A literature review is a type of writing that explores, analyses and synthesizes current literature around a particular topic or area of study. It can be included as part of a broader submission such as a research thesis or a report, or it may be a standalone essay assignment. It considers related texts together, comparing and contrasting them with each other.
Note that a literature review is not simply a summary of articles and sources, but rather a well-woven review of related literature. It looks for aspects of consensus and explores areas of academic disagreement within the scope of the theme or area being addressed by the review.
A systematic review attempts to identify, appraise and synthesize all the empirical evidence that meets pre-specified eligibility criteria to answer a given research question. Researchers conducting systematic reviews use explicit methods aimed at minimizing bias, in order to produce more reliable findings that can be used to inform decision making. (See Section 1.2 in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions).
What is involved in a literature review?
A literature review typically involves the following steps:
What is a systematic review?
Systematic reviews aim to bring together all the best quality evidence on a topic to answer a particular research question. Systematic reviews are defined by their rigour, transparency and objectivity. Authors conduct thorough literature searches, then use pre-specified eligibility criteria to include studies for analysis. The entire process is well-documented in order to facilitate replication. Because of the exhaustive nature of the searching and analysis, systematic reviews are commonly done in teams.
You might undertake a systematic review under the following circumstances:
Explore the Guidelines tab on this page to find materials that will take you through the systematic review process step by step.
Adapted from Salis, A. Systematically review the literature [Webinar]. Salis Institute. https://www.salisinstitute.com/
Are systematic reviews the best study design for you? Here is a guide to some of the literature review types available and their key characteristics.
| Systematic Review | Integrative Review | Scoping Review | Literature Review | |
| Purpose & Features |
To evaluate all the best quality evidence on a topic to answer a particular research question. Rigorous with explicit and reproducible methodology. Inclusion criteria, search strategies and analysis details are included. |
Gather and synthesize both empirical and theoretical evidence relevant to a clearly defined problem. States inclusion criteria, search strategy, extraction, appraisal and analysis plan. |
Assess the size and scope of existing literature on a topic, generally conducted when literature is diverse in type. Does not aim to answer a particular question. Rigorous with explicit and reproducible methodology. Inclusion criteria, search strategies and methods are included. |
Broad, selective view of the literature on a topic. Analysis may be chronological, conceptual or thematic. Usually lacks inclusion criteria and search strategies. Not comprehensive and vulnerable to bias. |
| Research Question |
Specific |
Directly linked to the identified problem, where there is a knowledge gap |
May be broad |
Not specific |
| Literature types included |
Well-defined; usually primary research. |
Empirical and theoretical types. |
All types depending on the research question. |
High-quality peer-reviewed articles, but also may include conference papers, news or other credible sources. |
| Data Extraction | Always | Varies depending on objectives | Varies depending on objectives | Not required |
|
Further reading Dobbins, M. (2017). Rapid review guidebook. National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools. https://www.nccmt.ca/tools/rapid-review-guidebook Grant, M.J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and 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), 143–143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x Toronto, C., & Remington, R. (2020). A step-by-step guide to conducting an integrative review. Springer International. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-37504-1 Dhollande S., Taylor A., Meyer S., & Scott M. (2021) Conducting integrative reviews: a guide for novice nursing researchers. Journal of Research in Nursing, 26(5), 427-438. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987121997907 |
What is a systematic review?
Watch the video below to understand what a systematic review involves then visit our Systematic Review Subject Guide
Cochrane systematic review:
Kumar, A., Delbaere, K., Zijlstra, G. A. R., Carpenter, H., Iliffe, S., Masud, T., Skelton, D., Morris, R., & Kenick, D. (2014). Exercise for reducing fear of falling in older people living in the community. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD009848.pub2
Qualitative systematic review:
Mytton, J., Ingram, J., Manns, S., & Thomas, J. (2014). Facilitators and Barriers to Engagement in Parenting Programs: A Qualitative Systematic Review. Health Education & Behavior, 41(2), 127–137. https://doi.org/10.1177/1090198113485755
Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) systematic review:
Ellwood, L., Torun, G., Bahar, Z., & Fernandez, R. (2019). Effects of flavonoid-rich fruits on hypertension in adults: A systematic review. JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports, 17, 2075-2105. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00050
Mixed methods systematic review:
Kinsella, N., Stattin, P., Cahill, D., Brown, C., Bill-Axelson, A., Bratt, O., Carlsson, S., & Van Hemelrijck, M. (2018). Factors influencing men’s choice of and adherence to active surveillance for low-risk prostate cancer: A mixed-method systematic review. European Urology, 74(3), 261–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eururo.2018.02.026
The following documents provide guidance for what to include in a systematic review, and best practices for conducting them.
Copyright © 2024 The University of Notre Dame Australia | CRICOS Provider Code: 01032F | TEQSA PRV12170 | RTO Code 0064
