|
A literature review is a critical and in-depth evaluation of previous research. It is a summary and synopsis of a particular area of research, allowing anybody reading the paper to establish why you are pursuing this particular research program. A good literature review expands upon the reasons behind selecting a particular research question. The purpose of a literature review is to:
|
A literature review should be structured like any other essay, containing an introduction, body, and conclusion.
The introduction should:
The middle or main body should:
The conclusion should:
Source: https://www.rlf.org.uk/resources/the-structure-of-a-literature-review/
Example
Writing the literature review from University of Queensland.
A literature review is a critical and in-depth evaluation of previous research. It is a summary and synopsis of a particular area of research, allowing anybody reading the paper to establish why you are pursuing this particular research program. A good literature review expands upon the reasons behind selecting a particular research question.
| Question | Not necessarily focused on a single question, but may describe an overview |
|---|---|
| Protocol | No protocol is included. |
| Background | Provides summary of the available literature on a topic |
| Objectives | Objective may or may not be identified |
| Inclusion and exclusion criteria | Criteria may not be specified |
| Search strategy | Strategy may not be explicitly stated |
| Process of selecting articles | Not described in a literature review |
| Process of evaluating articles | Evaluation of study quality may or may not be included |
| Process of extracting relevant information | Not clear or explicit |
| Results and data synthesis | Summary based on studies where the quality of the articles may not be expected. May also be influenced by the reviewer's theories, needs and beliefs |
| Discussion | Written by expert/s with a detailed knowledge of the issues |
| Number of reviewers | Can be conducted by one reviewer |
Visit the Researcher Skills Toolkit for more information on how to conduct literature review research.
A systematic literature review is designed to review relevant literature in your field through a highly rigorous and 'systematic' process.
The process of undertaking a systematic literature review covers not only the content found in the literature but the methods used to find the literature, what search strategies you used, how and where you searched, what was included/excluded from your research and to determine whether any gaps can be found in existing research.
| Question | Focused on a single question |
|---|---|
| Protocol | A protocol may be created |
| Background | Provides a summary of the available literature on the topic |
| Objectives | Clear objectives are identified |
| Inclusion and exclusion criteria | Criteria stated before the review is conducted |
| Search strategy | Comprehensive search conducted in a systematic way |
| Process of selecting articles | Usually clear and explicit |
| Process of evaluating articles | Comprehensive evaluation of study quality |
| Process of extracting relevant information | Usually clear and specific |
| Results and data synthesis | Clear summaries of studies based on high quality evidence |
| Discussion | Written by expert/s with a detailed knowledge of the issues |
| Number of reviewers | Can be conducted by one reviewer |
Visit the Researcher Skills Toolkit for more information on how to conduct literature review research.
The following drop downs provide a brief descriptions of other common reviews types. There are tools such as the 'what review is right for you?' that can assist in helping you decide which review to conduct.
A systematic review is a summary of the medical literature that uses explicit methods to perform a comprehensive literature search and critical appraisal of individual studies and that uses appropriate statistical techniques to combine these valid studies.
| Question | Focused on a single question |
|---|---|
| Protocol | A protocol is usually registered or published prior to commencing the review |
| Background | Provides a summary of the available literature on the topic |
| Objectives | Clear objectives are identified |
| Inclusion and exclusion criteria | Criteria stated before the review is conducted |
| Search strategy | Comprehensive search conducted in a systematic way |
| Process of selecting articles | Transparent to minimize bias and human error, detailed in the protocol |
| Process of evaluating articles | Comprehensive evaluation of study quality |
| Process of extracting relevant information | Usually clear and specific |
| Results and data synthesis | Clear summaries of studies based on high quality evidence |
| Discussion | Written by expert/s with a detailed knowledge of the issues |
| Number of reviewers | At least three to independently evaluate studies and adjudicate any differences |
Visit the Systematic Review LibGuide for more information on how to conduct this type of review.
Some characteristics of an Integrative review include; generating or refining a theory or hypothesis; combine empirical and theoretical research; examine research on a given health phenomenon; inform healthcare policy and practice
Meta-analysis provides statistical combination of the results of quantitative studies. They aim for exhaustive, comprehensive searching. Meta-analysis can be included in systematic reviews, but note that not all systematic reviews contain a meta-analysis. Characteristics include: ability to draw together smaller studies to contribute to larger picture of impact; Time-efficient for decision makers, compared with reviewing individual studies.
Qualitative reviews are interpretative studies that can incorporate reports from users and observations from practitioners to allow for broader understanding than data-only would allow. Characteristics include: Allowing for synthesis of non-statistical information; Can highlight themes across individual studies; Complements research evidence with reports from users and observations from practitioners.
Scoping reviews provide an ‘environmental scan’ (preliminary assessment) of the literature that is currently available in an area of research. Scoping reviews differ from mapping reviews as the outcome is only the review, not designed to conduct further reviews or research. Characteristics include; provides a quick search that can inform if a full review is needed; a systematic approach.
For a more detailed list of review types, see:
Grant, M.J. & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x
Munn, Z., Stern, C., Aromataris, E., Lockwood, C., & Jordan, Z. (2018). What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences. BMC medical research methodology, 18(1), 5. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-017-0468-4
Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546-553. doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review by 