Explore the vast range of titles available.

\"Celebrating the 20th Anniversary of the NYRB Classics series, a collection of twenty favorite selections. In Greek mythology, Ariadne gave Theseus a ball of red thread to guide him through the labyrinth, and the Red Thread offers a path through and a way to explore the ins and outs and twists and turns of the celebrated NYRB Classics series, now twenty years old. The NYRB Classics series is known for translating great books from throughout the ages and all over the world; for rediscovering neglected geniuses such as Eve Babitz, Sylvia Townsend Warner, and John Williams; and for its wide-ranging eclecticism. The series ranges across time and space and through multiple literary genres, from the novel and the short story to memoirs, diaries, essays personal and impersonal, works of history, philosophy, and criticism, poems and polemics and how-to books. This selection of stories, chapters, essays, poems, reflections, remembrances and sundry other literary illuminations has been made by the founder and editor of the series, Edwin Frank, to suggest something of its unique range and encapsulate the idea that writing that is truly alive may turn up anywhere\"-- Provided by publisher.

Systematic literature reviews are an increasingly used review methodology to synthesize the existing body of literature in a field. However, editors complain about a high number of desk rejections because of a lack in quality. Poorly developed review articles are not published because of a perceived lack of contribution to the field. Our article supports authors of standalone papers and graduate students in the Entrepreneurship domain to write contribution-focused systematic reviews e.g. by providing a concrete guideline. Our article analyzes the strengths and weaknesses of a systematic literature review and how they can be overcome. Furthermore, we provide a combined list of highly ranked journals in the Entrepreneurship domain as a basis for quality appraisal. Finally, this article builds a scenario for the future of the systematic literature review methodology and shows how technological improvements have changed this methodology and what can be achieved in the future.

General guidelines for conducting literature reviews often do not address the question of literature searches and dealing with a potentially large number of identified sources. These issues are specifically addressed by so-called systematic literature reviews (SLRs) that propose a strict protocol for the search and appraisal of literature. Moreover, SLRs are claimed to be a ‘standardized method’ for literature reviews that is replicable, transparent, objective, unbiased and rigorous, and thus superior to other approaches for conducting literature reviews. These are significant and consequential claims that – despite increasing adoption of SLRs – remained largely unnoticed in the information systems (IS) literature. The objective of this debate is to draw attention of the IS community to SLR's claims, to question their justification and reveal potential risks of their adoption. This is achieved by first examining the origins of SLR and the prescribed SLR process and then by critically assessing their claims and implications. In this debate, we show that SLRs are applicable and useful for a very specific kind of literature review, a meta study that identifies and summarizes evidence from earlier research. We also demonstrate that the claims that SLRs provide superior quality are not justified. More importantly, we argue that SLR as a general approach to conducting literature reviews is highly questionable, concealing significant perils. The paper cautions that SLR could undermine critical engagement with literature and what it means to be scholarly in academic work.

Systematic literature reviews (SLRs) have become a standard tool in many fields of management research but are often considerably less stringently presented than other pieces of research. The resulting lack of replicability of the research and conclusions has spurred a vital debate on the SLR process, but related guidance is scattered across a number of core references and is overly centered on the design and conduct of the SLR, while failing to guide researchers in crafting and presenting their findings in an impactful way. This paper offers an integrative review of the widely applied and most recent SLR guidelines in the management domain. The paper adopts a well-established six-step SLR process and refines it by sub-dividing the steps into 14 distinct decisions: (1) from the research question, via (2) characteristics of the primary studies, (3) to retrieving a sample of relevant literature, which is then (4) selected and (5) synthesized so that, finally (6), the results can be reported. Guided by these steps and decisions, prior SLR guidelines are critically reviewed, gaps are identified, and a synthesis is offered. This synthesis elaborates mainly on the gaps while pointing the reader toward the available guidelines. The paper thereby avoids reproducing existing guidance but critically enriches it. The 6 steps and 14 decisions provide methodological, theoretical, and practical guidelines along the SLR process, exemplifying them via best-practice examples and revealing their temporal sequence and main interrelations. The paper guides researchers in the process of designing, executing, and publishing a theory-based and impact-oriented SLR.

Customer experience is a key marketing concept, yet the growing number of studies focused on this topic has led to considerable fragmentation and theoretical confusion. To move the field forward, this article develops a set of fundamental premises that reconcile contradictions in research on customer experience and provide integrative guideposts for future research. A systematic review of 136 articles identifies eight literature fields that address customer experience. The article then compares the phenomena and metatheoretical assumptions prevalent in each field to establish a dual classification of research traditions that study customer experience as responses to either (1) managerial stimuli or (2) consumption processes. By analyzing the compatibility of these research traditions through a metatheoretical lens, this investigation derives four fundamental premises of customer experience that are generalizable across settings and contexts. These premises advance the conceptual development of customer experience by defining its core conceptual domain and providing guidelines for further research.

This paper presents a comprehensive review of the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Systematic Literature Reviews (SLRs). A SLR is a rigorous and organised methodology that assesses and integrates prior research on a given topic. Numerous tools have been developed to assist and partially automate the SLR process. The increasing role of AI in this field shows great potential in providing more effective support for researchers, moving towards the semi-automatic creation of literature reviews. Our study focuses on how AI techniques are applied in the semi-automation of SLRs, specifically in the screening and extraction phases. We examine 21 leading SLR tools using a framework that combines 23 traditional features with 11 AI features. We also analyse 11 recent tools that leverage large language models for searching the literature and assisting academic writing. Finally, the paper discusses current trends in the field, outlines key research challenges, and suggests directions for future research. We highlight three primary research challenges: integrating advanced AI solutions, such as large language models and knowledge graphs, improving usability, and developing a standardised evaluation framework. We also propose best practices to ensure more robust evaluations in terms of performance, usability, and transparency. Overall, this review offers a detailed overview of AI-enhanced SLR tools for researchers and practitioners, providing a foundation for the development of next-generation AI solutions in this field.

The “standing on the shoulders of giants” metaphor is often used to acknowledge the work of others when undertaking research and, in particular, stresses the importance of literature reviews in scientific inquiry. Though the significance of literature reviews has never been in doubt, researchers, especially novice researchers, still struggle with developing effective strategies for reviewing literature. An important reason for this difficulty is the rapidly increasing number of potentially relevant publications—not all of which necessarily add value to a literature review. As such, avoiding standing on the shoulders of dwarfs literature search emerges as a major issue in crafting an effective literature review. In this paper, we discuss challenges of literature searches in the increasingly dynamic context of information systems (IS) research and make recommendations for how to deal with them. We present practical guidelines and a checklist to help researchers with planning and organizing their literature searches.

Self-tracking technologies are widely used in people’s daily lives and health care. Academic research on self-tracking and the quantified self has also accumulated rapidly in recent years. Surprisingly, there is a paucity of research that reviews, classifies, and synthesizes the state of the art with respect to self-tracking and the quantified self.

Background Activated phosphoinositide 3-kinase delta (PI3Kδ) syndrome (APDS) is an ultra-rare inborn error of immunity, characterised by immunodeficiency and immune dysregulation. Having only been recognised in 2013, evidence on APDS is limited. We carried out four systematic literature reviews (SLRs) to identify and narratively synthesise evidence on the following for APDS: epidemiology (epidemiology SLR), clinical efficacy/safety of treatments (clinical SLR), cost-effectiveness and costs/healthcare (HCRU) associated with (economic SLR) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and utility data (HRQoL SLR) from a global perspective. Methods The Cochrane Collaboration and the University of York’s Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) guidelines were followed. MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, University of York CRD, conference proceedings and other grey literature were searched through to May 2023 for all SLRs, except the epidemiology SLR (searched to Nov 2021); economic databases were also searched for the economic and HRQoL SLRs. Eligible records were: primary epidemiology publications (epidemiology SLR), interventional/observational studies of treatments (clinical SLR), cost/HCRU studies/economic evaluations (economic SLR) and HRQoL/utility studies (HRQoL SLR) in people with APDS. Risk of bias was assessed using the Downs and Black checklist (clinical SLR) and the Drummond checklist (economic SLR). Results The numbers of unique relevant studies identified were: 0 (epidemiology SLR), 117 (clinical SLR; 87 reported on <5 patients), 2 (economic SLR) and 1 (HRQoL SLR). The clinical SLR reported symptomatic treatments to be only partially effective at controlling APDS manifestations, with variable tolerability. Outcome reporting was heterogeneous and inconsistent, with small sample sizes and patients receiving multiple treatments, limiting interpretation of results. The economic SLR reported a high direct cost of APDS. Additional HRQoL/utility studies are required to evaluate the clinical and HRQoL burden of APDS and the impact of therapies. Conclusion Four methodologically robust SLRs identified limited evidence on epidemiology, clinical outcomes, costs and HRQoL in APDS, reflecting its ultra-rare nature and recent recognition. This suggests a need for more rigorous data evaluating the clinical and economic effectiveness of APDS treatments. Outcome reporting was highly heterogeneous and inconsistent across studies, sample sizes were small and patients often received multiple treatments, limiting interpretation of results.

This meta-review aimed to present all available quantitative pooled estimates for the associations between psychosocial work exposures and health outcomes using a systematic literature review of literature reviews with meta-analysis. A systematic review of the literature from 2000 to 2020 was conducted using PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, and PsycINFO databases following the PRISMA guidelines. All literature reviews and Individual-Participant Data (IPD)-Work consortium studies exploring an association between psychosocial work exposures and health outcomes and providing pooled estimates using meta-analysis were included. All types of psychosocial work exposures and health outcomes were studied. The quality of each included review was assessed. A total of 72 reviews and IPD-Work consortium studies were included. These mainly focused on job strain as exposure and cardiovascular diseases and mental disorders as outcomes. The associations between psychosocial work factors and cardiovascular diseases and mental disorders were in general significant, and the magnitude of these associations was stronger for mental disorders than for cardiovascular diseases. Based on high-quality reviews, significant associations were found between job/high strain and long working hours as exposures and coronary heart diseases, (ischemic) stroke, and depression as outcomes. A few additional significant associations involved other exposures and health outcomes. The included reviews brought convincing findings on the associations of some psychosocial work factors with mental disorders and cardiovascular diseases. More research may be needed to explain these associations, explore other exposures and outcomes, and make progress towards determining the causality of the associations.