAN TEKNIK ANALISIS DATA DALAM PENELITIAN PENDIDIKAN

Khaerul Muttakin, Ahmad Riyadissolihin, Elfira Yunita Sapitri, Khalimatus Sa’diyah, Ninda Maharani

Sari

Perkembangan penggunaan Systematic Literature Review (SLR) dalam penelitian pendidikan menunjukkan peningkatan yang signifikan, namun masih ditemukan berbagai kesalahan dalam penerapan tahapan dan teknik analisis data sehingga diperlukan penguatan pemahaman metodologis bagi peneliti. Kajian ini bertujuan mendeskripsikan tahapan pelaksanaan serta teknik analisis data dalam Systematic Literature Review pada penelitian pendidikan. Penelitian menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif dengan jenis penelitian kepustakaan melalui kajian metodologis. Data diperoleh dari berbagai literatur ilmiah berupa artikel jurnal, buku metodologi penelitian, dan dokumen akademik yang relevan dengan implementasi SLR. Pengumpulan data dilakukan melalui penelusuran literatur pada basis data akademik, seperti Google Scholar dan Scopus. Analisis data dilakukan secara deskriptif melalui reduksi data, kategorisasi, interpretasi, dan penarikan kesimpulan. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahwa pelaksanaan SLR dilakukan melalui tahapan identifikasi topik, penelusuran literatur, seleksi artikel, ekstraksi data, analisis data, dan penyusunan sintesis kajian secara sistematis. Selain itu, penelitian ini mengidentifikasi karakteristik, fungsi, serta rekomendasi penggunaan content analysis, thematic analysis, narrative synthesis, dan meta-analysis sesuai tujuan dan jenis data penelitian. Kajian ini memberikan kontribusi konseptual dalam memperkuat kerangka metodologis dalam menerapkan SLR sehingga dapat menjadi referensi bagi peneliti dalam melaksanakan kajian literatur secara lebih sistematis, transparan, dan akademis.

Kata Kunci

Kajian metodologis, Systematic Literature Review, Tahapan SLR, Teknik analisis data

Referensi

Aguinis, H., Ramani, R. S., & Alabduljader, N. (2023). Best-Practice Recommendations for Producers, Evaluators, and Users of Methodological Literature Reviews. Organizational Research Methods, 26(1), 46–76. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120943281

Almusaed, A., Almssad, A., & Yitmen, I. (2025). Writing the Literature Review. In Practice of Research Methodology in Civil Engineering and Architecture (pp. 723–752). Springer Nature Switzerland. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-97393-2_21

Azarian, M., Yu, H., Shiferaw, A. T., & Stevik, T. K. (2023). Do We Perform Systematic Literature Review Right? A Scientific Mapping and Methodological Assessment. Logistics, 7(4), 89. https://doi.org/10.3390/logistics7040089

Basu, R., Paul, J., & Singh, K. (2022). Visual merchandising and store atmospherics: An integrated review and future research directions. Journal of Business Research, 151, 397–408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.07.019

Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T., & Rothstein, H. R. (2021). Introduction to Meta-Analysis. John wiley & sons.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in (reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2024). Supporting best practice in reflexive thematic analysis reporting in Palliative Medicine : A review of published research and introduction to the Reflexive Thematic Analysis Reporting Guidelines (RTARG). Palliative Medicine, 38(6), 608–616. https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163241234800

Campbell, M., Katikireddi, S. V., Sowden, A., & Thomson, H. (2019). Lack of transparency in reporting narrative synthesis of quantitative data: a methodological assessment of systematic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 105, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2018.08.019

Campbell, M., McKenzie, J. E., Sowden, A., Katikireddi, S. V., Brennan, S. E., Ellis, S., Hartmann-Boyce, J., Ryan, R., Shepperd, S., Thomas, J., Welch, V., & Thomson, H. (2020). Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: reporting guideline. BMJ, l6890. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.l6890

Chen, D.-T. “Victor,” Wang, Y.-M., & Lee, W. C. (2016). Challenges confronting beginning researchers in conducting literature reviews. Studies in Continuing Education, 38(1), 47–60. https://doi.org/10.1080/0158037X.2015.1030335

Chigbu, U. E., Atiku, S. O., & Du Plessis, C. C. (2023). The Science of Literature Reviews: Searching, Identifying, Selecting, and Synthesising. Publications, 11(1), 2. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications11010002

Chong, S. W., Lin, T. J., & Chen, Y. (2022). A methodological review of systematic literature reviews in higher education: Heterogeneity and homogeneity. Educational Research Review, 35, 100426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2021.100426

Cooper, H. (2017). Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis: A Step-by-Step Approach. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071878644

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. SAGE Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506326139

Delgado-Chaves, F. M., Jennings, M. J., Atalaia, A., Wolff, J., Horvath, R., Mamdouh, Z. M., Baumbach, J., & Baumbach, L. (2025). Transforming literature screening: The emerging role of large language models in systematic reviews. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 122(2), e2411962122. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2411962122

Dixon-Woods, M. (2011). Using framework-based synthesis for conducting reviews of qualitative studies. BMC Medicine, 9(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-9-39

Dixon-Woods, M., Agarwal, S., Jones, D., Young, B., & Sutton, A. (2005). Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: A review of possible methods. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, 10(1), 45–53. https://doi.org/10.1177/135581960501000110

Dong, J. (2023). How does a research topic evolve into a research field? — a bibliometric analysis of metadiscourse research. Ibérica, 45, 163–189. https://doi.org/10.17398/2340-2784.45.163

Farrukh, A., & Sajjad, A. (2023). A Critical Review of Literature Review Methodologies. In Advancing Methodologies of Conducting Literature Review in Management Domain (pp. 103–123). https://doi.org/10.1108/S2754-586520230000002006

Flemming, K., & Noyes, J. (2021). Qualitative Evidence Synthesis: Where Are We at? International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 20. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406921993276

Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta‐analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods, 11(2), 181–217. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378

Haddaway, N. R., Bethel, A., Dicks, L. V., Koricheva, J., Macura, B., Petrokofsky, G., Pullin, A. S., Savilaakso, S., & Stewart, G. B. (2020). Eight problems with literature reviews and how to fix them. Nature Ecology & Evolution, 4(12), 1582–1589. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-020-01295-x

Heck, T., Keller, C., & Rittberger, M. (2024). Coverage and similarity of bibliographic databases to find most relevant literature for systematic reviews in education. International Journal on Digital Libraries, 25(2), 365–376. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00799-023-00364-3

Hernandez, A. V., Marti, K. M., & Roman, Y. M. (2020). Meta-Analysis. Chest, 158(1), S97–S102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chest.2020.03.003

Islam, M. S., Al Mamun, M., & Hoque, I. (2025). A guide to literature reviews: a comprehensive flowchart beyond PRISMA for sample selection and justifications. Management Review Quarterly, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-025-00528-2

Khan, K. S., Bueno-Cavanillas, A., & Zamora, J. (2022). Revisiones sistemáticas en cinco pasos: II. Cómo identificar los estudios relevantes. Medicina de Familia. SEMERGEN, 48(6), 431–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.semerg.2021.12.006

Klarin, A. (2024). How to conduct a bibliometric content analysis: Guidelines and contributions of content co‐occurrence or co‐word literature reviews. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 48(2), e13031. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.13031

Klaser, K., Casari, P., & Cuel, R. (2024). Are second-level literature reviews reliable? An assessment through bibliometric and network analysis. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4755616/v1

Kleinheksel, A. J., Rockich-Winston, N., Tawfik, H., & Wyatt, T. R. (2020). Demystifying Content Analysis. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 84(1), 7113. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe7113

Kozleski, E. B. (2017). The Uses of Qualitative Research. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 42(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10.1177/1540796916683710

Kraus, S., Breier, M., Lim, W. M., Dabić, M., Kumar, S., Kanbach, D., Mukherjee, D., Corvello, V., Piñeiro-Chousa, J., Liguori, E., Palacios-Marqués, D., Schiavone, F., Ferraris, A., Fernandes, C., & Ferreira, J. J. (2022). Literature reviews as independent studies: guidelines for academic practice. Review of Managerial Science, 16(8), 2577–2595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-022-00588-8

Kushnir, I. (2025). Thematic analysis in the area of education: a practical guide. Cogent Education, 12(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2471645

Lame, G. (2019). Systematic Literature Reviews: An Introduction. Proceedings of the Design Society: International Conference on Engineering Design, 1(1), 1633–1642. https://doi.org/10.1017/dsi.2019.169

Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., & Ali, F. (2022). Advancing knowledge through literature reviews: ‘what’, ‘why’, and ‘how to contribute.’ The Service Industries Journal, 42(7–8), 481–513. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2022.2047941

Linnenluecke, M. K., Marrone, M., & Singh, A. K. (2020). Conducting systematic literature reviews and bibliometric analyses. Australian Journal of Management, 45(2), 175–194. https://doi.org/10.1177/0312896219877678

Martinez, E. C., Flores Valdés, J. R., Castillo, J. L., Castillo, J. V, Blanco Montecino, R. M., Morin Jimenez, J. E., Arriaga Escamilla, D., & Diarte, E. (2023). Ten Steps to Conduct a Systematic Review. Cureus, 15(12), e51422. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.51422

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, 27(1), 81–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12381

Mengist, W., Soromessa, T., & Legese, G. (2020). Method for conducting systematic literature review and meta-analysis for environmental science research. MethodsX, 7, 100777. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2019.100777

Migliavaca, C. B., Stein, C., Colpani, V., Barker, T. H., Ziegelmann, P. K., Munn, Z., & Falavigna, M. (2022). Meta‐analysis of prevalence: I2 statistic and how to deal with heterogeneity. Research Synthesis Methods, 13(3), 363–367. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1547

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis. SAGE Publications.

Mishra, V., & Mishra, M. P. (2023). PRISMA for Review of Management Literature – Method, Merits, and Limitations – An Academic Review. In Advancing Methodologies of Conducting Literature Review in Management Domain (pp. 125–136). https://doi.org/10.1108/S2754-586520230000002007

Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x

Muttakin, K., Nisa’, A. S., & Wahid, I. D. (2026). A Comparative Systematic Review of KTSP, K13, and Merdeka Curricula in Developing Arabic Language Competence at The Middle School Level. Abjadia : International Journal of Education, 11(1), 24–41. https://doi.org/10.18860/abj.v11i1.39468

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., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, n71. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71

Paré, G., & Kitsiou, S. (2017). Methods for Literature Reviews. In Handbook of eHealth evaluation: An evidence-based approach [Internet]. University of Victoria.

Paul, J. (2025). Crafting Impactful Systematic Literature Reviews: Thumb Rules and Suggestions. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 49(5), e70103. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcs.70103

Paul, J., & Barari, M. (2022). Meta‐analysis and traditional systematic literature reviews—What, why, when, where, and how? Psychology & Marketing, 39(6), 1099–1115. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.21657

Paul, J., Khatri, P., & Kaur Duggal, H. (2024). Frameworks for developing impactful systematic literature reviews and theory building: What, Why and How? Journal of Decision Systems, 33(4), 537–550. https://doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2023.2197700

Pautasso, M. (2019). The Structure and Conduct of a Narrative Literature Review. In A Guide to the Scientific Career (pp. 299–310). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118907283.ch31

Popay, J., Roberts, H., Sowden, A., Petticrew, M., Arai, L., Rodgers, M., Britten, N., & Duffy, K. R. and S. (2006). Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews [Lancaster University]. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.1018.4643

Popenoe, R., Langius-Eklöf, A., Stenwall, E., & Jervaeus, A. (2021). A practical guide to data analysis in general literature reviews. Nordic Journal of Nursing Research, 41(4), 175–186. https://doi.org/10.1177/2057158521991949

Rammal, H. G. (2023). Systematic Literature Reviews: Steps and Practical Tips. In Advancing Methodologies of Conducting Literature Review in Management Domain (pp. 27–35). https://doi.org/10.1108/S2754-586520230000002002

Roberts, T., & Oosterom, M. (2025). Digital Authoritarianism: a Systematic Literature Review. Information Technology for Development, 31(4), 860–884. https://doi.org/10.1080/02681102.2024.2425352

Rouhani, S., Bozorgi, S. A., Amoozad Mahdiraji, H., & Vrontis, D. (2026). Text analytics and new service development: a hybrid thematic analysis with systematic literature review approach. EuroMed Journal of Business, 21(1), 193–233. https://doi.org/10.1108/EMJB-01-2024-0017

Sauer, P. C., & Seuring, S. (2023). How to conduct systematic literature reviews in management research: a guide in 6 steps and 14 decisions. Review of Managerial Science, 17(5), 1899–1933. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-023-00668-3

Schick-Makaroff, K., MacDonald, M., Plummer, M., Burgess, J., & Neander, W. (2016). What Synthesis Methodology Should I Use? A Review and Analysis of Approaches to Research Synthesis. AIMS Public Health, 3(1), 172–215. https://doi.org/10.3934/publichealth.2016.1.172

Shaffril, H. A. M., Samsuddin, S. F., & Abu Samah, A. (2021). The ABC of systematic literature review: the basic methodological guidance for beginners. Quality & Quantity, 55(4), 1319–1346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-020-01059-6

Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039

Stransky, J., Ritz, C., Miskioğlu, E., Bodnar, C., & Dringenberg, E. (2026). Steps for designing research to compare how one believes they will behave to how they behave. European Journal of Engineering Education, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1080/03043797.2026.2636944

Toronto, C. E., & Remington, R. (2020). A Step-by-Step Guide to Conducting an Integrative Review. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37504-1

Tugwell, P., & Tovey, D. (2021). PRISMA 2020. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 134, A5–A6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.04.008

Urquhart, C., Cheuk, B., Lam, L., & Snowden, D. (2025). Sense‐making, sensemaking and sense making—A systematic review and meta‐synthesis of literature in information science and education: An Annual Review of Information Science and Technology (ARIST) paper. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 76(1), 3–97. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24866

van Dinter, R., Tekinerdogan, B., & Catal, C. (2021). Automation of systematic literature reviews: A systematic literature review. Information and Software Technology, 136, 106589. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infsof.2021.106589

van Riel, A., & Snyder, H. (2024). Enhancing the impact of literature reviews: guidelines for making meaningful contributions. Spanish Journal of Marketing - ESIC, 28(3), 250–265. https://doi.org/10.1108/SJME-05-2024-0125

Varsha, P. S., Chakraborty, A., & Kar, A. K. (2024). How to Undertake an Impactful Literature Review: Understanding Review Approaches and Guidelines for High-impact Systematic Literature Reviews. South Asian Journal of Business and Management Cases, 13(1), 18–35. https://doi.org/10.1177/22779779241227654

Vriezen, R., Sargeant, J. M., Vriezen, E., Winder, C. B., & O’Connor, A. M. (2019). Quality assessment of systematic reviews and meta-analyses that examine preventive antibiotic uses and management practices designed to prevent disease in livestock. Animal Health Research Reviews, 20(2), 305–318. https://doi.org/10.1017/S146625231900029X

Waffenschmidt, S., Knelangen, M., Sieben, W., Bühn, S., & Pieper, D. (2019). Single screening versus conventional double screening for study selection in systematic reviews: a methodological systematic review. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 19(1), 132. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-019-0782-0

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.25157/j-kip.v7i3.24160

Refbacks

  • Saat ini tidak ada refbacks.