stand alone literature review meaning

Literature reviews: Stand-alone review

• Reviewing for research
• Stand-alone review
• Scoping and planning
• Screening and appraising
• The process of reviewing
• Planning a search strategy

On these pages:

“Simple [stand-alone] literature review - A written document that critically reviews the relevant literature on a research topic, presenting a logical case that establishes a thesis delineating what is currently known about the subject.” Lawrence Machi & Brenda McEvoy , The Literature Review: Six Steps to Success

Literature reviews do not have to be part of a larger research project. Sometimes you are asked to undertake a stand-alone (sometimes referred to as 'simple') literature review as an separate assignment. In such cases, the review should summarise, synthesise and evaluate existing knowledge on a specific topic and come to a conclusion about current understanding.

Structure of a stand-alone literature review

A stand-alone review has a similar structure to a standard essay:

• Introduction - Show how the topic of your review fits in with the wider field, indicate how you conducted the review (details about specific search strategies are not needed, more an overview of the process) and summarise your main findings about the literature.
• Main body - Analyse the literature, identifying themes, gaps in understanding and areas of disagreement.
• Conclusion  - Summarise the main points and how they relate to each other. Restate your main findings in a bit more detail than you did in the introduction. Give any implications for the wider field.

Essay vs stand-alone literature review

The main different between an essay and a literature review is that an essay is focused on answering a question through a series of arguments supported by the literature; whereas, in a stand-alone literature review the focus is on the literature itself —what it tells you, but also its reliability and quality.

Another important difference is that with an essay you have more freedom about choosing literature that supports the argument you are making.

With a literature review, it is far more important to make sure you are representing all aspects of the topic.

This is not to say you are not making your own argument - it is just that your argument is about what you think the literature shows.

• << Previous: Reviewing for research
• Next: Systematic reviews >>
• Last Updated: Apr 9, 2024 3:41 PM
• URL: https://libguides.hull.ac.uk/literaturereviews
• Login to LibApps
• Library websites Privacy Policy
• University of Hull privacy policy & cookies
• Website terms and conditions
• Accessibility
• Report a problem

UCL Doctorate In Clinical Psychology

• Guidance for Stand-Alone Paper (SAP) Literature...

Guidance for Stand-Alone Paper (SAP) Literature Review

Aims of this page.

This page is intended to support trainees who are writing a Stand-Alone Paper (SAP) for their literature review. It will:

• Describe the steps needed to produce your SAP. Although SAP reviews vary in content and method, there is a common sequence of tasks to be accomplished.
• Signpost the resources available to support carrying out the SAP.

Sequence of steps

The table below describes the sequence of steps that you will need to take in order to complete your literature review.

At each step, you will need to make methodological decisions, and it is important that the finished SAP literature review be explicit about this process. For example, if at Step 3 ('Setting inclusion and exclusion criteria') you decide to exclude studies published before 1980, you will need to briefly explain why you did this.

Under some circumstances, you may have to deviate from this timetable. For example, the empirical project might require intensive data collection over the summer between the second and third year, meaning that the literature review has to be delayed. If you think you will be unable to submit a good draft in November of the third year, you should discuss this with your supervisor and come up with an alternative timetable.

Step 1 - Question formulation for the SAP

The SAP literature review asks a question (or linked questions) that can be answered by the empirical literature. Choosing a good question is not a trivial task; it takes time and effort. Here are some tips:

• The process of choosing a question is iterative. It involves coming up with some initial ideas and then using informal searches to get a sense of the body of relevant literature, and whether any reviews in the area have already been done. These initial searches will yield information that helps you to clarify your provisional questions. You will then go back to the literature, and this could cause further evolution of your questions.
• Involve your supervisor. They are an invaluable ally and guide in this iterative process of coming up with ideas and then exploring the literature.
• Make sure your question has some clinical relevance.
• The review topic should have a logical link to the empirical paper topic, so that there is a common thread running through the thesis. For example, the link could be a shared clinical phenomenon, population or intervention.

Relevance of previous reviews

It is common to come across already-published reviews that at least partially overlap with your own SAP literature review. This creates a dilemma: should you proceed with your review anyway, or find another question? The key issue is whether your review could potentially contribute substantial new knowledge, beyond that available from the already-published review(s). For example, several important new studies may have been published since the previous review. Or, perhaps your SAP question can be adjusted, to be wider or narrower.

Step 2 - Deciding on a review method

All literature reviews involve synthesising studies in order to answer a question, or a set of questions. There are different ways of doing this, i.e., there are different types of literature review. The type depends on the question, and the nature of the available literature. The main types are:

Narrative synthesis

This is the approach most commonly used for a SAP literature reveiw in DClinPsy thesis. Its defining characteristic is the "systematic review and synthesis of findings from multiple studies that relies primarily on the use of words and text to summarise and explain the findings of the synthesis" (Popay et al., University of Lancaster) .

You can find some examples of DClinPsy SAP literature reviews that use narrative syntheses, in the literarure reveiw section of the Research Project Support Moodle.

Meta-analysis

Meta-analysis is a procedure for statistically synthesising findings by aggregating effect sizes across several studies. It can be used to yield a useful summary statistic and also examine moderators, i.e., test whether there are study variables that influence effect sizes. Whilst meta-analysis is often used to synthesise group difference effect sizes from trials, it is actually a versatile technique that can provide a quantitative synthesis of different types of effect size statistics (e.g., odds ratios, correlations).

You can find some examples of DClinPsy SAP meta-analyses in the literature review section of the Research Project Support Moodle.

Getting help with meta-analysis

If you need help with your meta-analysis, the first person to consult is your supervisor. If you need additional support, Vyv Huddy and Amanda Williams are both happy to support trainees with their literature reviews, including meta-analyses, and should be contacted by email in the first instance.

Meta-analysis software

Review Manager (RevMan) is freely downloadable Cochrane Collaboration software developed for systematic review and meta-analysis, and is supported by information on the Cochrane site. It is especially straightforward to use for synthesising the outcomes of clinical trials. Amanda Williams offers support for use of RevMan.

In addition, the 'metan' routine in STATA is a useful tool for meta-analysis, and is available to trainees via the cluster room PCs and the UCL remote desk top. Vyv Huddy offers support for use of STATA for meta-analysis. Another option is the 'metafor' routine in R, which is freely downloadable. The course test library has a book on doing meta-analysis using STATA. To borrow this, please contact the research administrator.

Reviews of Qualitative Research: Meta Synthesis

Qualitative studies can be aggregated using a procedure called 'meta-synthesis', or 'qualitative meta-analysis'. The procedure is essentially a thematic analysis of the themes in each of the individual studies under review. The following reference is a useful introduction to this type of literature review:

Timulak, L. (2009). Meta-analysis of qualitative studies: A tool for reviewing qualitative research findings in psychotherapy. Psychotherapy Research , 19 (4-5), 591-600.

You can find an example of a DClinPsy SAP meta synthesis in the literature review section of the Research Project Support Moodle.

Step 3 - Setting inclusion and exclusion criteria

The inclusion and exclusion criteria translate the research question into a set of formal requirements for the papers to be reviewed. They are analogous to the inclusion and exclusion criteria in the empirical study, which explicitly state which participants you intend to recruit. They address the question of exactly which kinds of studies you are looking for to answer your question(s). The search strategy then will dictate how you locate these studies.

For reviews of interventions, and for some other review topics, it is often helpful to use the PICOS framework when setting out the inclusion and exclusion criteria, i.e. to specify the Population, Intervention, Comparator, Outcomes and Setting.

The quantity of studies

Trainees often ask 'how many studies do I have to review for a SAP?' Alas, there is no simple answer to this question. Fundamentally, the SAP literature review is intended to demonstrate your capacity to appraise and synthesise empirical evidence. This is demonstrated not just by the number of papers reviewed, but also on the richness of the information they convey and the quality of your synthesis.

In practice, most UCL DClinPsy SAP literature reviews cover more than 10 papers and fewer than 40. Nevertheless, some successful SAP literature reviews have covered fewer than 10 papers. Such reviews were enriched by various means, such as reviewing multiple outcomes or multiple assessment points and providing a deeper consideration of methodology.

SAP reviews rarely incorporate more than 40 studies and in this case would most often synthesise their findings using quantitative meta-analytic methods. A review can be undermined by trying to cover too many studies. If initial searches identify an excessive number of studies, then the review's scope can be narrowed.

Step 4 - Designing and conducting the search

The SAP literature review must be systematic, using a rigorous and transparent search of the literature in order to identify all studies that meet your inclusion criteria. The systematic search is the cornerstone of a good SAP literature review, as it ensures that a fair and balanced picture of current research is presented.

Conducting a systematic search for a DClinPsy literature review

The Cochrane Handbook offers guidance on systematic search procedures. However, for the DClinPsy, compromises are commonly made: e.g., only peer-reviewed papers, English language, and not emailing authors for missing information. Some of these compromises may need to be reconsidered if you subsequently prepare the paper for publication.

Support from Library Team

It is often useful, though it is not required, to discuss the search strategy with a UCL librarian. Librarians are experts in information retrieval, and the UCL Library Service has an identified Psychology specialist. A member of the UCL library team delivers specific session on carrying out your systematic search. This includes advice on:

· resources for identifying key concepts

· choosing an appropriate database

· defining search terms

· revising the search strategy

· hand searching

· removing duplicate items

· good practice in systematic searching.

A library services module is available on Moodle - WISE - provides further resources on these steps and can be found here (link: http://www.ucl.ac.uk/library/training/guides ).

Recording the search results

It may help to store and organise the information gathered by the search on a database. This could include the identified studies, recording duplicate publications of results, reasons for inclusion or exclusion, information that has been extracted and coded (demographics, clinical information, design, measures and main findings).

For your SAP reviews there is no obligation to have independent confirmation of study inclusion, data entry, coding of studies or for other researchers to check of the veracity of the database . This is often carried out in registered systematic reviews, and, if you wish to publish your review then this may be necessary. However, such 'double-checking' places unacceptable demands on trainees, who have to do their review in a limited amount of time.

Flow diagram using PRISMA format

The search should be depicted in a flow diagram, showing the stages from the search to the final set of studies, and indicating decisions and reasons for exclusion at each stage. The PRISMA statement (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) provides a framework that can be used for all kinds of reviews. When you present your SAP literature review in the thesis, it should contain a PRISMA diagram.

Step 5 - Synthesising the literature

Once you have identified the studies that meet your inclusion and exclusion criteria, it is time to embark upon the fundamental task of your SAP review: synthesising these studies in order to address your research question(s).

How you do this will depend upon the type of SAP review: for example, the method of synthesis is different for a meta-analysis compared to a narrative review. Nevertheless, it is always a good idea to create a table describing key features of your studies. This serves to summarise information, and can then give you ideas about themes and trends in the studies.

Quality appraisal / Risk of Bias

All SAP literature reviews involve a critical appraisal of the methodological quality of the included studies, and of how study quality impacts on interpretation of findings. Increasingly, researchers use structured measures, known as 'quality appraisal tools' to rate the quality of each study. There is a course document on the literature review section of the Research Project Support Moodle giving a list of these tools.

There is no requirement for trainees to use a quality appraisal tool in their literature review. Whether or not you use one will depend upon the nature of the literature you are reviewing, the question you are asking and whether a relevant tool exists. If the review concerns treatment efficacy based on findings of randomised controlled trials, a quality appraisal tool will normally be used, usually the Cochrane one called 'risk of bias'. On the other hand, many topics are not well suited to this sort of structured appraisal, or relevant appraisal tools may have not been developed.

The bottom line is that trainees should only use an appraisal tool if it will enhance their review. When thinking about whether to use one, it may be worth considering some of the criticisms that have been levelled at them:

• Lack depth necessary for certain specialist topics
• Items can be difficult to interpret (e.g. "study design evident and appropriate")
• Information required is often missing, and that can be authors' or journal editors' decision, so cannot be interpreted usefully.
• Single overall quality score is arbitrary, scoring serious defects (e.g. statistical flaws or inappropriate outcome measures were used) as the same weight as minor concerns (therapists could not be blinded to which intervention they delivered).

Step 6: Writing the SAP review

The SAP literature review has the format of a scientific paper, with sections entitled Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion.

One commonly used approach to producing a first draft of the SAP is to initially write the Introduction and Methods sections, and to produce the table (or tables) describing the identified studies. This is then discussed with the supervisor, laying the ground for the Results and Discussion to be produced. It is important to talk to your supervisor early on in the process to agree the steps you will take towards producing a first draft.

All written work is improved via a process of drafts being critiqued. You should expect to receive in depth comments from your supervisor on your first draft; and to undertake substantial revisions when producing a second draft. You may need to go through further iterations to ensure the literature review is at the appropriate standard. Please see the section of the literature review on the 'Writing and presenting your thesis' for more information on the format and structure of this piece of work.

When writing the SAP literature review, be sure to cover research and clinical implications in your conclusions. Say what studies would best resolve uncertainties about your research question, and say what clinicians might decide to do in the light of current evidence. Recognise that clients will also read these, or they may be summarised for patient groups: think about what they want to know and how you can help meet that need, at least in part.

Length of the final draft

As a rule of thumb, reviews should be around 8,000 words, not including tables and references. If your review is longer than this, the chances are that it would be improved by being edited down.

Additional matters on the literature review

Publishing your sap review.

Trainee SAP literature reviews are original pieces of work that generate new understandings of clinically-important topics. They are often worth publishing. We recommend that, once you have the review written, you discuss this with your supervisor. They can help you decide what journal to target, and how the review will need to be modified in order to be considered for publication. You may need to do some work shortening the review, updating your search and getting someone to independently validate some steps of the review process (e.g., searches, data extraction). The PRISMA criteria described above often become a requirement at this stage; this depends on the editorial guidelines of specific journals.

There has been a lot of criticism of systematic reviews recently for concluding that the intervention may or may not be helpful and that more research is needed. That doesn't really say anything new, and is disappointing to clinicians, service users, and service funders and commissioners. It is far more helpful to be specific about what effects interventions have or do not have; how confident you can be in that finding (e.g., would it easily be overturned by the publication of a couple of large negative trials?), and what the 'more research' that is needed should look like. This draws on good features of the studies you reviewed, and tells people what to look for (or potential researchers what to do) that will advance the field.

Prospective registration of SAP reviews

Transparency is a vital aspect of published literature reviews. Review registration has emerged as a means of ensuring transparency by demonstrating that a review took place as planned, and can be replicated easily. This means the protocol cannot be amended at a later stage in response to disappointing results. The International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (link: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/about.php?about=about ) has been developed to enable researchers to register their reviews and publish their protocol. To register a review, researchers complete an online form that prompts for a range of information concerning the protocol. This is a useful process while planning a review, regardless of whether the review is subsequently registered. There is no obligation for trainees to register their review but journals are increasingly asking for information regarding registration . This should be borne in mind if the trainee and supervisor plan to publish the review.

Discovering a similar review at a late stage of the process

Occasionally, as a trainee is coming to the end of producing their SAP literature review, they discover another recently-published review that substantially overlaps. It is important to recognise that under such circumstances, trainees are not expected to start again on another review. As long as the overlapping review was published after the trainee did their searches, examiners will be understanding. If you do discover that an overlapping review has been published, the important thing is to consult your supervisor and the Research Director. They can help you manage the situation.

How to Write a Literature Review

What is a literature review.

• What Is the Literature
• Writing the Review

A literature review is much more than an annotated bibliography or a list of separate reviews of articles and books. It is a critical, analytical summary and synthesis of the current knowledge of a topic. Thus it should compare and relate different theories, findings, etc, rather than just summarize them individually. In addition, it should have a particular focus or theme to organize the review. It does not have to be an exhaustive account of everything published on the topic, but it should discuss all the significant academic literature and other relevant sources important for that focus.

This is meant to be a general guide to writing a literature review: ways to structure one, what to include, how it supplements other research. For more specific help on writing a review, and especially for help on finding the literature to review, sign up for a Personal Research Session .

The specific organization of a literature review depends on the type and purpose of the review, as well as on the specific field or topic being reviewed. But in general, it is a relatively brief but thorough exploration of past and current work on a topic. Rather than a chronological listing of previous work, though, literature reviews are usually organized thematically, such as different theoretical approaches, methodologies, or specific issues or concepts involved in the topic. A thematic organization makes it much easier to examine contrasting perspectives, theoretical approaches, methodologies, findings, etc, and to analyze the strengths and weaknesses of, and point out any gaps in, previous research. And this is the heart of what a literature review is about. A literature review may offer new interpretations, theoretical approaches, or other ideas; if it is part of a research proposal or report it should demonstrate the relationship of the proposed or reported research to others' work; but whatever else it does, it must provide a critical overview of the current state of research efforts. 

Literature reviews are common and very important in the sciences and social sciences. They are less common and have a less important role in the humanities, but they do have a place, especially stand-alone reviews.

Types of Literature Reviews

There are different types of literature reviews, and different purposes for writing a review, but the most common are:

• Stand-alone literature review articles . These provide an overview and analysis of the current state of research on a topic or question. The goal is to evaluate and compare previous research on a topic to provide an analysis of what is currently known, and also to reveal controversies, weaknesses, and gaps in current work, thus pointing to directions for future research. You can find examples published in any number of academic journals, but there is a series of Annual Reviews of *Subject* which are specifically devoted to literature review articles. Writing a stand-alone review is often an effective way to get a good handle on a topic and to develop ideas for your own research program. For example, contrasting theoretical approaches or conflicting interpretations of findings can be the basis of your research project: can you find evidence supporting one interpretation against another, or can you propose an alternative interpretation that overcomes their limitations?
• Part of a research proposal . This could be a proposal for a PhD dissertation, a senior thesis, or a class project. It could also be a submission for a grant. The literature review, by pointing out the current issues and questions concerning a topic, is a crucial part of demonstrating how your proposed research will contribute to the field, and thus of convincing your thesis committee to allow you to pursue the topic of your interest or a funding agency to pay for your research efforts.
• Part of a research report . When you finish your research and write your thesis or paper to present your findings, it should include a literature review to provide the context to which your work is a contribution. Your report, in addition to detailing the methods, results, etc. of your research, should show how your work relates to others' work.

A literature review for a research report is often a revision of the review for a research proposal, which can be a revision of a stand-alone review. Each revision should be a fairly extensive revision. With the increased knowledge of and experience in the topic as you proceed, your understanding of the topic will increase. Thus, you will be in a better position to analyze and critique the literature. In addition, your focus will change as you proceed in your research. Some areas of the literature you initially reviewed will be marginal or irrelevant for your eventual research, and you will need to explore other areas more thoroughly. 

Examples of Literature Reviews

See the series of Annual Reviews of *Subject* which are specifically devoted to literature review articles to find many examples of stand-alone literature reviews in the biomedical, physical, and social sciences. 

Research report articles vary in how they are organized, but a common general structure is to have sections such as:

• Abstract - Brief summary of the contents of the article
• Introduction - A explanation of the purpose of the study, a statement of the research question(s) the study intends to address
• Literature review - A critical assessment of the work done so far on this topic, to show how the current study relates to what has already been done
• Methods - How the study was carried out (e.g. instruments or equipment, procedures, methods to gather and analyze data)
• Results - What was found in the course of the study
• Discussion - What do the results mean
• Conclusion - State the conclusions and implications of the results, and discuss how it relates to the work reviewed in the literature review; also, point to directions for further work in the area

Here are some articles that illustrate variations on this theme. There is no need to read the entire articles (unless the contents interest you); just quickly browse through to see the sections, and see how each section is introduced and what is contained in them.

The Determinants of Undergraduate Grade Point Average: The Relative Importance of Family Background, High School Resources, and Peer Group Effects , in The Journal of Human Resources , v. 34 no. 2 (Spring 1999), p. 268-293.

This article has a standard breakdown of sections:

• Introduction
• Literature Review
• Some discussion sections

First Encounters of the Bureaucratic Kind: Early Freshman Experiences with a Campus Bureaucracy , in The Journal of Higher Education , v. 67 no. 6 (Nov-Dec 1996), p. 660-691.

This one does not have a section specifically labeled as a "literature review" or "review of the literature," but the first few sections cite a long list of other sources discussing previous research in the area before the authors present their own study they are reporting.

• Next: What Is the Literature >>
• Last Updated: Jan 11, 2024 9:48 AM
• URL: https://libguides.wesleyan.edu/litreview

3 Literature Review

Charitianne Williams

By the end of this chapter, you will be able to do the following:

• Understand the purpose and function of a literature review.
• Structure a literature review according to basic genre expectations.
• Synthesize ideas from multiple sources using a synthesis matrix.
• Choose between narrative or parenthetical citation and direct quoting, or paraphrase with intent and purpose.

I. Introduction

The purpose of a literature review is just that—it reviews. This means that literature reviews examine a text after it was produced, with all the benefits that hindsight allows a reader. In popular culture, we commonly review movies, restaurants, vacation spots, products, etc. In those reviews, you look back at the single thing you are reviewing and your experience with it. You focus on the strengths and weaknesses of your experience and judge the experience as positive or negative while recommending or not recommending the place or product and explaining why.

An academic literature review does something different, although some of the skills and strategies you use remain the same. The job of a literature review is to examine a collection of research or scholarship (not a single thing or text) on a given topic and show how that scholarship fits together. Literature reviews summarize, describe, evaluate, and synthesize the work of other authors and researchers while looking for common trends/patterns, themes, inconsistencies, and gaps in this previous research. The main strategy writers of a literature review use is synthesis.

SYNTHESIS: the combination of ideas and elements to form a complete system or theory.

A good metaphor for synthesis is cooking! Imagine the ingredients for a loaf of bread laid out on a kitchen cabinet. Each ingredient—eggs, milk, flour, sugar, salt, yeast—have their own purpose and can be combined in different ways to form food other than bread. Knowing all of those individual attributes that make an egg an egg, or the difference between yeast and flour, is what makes you a chef. When you combine all these ingredients according to the recipe, you get something different than all the ingredients on their own: and most of us would rather eat a slice of bread than a spoonful of flour. The product of synthesis is like bread. Synthesis takes a list of ingredients and makes them into something more than the ingredients alone.

Usually, the writers of a literature review will start with a question that they want to answer through informed and research-based evidence gathered while reading others’ work on related topics. The “thesis” or controlling idea of a literature review may be that same question ( “This review seeks to answer…” ) or it may be a statement describing the reviewed research. The thesis reflects the purpose of the literature review as a genre and is different from the thesis you will write for the research paper that argues a claim or asserts a new idea.

Example 3.1: Look at this thesis statement taken from the introduction of a literature review in environmental psychology on the relationship between “nature sounds” and restorative environments:

From this example, we can learn many things about literature reviews:

• They are explicit and focused on their topic. The opening states an observable truth about the current research ( emphasizes nature ), is followed by a general condition ( positive psychological experiences) within that research, and then finally focuses on describing how a particular outcome is achieved (listening to nature sounds is restorative).
• They seek to pre vent or eliminate misunderstanding. Note the use of specialized key terms, exacting transitional phrases, and meaningful verbs in the thesis such as “ restorative environments,” “in particular,” and “ generate .”
• They seek to forward understanding. In other words, literature reviews examine and link together evidence described and validated in the research of others so a reader can learn how a field is developing. ( Research seems to agree that nature sounds can relieve stress and fatigue–this review will examine that conclusion so readers can understand/ build on how and why.)

Moving from the beginning to the very end of the literature review, we can also learn many things about literature reviews from the sources used. Think of each text listed in the References section of a literature review as contributing pieces to a gigantic puzzle.

Example 3.2: Look at the first three articles listed in the References for the article excerpted above:

Abbott, L. C., Taff, D., Newman, P., Benfield, J. A., and Mowen, A. J. (2016). The influence of natural sounds on attention restoration. J. Park Recreation Adm. 34, 5–15. doi: 10.18666/JPRA-2016-V34-I3-6893

Aletta, F., and Kang, J. (2019). Promoting healthy and supportive acoustic environments: going beyond the quietness. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 16:4988. doi: 10.3390/ijerph16244988

Aletta, F., Oberman, T., and Kang, J. (2018). Associations between positive health-related effects and soundscapes perceptual constructs: a systematic review. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 15:2392. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15112392

None of these sources are exactly the same. One focuses on sound and attention, the next two on sound and health, and none of them are quite the same as sound and restoration —but they are all pieces of the puzzle that give a full understanding of how sound and restorative environments relate.

As the author of the literature review, it is your job to join the pieces together, giving your reader a complete picture of what researchers know about your topic.

Literature reviews are an indispensable tool for researchers. Instead of having to read dozens of articles on a topic, a researcher could instead read a literature review that synthesizes what is known and puts each piece of scholarship into conversation with the others. This could be not only quicker, but also more valuable.

Have you heard the saying that the whole is more than the sum of its parts? The knowledge constructed by a well-written literature review often outweighs the knowledge constructed by simply reading each article in the References section on its own because the author of a literature review processes and analyzes the information for the reader.

Literature reviews occur in two general forms—as a background section in a scholarly work or as a stand-alone genre in and of itself. In both situations, the basic purpose and structure of the literature review is similar: it is the length and the scope that varies. For example, consider the previous chapter, the Proposal. In most proposals, you will want to convince your audience that you are informed on the background of your topic—a literature review is how you would do that. Since a proposal is commonly a short text, you do not have the space to summarize every piece of research. You must select an important set and synthesize that information into a small section signaling your expertise.

On the other hand, consider a professional journal intended to keep its readers up to date on new technologies and findings in a specific field or career. New ideas and discoveries are emerging every day, and it can be difficult to stay on top of all of these new findings, understand how they fit together, and also keep track of your own career responsibilities! A magazine might hire an author to read all the new research on a specific topic and synthesize it into a single article, a state-of-the-art review, so that practitioners in a field can read a single 25-page article instead of 100 25-page articles.

More Resources 3.1: Literature Reviews

II. Rhetorical Considerations: Voice

Using the scholarship of other writers and researchers is one of the things that differentiates academic writing from other types of writing. Using others’ scholarship in a meaningful way that creates new knowledge without mischaracterizing the original findings takes effort, attention, and usually several rounds of revision and rewriting. One of the issues is voice , which refers to the attitude and tone of a text—think of it as what the text “sounds like” in your head as you read it. Voice is an important element of cohesion , or what some people think of as “flow.” Creating a consistent voice in the mind of your reader helps them fit all the information in a text together in the way the author intends. Check out this advice from APAstyle.org about academic style and voice.

Think back to your annotated bibliography and how you created your summaries. You probably used key terms from the original authors’ texts, but because you had to take whole articles and restate the meaning in a short paragraph, there wasn’t room to just repeat the words of the original author. So you had to write the summaries in your voice . If you used those key terms correctly and in ways similar to original authors, those key terms probably did not interfere with cohesiveness and voice. However, in the literature review, you have many more voices to synthesize than you did to summarize in the annotated bibliography. Maintaining a consistent and cohesive voice will be challenging. An important way to maintain voice is through paraphrasing, discussed later in this chapter.

More Resources 3.2: Transitions

Another important way to maintain cohesion is through the use of metadiscourse (see Chapter 2) and transitional phrases. See this link for the use and meaning of transitional phrases, sometimes called signposts .

III. The Literature Review Across the Disciplines

Example 3.3: Academic and Professional Examples

Structure of Literature Reviews

While the details vary across disciplines, all literature reviews tend to have similar basic structure. The introduction of a literature review informs the reader on the topic by defining key terms, citing key researchers or research periods in the field, and introducing the main focus of the review in a descriptive thesis statement. The introduction also explains the organization of the review. In a literature review, you organize your discussion of the research by topic or theme— not article or author. This is in direct contrast to the annotated bibliography, which is often the first step in the writing process for a literature review.

In the annotated bibliography, you organize your entries in alphabetical order by authors’ last names. Each annotation is directly connected to a single text. A literature review is connected to a collection of texts, and therefore must be organized in a way that reflects this.

Example 3.4: Let’s examine the full paragraph that the thesis statement we analyzed earlier came from:

A systematic review by Aletta et al. (2018) has identified links between positive urban soundscapes (which may also include nature sounds) and health and well-being, including stress recovery. Given the emphasis on nature w ithin restorative environments (see Hartig et al., 2014 ), the present narrative literature review focuses on evidence for positive psychological experiences of nature sounds and soundscapes specifically, and in particular how listening to these can generate perceptions and outcomes of restoration from stress and fatigue. This review has five key objectives, summarized in Figure 1 [in the article] . First, it explores literature regarding the impact of nature sounds on perceptions and experiences of wider natural environments. Second, it examines evidence regarding cognitive and affective appraisals of nature sounds and their contributions to overall perceptions of restorative environments. Third, literature regarding restorative outcomes in response to nature sounds is assessed. Fourth, the relevance of key restoration theories to this top ic is examined and areas where these theories are limited are identified. Fifth, a possible new theoretical area of interest—semantic associations with nature—is discussed and exemplified by recent acoustics research (Ratcliffe, 2021, emphasis added).

Notice how the thesis statement (in bold ) is followed by an explicit description of the five key objectives—which correspond to the titles (usually called headings ) of the five major sections of the body of the literature review. The introduction basically outlines the body of the literature review to make it easier for a researcher to find the specific information they are looking for. What follows each of these headings is an analysis and synthesis of the topic described in the heading—which is what we mean when we say a literature review is organized by topic.

Example 3.5: See how the body sections of a literature review synthesize research and evidence in relation to a focused topic. Read this example taken from a literature review in another discipline, nursing.

The introduction states that the review’s purpose is to understand the issues facing nurses in situations such as the COVID-19 pandemic. The researchers found several themes in the research that all contributed to nurses’ experiences. This paragraph describes one of those themes which the authors label “Professional collegiality”:

3.2.2. Professional collegiality

Professional camaraderie amongst nursing colleagues working during a pandemic was high (Ives et al., 2009, Kim, 2018, Liu a nd Liehr , 2009). Nurses acknowledged the importance of caring for their co-workers and in sharing the load. Some nurses associated the experience with working on a battlefield, whereby they worked together as a team protecting one another (Chung et al., 20 05, Kang et al., 2018, Liu and Liehr , 2009). Appreciation of their nursing colleagues was demonstrated through sharing their experiences, willingness to work together and encouraging a team spirit (Shih et al., 2007, Chung et al., 2005, Chiang et al., 2007 ). (Ratcliffe, 2021, p.4)

In this single paragraph, there are seven different research articles cited, and some of them are cited twice. There is no way to write a coherent paragraph summarizing seven different research articles at once—instead, the authors of this paragraph reviewed what the researchers said about collegiality, found where their findings pointed in the same direction, and put those connections into their own words. This is the importance of the review’s body section: it is here where you really dig into the content, meaning, and implications of the scholarship you are discussing.

The end of a literature review looks different from the one- or two-paragraph conclusion we are used to in other texts. The end is often made up of multiple sections, each with a slightly different purpose, although all are probably recognizable to you. A “Discussion” section is almost always present, where the author summarizes the most important findings of each section. In most cases, the “Discussion” section does not contain new information, but ties the different body sections together in ways that provide a deeper analysis.

The end of a literature review may also contain an “Implications for Future Research” or “Resolution” after the Discussion—sometimes this final section is even called “Conclusion.” What this last section looks like is often dependent upon the type of review you are writing, and whether the review is standing alone as a complete text or part of a larger project.

In any situation, across all disciplines, it is important to understand how your literature review is meant to inform the reader and what kind of review is appropriate for the context, in order to decide how you should structure the beginning and end of your review.

Types of Literature Reviews

There are different types of literature reviews, although in undergraduate study the Traditional or Narrative Review is most common. Narrative reviews are somewhat exploratory in their content—in a narrative review you are synthesizing the results of specific texts selected for their connection to your topic. Narrative reviews almost always end with a section describing areas for future research if they are a stand-alone text, or a section describing why the author’s research is so needed if part of a larger research article. The chart below outlines the key differences between three major literature review types. Notice that each type has a slightly different purpose. You might think about which type best fits your project as you read.

Table 3.1: Types of Literature Reviews

More Resources 3.3: Literature Review Structures

IV. Research Strategies: Developing a Methodology

Systematic and scoping reviews should always contain a Research Methodology that explains to your reader exactly how you found the research you are reviewing. Often Narrative Reviews will also contain a research methodology, although it will be slightly different since they are not comprehensive reviews, meaning, they do not attempt to find all the research on a topic—by design, they cover only a specific portion. Even if you are not required to write up your methodology, you need clear research strategies to find the appropriate scholarship for your literature review.

Example 3.6: Check out this excerpt from the methods sections from a psychology literature review. Note how the authors clearly describe what types of sources they’ll be using as well as their steps throughout the research process.

Drawing on individual case studies, archival reports, correlational studies, and laboratory and field experiments, this monograph scrutinizes a sequence of events during which confessions may be obtained from criminal suspects and used as evidence. First, we examine the pre-interrogation interview, a process by which police …( Kassin and Gudjonsson , 2004, p.33)

Example 3.7: Here is another example from the field of education. In it the authors describe two separate searches they performed to gather the literature—the first search used key terms they decided upon before reading any scholarship, and the second search used the terms that they found were common to that first set of texts (see more about key terms here and in the Annotated Bibliography chapter).

We conducted two rounds of literature searches, utilizing the following databases: World CAT (general search), EB SCO Academic Search Complete, EBSCO Education Source, and Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (ProQuest). In the first round, we searched using every possible combination of the following terms: ‘race,’ ‘language teaching,’ ‘ethnicity,’ ‘language p edagogy,’ ‘Whiteness,’ ‘racialized,’ ‘antiracism,’ and ‘ nativeness .’ For the second round of our literature search, we searched using terms that we saw emerging from the literature such as ‘racial identities of language learners,’ ‘racial identities of lan guage teachers,’ ‘language varieties and language teaching,’ ‘race and language teacher education,’ ‘race and educational policy,’ ‘race and language programs,’ and ‘race and language curriculum’ and also repeated our earlier searches in order to keep the literature updated. (Von Esch et al., 2020, p. 392)

No matter the type of research (see a description of qualitative vs. quantitative research ), the specific genres (see descriptions of academic research genres ), or the time frame (see a discussion on the importance of publication date ) you use for your review, it is important to think through the options, make a decision, and incorporate all your research knowledge—use of key terms, use of subject filters, use of specialized databases, etc.—into a coherent and meaningful process that results in the best scholarship for your inquiry and review.

Here’s a video to help you get started on using databases for research:

Library Referral: Connecting the Conversation with Scholarly Sources and Beyond​

(by Annie R. Armstrong)

Research involves drawing from numerous voices from a range of source types. The sources you choose to include in your conversation are context-specific and might vary depending on your topic or the parameters of your assignment. Review your assignment description and talk to your instructor about guidelines. While most research papers emphasize scholarly sources, expertise isn’t always equated with scholarliness and you might want to branch out. For example, a research paper focusing on exploitation of Native American land and communities by the mining industry should make some attempt to include sources generated by the communities under discussion, especially if their point of view is not represented in the peer-reviewed, scholarly sources you’ve found. Think about who the stakeholders are as related to various aspects of your topic and how you can tap into their voices through available resources. You may want to consult a librarian about this.

The chart below summarizes the breadth of source types available through library websites versus the open web:

Table 3.2: Scholarly Sources and Beyond

V. Reading Strategies: Intertextuality and Graphic Organizers

Typically we think of reading as something we do to learn the content of a text—and this is absolutely true! But true understanding means knowing the relationships between and impact of separate but related topics, which might mean understanding how different texts—generally focused on one topic—overlap or differ.

Intertextuality refers to the connections that exist between texts. Intertextuality as a reading strategy means looking for the connections between the text you are reading and others you have already read; anticipating connections with other texts that you have not yet read, but plan to; as well as connections to whole disciplines, fields, and social phenomena. Reading for intertextuality means looking for opportunities to connect texts with each other, and keeping track of those connections in a productive way.

This means note-taking is essential to intertextual reading. Once you have thought carefully about why you are reading a text, what types of information to look for, and what you will do with that information, you can better decide how to keep track of that information. In regards to literature reviews, one type of graphic organizer dominates: the Synthesis Matrix.

The synthesis matrix is a way to keep track of the themes, concepts, and patterns that are emerging from your reading—NOT all the individual content of each article. This is important, yes, and you will need the citations, but literature reviews move one step further into the topic than simply identifying the pieces. You will need to synthesize.

If you have an annotated bibliography of sources already, it is the perfect way to start your synthesis matrix. An annotated bibliography is often the first step in preparing for a literature review, and is quite similar to an ingredient list, if we are using the metaphor from the introduction. (For a detailed description of how to write an annotated bibliography, see Chapter 1 ).

In your annotations, you will have selected the most important information that text supplies in relation to your topic. For an example, let’s take the Conference on College Composition and Communication’s statement “ Students’ Right to Their Own Language ,” which contains two annotated bibliographies. The second uses more recent sources and looks most like the annotated bibliographies you will write as a student, so let’s start there.

Example 3.8: Here are three annotations from that bibliography. As you read, take notice of the different highlighted colors. Phrases italicized and highlighted green identify ideas related to linguistic identity , phrases bolded and highlighted in blue identify concepts related to grammar analysis , and phrases underlined and highlighted orange identify groups and ideas related to educational objectives :

Fought, Carmen. Chicano English in Context. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003.

Based primarily on data collected from adolescent and young adult native speakers in Los Angeles , this book is a comprehensive sociolinguistic study of language and language change in Latino/a communities. It provides the basics of Chicano English (CE) structure (phonology, syntax, and semantics) and its connection to the social and cultural identity of its speakers, along with detailed analyses of particular sociolinguistic variables. Emphasis is given to the historical, social, and linguistic contexts of CE. In addition, the differences between native and non-native CE speakers are covered. A final chapter discusses the future of research on CE.

Lippi-Green, Rosina. English with an Accent: Language, Ideology, and Discrimination in the United States . London and New York: Routledge, 1997.

The author examines linguistic facts about the structure and function of language , explores commonly held myths about language, and develops a model of “the language subordination process.” Then, using a case-study approach, she applies the model to specific institutional practices (e.g., in education, news media, business) to show how false assumptions about language lead to language subordination. The author analyzes specific groups and individuals (speakers of African American English, Southern U.S. English, and the foreign-language accent of Latinos and Asian Americans) and discusses why and how some embrace linguistic assimilation while others resist it.

Nero, Shondel J. Englishes in Contact: Anglophone Caribbean Students in an Urban College. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press, 2001.

This qualitative study of four anglophone Caribbean students at a New York City college offers an in-depth examination of the students’ written and spoken language and the challenges faced by both students and teachers as such students acquire academic literacy. Case studies of the four participants include excerpts from tape-recorded interviews, which reflect their linguistic self-perception, and sociolinguistic and educational experiences in their home countries and in New York City. Samples of their college writing over four semesters are represented and analyzed on morphosyntactic and discourse levels to determine the patterns that emerge when Creole English speakers attempt to write Standard Written English. Related issues such as language and identity , language attitudes, and educational responses to ethnolinguistic diversity are also discussed.

Once you have identified a concept like “language and identity” for your literature review, you can start getting “intertextual”! Review your other annotated sources and your new sources for their discussion of language and identity, as well as parallel concepts—what else do researchers address when they discuss language and identity? What do they discuss instead? Go back to the methods you used to come up with key terms for your literature search—the same strategies now apply to your reading. Also look for “umbrella” concepts, patterns in methodologies—anything that emerges while you read intertextually, focusing on the text in front of you while also remembering all the others you read before. Look for the themes in your annotated bibliography and keep track of the page numbers where these themes appear—plan to go back to those pages several times as you write your literature review.

This is a different type of reading than you did for the annotated bibliography, and might mean you go back and reread your sources several times in this new way—don’t think of this as just repeating labor you have already performed. This is new work, designed to uncover new things in the research. Re-reading articles multiple times is something all serious writers do, and something you should do, too. It isn’t redundant, it is recur sive .

Table 3.3: Synthesis Matrix for Individuals’ Choices in Linguistic Identity

Put your sources into conversations around your themes, as shown in the table above. Notice that the top row names the themes covered in that column, put into original wording similar, but not identical, to the wording in the annotated bibliographies. Not every source will address every topic—not every article is the same. The last row starts to describe what is happening in each column across the whole collection of texts. In this way, your synthesis matrix takes the ingredient list provided by the annotated bibliography and makes it into a recipe for your final product—the literature review.

More Resources 3.4: Synthesis Matrix

VI. Writing Strategies: Citation, Quotation, and Paraphrase

Citation is when you use the work of other authors in your writing and mark that portion of your writing so your reader understands what idea is being “borrowed.” Citation also tells your reader where they could find that original idea in the original text, and how your text fits together with the web of other texts related to your topic: in other words, citations help create intertextuality. A citation placed in your sentences should refer directly to the full bibliographic information in your Works Cited or References page.

As you read in Chapter 1, there are different styles of citation including AMA, APA, CMS, and MLA. You can refer back to that chapter for a more detailed explanation of each. In this section, we’ll cover the basics that are common to citation practices. Most academic styles use the original author’s last name as the central part of the in-text citation, since References pages usually list cited works alphabetically by last name, but some use footnotes or endnotes instead, listing works in the order they were cited. It is important to know which academic style you are using for your literature review so that you can make the right choice.

In-text citation takes one of two forms: parenthetical or narrative. In a narrative citation the author of the original work is mentioned in the sentence.

Example 3.9: Here’s an example taken from the introduction of the same literature review discussed in the Research Strategies: Developing a Methodology section of this chapter.

Several pieces offered a comprehensive review of the historical literature on the formation of Black English as a construct in the context of slavery and Jim Crow, and the historical teaching of Black English within the U .S. context, including Wheeler ( 2016 ) and Alim and Baugh (2007). Wheeler (2016) equated Standard English with ‘White’ English and challenged its hegemony in dialectically diverse classrooms. She named the “racism inherent in [fostering] bidialectalism [th rough teaching]” (p. 380), arguing that we are acknowledging that the only way for African-Americans to be upwardly mobile was to learn how to speak ‘White’ English. Alim (2010) , explained, “By uncritically presenting language varieties as ‘equal’ but diff ering in levels of ‘appropriateness,’ language and Dialect Awareness programs run the risk of silently legitimizing ‘Standard English’” (p. 215)…. Current work addressing AAVE studies has been shifting focus to translingualism and to promoting such pedag ogies as code-meshing (Young, Barrett, Young Rivera and Lovejoy, 2014) and translanguaging (García & Wei, García and Wei, 2014) , embedded in a critical analysis of the racial logics underpinning the denigration of some languages. This work, combined with e xtensive examinations of the connections between race, language, teaching, and identity ( e.g. Flores & Rosa, 2015; Alim et al., 2016 ), has laid a foundation for a raciolinguistics approach to teaching, which we return to later in this article. (Von Esch et al., 2020, p. 399, emphasis added .)

In the first sentence, we see two narrative citations just before the period. These citations state the authors’ names as a part of the sentence, and put the publication date of the articles in parenthesis. It makes sense to use a narrative citation in the topic sentence, since most of the paragraph is a synthesis of Wheeler and Alim’s research. The second sentence starts with Wheeler’s name in the subject position, and the fourth sentence starts with Alim’s name in the subject position—both are narrative citations, a form chosen by the author to emphasize the importance and similarities in the two articles.

In the last two sentences, we see parenthetical citations. The citation information is in parenthesis within the sentences, which focuses the reader on the ideas, not the research itself. Imagine you were reading this article out loud—you would most certainly say the narrative citations “Wheeler” and “Alim”; you might choose not to say “Young, Barrett, Young-Rivera, & Lovejoy, 2014,” though, and no one listening to you would notice the omission. This is the most important difference between narrative and parenthetical citation—narrative draws attention to the researchers, while parenthetical allows a focus on ideas. In academic writing, you often have reason to use both, but it is important to note that using parenthetical citation is less disruptive to your voice—it keeps a reader focused on the ideas you are explaining.

Usually you are citing a type of quotation in your text (although different disciplines have other situations that they cite). Direct quotation and paraphrase are usually what we talk about when we talk about using resources in your writing, although summary is cited as well.

Direct quotation is when you take the original words of one author and place them in your own text. When you quote in your own writing, you mark the copied text—usually with quotation marks “” around the text and a citation afterwards. Quoting is useful when the original author is an important authority on a topic or if you want to define/describe another’s point of view in a way that leaves no room for misinterpretation.

In a literature review, a direct quote will almost always be accompanied by a narrative citation. But direct quoting can cause some issues in your own text, such as a sudden shift in voice and a loss of cohesion; the potential for misunderstanding and misrepresentation, since the quote has been separated from its original context; and wordiness —quotes can take up too much space both in terms of the quote itself, and of the explanation and context you must provide for the introduced idea. For these reasons, literature reviews do not contain much direct quoting.

Paraphrasing is a way to accomplish similar goals to direct quoting without causing the same problems. Paraphrasing is when you use only the original author’s key terms and ideas, but your own words. Paraphrasing still contains a citation afterwards that directs the reader to the full bibliographic information in your Works Cited, but does not require quotation marks since the language is yours. Paraphrase may be longer or shorter than the original author’s text, and uses both narrative and parenthetical citation. Paraphrase also allows you to cite more than one piece of research containing the same idea in a single sentence, such as the last sentence in the example paragraph above. This kind of citation string is important to literature reviews because it clearly identifies patterns and trends in research findings.

Key Takeaways

• Literature reviews are a synthesis of what other researchers have discovered on your topic. Think of reviews as “the big picture.”
• Taking so much information from other sources can get confusing–use section headings to keep your review organized and clear.
• Diverse citation, quotation, and paraphrasing techniques are necessary to help your reader understand where the ideas are coming from, AND to help make the ideas “stick together.”
• Keeping all the new knowledge you are learning from your sources organized is hard! Take notes using citations and use a graphic organizer to keep yourself on track.

Fernandez, Lord, H., Halcomb, E., Moxham, L., Middleton, R., Alananzeh, I., & Ellwood, L. (2020). Implications for COVID-19: A systematic review of nurses’ experiences of working in acute care hospital settings during a respiratory pandemic. International Journal of Nursing Studies , 111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2020.103637

Kassin, S. M., & Gudjonsson, G. H. (2004). The psychology of confessions. Psychological Science in the Public Interest , 5 (2), 33–67. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1529-1006.2004.00016.x

National Council of Teachers of English. (2018, June 16). Students’ right to their own language (with bibliography) . Conference on College Composition and Communication. Retrieved July 24, 2022, from https://cccc.ncte.org/cccc/resources/positions/srtolsummary

NEIU Libraries. (2020). “How should I search in a database?”  YouTube . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8fgBF0EuH_o

Ratcliffe, E. (2021). Summary Flowchart [Image]. Frontiers in Psychology. https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.570563/full#B3

Ratcliffe, E. (2021). Sound and soundscape in restorative natural environments: A narrative literature review. Frontiers in Psychology , 12 . https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.570563

Sasaki. K. (2022). Synthesis and Recipes [Image].

Von Esch, K., Motha, S., & Kubota, R. (2020). Race and language teaching. Language Teaching, 53 (4), 391-421. doi:10.1017/S0261444820000269

Writing for Inquiry and Research Copyright © 2023 by Charitianne Williams is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

How to Write a Literature Review: Home

Introduction.

This libguide offers an overview on how to write a literature review in general. If you need further information or personal consultation, please contact Junli Diao, Assistant Professor/Head of Cataloging & Serials. If you need help in writing a systematic review, please contact Stefka Tzanova, Assistant Professor/Science Librarian.

What is a literature review?

A literature review is a comprehensive survey of research done on a specific topic. A literature review can be part of a research article, a proposal or a dissertation, providing readers with background information connected to the chosen research question. It can also be taken as an independent piece to demonstrate a thorough understanding of a subject or a research area. If it is the first time to write a literature review, this could be a challenging process.

What is the purpose of a literature review?

A literature review serves various purposes. A well-done literature review demonstrates to readers what is already known and what is not yet known in a research area, and it shows the extent of your familiarity with other research on the chosen topic. A good literature review helps create an effective dialogue between readers and the researcher. As part of a research paper or dissertation, one of the added values lies in identifying inconsistencies, disparities, gaps or blank spots in current research through synthesizing, analyzing, and critiquing previous research, which helps build the rationale why further, extended or a totally new investigation is essentially required by the current study. So, a literature review sets the stage and justifies the purpose of a study, which builds close connection with the methodology chosen in the research.

A stand-alone literature review (sometimes it is called a review article once it is published in comparison to research articles that collect and analyze data) can be an assignment of the course you are taking. A stand-alone literature review can also be the outcome of an Independent Study project that you registered for. Both situations require that current knowledge of a specific topic should be collected, evaluated, summarized and synthesized, leading to an insightful argument or a meaningful conclusion. Comparatively speaking, a literature review required by an Independent Study should demonstrate extensive and deep analysis, which leads to a systematic review.

How to choose a topic?

Identifying the right topic to review is the first, but crucial step in writing a good literature review. Sometimes, your professor offers you a list of specific topics to choose from or asks you to create a research question from a list of broader topics that they supplied. If that is the case, things can be becoming easier. Be aware that actually how much you understand the content taught in the class by your professor and how familiar you are with required and selective readings for the course will help you write a literature review that meets the assignment criteria. Sometimes, it is totally up to you to make the decision what topic you want to review. If the topic is too broad, your writing will become difficult to manage because you will be facing countless materials; if the topic is too narrow, it goes in the opposite direction because there is nothing much to read and write. For instance, “global warming” is too broad a topic, and the search in a regular database like Academic Search Complete yields tons of resources. But if you choose “developing countries’ political response toward global warming,” it will become less daunting and more manageable. Choose something that you find interesting. Too broad or too specific of a focus will waste your time. To know how to narrow a broader research topic, please consult this libguide .

How to find reading resources?

Once you decide the appropriate topic, what comes next is to find things to read. There are two categories of resources that you can actually utilize: scholarly resources and popular resources (here is a link to a youtube video). Scholarly resources include empirical journal articles, dissertations, books, review articles, scholarly essays, textbooks, encyclopedias and dictionaries. Popular resources include nationally and international renowned magazines and newspapers. If you are working on a course assignment, keep in mind the criteria described in the assignment and understand what kind of materials are preferred. For instance, your professor might put a limitation on the publication date and ask you to review scholarly articles published in the past ten years. Whatever resources you are looking for, please do take advantage of library services to find relevant ones: Databases by Subject and LibGuide . If you have any question or doubt, please contact the subject liaison librarian without hesitation.

How to read and organize reading materials?

How to efficiently read collected materials is a personal and complex task. My personal strategy is to read, organize, read again and reflect. I read every piece from its title to its reference list and try to understand as much as I can without doing much reflection or criticism in the first round. The benefit is three fold: gain a quick, general understanding of what I have collected and what is going on in the field; retrieve more relevant articles by checking the reference list; and organize my materials and decide what is to be kept and brought to the next stage of reading and what is to be discarded. I usually categorize the kept materials by topic, research methods, similar findings, chronological order, or by authors’ who share the common or opposite arguments, and then I thoroughly read selected materials again. This time, I usually highlight key points, important sentences, mark questions, and take notes. I do not spend too much time reading part of articles that are less important or totally irrelevant to the topic. Reading is a personal activity and you can only develop your own strategies by reading more.

How to write and structure a literature review?

Writing is another personal and complex task. A literature review is not piling up who-said-what together or stitching together others’ research results. If it is your first time to write a literature review, try to write a summary of each material that you chose, identify similarities and differences of summaries, and then group them accordingly and reflect on the reasons. If the literature review is part of a research article or a dissertation, pay attention to coherence with the preceding and succeeding sections. Basically, your writing should enable readers to feel like blood running in a vessel without any blockage. If you are working on a stand-alone literature review, such as for a course assignment, you should be aware of its basic structure: introduction, main body and conclusion. Generally speaking, the introduction provides the background or purpose of the literature review. A straight-forward, informative, and strategically-led introduction will leave a good first impression on readers. The main body contains a review of the literature, logically and coherently, that you read. Depending on how long your paper is expected to be, it may involve headings and subheadings to indicate the theme of each section. How well the materials are categorized and how many notes are taken, organized, summarized, and reflected lay a good foundation for the main body of a literature review. Finally, your literature review calls for a conclusion that demonstrates how well the question raised in the introduction has been answered and how well the goal of the review has been achieved. You could summarize the key points already discussed or make implications to the researched field, as well as pointing out any limitation(s) of the current study and/or making any recommendation(s) for future work when necessary. Do summarize and highlight what you have done in the conclusion. Do not add new, irrelevant arguments or information, which is distractive and confusing.

How to cite resources?

The final part is to create a reference list that shows the materials that you consulted and used in the manuscript. Be aware what citation style is preferred by the requirements of your writing assignment, proposal guideline, dissertation, or journal. At the Circulation and Reserve section in the York College Library, you can check out APA, MLA, Chicago style handbooks. You can also take advantage of Purdue Owl for instant and up-to-date examples and tutorials or the citation libguide for more information. If you want to improve and polish your writing techniques, please visit the Collaborative Learning Center , where one-on-one, small group and online writing tutoring are offered. If you have more questions, the reference desk provides walk-in services, or you could email us or contact subject liaison librarians for consultation.

Asst Prof/Head of Cataloging & Serials

Useful Databases

Please take advantage of the database of Annual Review and you can find excellent review articles. Generally speaking, in a regular database, such as PsycARTICLEs and PsycINFO you can find a feature called "Document Type," which helps limit the results within the scope of review articles.

• Annual Reviews This link opens in a new window A nonprofit publisher dedicated to synthesizing and integrating knowledge for the progress of science and the benefit of society.
• PsycARTICLES This link opens in a new window Full-text, peer-reviewed articles in social and behavioral sciences published by the APA.
• PsycINFO 1887-Current This link opens in a new window Index of the literature in psychology and related disciplines such as psychiatry, education, business, medicine, nursing, pharmacology, law, linguistics, and social work.
• Last Updated: Sep 18, 2023 10:51 AM
• URL: https://libguides.york.cuny.edu/literature_review

Research Methods and Design

• Action Research
• Case Study Design

Literature Review

• Quantitative Research Methods
• Qualitative Research Methods
• Mixed Methods Study
• Indigenous Research and Ethics This link opens in a new window
• Identifying Empirical Research Articles This link opens in a new window
• Research Ethics and Quality
• Data Literacy
• Get Help with Writing Assignments

A literature review is a discussion of the literature (aka. the "research" or "scholarship") surrounding a certain topic. A good literature review doesn't simply summarize the existing material, but provides thoughtful synthesis and analysis. The purpose of a literature review is to orient your own work within an existing body of knowledge. A literature review may be written as a standalone piece or be included in a larger body of work.

You can read more about literature reviews, what they entail, and how to write one, using the resources below. 

Am I the only one struggling to write a literature review?

Dr. Zina O'Leary explains the misconceptions and struggles students often have with writing a literature review. She also provides step-by-step guidance on writing a persuasive literature review.

An Introduction to Literature Reviews

Dr. Eric Jensen, Professor of Sociology at the University of Warwick, and Dr. Charles Laurie, Director of Research at Verisk Maplecroft, explain how to write a literature review, and why researchers need to do so. Literature reviews can be stand-alone research or part of a larger project. They communicate the state of academic knowledge on a given topic, specifically detailing what is still unknown.

This is the first video in a whole series about literature reviews. You can find the rest of the series in our SAGE database, Research Methods:

Videos covering research methods and statistics

Identify Themes and Gaps in Literature (with real examples) | Scribbr

Finding connections between sources is key to organizing the arguments and structure of a good literature review. In this video, you'll learn how to identify themes, debates, and gaps between sources, using examples from real papers.

4 Tips for Writing a Literature Review's Intro, Body, and Conclusion | Scribbr

While each review will be unique in its structure--based on both the existing body of both literature and the overall goals of your own paper, dissertation, or research--this video from Scribbr does a good job simplifying the goals of writing a literature review for those who are new to the process. In this video, you’ll learn what to include in each section, as well as 4 tips for the main body illustrated with an example.

• Literature Review This chapter in SAGE's Encyclopedia of Research Design describes the types of literature reviews and scientific standards for conducting literature reviews.
• UNC Writing Center: Literature Reviews This handout from the Writing Center at UNC will explain what literature reviews are and offer insights into the form and construction of literature reviews in the humanities, social sciences, and sciences.
• Purdue OWL: Writing a Literature Review The overview of literature reviews comes from Purdue's Online Writing Lab. It explains the basic why, what, and how of writing a literature review.

Organizational Tools for Literature Reviews

One of the most daunting aspects of writing a literature review is organizing your research. There are a variety of strategies that you can use to help you in this task. We've highlighted just a few ways writers keep track of all that information! You can use a combination of these tools or come up with your own organizational process. The key is choosing something that works with your own learning style.

Citation Managers

Citation managers are great tools, in general, for organizing research, but can be especially helpful when writing a literature review. You can keep all of your research in one place, take notes, and organize your materials into different folders or categories. Read more about citations managers here:

• Manage Citations & Sources

Concept Mapping

Some writers use concept mapping (sometimes called flow or bubble charts or "mind maps") to help them visualize the ways in which the research they found connects.

There is no right or wrong way to make a concept map. There are a variety of online tools that can help you create a concept map or you can simply put pen to paper. To read more about concept mapping, take a look at the following help guides:

• Using Concept Maps From Williams College's guide, Literature Review: A Self-guided Tutorial

Synthesis Matrix

A synthesis matrix is is a chart you can use to help you organize your research into thematic categories. By organizing your research into a matrix, like the examples below, can help you visualize the ways in which your sources connect. 

• Walden University Writing Center: Literature Review Matrix Find a variety of literature review matrix examples and templates from Walden University.
• Writing A Literature Review and Using a Synthesis Matrix An example synthesis matrix created by NC State University Writing and Speaking Tutorial Service Tutors. If you would like a copy of this synthesis matrix in a different format, like a Word document, please ask a librarian. CC-BY-SA 3.0
• << Previous: Case Study Design
• Next: Quantitative Research Methods >>
• Last Updated: May 7, 2024 9:51 AM

CityU Home - CityU Catalog

Evidence-Based Practice (EBP)

• The EBP Process
• Forming a Clinical Question
• Inclusion & Exclusion Criteria
• Acquiring Evidence
• Appraising the Quality of the Evidence
• Writing a Literature Review
• Finding Psychological Tests & Assessment Instruments

What Is a Literature Review?

A literature review is an integrated analysis of scholarly writings that are related directly to your research question. Put simply, it's  a critical evaluation of what's already been written on a particular topic . It represents the literature that provides background information on your topic and shows a connection between those writings and your research question.

A literature review may be a stand-alone work or the introduction to a larger research paper, depending on the assignment. Rely heavily on the guidelines your instructor has given you.

What a Literature Review Is Not:

• A list or summary of sources
• An annotated bibliography
• A grouping of broad, unrelated sources
• A compilation of everything that has been written on a particular topic
• Literary criticism (think English) or a book review

Why Literature Reviews Are Important

• They explain the background of research on a topic
• They demonstrate why a topic is significant to a subject area
• They discover relationships between research studies/ideas
• They identify major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic
• They identify critical gaps and points of disagreement
• They discuss further research questions that logically come out of the previous studies

To Learn More about Conducting and Writing a Lit Review . . .

Monash University (in Australia) has created several extremely helpful, interactive tutorials. 

• The Stand-Alone Literature Review, https://www.monash.edu/rlo/assignment-samples/science/stand-alone-literature-review
• Researching for Your Literature Review,  https://guides.lib.monash.edu/researching-for-your-literature-review/home
• Writing a Literature Review,  https://www.monash.edu/rlo/graduate-research-writing/write-the-thesis/writing-a-literature-review

Keep Track of Your Sources!

A citation manager can be helpful way to work with large numbers of citations. See UMSL Libraries' Citing Sources guide for more information. Personally, I highly recommend Zotero —it's free, easy to use, and versatile. If you need help getting started with Zotero or one of the other citation managers, please contact a librarian.

• << Previous: Appraising the Quality of the Evidence
• Next: Finding Psychological Tests & Assessment Instruments >>
• Last Updated: May 16, 2024 2:44 PM
• URL: https://libguides.umsl.edu/ebp

Literature Review Guide: What is a Literature Review?

• What is a Literature Review?
• How to start?
• Picking your research question and searching
• Search strategies and Databases
• How to organise the review
• Examples of Literature Reviews
• Library summary

What is a literature review?

A literature review is an overview of the previously published works on a topic.

There are different types of literature reviews.

A stand alone literature review can be a single work in its own right.  Examples include

• A class assignment/essay.
• A review article

Literature reviews can also form a part of larger bodies of work. Examples include

• A thesis / dissertation/ final year project.
• An academic journal article introduction.

University of Reading: Literature Review Guide

Writing the literature review.

• What is a literature review Includes an example literature review, and guidelines for literature review structure. From James Cook University.

Literature review

Literature review checklist.

• Checklist for Analysing Literature Reviews

 From the Markville Secondary School site in Canada.  This is a checklist for analysing Literature Reviews but will be of use to those writing Literature Reviews too. 

This Libguide is licensed under Creative Commons as 

Video that may help

North Carolina State Library’s video on literature reviews. gives a defination of literature review, ad details of the sturcture and process of creating a literature review.  

Undertaking a Literature review: step by step approach

• Cronin, P., Ryan, F., & Coughlan, M. (2008). Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach. British journal of nursing, 17(1), 38.

Although this article is aimed at Nursing students the principles can be applied to the creation of any Literature Review.

• Next: How to start? >>
• Last Updated: Sep 6, 2024 3:37 PM
• URL: https://ait.libguides.com/literaturereview

Engineering

• Find Articles
• Organizations
• Research Process
• Interactive Tutorials This link opens in a new window
• Cite Your Work
• Plagiarism This link opens in a new window
• Literature reviews
• Presenting Your Research This link opens in a new window
• Patents, Trademarks, and Copyright This link opens in a new window
• Library Use and COVID-19 This link opens in a new window

Literature Reviews in Engineering

What is a literature review.

"A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. Occasionally you will be asked to write one as a separate assignment ... but more often it is part of the introduction to an essay, research report, or thesis. In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries."

--Written by Dena Taylor, Health Sciences Writing Centre and available at  http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/advice/specific-types-of-writing/literature-review  (Accessed August 27th, 2019)

What is the purpose of a literature review?

Not to be confused with a book review, a  literature review  surveys scholarly articles, books and other sources (e.g. dissertations, conference proceedings, reports) relevant to a particular issue, area of research, or theory.  Literature reviews provide a description, summary, and critical evaluation of each work. The purpose is to offer an overview of and background on significant literature published on a topic, as well as your own critical thinking on how these works comprise this background, and what questions remain unaddressed by the existing literature.  A literature review's purpose is to:

Place each work in the context of its contribution

Describe the relationship of each work to others under consideration

Identify new ways to interpret and shed light on any gaps in previous research

Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies

Identify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication of effort (or retest previous effort to confirm or dispute it)

Point the way forward for further research

Place one's original work in the context of existing literature

The Literature Review Process:

Writing a literature review is a non-linear process. You may decide to revise your research question, find more resources and discard resources you've already found, change the way you want to structure your literature review, or how you want to address theories and ideas. Also, as you find resources on your topic, you will find that what you're writing is part of a larger conversation. There are already leading theories and a history on the topic you're pursuing and leaders who are already publishing their ideas. You'll become part of that conversation.

• Choose a topic to explore and develop a research question to focus your research. You may revise this as you go.
• Research and collect information from a variety of sources - books, journal articles, patents, conference proceedings, theses and dissertations, etc.
• Make note of those who are leading the conversation and the main theories in this field of research.
• Make a brief note for each source of information. How do your sources support or contradict your theories?
• Keep track of citations. You may want to use a citation manager such as EndNote or Zotero.
• Organize your thoughts. What do you want to say and how do you want to say it?
• Read sources more completely that fit within the scope of your research question.
• Write, revise, proof-read, and add a bibliography.

Elements of a literature review:

An overview of the subject, issue or theory under consideration, along with the objectives of the literature review

Division of works under review into categories (e.g. those in support of a particular position, those against, and those offering alternative theses entirely)

Explanation of how each work is similar to and how it varies from the others

Conclusions as to which pieces are best considered in their argument, and make the greatest contribution to the understanding and development of their area of research  

The literature review does not present new  primary  scholarship.  That comes in the section of your research that describes your experimentation (see the Research Process tab under Getting Started With Research).

• Literature Reviews: An Overview for Graduate Students Created by the North Caroline State University Libraries
• The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting It Written by Dena Taylor, Health Sciences Writing Centre, University of Toronto
• Tips & Tools on Literature Reviews Created by The Writing Center at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill
• "Learn How" from University of Wisconsin Clear definitions for each section of the lit review

What is a Literature Review and Why is it important?

A literature review not only summarizes the knowledge of a particular area or field of study, it also evaluates what has been done, what still needs to be done and why all of this is important to the subject.  , the stand-alone literature review:.

When a literature review stands alone, it is reviewing what is known about the topic, analyzed for trends, controversial issues, and what still needs to be studied to better understand the topic at hand. A stand-alone literature review can be as short as a few pages or may be more extensive with long bibliographies for in-depth reviews. 

• Three-dimensional display technologies for anatomical education: a literature review
• A systematic literature review of US engineering ethics interventions
• From Bitcoin to cybersecurity: A comparative study of blockchain application and security issues

The Literature Review as a Section:

Literature reviews can be used as part of dissertations, theses, research reports, and scholarly journal articles. They generally discuss what has been done before and how the research being introduced in this document fills a gap in the field's knowledge and why it is an important.  

• Ghost driver: A field study investigating the interaction between pedestrians and driverless vehicles
• An empirical study of wearable technology acceptance in healthcare

Annotated bibliographies

• What is an annotated bibliography?
• Writing an annotated bibliography
• Example annotations

WHAT IS AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY?

An annotated bibliography is a list of citations to books, articles, and documents. Each citation is followed by a brief (usually about 150 words) descriptive and evaluative paragraph, the annotation. The purpose of the annotation is to inform the reader of the relevance, accuracy, and quality of the sources cited.

ANNOTATIONS VS. ABSTRACTS

Abstracts are the purely descriptive summaries often found at the beginning of scholarly journal articles or in periodical indexes. Annotations are descriptive and critical; they may describe the author's point of view, authority, or clarity and appropriateness of expression.

Permission to use all content in the tabs on this page granted from: Olin Library Reference Research & Learning Services Cornell University Library Ithaca, NY, USA

This guide shared under a Creative Commons Commons Deed, version 2.0 regarding attribution, noncommercial use, and "Share Alike" reuse.

WRITING AN ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Creating an annotated bibliography calls for the application of a variety of intellectual skills: concise exposition, succinct analysis, and informed library research.

• First, locate and record citations to books, periodicals, and documents that may contain useful information and ideas on your topic. Briefly examine and review the actual items. Then choose those works that provide a variety of perspectives on your topic.
• Cite the book, article, or document using the appropriate style -- here is a page explaining and offering examples of the different major citation styles.
• Write a concise annotation that summarizes the central theme and scope of the book or article. Include one or more sentences that (a) evaluate the authority or background of the author, (b) comment on the intended audience, (c) compare or contrast this work with another you have cited, or (d) explain how this work illuminates your bibliography topic.

SAMPLE ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY ENTRY FOR A JOURNAL ARTICLE

The following example uses APA style ( Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association , 6th edition, 2010)  for the journal citation:

Waite, L. J., Goldschneider, F. K., & Witsberger, C. (1986). Nonfamily living and the erosion of traditional family orientations among young adults.  American Sociological Review,   51 , 541-554. The authors, researchers at the Rand Corporation and Brown University, use data from the National Longitudinal Surveys of Young Women and Young Men to test their hypothesis that nonfamily living by young adults alters their attitudes, values, plans, and expectations, moving them away from their belief in traditional sex roles. They find their hypothesis strongly supported in young females, while the effects were fewer in studies of young males. Increasing the time away from parents before marrying increased individualism, self-sufficiency, and changes in attitudes about families. In contrast, an earlier study by Williams cited below shows no significant gender differences in sex role attitudes as a result of nonfamily living.

This example uses MLA style ( MLA Handbook , 8th edition, 2016)  for the journal citation:

Waite, Linda J., et al. "Nonfamily Living and the Erosion of Traditional Family Orientations Among Young Adults."  American Sociological Review,  vol. 51, no. 4, 1986, pp. 541-554. The authors, researchers at the Rand Corporation and Brown University, use data from the National Longitudinal Surveys of Young Women and Young Men to test their hypothesis that nonfamily living by young adults alters their attitudes, values, plans, and expectations, moving them away from their belief in traditional sex roles. They find their hypothesis strongly supported in young females, while the effects were fewer in studies of young males. Increasing the time away from parents before marrying increased individualism, self-sufficiency, and changes in attitudes about families. In contrast, an earlier study by Williams cited below shows no significant gender differences in sex role attitudes as a result of nonfamily living.

• Additional examples from Purdue OWL (Online Writing Lab)
• << Previous: Plagiarism
• Next: Presenting Your Research >>
• Last Updated: Jul 8, 2024 9:36 AM
• URL: https://libraries.wichita.edu/engineering

Literature Review

What is a literature review, components of a literature review, creative commons license.

• 1. Find Sources
• 2. Evaluate Sources
• 3. Organize Information

• Contact your Librarian

A literature review is a summary and evaluation of significant documents and developments on a topic. Completing a literature review will ensure a good understanding of a topic.

Start by identifying key documents on a topic and compile a bibliography or list. Gather significant documents relating to your topic, including books, journal articles, newspaper articles, etc. Use journal citation reports to help identify frequently referenced articles.

Depending of the type of literature review being conducted you might need anywhere from 5-50 references. An undergraduate review could require anywhere from 5-20 titles, depending on the type of assignment, while a thesis would require more in depth knowledge of a topic, with 20-50 references or more. Ask your instructor for specific details.

Group the literature into key themes and theories and use these grouping as headings to organize your writing.

A literature review can be a stand-alone document, or it may be part of the introduction of an essay or thesis, providing an overview of key themes and context for the larger report.

The introduction presents the topic of research, address any controversies and provide background information and history of the topic.

The body can be broken down into headings related to themes, theories and trends in the literature. Each heading should summarize and evaluate the literature for its contributions, and identify any strengths, weaknesses, contradictions and gaps in the research.

The conclusion summarizes key concepts and trends found in the literature. The conclusion may indicate what contributions your research will make and/or suggest possibilities for future studies.

A literature review that is an introductory part of an essay or thesis should conclude by indicating what contributions your research will make to the field. The conclusion of a stand-alone literature review should suggest practical applications for the research and possibilities for future studies in the field. It may also be accompanied by an annotated bibliography, briefly summarizing each source.

• Finding Books
• Finding Articles
• Search Citators
• Evaluate Your Sources
• Cite Your Findings
• Article Citation Numbers
• Organize Information into Sections
• Draw Conclusions
• Types of Literature Reviews
• Introduction

This guide was created by Ontario Tech Libraries and is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License , except where otherwise noted. 

• Next: 1. Find Sources >>
• Last Updated: Mar 18, 2024 1:56 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.ontariotechu.ca/literaturereview

Literature Reviews

• Getting Started

Selecting a Review Type

Defining the scope of your review, four common types of reviews.

• Developing a Research Question
• Searching the Literature
• Searching Tips
• ChatGPT [beta]
• Documenting your Search
• Using Citation Managers
• Concept Mapping
• Writing the Review
• Further Resources

More Review Types

This article by Sutton & Booth (2019) explores 48 distinct types of Literature Reviews:

Which Review is Right for You?

The  Right Review tool  has questions about your lit review process and plans. It offers a qualitative and quantitative option. At completion, you are given a lit review type recommendation.

You'll want to think about the kind of review you are doing. Is it a selective or comprehensive review? Is the review part of a larger work or a stand-alone work ?

For example, if you're writing the Literature Review section of a journal article, that's a selective review which is part of a larger work. Alternatively, if you're writing a review article, that's a comprehensive review which is a stand-alone work. Thinking about this will help you develop the scope of the review.

This exercise will help define the scope of your Literature Review, setting the boundaries for which literature to include and which to exclude.

A FEW GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS WHEN DEFINING SCOPE

• Which populations to investigate — this can include gender, age, socio-economic status, race, geographic location, etc., if the research area includes humans.
• What years to include — if researching the legalization of medicinal cannabis, you might only look at the previous 20 years; but if researching dolphin mating practices, you might extend many more decades.
• Which subject areas — if researching artificial intelligence, subject areas could be computer science, robotics, or health sciences
• How many sources  — a selective review for a class assignment might only need ten, while a comprehensive review for a dissertation might include hundreds. There is no one right answer.
• There will be many other considerations that are more specific to your topic. 

Most databases will allow you to limit years and subject areas, so look for those tools while searching. See the Searching Tips tab for information on how use these tools.

LITERATURE REVIEW

• Often used as a generic term to describe any type of review
• More precise definition:  Published materials that provide an examination of published literature . Can cover wide range of subjects at various levels of comprehensiveness.
• Identifies gaps in research, explains importance of topic, hypothesizes future work, etc.
• Usually written as part of a larger work like a journal article or dissertation

SCOPING REVIEW

• Conducted to address broad research questions with the goal of understanding the extent of research that has been conducted.
• Provides a preliminary assessment of the potential size and scope of available research literature. It aims to identify the nature and extent of research evidence (usually including ongoing research) 
• Doesn't assess the quality of the literature gathered (i.e. presence of literature on a topic shouldn’t be conflated w/ the quality of that literature)
• " Preparing scoping reviews for publication using methodological guides and reporting standards " is a great article to read on Scoping Reviews

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

• Common in the health sciences ( Taubman Health Sciences Library guide to Systematic Reviews )
• Goal: collect all literature that meets specific criteria (methodology, population, treatment, etc.) and then appraise its quality and synthesize it
• Follows strict protocol for literature collection, appraisal and synthesis
• Typically performed by research teams 
• Takes 12-18 months to complete
• Often written as a stand alone work

META-ANALYSIS

• Goes one step further than a systematic review by statistically combining the results of quantitative studies to provide a more precise effect of the results. 
• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: Developing a Research Question >>
• Last Updated: May 9, 2024 11:44 AM
• URL: https://guides.lib.umich.edu/litreview

• eLibrary Home
• eLibrary Login

Home > Journals > AIS Journals > CAIS > Vol. 37 (2015)

A Guide to Conducting a Standalone Systematic Literature Review

Chitu Okoli , Concordia University Follow

Many scholars are not well trained in conducting a standalone literature review, a scholarly paper that in its entirety summarizes and synthesizes knowledge from a prior body of research. Numerous guides that exist for information systems (IS) research mainly concentrate on only certain parts of the process; few span the entire process. This paper introduces the rigorous, standardized methodology for the systematic literature review (also called systematic review) to IS scholars. This comprehensive guide extends the base methodology from the health sciences and other fields with numerous adaptations to meet the needs of methodologically diverse fields such as IS research, especially those that involve including and synthesizing both quantitative and qualitative studies. Moreover, this guide provides many examples from IS research and provides references to guides with further helpful details for conducting a rigorous and valuable literature review. Although tailored to IS research, it is sufficiently broad to be applicable and valuable to scholars from any social science field.

10.17705/1CAIS.03743

Recommended Citation

Okoli, C. (2015). A Guide to Conducting a Standalone Systematic Literature Review. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37, pp-pp. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03743

Since November 23, 2015

When commenting on articles, please be friendly, welcoming, respectful and abide by the AIS eLibrary Discussion Thread Code of Conduct posted here .

• Journal Home
• About This Journal
• Editorial Board
• Submission Requirements
• Open Review Depository
• Best of CAIS
• Past Editors-in-Chief
• Submit an Author-Video Here
• Most Popular Papers
• Receive Email Notices or RSS

Advanced Search

ISSN: 1529-3181

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

Posted on Dec 4, 2015 in

Okoli 2015: A Guide to Conducting a Standalone Systematic Literature Review

Many scholars are not well trained in conducting a standalone literature review, a scholarly paper that in its entirety summarizes and synthesizes knowledge from a prior body of research. Numerous guides that exist for information systems (IS) research mainly concentrate on only certain parts of the process; few span the entire process. This paper introduces the rigorous, standardized methodology for the systematic literature review (also called systematic review) to IS scholars. This comprehensive guide extends the base methodology from the health sciences and other fields with numerous adaptations to meet the needs of methodologically diverse fields such as IS research, especially those that involve including and synthesizing both quantitative and qualitative studies. Moreover, this guide provides many examples from IS research and provides references to guides with further helpful details for conducting a rigorous and valuable literature review. Although tailored to IS research, it is sufficiently broad to be applicable and valuable to scholars from any social science field.

Download the official publisher version here: Full Text PDF (courtesy of the Association for Information Systems open access license).

A Systematic Guide to Literature Review Development

Very interesting keep it up.

Post a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• Teaching philosophy
• Build theory with literature reviews
• COMM 226: Business Technology Management
• BTM 382: Database Management
• BTM 395: Internet Programming
• DESC 495: IS design and implementation
• DESC 384: Business data communications
• DESC 391: Object-oriented programming
• Core of object-oriented programming
• Publications
• Open content and open source software
• Research methodology
• Internet in developing countries
• Competitive strategy using the Internet
• Miscellaneous research topics

βίος – Professional

• Professional Background
• Professional Contact
• Professional
• Family and Friends
• Where I’ve Been
• Zoe: my spiritual life
• Gospel and truth
• Church life
• Rivers of living water
• Christian songs

Read the Bible every day, a chapter at a time

Posted by Chitu in Rivers of Living Water

Recovery Version Bible Review

Posted by Chitu in Gospel and Truth

Sending PHP mail from localhost

Posted by Chitu in Computers and the Internet

Display advanced Unicode in Oracle SQL Developer

Create test data for a database with foreign keys, recovery version crosswire version, piazza for students: helpful tips.

Posted by Chitu in Teaching

The jubilee is only for captives

New testament grace, whetten 1989: what constitutes a theoretical contribution.

Posted by Chitu in Research summaries

People are Thirsty

Follow my professional twitter stream.

© 2008–2024 Chitu Okoli. This page is licensed Creative Commons BY-NC-SA , unless specified otherwise.

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

The 4 Key Strengths of China’s Economy — and What They Mean for Multinational Companies

• Mitch Presnick
• James B. Estes

Companies that fail to understand them risk falling behind.

China’s hybrid “state capitalist” system, driven by centralized planning and fierce competition, has led to dominance in critical technological fields and emerging markets. Western multinational corporations are advised to adopt a pragmatic approach to capitalize on four key strengths of China’s economy: its innovation ecosystem, its investment in the Global South, its ultra-competitive markets, and its vast consumer base. Those who fail to engage risk losing global revenue and strategic opportunities.

In 1978, Deng Xiaoping launched his “Reform and Opening” policy to leverage Western technology and know-how for China’s development. It was a politically risky move: Ideological hardliners in the Communist Party resented the implicit assumption of China’s economic backwardness under socialism — and the superiority of the capitalist West. But Deng recognized that China’s modernization required both pragmatism and humility.

• MP Mitch Presnick is a visiting fellow of practice at the Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies at Harvard University. He is the founder and former chair & CEO of Super 8 Hotels China, the founder and former managing director of the China practice of APCO Worldwide, a Washington D.C. advisory and advocacy firm, and the former vice chair of the American Chamber of Commerce in China.
• JE James B. Estes is a senior at St. Paul’s School, Concord New Hampshire. He is research assistant to visiting fellow of practice Mitch Presnick at the Fairbank Center of Chinese Studies at Harvard University. He is co-founder and project director for educational startup company Reason & Rationality LLC.

Partner Center

Log in using your username and password

• Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
• Latest content
• Current issue
• For authors
• New editors
• BMJ Journals

You are here

• Online First
• Effects of muscle strength training combined with aerobic training versus aerobic training alone on cardiovascular disease risk indicators in patients with coronary artery disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials
• Article Text
• Article info
• Citation Tools
• Rapid Responses
• Article metrics

• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6623-6994 Tasuku Terada 1 , 2 ,
• Robert Pap 3 ,
• Abby Thomas 4 ,
• Roger Wei 5 ,
• Takumi Noda 6 , 7 ,
• Sarah Visintini 8 ,
• Jennifer L Reed 2 , 9 , 10
• 1 Physiology, Pharmacology and Neuroscience, School of Life Sciences , University of Nottingham , Nottingham , UK
• 2 Exercise Physiology and Cardiovascular Health Lab, Division of Cardiac Prevention and Rehabilitation, University of Ottawa Heart Institute , Ottawa , ON , Canada
• 3 University of Alberta Faculty of Medicine & Dentistry , Edmonton , AB , Canada
• 4 Department of Community Health Sciences , University of Calgary , Calgary , AB , Canada
• 5 Faculty of Medicine , University of Ottawa , Ottawa , ON , Canada
• 6 Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Department of Rehabilitation Sciences , Kitasato University , Sagamihara , Japan
• 7 Department of Cardiovascular Rehabilitation, National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center , Suita , Japan
• 8 Berkman Library , University of Ottawa Heart Institute , Ottawa , ON , Canada
• 9 School of Epidemiology and Public Health, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa , Ottawa , ON , Canada
• 10 School of Human Kinetics, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa , Ottawa , ON , Canada
• Correspondence to Dr Tasuku Terada; tasuku.terada{at}nottingham.ac.uk

Objective To compare the effects of aerobic training combined with muscle strength training (hereafter referred to as combined training) to aerobic training alone on cardiovascular disease risk indicators in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD).

Design Systematic review with meta-analysis.

Data sources MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, trial registries and grey literature sources were searched in February 2024.

Eligibility criteria Randomised clinical trials comparing the effects of ≥4 weeks of combined training and aerobic training alone on at least one of the following outcomes: cardiorespiratory fitness (CRF), anthropometric and haemodynamic measures and cardiometabolic blood biomarkers in patients with CAD.

Results Of 13 246 studies screened, 23 were included (N=916). Combined training was more effective in increasing CRF (standard mean difference (SMD) 0.26, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.49, p=0.03) and lean body mass (mean difference (MD) 0.78 kg, 95% CI 0.39 kg to 1.17 kg, p<0.001), and reducing per cent body fat (MD −2.2%, 95% CI −3.5% to −0.9%, p=0.001) compared with aerobic training alone. There were no differences in the cardiometabolic biomarkers between the groups. Our subgroup analyses showed that combined training increases CRF more than aerobic training alone when muscle strength training was added to aerobic training without compromising aerobic training volume (SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.68, p=0.02).

Conclusion Combined training had greater effects on CRF and body composition than aerobic training alone in patients with CAD. To promote an increase in CRF in patients with CAD, muscle strength training should be added to aerobic training without reducing aerobic exercise volume.

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.

https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2024-108530

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

X @TasukuTerada

Contributors TT is the guarantor. TT drafted the manuscript. TT and SV contributed to the development of the selection and data extraction criteria. SV developed the search strategy. TT, AT, RW, RP and TN screened studies for inclusion. TT, AT, RW, RP and TN extracted information on adherence and adverse events. TT and PR completed the risk of bias assessments. RP and JR critically reviewed the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interests None declared.

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.

Read the full text or download the PDF: