formulating a research question for literature review

Library Services

UCL LIBRARY SERVICES

Guides and databases
Library skills
Systematic reviews

Formulating a research question

What are systematic reviews?
Types of systematic reviews
Identifying studies
Searching databases
Describing and appraising studies
Synthesis and systematic maps
Software for systematic reviews
Online training and support
Live and face to face training
Individual support
Further help

Clarifying the review question leads to specifying what type of studies can best address that question and setting out criteria for including such studies in the review. This is often called inclusion criteria or eligibility criteria. The criteria could relate to the review topic, the research methods of the studies, specific populations, settings, date limits, geographical areas, types of interventions, or something else.

Systematic reviews address clear and answerable research questions, rather than a general topic or problem of interest. They also have clear criteria about the studies that are being used to address the research questions. This is often called inclusion criteria or eligibility criteria.

Six examples of types of question are listed below, and the examples show different questions that a review might address based on the topic of influenza vaccination. Structuring questions in this way aids thinking about the different types of research that could address each type of question. Mneumonics can help in thinking about criteria that research must fulfil to address the question. The criteria could relate to the context, research methods of the studies, specific populations, settings, date limits, geographical areas, types of interventions, or something else.

Examples of review questions

Needs - What do people want? Example: What are the information needs of healthcare workers regarding vaccination for seasonal influenza?
Impact or effectiveness - What is the balance of benefit and harm of a given intervention? Example: What is the effectiveness of strategies to increase vaccination coverage among healthcare workers. What is the cost effectiveness of interventions that increase immunisation coverage?
Process or explanation - Why does it work (or not work)? How does it work (or not work)? Example: What factors are associated with uptake of vaccinations by healthcare workers? What factors are associated with inequities in vaccination among healthcare workers?
Correlation - What relationships are seen between phenomena? Example: How does influenza vaccination of healthcare workers vary with morbidity and mortality among patients? (Note: correlation does not in itself indicate causation).
Views / perspectives - What are people's experiences? Example: What are the views and experiences of healthcare workers regarding vaccination for seasonal influenza?
Service implementation - What is happening? Example: What is known about the implementation and context of interventions to promote vaccination for seasonal influenza among healthcare workers?

Examples in practice : Seasonal influenza vaccination of health care workers: evidence synthesis / Loreno et al. 2017

Example of eligibility criteria

Research question: What are the views and experiences of UK healthcare workers regarding vaccination for seasonal influenza?

Population: healthcare workers, any type, including those without direct contact with patients.
Context: seasonal influenza vaccination for healthcare workers.
Study design: qualitative data including interviews, focus groups, ethnographic data.
Date of publication: all.
Country: all UK regions.
Studies focused on influenza vaccination for general population and pandemic influenza vaccination.
Studies using survey data with only closed questions, studies that only report quantitative data.

Consider the research boundaries

It is important to consider the reasons that the research question is being asked. Any research question has ideological and theoretical assumptions around the meanings and processes it is focused on. A systematic review should either specify definitions and boundaries around these elements at the outset, or be clear about which elements are undefined.

For example if we are interested in the topic of homework, there are likely to be pre-conceived ideas about what is meant by 'homework'. If we want to know the impact of homework on educational attainment, we need to set boundaries on the age range of children, or how educational attainment is measured. There may also be a particular setting or contexts: type of school, country, gender, the timeframe of the literature, or the study designs of the research.

Research question: What is the impact of homework on children's educational attainment?

Scope : Homework - Tasks set by school teachers for students to complete out of school time, in any format or setting.
Population: children aged 5-11 years.
Outcomes: measures of literacy or numeracy from tests administered by researchers, school or other authorities.
Study design: Studies with a comparison control group.
Context: OECD countries, all settings within mainstream education.
Date Limit: 2007 onwards.
Any context not in mainstream primary schools.
Non-English language studies.

Mnemonics for structuring questions

Some mnemonics that sometimes help to formulate research questions, set the boundaries of question and inform a search strategy.

Intervention effects

PICO Population – Intervention– Outcome– Comparison

Variations: add T on for time, or ‘C’ for context, or S’ for study type,

Policy and management issues

ECLIPSE : Expectation – Client group – Location – Impact ‐ Professionals involved – Service

Expectation encourages reflection on what the information is needed for i.e. improvement, innovation or information. Impact looks at what you would like to achieve e.g. improve team communication .

How CLIP became ECLIPSE: a mnemonic to assist in searching for health policy/management information / Wildridge & Bell, 2002

Analysis tool for management and organisational strategy

PESTLE: Political – Economic – Social – Technological – Environmental ‐ Legal

An analysis tool that can be used by organizations for identifying external factors which may influence their strategic development, marketing strategies, new technologies or organisational change.

PESTLE analysis / CIPD, 2010

Service evaluations with qualitative study designs

SPICE: Setting (context) – Perspective– Intervention – Comparison – Evaluation

Perspective relates to users or potential users. Evaluation is how you plan to measure the success of the intervention.

Clear and present questions: formulating questions for evidence based practice / Booth, 2006

Read more about some of the frameworks for constructing review questions:

Formulating the Evidence Based Practice Question: A Review of the Frameworks / Davis, 2011
<< Previous: Stages in a systematic review
Next: Identifying studies >>
Last Updated: Mar 21, 2024 1:29 PM
URL: https://library-guides.ucl.ac.uk/systematic-reviews

Literature Reviews

Getting Started
Choosing a Type of Review

Developing a Research Question

Finding example literature reviews.

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

Goldilocker Tool

formulating a research question for literature review

UM Librarians have developed a quick tool called Goldilocker to help beginners who are struggling to refine their Research Question.

DEVELOPING A RESEARCH QUESTION

Before searching for sources, you need to formulate a Research Question — this is what you are trying to answer using the existing academic literature. The Research Question pinpoints the focus of the review .

Your first step involves choosing, exploring, and focusing a topic. At this stage you might discover that you need to tweak your topic or the scope of your research as you learn more about the topic in the literature.

THINGS TO KEEP IN MIND:

The question must be "researchable" — it can be answered with accessible facts and data
Questions often start with How, Why, What, Which
The question opens the door for other areas of inquiry — it identifies a gap in existing research
Questions should be open-ended and focus on cause and effect

TRY TO AVOID:

Simple yes/no questions, or questions with an easy answer (what is the radius of the moon?)
Questions that can only be answered by an opinion (does it smell nice when it rains?)
Questions that involve secret information (what is the recipe for Coca-Cola?)
Questions that are too broad or too narrow

REFINING YOUR RESEARCH QUESTION

Two examples of refining research questions that could be considered either too broad or too narrow.

USING DATABASE FILTER TOOLS

It can be helpful to read existing literature reviews on your topic to get an idea of major themes, how authors structure their arguments, or what reviews look like in your discipline.

DOCUMENT TYPE FILTERS

Many library databases have the option to highlight just Review Articles after you perform a search. Filters above show what the Document Type filter looks like, with a "Review" option. These examples are from Scopus and ProQuest. The "Review" filter here refers to free-standing, comprehensive Review Articles on a topic, as opposed to a shorter literature review inside a scholarly article.

LIT REVIEWS INSIDE ARTICLES

It is also worth taking a look at the shorter literature reviews inside scholarly articles. These can sometimes be called "Background" or "Background Literature." Look for a section typically following the Introduction that covers the history or gives context on the paper's topic.

EXAMPLE REVIEW ARTICLES

Here are a few examples of Review Articles in different disciplines. Note sometimes an article can be a Review Article without the word "review" in the title.

HUMANITIES — Art — " Art and Crime: Conceptualising Graffiti in the City " from the journal Geography Compass

SCIENCES — Climate Change — " Mercury Isotopes in Earth and Environmental Sciences " from the journal Annual Review of Earth and Planetary Sciences

SOCIAL SCIENCES — Psychology — " Structural Competency and the Future of Firearm Research " from the journal Social Science & Medicine

<< Previous: Choosing a Type of Review
Next: Searching the Literature >>
Last Updated: Feb 29, 2024 10:31 AM
URL: https://guides.lib.umich.edu/litreview

Reserve a study room
Library Account
Undergraduate Students
Graduate Students
Faculty & Staff

How to Conduct a Literature Review (Health Sciences and Beyond)

What is a Literature Review?

The Research Questions

Selection Criteria
Database Search
Documenting Your Search
Organize Key Findings
Reference Management

Background vs. Foreground Questions

You may need to find answers to background questions (i.e. about general knowledge) before seeking answers to foreground questions (i.e. about specific knowledge, such as information that might inform a clinical decision).

The research questions on this page are for foreground questions.

A well-formulated research question:

starts your entire search process
provides focus for your searches
guides the selection of literature sources

Question formats are helpful tools researchers can use to structure a question that will facilitate a focused search. Such formats include: PICO , PEO , SPIDER , and COSMIN . Other formats can be found here .

The PICO format is commonly used in evidence-based clinical practice. This format creates a "well-built" question that identifies four concepts: (1) the P atient problem or P opulation, (2) the I ntervention, (3) the C omparison (if there is one), and (4) the O utcome(s) .

Example : In adults with recurrent furunculosis (skin boils), do prophylactic antibiotics, compared to no treatment, reduce the recurrence rate? ( Cochrane Library Tutorial, 2005 )

The PEO question format is useful for qualitative research questions. Questions based on this format identify three concepts: (1) P opulation, (2) E xposure, and (3) O utcome(s) .

Example: In infants, is there an association between exposure to soy milk and the subsequent development of peanut allergy ( Levine, Ioannidis, Haines, & Guyatt, 2014 )?

The SPIDER question format was adapted from the PICO tool to search for qualitative and mixed-methods research. Questions based on this format identify the following concepts: (1) S ample, (2) P henomenon of I nterest, (3) D esign, (4) E valuation, and (5) R esearch type .

Example: What are young parents’ experiences of attending antenatal education?

Search for ( S AND P of I AND ( D OR E ) AND R ) ( Cooke, Smith, & Booth, 2012 ).

The COSMIN ( CO nsensus-based S tandards for the selection of health status M easurement IN struments ) format is used for systematic review of measurement properties. Questions based on this format identify (1) the construct or the name(s) of the outcome measurement instrument(s) of interest, (2) the target population, (3) the type of measurement instrument of interest, and (4) the measurement properties on which the review focuses.

Visit the COSMIN website to view the COSMIN manual and checklist.

<< Previous: What is a Literature Review?
Next: Selection Criteria >>
Last Updated: Mar 15, 2024 12:22 PM
URL: https://guides.library.vcu.edu/health-sciences-lit-review

University of Oregon Libraries
Research Guides

How to Write a Literature Review

1. Identify the Question
Literature Reviews: A Recap
Reading Journal Articles
Does it Describe a Literature Review?

Identify the question

Developing a research question.

2. Review Discipline Styles
Searching Article Databases
Finding Full-Text of an Article
Citation Chaining
When to Stop Searching
4. Manage Your References
5. Critically Analyze and Evaluate
6. Synthesize
7. Write a Literature Review

From Topic to Question (Infographic)

This graphic emphasizes how reading various sources can play a role in defining your research topic.

( Click to Enlarge Image )

From Topic to Question infographic. Follow the "long description" link for a web accessible description.

Text description of "From Topic to Question" for web accessibility

In some cases, such as for a course assignment or a research project you're working on with a faculty mentor, your research question will be determined by your professor. If that's the case, you can move on to the next step . Otherwise, you may need to explore questions on your own.

A few suggestions

Photo Credit: UO Libraries

According to The Craft of Research (2003) , a research question is more than a practical problem or something with a yes/no answer. A research question helps you learn more about something you don't already know and it needs to be significant enough to interest your readers.

Your Curiosity + Significance to Others = Research Question

How to get started.

In a research paper, you develop a unique question and then synthesize scholarly and primary sources into a paper that supports your argument about the topic.

Identify your Topic (This is the starting place from where you develop a research question.)
Refine by Searching (find background information) (Before you can start to develop a research question, you may need to do some preliminary background research to see (1) what has already been done on the topic and (2) what are the issues surrounding the topic.) HINT: Find background information in Google and Books.
Refine by Narrowing (Once you begin to understand the topic and the issues surrounding it, you can start to narrow your topic and develop a research question. Do this by asking the 6 journalistic question words.

Ask yourself these 6 questions

These 6 journalistic question words can help you narrow your focus from a broad topic to a specific question.

Who : Are you interested in a specific group of people? Can your topic be narrowed by gender, sex, age, ethnicity, socio-economic status or something else? Are there any key figures related to your topic?

What : What are the issues surrounding your topic? Are there subtopics? In looking at background information, did you notice any gaps or questions that seemed unanswered?

Where : Can your topic be narrowed down to a geographic location? Warning: Don't get too narrow here. You might not be able to find enough information on a town or state.

When : Is your topic current or historical? Is it confined to a specific time period? Was there a causative event that led your topic to become an area of study?

Why : Why are you interested in this topic? Why should others be interested?

How : What kinds of information do you need? Primary sources, statistics? What is your methodology?

Detailed description of, "Developing a Research Question" for web accessibility

<< Previous: Does it Describe a Literature Review?
Next: 2. Review Discipline Styles >>
Last Updated: Jan 10, 2024 4:46 PM
URL: https://researchguides.uoregon.edu/litreview

1501 Kincaid Street Eugene, OR 97403 P: 541-346-3053 F: 541-346-3485

Visit us on Facebook
Visit us on Twitter
Visit us on Youtube
Visit us on Instagram
Report a Concern
Nondiscrimination and Title IX
Accessibility
Privacy Policy
Find People

Systematic and systematic-like review toolkit: Step 1: Formulating the research question

Systematic and systematic-like review toolkit.

Systematic and systematic-like reviews overview

Step 1: Formulating the research question

Step 2: Developing the search
Step 3: Screening and selection of articles
Step 4: Appraisal of articles
Step 5: Writing and publishing
Filters and complex search examples
Evidence synthesis support services

Tip: Look for these icons for guidance on which technique is required

Email your Librarians

The first stage in a review is formulating the research question. The research question accurately and succinctly sums up the review's line of inquiry. This page outlines approaches to developing a research question that can be used as the basis for a review.

Research question frameworks

It can be useful to use a framework to aid in the development of a research question. Frameworks can help you identify searchable parts of a question and focus your search on relevant results

A technique often used in research for formulating a clinical research question is the PICO model. Slightly different versions of this concept are used to search for quantitative and qualitative reviews.

The PICO/ PECO framework is an adaptable approach to help you focus your research question and guide you in developing search terms. The framework prompts you to consider your question in terms of these four elements:

P : P atient/ P opulation/ P roblem

I/E : I ntervention/ I ndicator/ E xposure/ E vent

C : C omparison/ C ontrol

O : O utcome

For more detail, there are also the PICOT and PICOS additions:

PICO T - adds T ime

PICO S - adds S tudy design

PICO example

Consider this scenario:

Current guidelines indicate that nicotine replacement therapies (NRTs) should not be used as an intervention in young smokers. Counselling is generally the recommended best practice for young smokers, however youth who are at high risk for smoking often live in regional or remote communities with limited access to counselling services. You have been funded to review the evidence for the effectiveness of NRTs for smoking cessation in Australian youths to update the guidelines.

The research question stemming from this scenario could be phrased in this way:

In (P) adolescent smokers , how does (I) nicotine replacement therapy compared with (C) counselling affect (O) smoking cessation rates ?

Alternative frameworks

PICO is one of the most frequently used frameworks, but there are several other frameworks available to use, depending on your question.

Question type

Qualitative; Aetiology or risk
Services, policy, social care
Prevalence & prognosis; Economics

Structuring qualitative questions?

Try PIC or SPIDER :

P opulation, Phenomena of I nterest, C ontext
S ample, P henomenon of I nterest, D esign, E valuation, R esearch type

Cooke, A., Smith, D., & Booth, A. (2012). Beyond PICO: the SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis . Qualitative health research, 22(10), 1435-1443.

Question about aetiology or risk?

P opulation, E xposure, O utcomes

Moola, Sandeep; Munn, Zachary; Sears, Kim; Sfetcu, Ralucac; Currie, Marian; Lisy, Karolina; Tufanaru, Catalin; Qureshi, Rubab; Mattis, Patrick; Mu, Peifanf. Conducting systematic reviews of association (etiology) , International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare: September 2015 - Volume 13 - Issue 3 - p 163-169.

Evaluating an intervention, policy or service?

Try SPICE :

S etting, P opulation or P erspective, I ntervention, C omparison, E valuation

Booth, A. (2006), " Clear and present questions: formulating questions for evidence based practice ", Library Hi Tech, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 355-368. https://doi-org.ezproxy-b.deakin.edu.au/10.1108/07378830610692127

Investigating the outcome of a service or policy?

Try ECLIPSE :

E xpectation, C lient group, L ocation, I mpact, P rofessionals, SE rvice

Wildridge, V., & Bell, L. (2002). How CLIP became ECLIPSE: a mnemonic to assist in searching for health policy/management information . Health Information & Libraries Journal, 19(2), 113-115.

Working out prevalence or incidence?

Try CoCoPop :

Co ndition, Co ntext, Pop ulation

Munn, Z., Moola, S., Lisy, K., Riitano, D., & Tufanaru, C. (2015). Methodological guidance for systematic reviews of observational epidemiological studies reporting prevalence and cumulative incidence data . International journal of evidence-based healthcare, 13(3), 147-153.

Determining prognosis?

P opulation, Prognostic F actors, O utcome

Conducting an economic evaluation?

Try PICOC :

P opulation, I ntervention, C omparator/s, O utomes, Context

Petticrew, M., & Roberts, H. (2006). Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide . Blackwell Pub.

JBI recommends the PCC (Population (or Participants), Concept, and Context) search framework to develop the research question of a scoping review. In some instances, just the concept and context are used in the search.

The University of Notre Dame Australia provides information on some different frameworks available to help structure the research question.

Search for existing reviews

Before you start searching, find out whether any systematic reviews have been conducted recently on your topic. This is because similar systematic reviews could help with identifying your search terms, and information on your topic. It is also helpful to know if there is already a systematic review on your topic as it may mean you need to change your question.

Cochrane Library and Joanna Briggs Institute publish systematic reviews. You can also search for the term "systematic review" in any of the subject databases. You can also search PROSPERO , an international register of systematic reviews, to see if there are any related reviews underway but not yet published; there are additional review registers detailed below.

Watch this video to find out how to search for published systematic reviews

Protocols and Guidelines for reviews

It is recommended that authors consult relevant guidelines and create a protocol for their review.

Protocols provide a clear plan for how the review will be conducted, including what will and will not be included in the final review. Protocols are widely recommended for any systematic review and are increasingly a requirement for publication of a completed systematic review.

Guidelines provide specific information on how to perform a review in your field of study. A completed review may be evaluated against the relevant guidelines by peer reviewers or readers, so it makes sense to follow the guidelines as best you can.

Click the headings below to learn more about the importance of protocols and guidelines.

Your protocol (or plan for conducting your review) should include the rationale, objectives, hypothesis, and planned methods used in searching, screening and analysing identified studies used in the review. The rationale should clearly state what will be included and excluded from the review. The aim is to minimise any bias by having pre-defined eligibility criteria.

Base the protocol on the relevant guidelines for the review that you are conducting. PRISMA-P was developed for reporting and development of protocols for systematic reviews. Their Explanation and Elaboration paper includes examples of what to write in your protocol. York's CRD has also created a document on how to submit a protocol to PROSPERO .

There are several registers of protocols, often associated with the organisation publishing the review. Cochrane and Joanna Briggs Institute both have their own protocol registries, and PROSPERO is a wide-reaching registry covering protocols for Cochrane, non-Cochrane and non-JBI reviews on a range of health, social care, education, justice, and international development topics.

Before beginning your protocol, search within protocol registries such as those listed above, or Open Science Framework or Research Registry , or journals such as Systematic Reviews and BMJ Open . This is a useful step to see if a protocol has already been submitted on your review topic and to find examples of protocols in similar areas of research.

While a protocol will contain details of the intended search strategy, a protocol should be registered before the search strategy is finalised and run, so that you can show that your intention for the review has remained true and to limit duplication of in progress reviews.

A protocol should typically address points that define the kind of studies to be included and the kind of data required to ensure the systematic review is focused on the appropriate studies for the topic. Some points to think about are:

What study types are you looking for? For example, randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, qualitative studies
What sample size is acceptable in each study (power of the study)?
What population are you focusing on? Consider age ranges, gender, disease severity, geography of patients.
What type of intervention are you focusing on?
What outcomes are of importance to the review, including how those outcomes are measured?
What context should you be looking for in a study? A lab, acute care, school, community...
How will you appraise the studies? What methodology will you use?
Does the study differentiate between the target population and other groups in the data? How will you handle it if it does not?
Is the data available to access if the article does not specify the details you need? If not, what will you do?
What languages are you able to review? Do you have funding to translate articles from languages other than English?

Systematic Review guidelines

The Cochrane handbook of systematic reviews of interventions is a world-renowned resource for information on designing systematic reviews of intervention.

Many other guidelines have been developed from these extensive guidelines.

General systematic reviews

The PRISMA Statement includes the well-used Checklist and Flow Diagram.
Systematic Reviews: CRD's guidance on undertaking reviews in health care . One of the founding institutions that developed systematic review procedure. CRD's guide gives detailed clearly written explanations for different fields in Health.
National Academies Press (US); 2011. 3, Standards for Finding and Assessing Individual Studies. Provides guidance on searching, screening, data collection, and appraisal of individual studies for a systematic review.

Meta-analyses

An alternative to PRISMA is the Meta‐analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) for observational studies. It is a 35‐item checklist. It pays more attention to certain aspects of the search strategy, in particular the inclusion of unpublished and non‐English‐language studies.

Surgical systematic reviews

Systematic reviews in surgery-recommendations from the Study Center of the German Society of Surgery . Provides recommendations for systematic reviews in surgery with or without meta-analysis, for each step of the process with specific recommendations important to surgical reviews.

Nursing/Allied Health systematic reviews

Joanna Briggs Institute Manual for Evidence Synthesis a comprehensive guide to conducting JBI systematic and similar reviews

Nutrition systematic reviews

Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics Evidence Analysis Manual is designed to guide expert workgroup members and evidence analysts to understand and carry out the process of conducting a systematic review.

Occupational therapy

American Occupational Therapy Association: Guidelines for Systematic reviews . The American Journal of Occupational Therapy (AJOT) provides guidance for authors conducting systematic reviews.

Education/Law/ Sociology systematic reviews

Campbell Collaboration, Cochrane's sister organisation provides guidelines for systematic reviews in the social sciences: MECIR
Systematic Reviews in Educational Research: Methodology, Perspectives and Application

Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Diagnostic Test Accuracy

COSMIN Guideline for Systematic Reviews of Outcome Measurement Instruments – This was developed for patient reported outcomes (PROMs) but has since been adapted for use with other types of outcome measurements in systematic reviews.

Prinsen, C.A.C., Mokkink, L.B., Bouter, L.M. et al. COSMIN guideline for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures . Qual Life Res 27, 1147–1157 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1798-3

HuGENet™ Handbook of systematic reviews – particularly useful for describing population-based data and human genetic variants.

AHRQ: Methods Guide for Effectiveness and Comparative Effectiveness Reviews - from the US Department of Health and Human Services, guidelines on conducting systematic reviews of existing research on the effectiveness, comparative effectiveness, and harms of different health care interventions.

Mariano, D. C., Leite, C., Santos, L. H., Rocha, R. E., & de Melo-Minardi, R. C. (2017). A guide to performing systematic literature reviews in bioinformatics . arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.05813.

Integrative Review guidelines

Integrative reviews may incorporate experimental and non-experimental data, as well as theoretical information. They differ from systematic reviews in the diversity of the study methodologies included.

Guidelines:

Whittemore, R. and Knafl, K. (2005), The integrative review: updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52: 546–553. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
A step-by-step guide to conducting an Integrative Review (2020), edited by C.E. Toronto & Ruth Remington, Springer Books

Rapid Review guidelines

Rapid reviews differ from systematic reviews in the shorter timeframe taken and reduced comprehensiveness of the search.

Cochrane has a methods group to inform the conduct of rapid reviews with a bibliography of relevant publications .

A modified approach to systematic review guidelines can be used for rapid reviews, but guidelines are beginning to appear:

Crawford C, Boyd C, Jain S, Khorsan R and Jonas W (2015), Rapid Evidence Assessment of the Literature (REAL©): streamlining the systematic review process and creating utility for evidence-based health care . BMC Res Notes 8:631 DOI 10.1186/s13104-015-1604-z

Philip Moons, Eva Goossens, David R. Thompson, Rapid reviews: the pros and cons of an accelerated review process , European Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing, Volume 20, Issue 5, June 2021, Pages 515–519, https://doi.org/10.1093/eurjcn/zvab041

Rapid Review Guidebook: Steps for conducting a rapid review National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools (McMaster University and Public Health Agency Canada) 2017

Tricco AC, Langlois EV, Straus SE, editors (2017) Rapid reviews to strengthen health policy and systems: a practical guide (World Health Organization). This guide is particularly aimed towards developing rapid reviews to inform health policy.

Scoping Review guidelines

Scoping reviews can be used to map an area, or to determine the need for a subsequent systematic review. Scoping reviews tend to have a broader focus than many other types of reviews, however, still require a focused question.

Peters MDJ, Godfrey C, McInerney P, Munn Z, Tricco AC, Khalil, H. Chapter 11: Scoping Reviews (2020 version). In: Aromataris E, Munn Z (Editors). Joanna Briggs Institute Reviewer's Manual, JBI, 2020.
Statement / Explanatory paper

Scoping reviews: what they are and how you can do them - Series of Cochrane Training videos presented by Dr. Andrea C. Tricco and Kafayat Oboirien

Martin, G. P., Jenkins, D. A., Bull, L., Sisk, R., Lin, L., Hulme, W., ... & Group, P. H. A. (2020). Toward a framework for the design, implementation, and reporting of methodology scoping reviews . Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 127, 191-197.

Khalil, H., McInerney, P., Pollock, D., Alexander, L., Munn, Z., Tricco, A. C., ... & Peters, M. D. (2021). Practical guide to undertaking scoping reviews for pharmacy clinicians, researchers and policymakers . Journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics.

Colquhoun, H (2016) Current best practices for the conduct of scoping reviews (presentation)

Arksey H & O'Malley L (2005) Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework , International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8:1, 19-32, DOI: 10.1080/1364557032000119616

Umbrella reviews

Pollock M, Fernandes RM, Becker LA, Pieper D, Hartling L. Chapter V: Overviews of Reviews . In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.2 (updated February 2021). Cochrane, 2021. Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook .
Aromataris E, Fernandez R, Godfrey C, Holly C, Khalil H, Tungpunkom P. Chapter 10: Umbrella Reviews . In: Aromataris E, Munn Z (Editors). JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI, 2020. Available from https://jbi-global-wiki.refined.site/space/MANUAL/4687363 .
Aromataris, Edoardo; Fernandez, Ritin; Godfrey, Christina M.; Holly, Cheryl; Khalil, Hanan; Tungpunkom, Patraporn. Summarizing systematic reviews: methodological development, conduct and reporting of an umbrella review approach , International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare: September 2015 - Volume 13 - Issue 3 - p 132-140.

Meta-syntheses

Noyes, J., Booth, A., Cargo, M., Flemming, K., Garside, R., Hannes, K., ... & Thomas, J. (2018). Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series—paper 1: introduction . Journal of clinical epidemiology, 97, 35-38.

Harris, J. L., Booth, A., Cargo, M., Hannes, K., Harden, A., Flemming, K., ... & Noyes, J. (2018). Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series—paper 2: methods for question formulation, searching, and protocol development for qualitative evidence synthesis . Journal of clinical epidemiology, 97, 39-48.

Noyes, J., Booth, A., Flemming, K., Garside, R., Harden, A., Lewin, S., ... & Thomas, J. (2018). Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series—paper 3: methods for assessing methodological limitations, data extraction and synthesis, and confidence in synthesized qualitative findings . Journal of clinical epidemiology, 97, 49-58.

Cargo, M., Harris, J., Pantoja, T., Booth, A., Harden, A., Hannes, K., ... & Noyes, J. (2018). Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series—paper 4: methods for assessing evidence on intervention implementation . Journal of clinical epidemiology, 97, 59-69.

Harden, A., Thomas, J., Cargo, M., Harris, J., Pantoja, T., Flemming, K., ... & Noyes, J. (2018). Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series—paper 5: methods for integrating qualitative and implementation evidence within intervention effectiveness reviews . Journal of clinical epidemiology, 97, 70-78.

Flemming, K., Booth, A., Hannes, K., Cargo, M., & Noyes, J. (2018). Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series—Paper 6: Reporting guidelines for qualitative, implementation, and process evaluation evidence syntheses . Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 97, 79-85.

Walsh, D. and Downe, S. (2005), Meta-synthesis method for qualitative research: a literature review . Journal of Advanced Nursing, 50: 204–211. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03380.x

Living reviews

Akl, E.A., Meerpohl, J.J., Elliott, J., Kahale, L.A., Schünemann, H.J., Agoritsas, T., Hilton, J., Perron, C., Akl, E., Hodder, R. and Pestridge, C., 2017. Living systematic reviews: 4. Living guideline recommendations . Journal of clinical epidemiology, 91, pp.47-53.

Qualitative systematic reviews

Dixon-Woods, M., Bonas, S., Booth, A., Jones, D. R., Miller, T., Sutton, A. J., . . . Young, B. (2006). How can systematic reviews incorporate qualitative research? A critical perspective . Qualitative Research,6(1), 27–44.
Thomas, J., & Harden, A. (2008). Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews . BMC Medical Research Methodology,8, 45–45.

Mixed methods systematic review

Lizarondo L, Stern C, Carrier J, Godfrey C, Rieger K, Salmond S, Apostolo J, Kirkpatrick P, Loveday H. Chapter 8: Mixed methods systematic reviews . In: Aromataris E, Munn Z (Editors). JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI, 2020. Available from https://synthesismanual.jbi.global. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-09
Pearson, A, White, H, Bath-Hextall, F, Salmond, S, Apostolo, J, & Kirkpatrick, P 2015, ' A mixed-methods approach to systematic reviews ', International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, vol. 13, no. 3, p. 121-131. Available from: 10.1097/XEB.0000000000000052
Dixon-Woods, M., Agarwal, S., Jones, D., Young, B., & Sutton, A. (2005). Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: A review of possible methods . Journal of Health Services Research &Policy,10(1), 45–53.

Realist reviews

The RAMESES Projects - Includes information on publication, quality, and reporting standards, as well as training materials for realist reviews, meta-narrative reviews, and realist evaluation.

Rycroft-Malone, J., McCormack, B., Hutchinson, A. M., DeCorby, K., Bucknall, T. K., Kent, B., ... & Wilson, V. (2012). Realist synthesis: illustrating the method for implementation research . Implementation Science, 7(1), 1-10.

Wong, G., Westhorp, G., Manzano, A. et al. RAMESES II reporting standards for realist evaluations. BMC Med 14, 96 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-016-0643-1

Wong, G., Greenhalgh, T., Westhorp, G., Buckingham, J., & Pawson, R. (2013). RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC medicine, 11, 21. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-11-21

Wong, G., Greenhalgh, T., Westhorp, G., Buckingham, J., & Pawson, R. (2013). RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC medicine, 11(1), 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-11-21

Social sciences

Chapman, K. (2021). Characteristics of systematic reviews in the social sciences . The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 47(5), 102396.
Crisp, B. R. (2015). Systematic reviews: A social work perspective . Australian Social Work, 68(3), 284-295.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

Knowledge Base

Methodology

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

Published on January 2, 2023 by Shona McCombes . Revised on September 11, 2023.

What is a literature review? A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research that you can later apply to your paper, thesis, or dissertation topic .

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

Search for relevant literature
Evaluate sources
Identify themes, debates, and gaps
Outline the structure
Write your literature review

A good literature review doesn’t just summarize sources—it analyzes, synthesizes , and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

What is the purpose of a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1 – search for relevant literature, step 2 – evaluate and select sources, step 3 – identify themes, debates, and gaps, step 4 – outline your literature review’s structure, step 5 – write your literature review, free lecture slides, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions, introduction.

Quick Run-through
Step 1 & 2

When you write a thesis , dissertation , or research paper , you will likely have to conduct a literature review to situate your research within existing knowledge. The literature review gives you a chance to:

Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and its scholarly context
Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
Position your work in relation to other researchers and theorists
Show how your research addresses a gap or contributes to a debate
Evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of the scholarly debates around your topic.

Writing literature reviews is a particularly important skill if you want to apply for graduate school or pursue a career in research. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Writing literature reviews can be quite challenging! A good starting point could be to look at some examples, depending on what kind of literature review you’d like to write.

Example literature review #1: “Why Do People Migrate? A Review of the Theoretical Literature” ( Theoretical literature review about the development of economic migration theory from the 1950s to today.)
Example literature review #2: “Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines” ( Methodological literature review about interdisciplinary knowledge acquisition and production.)
Example literature review #3: “The Use of Technology in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Thematic literature review about the effects of technology on language acquisition.)
Example literature review #4: “Learners’ Listening Comprehension Difficulties in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Chronological literature review about how the concept of listening skills has changed over time.)

You can also check out our templates with literature review examples and sample outlines at the links below.

Download Word doc Download Google doc

Before you begin searching for literature, you need a clearly defined topic .

If you are writing the literature review section of a dissertation or research paper, you will search for literature related to your research problem and questions .

Make a list of keywords

Start by creating a list of keywords related to your research question. Include each of the key concepts or variables you’re interested in, and list any synonyms and related terms. You can add to this list as you discover new keywords in the process of your literature search.

Social media, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, TikTok
Body image, self-perception, self-esteem, mental health
Generation Z, teenagers, adolescents, youth

Search for relevant sources

Use your keywords to begin searching for sources. Some useful databases to search for journals and articles include:

Your university’s library catalogue
Google Scholar
Project Muse (humanities and social sciences)
Medline (life sciences and biomedicine)
EconLit (economics)
Inspec (physics, engineering and computer science)

You can also use boolean operators to help narrow down your search.

Make sure to read the abstract to find out whether an article is relevant to your question. When you find a useful book or article, you can check the bibliography to find other relevant sources.

You likely won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on your topic, so it will be necessary to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your research question.

For each publication, ask yourself:

What question or problem is the author addressing?
What are the key concepts and how are they defined?
What are the key theories, models, and methods?
Does the research use established frameworks or take an innovative approach?
What are the results and conclusions of the study?
How does the publication relate to other literature in the field? Does it confirm, add to, or challenge established knowledge?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research?

Make sure the sources you use are credible , and make sure you read any landmark studies and major theories in your field of research.

You can use our template to summarize and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using. Click on either button below to download.

Take notes and cite your sources

As you read, you should also begin the writing process. Take notes that you can later incorporate into the text of your literature review.

It is important to keep track of your sources with citations to avoid plagiarism . It can be helpful to make an annotated bibliography , where you compile full citation information and write a paragraph of summary and analysis for each source. This helps you remember what you read and saves time later in the process.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

Academic style
Vague sentences
Style consistency

See an example

To begin organizing your literature review’s argument and structure, be sure you understand the connections and relationships between the sources you’ve read. Based on your reading and notes, you can look for:

Trends and patterns (in theory, method or results): do certain approaches become more or less popular over time?
Themes: what questions or concepts recur across the literature?
Debates, conflicts and contradictions: where do sources disagree?
Pivotal publications: are there any influential theories or studies that changed the direction of the field?
Gaps: what is missing from the literature? Are there weaknesses that need to be addressed?

This step will help you work out the structure of your literature review and (if applicable) show how your own research will contribute to existing knowledge.

Most research has focused on young women.
There is an increasing interest in the visual aspects of social media.
But there is still a lack of robust research on highly visual platforms like Instagram and Snapchat—this is a gap that you could address in your own research.

There are various approaches to organizing the body of a literature review. Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time. However, if you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order.

Try to analyze patterns, turning points and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred.

If you have found some recurring central themes, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic.

For example, if you are reviewing literature about inequalities in migrant health outcomes, key themes might include healthcare policy, language barriers, cultural attitudes, legal status, and economic access.

Methodological

If you draw your sources from different disciplines or fields that use a variety of research methods , you might want to compare the results and conclusions that emerge from different approaches. For example:

Look at what results have emerged in qualitative versus quantitative research
Discuss how the topic has been approached by empirical versus theoretical scholarship
Divide the literature into sociological, historical, and cultural sources

Theoretical

A literature review is often the foundation for a theoretical framework . You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts.

You might argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach, or combine various theoretical concepts to create a framework for your research.

Like any other academic text , your literature review should have an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion . What you include in each depends on the objective of your literature review.

The introduction should clearly establish the focus and purpose of the literature review.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you might want to divide the body into subsections. You can use a subheading for each theme, time period, or methodological approach.

As you write, you can follow these tips:

Summarize and synthesize: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
Analyze and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers — add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
Critically evaluate: mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
Write in well-structured paragraphs: use transition words and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts

In the conclusion, you should summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance.

When you’ve finished writing and revising your literature review, don’t forget to proofread thoroughly before submitting. Not a language expert? Check out Scribbr’s professional proofreading services !

This article has been adapted into lecture slides that you can use to teach your students about writing a literature review.

Scribbr slides are free to use, customize, and distribute for educational purposes.

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

Sampling methods
Simple random sampling
Stratified sampling
Cluster sampling
Likert scales
Reproducibility

Statistics

Null hypothesis
Statistical power
Probability distribution
Effect size
Poisson distribution

Research bias

Optimism bias
Cognitive bias
Implicit bias
Hawthorne effect
Anchoring bias
Explicit bias

A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources (such as books, journal articles, and theses) related to a specific topic or research question .

It is often written as part of a thesis, dissertation , or research paper , in order to situate your work in relation to existing knowledge.

There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:

To familiarize yourself with the current state of knowledge on your topic
To ensure that you’re not just repeating what others have already done
To identify gaps in knowledge and unresolved problems that your research can address
To develop your theoretical framework and methodology
To provide an overview of the key findings and debates on the topic

Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.

The literature review usually comes near the beginning of your thesis or dissertation . After the introduction , it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology .

A literature review is a survey of credible sources on a topic, often used in dissertations , theses, and research papers . Literature reviews give an overview of knowledge on a subject, helping you identify relevant theories and methods, as well as gaps in existing research. Literature reviews are set up similarly to other academic texts , with an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion .

An annotated bibliography is a list of source references that has a short description (called an annotation ) for each of the sources. It is often assigned as part of the research process for a paper .

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved April 2, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, what is your plagiarism score.

Conducting a Literature Review

Getting Started
Define your Research Question
Finding Sources
Evaluating Sources
Organizing the Review
Cite and Manage your Sources

Additional Resources

Developing Research Questions by Monash University
Developing Strong Research Questions by Scribbr
Formulating Your Research Question by Vanderbilt University
Narrowing a Topic and Developing a Research Question by Indiana University

Develop your Research Question

Before you can begin your literature review, you will need to select a topic. It is helpful to think about your research topic as a question. For example, instead of a topic like "diversity", you could ask "How do diversity training programs impact hiring practices in retail organizations?"

A good research question is manageable in scope - not too broad, but not too narrow. If your topic is too broad, you may become overwhelmed and find it difficult to organize your ideas. If your topic is too narrow, you may not be able to find enough information to include in your literature review.

As the video below describes in further detail , a good research question should be focused on a single problem or issue, researchable using college resources, feasible within the constraints of your assignment, specific enough to find relevant sources about, complex enough to require thoughtful analysis, and relevant to your interests and/or field of study.

Developing a Research Question - General Tips

It is often helpful to start with a broad idea, then narrow your focus by brainstorming related ideas. If you have a general area of interest, you can think about various issues in that general subject area. Do any of your ideas present a puzzle or problem that you are interested in investigating? Are there issues that make you wonder about causes or consequences?

The general steps of a research question, explained in detail in the below video, are:

Choose a broad topic
If necessary, do some preliminary reading to find out about issues related to the topic or interesting subtopics
Narrow down a specific problem, issue, or subtopic to focus on
Looking at this narrower topic, come up with a question that could guide your research going forward

Your Research Question and the Literature Review

Your literature review should be guided by a central research question. Remember, it is not a collection of loosely related studies in a field but instead represents background and research developments related to a specific research question, interpreted and analyzed by you in a synthesized way.

As you begin to investigate and evaluate scholarly literature on your topic, you may find it necessary to revise your original research question based on what you learn. Be sure to expand your literature search to include any new concepts you may identify along the way !

Make sure your research question is not too broad or too narrow. Is it manageable?
Begin writing down terms that are related to your question. These will be useful for searches later.
If you have the opportunity, discuss your topic with your professor.

How many studies do you need to look at? How comprehensive should it be? How many years should it cover?

Tip: This may depend on your assignment. How many sources does the assignment require?

<< Previous: Getting Started
Next: Finding Sources >>
Last Updated: Dec 19, 2022 1:17 PM
URL: https://libraryservices.acphs.edu/lit_review

University of Tasmania, Australia

Systematic reviews for health: 1. formulate the research question.

Handbooks / Guidelines for Systematic Reviews
Standards for Reporting
Registering a Protocol
Tools for Systematic Review
Online Tutorials & Courses
Books and Articles about Systematic Reviews
Finding Systematic Reviews
Critical Appraisal
Library Help
Bibliographic Databases
Grey Literature
Handsearching
Citation Tracking
1. Formulate the Research Question
2. Identify the Key Concepts
3. Develop Search Terms - Free-Text
4. Develop Search Terms - Controlled Vocabulary
5. Search Fields
6. Phrase Searching, Wildcards and Proximity Operators
7. Boolean Operators
8. Search Limits
9. Pilot Search Strategy & Monitor Its Development
10. Final Search Strategy
11. Adapt Search Syntax
Documenting Search Strategies
Handling Results & Storing Papers

Step 1. Formulate the Research Question

A systematic review is based on a pre-defined specific research question ( Cochrane Handbook, 1.1 ). The first step in a systematic review is to determine its focus - you should clearly frame the question(s) the review seeks to answer ( Cochrane Handbook, 2.1 ). It may take you a while to develop a good review question - it is an important step in your review. Well-formulated questions will guide many aspects of the review process, including determining eligibility criteria, searching for studies, collecting data from included studies, and presenting findings ( Cochrane Handbook, 2.1 ).

The research question should be clear and focused - not too vague, too specific or too broad.

You may like to consider some of the techniques mentioned below to help you with this process. They can be useful but are not necessary for a good search strategy.

PICO - to search for quantitative review questions

Richardson, WS, Wilson, MC, Nishikawa, J & Hayward, RS 1995, 'The well-built clinical question: A key to evidence-based decisions', ACP Journal Club , vol. 123, no. 3, pp. A12-A12 .

We do not have access to this article at UTAS.

A variant of PICO is PICOS . S stands for Study designs . It establishes which study designs are appropriate for answering the question, e.g. randomised controlled trial (RCT). There is also PICO C (C for context) and PICO T (T for timeframe).

You may find this document on PICO / PIO / PEO useful:

Framing a PICO / PIO / PEO question Developed by Teesside University

SPIDER - to search for qualitative and mixed methods research studies

Cooke, A, Smith, D & Booth, A 2012, 'Beyond pico the spider tool for qualitative evidence synthesis', Qualitative Health Research , vol. 22, no. 10, pp. 1435-1443.

This article is only accessible for UTAS staff and students.

SPICE - to search for qualitative evidence

Cleyle, S & Booth, A 2006, 'Clear and present questions: Formulating questions for evidence based practice', Library hi tech , vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 355-368.

ECLIPSE - to search for health policy/management information

Wildridge, V & Bell, L 2002, 'How clip became eclipse: A mnemonic to assist in searching for health policy/management information', Health Information & Libraries Journal , vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 113-115.

There are many more techniques available. See the below guide from the CQUniversity Library for an extensive list:

Question frameworks overview from Framing your research question guide, developed by CQUniversity Library

This is the specific research question used in the example:

"Is animal-assisted therapy more effective than music therapy in managing aggressive behaviour in elderly people with dementia?"

Within this question are the four PICO concepts :

S - Study design

This is a therapy question. The best study design to answer a therapy question is a randomised controlled trial (RCT). You may decide to only include studies in the systematic review that were using a RCT, see Step 8 .

See source of example

Need More Help? Book a consultation with a Learning and Research Librarian or contact [email protected] .

<< Previous: Building Search Strategies
Next: 2. Identify the Key Concepts >>
Last Updated: Feb 22, 2024 11:38 AM
URL: https://utas.libguides.com/SystematicReviews

Module 2: Formulating a Research Question and Searching for Sources

Formulating a Research Question

As noted in Module 1: Types of Reviews , conducting a “pre-search” is a crucial first step in devising the research question. A well-formulated research question informs the research process. It can focus your information needs (i.e. identify inclusion and exclusion criteria), help to identify key search concepts, and guide you in the direction of relevant resources.

Types of Research Questions

There are two general types of research questions: quantitative and qualitative .

Quantitative Research Questions

Types of quantitative questions can be categorized as explanatory (i.e., relationship-based), descriptive, or comparative.

Explanatory questions aim to discover cause-and-effect relationships by comparing two or more variables, individuals or groups based on differing outcomes.
Descriptive questions will often quantify a single variable but may include multiple variables within a question. They typically ask for measurements, and can begin with: “how much”, “what percentage”, “how frequently”, or “how many”.
Comparative questions are designed to identify the “difference between” a dependent variable and two or more groups. These questions tend to begin with “what is the difference” or “what are the differences”.

Qualitative Research Questions

Qualitative questions aim to discover meaning or gain an understanding of a phenomenon. They ask questions that cannot be measured with specific numbers and statistics. Qualitative research questions often contain words like "lived experience" , “personal experience”, “understanding”, “meaning”, and “stories”.

A Comparison of Quantitative and Qualitative Questions

So how do quantitative and qualitative research questions differ when you are conducting a search? In Table 2.1 below, we provide some examples of research topics. Each topic can either be used for a quantitative or qualitative research question. For each question, the category of research question is clarified.

Key Takeaways

Regardless of the type of question being asked, a good research question cannot be answered with a simple yes or no (as demonstrated by the sample questions in Table 2.1).

Quantitative data can be counted, measured, and expressed using numbers.

Qualitative research relies on data obtained by the researcher from first-hand observation, interviews, questionnaires (on which participants write descriptively), focus groups, participant-observation, recordings made in natural settings, documents, and artifacts. The data are generally nonnumerical.

Personal knowledge about the world that has been gained through first-hand involvement in everyday events.

Advanced Research Skills: Conducting Literature and Systematic Reviews Copyright © 2021 by Kelly Dermody; Cecile Farnum; Daniel Jakubek; Jo-Anne Petropoulos; Jane Schmidt; and Reece Steinberg is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Library guides
Book study rooms
Library Workshops
Library Account

Library Services

Library Services Home

Advanced literature search and systematic reviews

Introduction

Formulate your question

Using frameworks to structure your question, selecting a framework, inclusion and exclusion criteria, the scoping search.

Videos and Support
Step 2 - Develop a search strategy
Step 3 - Selecting databases
Step 4 - Develop your protocol
Step 5 - Perform your search
Step 6 - Searching grey literature
Step 7 - Manage your results
Step 8 - Analyse and understand your results
Step 9 - Write your methodology
Videos and support

Formulating a clear, well-defined, relevant and answerable research question is essential to finding the best evidence for your topic. On this page we outline the approaches to developing a research question that can be used as the basis for a review.

Frameworks have been designed to help you structure research questions and identify the main concepts you want to focus on. Your topic may not fit perfectly into one of the frameworks listed on this page, but just using part of a framework can be sufficient.

The framework you should use depends on the type of question you will be researching.

A framework used for formulating a clinical research question, i.e. questions covering the effectiveness of an intervention, treatment, etc.

Extensions to PICO

If your topic has additional concepts, there are extensions to the PICO framework that you can use:

PICOS - S stands for study design. Use this framework if you are only interested in examining specific designs of study.

PICOT - T stands for timeframe. Use this framework if your outcomes need to be measured in a certain amount of time, e.g. 24 hours after surgery.

PICOC - C stands for context. Use this framework if you are focussing on a particular organisation or circumstances or scenario.

A framework used for questions relating to prognosis issues.

A framework used for questions relating to the prevalence / incidence of a condition.

Used for questions relating to cost effectiveness, economic evaluations and service improvements.

Used for questions relating to cost effectiveness, economic evaluations, and service improvements.

Used for qualitative questions evaluating experiences and meaningfulness

For quantitative and qualitative questions evaluating experiences, and meaningfulness.

Used for qualitative questions evaluating experiences and meaningfulness.

Framework used for qualitative questions evaluating experiences and meaningfulness.

When you formulate a research question you also need to consider your inclusion and exclusion criteria. These are a list of pre-defined characteristics the literature must have, if they are to be included in a study. Different factors can be used as inclusion or exclusion criteria.

The most common inclusion / exclusion criteria are:

Geographic location

Limit the review of study to geographical area.

How far back do you wish to search for information? (For systematic reviews you need to give a reason if you choose to restrict your search by date).

Publication type

Common excluded publications are reviews and editorials.

Participants

Adults, child studies, certain age groups?

Limit the review of study to language.

Peer review

Has to be reviewed by accredited professionals in the field.

Study design

Randomised controlled trials, cohort studies?

Primary care, hospitals, general practice, schools?

Once you have a clear research question, you need to conduct a scoping search to identify:

The search terms you should use to retrieve information on your topic.
The body of the literature that has already been written on your topic.
If a systematic review, covering the question you are considering, has already been published or has been registered and it is in the process of being completed. If that is the case, you need to modify your research question. If the systematic review was completed over five years ago, you can perform an update of the same question.

Search the following resources to find systematic reviews, either completed or in progress. Check the Supporting videos and online tutorials page on this guide for demonstration of how to do a scoping search.

Prospero To search for systematic reviews that are "in progress" and those that have already been published. Accessibility information for Prospero
TRIP Pro A clinical search engine providing access to research evidence in the form of primary research articles, clinical trials, systematic reviews and evidence summaries. Grey literature is also available in the form of clinical guidelines, ongoing trials, blogs, videos and patient information leaflets. more... less... TripPRO is the advanced version of Trip providing more full text access and more systematic reviews than the basic version
The Cochrane Library The Cochrane Library is a collection of databases that contain different types of high-quality, independent evidence to inform healthcare decision-making. more... less... Advanced search.

To find primary research related to your topic you can search databases available via:

EBSCOhost A platform providing access to databases covering a variety of subjects including business, economics, education, environment, food science, health, politics and sociology. Accessibility information for EBSCO
Ovid Online A platform providing access to a number of health databases covering general health topics as well as allied health; complementary medicine, health management, international health, maternity care, nursing and social policy. Accessibility information for Ovid Online
<< Previous: Introduction
Next: Step 2 - Develop a search strategy >>
Last Updated: Mar 22, 2024 10:49 AM
URL: https://libguides.city.ac.uk/systematic-reviews

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Publications
Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

Advanced Search
Journal List
Indian J Sex Transm Dis AIDS
v.31(1); Jan-Jun 2010

Formulating a researchable question: A critical step for facilitating good clinical research

Sadaf aslam.

Clinical and Translational Science Institute and Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA

Patricia Emmanuel

Developing a researchable question is one of the challenging tasks a researcher encounters when initiating a project. Both, unanswered issues in current clinical practice or when experiences dictate alternative therapies may provoke an investigator to formulate a clinical research question. This article will assist researchers by providing step-by-step guidance on the formulation of a research question. This paper also describes PICO (population, intervention, control, and outcomes) criteria in framing a research question. Finally, we also assess the characteristics of a research question in the context of initiating a research project.

INTRODUCTION

A researchable question is an uncertainty about a problem that can be challenged, examined, and analyzed to provide useful information.[ 1 ] A successful research project depends upon how well an investigator formulates the research question based on the problems faced in day-to-day research activities and clinical practice. The underlying questions of a research project provide important information to decide whether the topic is relevant, researchable, and significant. A well-formulated research question needs extreme specificity and preciseness which guides the implementation of the project keeping in mind the identification of variables and population of interest. Here we will present a clinical scenario and see how clinical questions arise and help us in finding the evidence to answer our question.

FORMULATING THE RESEARCH QUESTION

A 2-year-old boy presents in an outpatient clinic with fever and severe pain in his right ear. He has a history of recurrent ear infections, and his mother expresses a concern that he has been on the antibiotic amoxicillin for the past few weeks. She is worried about the consequences of the long-term antibiotic use. She is also concerned about the outcome associated with recurrent ear infections. She wants to know if the prescribed amoxicillin is effective, or it can be substituted with another antibiotic because of its side effects such as frequent diarrhea.

Several questions arise from this case which can be broadly classified into background and foreground questions. The general questions about a clinical problem or a disease are called “Background Questions.”[ 2 ] These questions generally ask what, when, how, and where about the disease, disorder, or treatment for instance, “What is otitis media?” or “How does amoxicillin work?” etc. These types of questions can be answered by going through review articles or text books.

The patient-oriented questions involving interpretation of a therapy or disease and consideration of risk vs. benefit for a patient or a group of patient are called “Foreground Questions.”[ 2 ] These types of complex clinical questions are best answered by primary or pre-assessed studies in the literature. These questions mostly compare the two, either two drugs or treatments or two diagnostic methods, etc.

The PICO (population, intervention, control, and outcomes) format [ Table 1 ] is considered a widely known strategy for framing a “foreground” research question.[ 3 ] Sackett et al . pointed out that breaking the question into four components will facilitate the identification of relevant information.

Considering PICO and FINER criteria for developing a research question[ 3 , 5 ]

Population or problem - addressing a specific population, its important characteristics and demographic information. From the above case, you can identify pediatric population with otitis media, the age range, sex, presenting complaint, and history.

Intervention or treatment of interest - the intervention can be a treatment, procedure, diagnostic test, and risk or prognostic factors. In this case, the intervention will be your plan to treat the patient which can be a new therapy, a diagnostic test, prognostic factor, or a procedure. For example, based on your observation in clinic, cefuroxime is another better treatment option as compared to amoxicillin in treating otitis media but you are not sure about its efficacy in pediatric population with otitis media.

Comparator or control -when a new therapy is compared with the existing one.

Outcome - is the effect of the intervention. For example, its effectiveness in controlling pain. Therefore, the outcome in the above case can be the relief of pain, the resolution of infection, or decreasing the risk of developing resistance. A good primary outcome should be easily quantifiable, specific, valid, reproducible, and appropriate to your research question.[ 4 ]

In a typical clinical setting, a clinician needs to know about background and foreground questions depending upon the experience about a particular disease and therapy. Once background questions are answered, more complex questions are addressed. The clinical questions arise from the central issues in a clinical work.[ 2 ] For example, identifying causes or risk factors (etiological questions), comparing diagnostic tests based on sensitivity and specificity (diagnostic query), identifying best treatment options (therapeutic question), and outcome of the treatment (prognostic question).

After determining a foreground question, the PICO approach is followed. Dissecting the question into parts makes it easy and searchable. As evident in this case, there are several relevant questions, for example: what are the outcomes associated with recurrent ear infection, what are the possible effects of long-term use of antibiotic, and what are the harms associated with current treatment? Now if you gather all the information from PICO approach, the following researchable questions can be formulated.

In children with acute otitis media (P), is cefuroxime (I) effective in reducing the duration of symptoms (O) as compared to amoxicillin (C)?

In children suffering from otitis media, will cefuroxime result in the improvement of symptoms and reduction in developing resistance?

Does treatment with amoxicillin increase the risk of developing resistance in children suffering from otitis media?

Does surgical procedure has better outcome for the treatment of otitis media in children after repeated antibiotic therapy?

From the above case, we have formulated multiple questions based on our patient’s illness and concerns. Now we can use the strategy of “selecting” the best question.[ 2 ] For example, which question has more significance for the patient’s well-being, which question is relevant to our knowledge needs and which question might lead to interesting answers for our patients and clinical query? Further, we need to consider the feasibility of finding the evidence in a short period.

ASSESSING THE RESEARCH QUESTION IN THE CONTEXT OF A STUDY DESIGN

As proposed by Hulley et al . [ Table 1 ], a research question should be formulated keeping in mind the FINER (feasible, interesting, novel, ethical, and relevant) criteria[ 5 ] and that the answer should fill gaps in the existing knowledge. The following points should be considered while assessing a research question.

Determining the required resources

The feasibility of conducting a research project is based on the research question and should be considered early in the process in order to avoid waste of resources and intellectual energy. This is sometimes difficult for a new investigator and they need guidance from their mentors.[ 4 ]

Consider doing a pilot or proof of concept study to asses the feasibility;
Consult a biostatistician early in the project in order to choose less costly design and common outcomes;
Consider feasibility of enrolling the intended number of subjects from the population of your interest. Also, consider expanding your inclusion criteria and modifying exclusion criteria if it is difficult to enroll the intended number; and
Consider cost of each element of the study design, research staff, and resources.

Significance of making it interesting and relevant

An important question may not seem interesting the way it is presented. It is a challenge to present a research question clearly and engage the interest and attention of the reviewers. Research is too much work to not have a passion for what you are investigating. You will have more support for your study, and it will be easier to publish if the topic is novel and also interests your collaborators, colleagues, and the community at large. It is important to pursue a research question with a passion of getting the truth out of the matter.[ 5 ] This is how we all perceive research; commitment to a high-quality systematic and unbiased completion of an innovative project. If your question can explain a given problem while pointing toward a specific aspect which is missing then your project can get a great deal of support.

Conducting literature review

The innovation of any research question is determined by a thorough literature search. Any replication of the study already existing in the literature is not worth repeating as it is. Depending upon the research question, sometimes the study can be replicated if your question approaches an existing problem in a refreshing way. This can be achieved by using a different populations, different techniques, new conceptual approaches, or linking two different studies in which outcomes did not solve the problem.[ 5 ] Once a preliminary question has been formulated, literature search should be done to find out what is known or unknown about the topic. The goal of the literature review is to determine what research has been conducted on the topic of interest? and how has it been conducted? and what are the gaps in the knowledge?. It is recommended to use PubMed, MedlinePlus, CINAHL, or Web of Science as the main search databases, but other databases can be used as well. PubMed clinical query is an easy and user-friendly database to search for evidence related to clinical practice. This also provides information to search MEDLINE by doing categorical searches, for example, therapeutic, diagnostic, etiological, and prognostic. The American College of Physicians (ACP) and clinical evidence from BMJ Publishing Group are excellent systems to find evidence on therapeutic questions. Other search engines such as OVID has a large selection of texts and journals which provides access to other databases such as Cochrane library in getting full text articles and systematic reviews. Gray et al . suggested 4 Ss for literature review: Systems : use of comprehensive resources, Synopses : extracting high-quality studies and abstracts, Syntheses: systematic reviews, and Studies : original research studies.[ 6 ] In the hierarchy of evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews are considered the best method for evidence. Systematic reviews are rigorous methods of collecting and synthesizing the results of many high-quality studies. Conducting a thorough literature search also helps in finding information on the methodology, calculating the sample size, and also the type of analysis as we are looking to find a difference. This information is necessary to help structure a new study and to identify gaps in the knowledge base of the scientific community.

Refining research question

A focused research question leads to a systematic planning of a research project. The difficulty in framing a research question is not due to the lack of ideas. The challenge is to transform a novel research question into a valid study design which is the next step in refining a research question.

Asking a well-formulated research question is a starting point in conducting a quality research project and in evidence-based clinical practice. The framework presented in this paper can be helpful for a clinician to formulate a question and search for an answer and for a researcher to develop a new research project. The classical approach is to identify a research question followed by a thorough literature search keeping in mind the PICO and FINER criteria. If it is a well-defined research question, it will lead to an appropriate study design and methodology. Discussing your research question with knowledgeable peers, department chair, mentor, and the biostatistician from the start will lead to the completion of a successful project. Other steps such as type and phase of the clinical trial, budget, informed consent, sites, resource constraints of both personnel and facilities, and timeline should also be considered while formulating a research question. We have introduced the concept of background and foreground questions and also the types of different questions that can arise (therapy, harm, diagnosis, and prognosis). We have described several strategies here while highlighting the major steps that will help investigators in framing a question with the goal of finding an answer based on evidence or initiation of a new research project. It is always good to focus on a single research question based on its relevance to patient’s health or one primary objective to drive the study design.[ 4 ] Once we have formulated our research question, we need to keep track of the progress toward finding an appropriate answer and then finally applying the results to a specific patient population. In short, a researchable question is what leads toward the facts rather than opinion[ 7 ] and is clearly linked to the overall research project goal.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge Dr. J.K Kosambiya, Dr. Eknath Naik, and Dr. Ambuj Kumar for their time in reviewing the paper and providing useful insights.

Source of Support: Nil

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

Disseminating Behavioral Research pp 53–61 Cite as

The Process of Scientific Writing: Developing a Research Question, Conducting a Literature Review, and Creating an Outline

Leif K. Albright 3
First Online: 10 December 2023

92 Accesses

The process of scientific writing is a multifaceted endeavor that plays a pivotal role in the advancement of knowledge and communication within the academic community. This chapter examines the essential stages of scientific writing, encompassing the formulation of a research question, the meticulous execution of a literature review, and the strategic construction of an effective outline. By delving into each stage’s significance and the symbiotic relationship between these stages, the chapter offers a comprehensive guide to facilitate successful scientific communication through the production of a coherent, impactful scientific research paper.

FINER criteria
Gap-spotting
Literature review
PICOT framework
Problematization
Research question

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

Available as PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Available as EPUB and PDF
Durable hardcover edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Berger, R. (2015). Now I see it, now I don’t: Researcher’s position and reflexivity in qualitative research. Qualitative Research, 15 (2), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1468794112468475

Article Google Scholar

Creswell, J. W. (2014). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (5th ed.). Pearson Education.

Google Scholar

Doody, O., & Bailey, M. E. (2016). Setting a research question, aim, and objective. Nurse Researcher, 23 (4) https://journals.rcni.com/doi/pdfplus/10.7748/nr.23.4.19.s5

Farrugia, P., Petrisor, B. A., Farrokhyar, F., & Bhandari, M. (2010). Practical tips for surgical research: Research questions, hypotheses and objectives. Canadian Journal of Surgery. Journal canadien de chirurgie, 53 (4), 278–281.

PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar

Galvan, J. L., & Galvan, M. C. (2017). Writing Literature Reviews: A guide for students of the social and behavioral sciences (7th ed.). Routledge.

Book Google Scholar

Heard, S. (2016). The scientist’s guide to writing: How to write more easily and effectively throughout your scientific career . Princeton University Press.

Hopson, J. (2013). A behavioral approach to fun . Invited address at the Second Education Conference of the Association for Behavior Analysis International, Chicago, IL. https://www.abainternational.org/events/education.aspx

Hulley, S. B., Cummings, S. R., Browner, W. S., Grady, D. G., & Newman, T. B. (2007). Designing Clinical Research (3rd ed.). Lippincott Williams and Wilkins.

Lipowski, E. E. (2008). Developing great research questions. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy, 65 (17), 1667–1670. https://academic.oup.com/ajhp/article- abstract/65/17/1667/5128061

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive approach (3rd ed.). Sage.

Normand, M. P. (2008). Increasing physical activity through self-monitoring, goal setting, and feedback. Behavioral Interventions: Theory & Practice in Residential & Community-Based Clinical Programs, 23 (4), 227–236.

Richardson, W. S., Wilson, M. C., Nishikawa, J., & Hayward, R. S. A. (Eds.). (1995). The well-built clinical question: a key to evidence-based decisions. ACP Journal Club, 123 (3), A12. https://doi.org/10.7326/acpjc-1995-123-3-a12

Sandberg, J., & Alvesson, M. (2011). Ways of constructing research questions: Gap-spotting or problematization? Organization, 18 (1), 23–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508410372151

Wilder, D. A., Austin, J., & Casella, S. (2009). Applying behavior analysis in organizations: Organizational behavior management. Psychological Services, 6 (3), 202–211.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Special Education, Manhattanville College, Purchase, NY, USA

Leif K. Albright

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Leif K. Albright .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Behavior Analysis Department, College of Graduate and Professional Studies- The Chicago School, Chicago, IL, USA

Annette K. Griffith

Behavior Analysis Department, College of Graduate and Professional Studies - The Chicago School, Chicago, IL, USA

Tyler C. Ré

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Albright, L.K. (2023). The Process of Scientific Writing: Developing a Research Question, Conducting a Literature Review, and Creating an Outline. In: Griffith, A.K., Ré, T.C. (eds) Disseminating Behavioral Research. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47343-2_4

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-47343-2_4

Published : 10 December 2023

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-47342-5

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-47343-2

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Behavioral Science and Psychology (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

Systematic Reviews: Formulating Your Research Question

What Type of Review is Right for You?
What is in a Systematic Review
Finding and Appraising Systematic Reviews
Formulating Your Research Question
Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
Creating a Protocol
Results and PRISMA Flow Diagram
Searching the Published Literature
Searching the Gray Literature
Methodology and Documentation
Managing the Process
Scoping Reviews

Types of Questions

Research questions should be answerable and also fill important gaps in the knowledge. Developing a good question takes time and may not fit in the traditional framework. Questions can be broad or narrow and there are advantages and disadvantages to each type.

Questions can be about interventions, diagnosis, screening, measuring, patients/student/customer experiences, or even management strategies. They can also be about policies. As the field of systematic reviews grow, more and more people in humanities and social sciences are embracing systematic reviews and creating questions that fit within their fields of practice.

More information can be found here:

Thomas J, Kneale D, McKenzie JE, Brennan SE, Bhaumik S. Chapter 2: Determining the scope of the review and the questions it will address. In: Higgins JPT, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, Li T, Page MJ, Welch VA (editors). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version 6.0 (updated July 2019). Cochrane, 2019. Available from www.training.cochrane.org/handbook .

Frameworks are used to develop the question being asked. The type of framework doesn't matter as much as the question being selected.

Think of these frameworks as you would for a house or building. A framework is there to provide support and to be a scaffold for the rest of the structure. In the same way, a research question framework can also help structure your evidence synthesis question.

Organizing Your Question

Formulating non-PICO questions Although the PICO formulation should apply easily to the majority of effectiveness questions and a great number besides you may encounter questions that are not easily accommodated within this particular framework. Below you will find a number of acceptable alternatives:
Using The PICOS Model To Design And Conduct A Systematic Search: A Speech Pathology Case Study
7 STEPS TO THE PERFECT PICO SEARCH Searching for high-quality clinical research evidence can be a daunting task, yet it is an integral part of the evidence-based practice process. One way to streamline and improve the research process for nurses and researchers of all backgrounds is to utilize the PICO search strategy. PICO is a format for developing a good clinical research question prior to starting one’s research. It is a mnemonic used to describe the four elements of a sound clinical foreground question (Yale University’s Cushing/Whitney Medical Library)

to search for quantitative review questions

P: Patient or Population

I: Intervention (or Exposure)

C: Comparison (or Control)

Variations Include:

S: Study Design

T: Timeframe

to search for qualitative evidence

S: Setting (where?)

P: Perspecitve (for whom?)

I: Intervention (what?)

C: Comparison (compared with what?)

E: Evaluation (with what result?)

to search for qualitative and mixed methods research studies

S: Sample

PI: Phenomenon of Interest

E: Evaluation

R: Research type

to search for health policy/management information

E: Expectation (improvement or information or innovation)

C: Client group (at whom the service is aimed)

L: Location (where is the service located?)

I: Impact (outcomes)

P: Professionals (who is involved in providing/improving the service)

Se: Service (for which service are you looking for information)

PICO Template Questions

Try words from your topic in these templates. Your PICO should fit only one type of question in the list.

For an intervention/therapy:

In _______(P), what is the effect of _______(I) on ______(O) compared with _______(C) within ________ (T)?

For etiology:

Are ____ (P) who have _______ (I) at ___ (Increased/decreased) risk for/of_______ (O) compared with ______ (P) with/without ______ (C) over _____ (T)?

Diagnosis or diagnostic test:

Are (is) _________ (I) more accurate in diagnosing ________ (P) compared with ______ (C) for _______ (O)?

Prevention:

For ________ (P) does the use of ______ (I) reduce the future risk of ________ (O) compared with _________ (C)?

Prognosis/Predictions

In__________ (P) how does ________ (I) compared to _______(C) influence _______ (O) over ______ (T)?

How do ________ (P) diagnosed with _______ (I) perceive ______ (O) during _____ (T)?

Template taken from Southern Illinois University- Edwardsville

Example PICO Questions

Intervention/Therapy:

In school-age children (P), what is the effect of a school-based physical activity program (I) on a reduction in the incidence of childhood obesity (O) compared with no intervention (C) within a 1 year period (T)?

In high school children (P), what is the effect of a nurse-led presentation on bullying (I) on a reduction in reported incidences of bullying (O) compared with no intervention (C) within a 6 month time frame (T)?

Are males 50 years of age and older (P) who have a history of 1 year of smoking or less (I) at an increased risk of developing esophageal cancer (O) compared with males age 50 and older (P) who have no smoking history (C)?

Are women ages 25-40 (P) who take oral contraceptives (I) at greater risk for developing blood clots (O) compared with women ages 25-40 (P) who use IUDs for contraception (C) over a 5 year time frame (T)?

Diagnosis/Diagnostic Test:

Is a yearly mammogram (I) more effective in detecting breast cancer (O) compared with a mammogram every 3 years (C) in women under age 50 (P)?

Is a colonoscopy combined with fecal occult blood testing (I) more accurate in detecting colon cancer (O) compared with a colonoscopy alone (C) in adults over age 50 (P)?

For women under age 60 (P), does the daily use of 81mg low-dose Aspirin (I) reduce the future risk of stroke (O) compared with no usage of low-dose Aspirin (C)?

For adults over age 65 (P) does a daily 30 minute exercise regimen (I) reduce the future risk of heart attack (O) compared with no exercise regimen (C)?

Prognosis/Predictions:

Does daily home blood pressure monitoring (I) influence compliance with medication regimens for hypertension (O) in adults over age 60 who have hypertension (P) during the first year after being diagnosed with the condition (T)?

Does monitoring blood glucose 4 times a day (I) improve blood glucose control (O) in people with Type 1 diabetes (P) during the first six months after being diagnosed with the condition (T)?

How do teenagers (P) diagnosed with cancer (I) perceive chemotherapy and radiation treatments (O) during the first 6 months after diagnosis (T)?

How do first-time mothers (P) of premature babies in the NICU (I) perceive bonding with their infant (O) during the first month after birth (T)?

<< Previous: Finding and Appraising Systematic Reviews
Next: Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria >>
Last Updated: Mar 5, 2024 3:43 PM
URL: https://guides.lib.lsu.edu/Systematic_Reviews

Provide Website Feedback Accessibility Statement

Systematic Reviews for Non-Health Sciences

1. Formulating the research question
Getting started
Types of reviews
0. Planning the systematic review
2. Developing the protocol
3. Searching, screening, and selection of articles
4. Critical appraisal
5. Writing and publishing
Software and tools
Software tutorials
Resources by discipline
Duke Med Center Library: Systematic reviews This link opens in a new window
Overwhelmed? General literature review guidance This link opens in a new window

Email a Librarian

Contact a Librarian

Ask a Librarian

Formulating a research question, formulating a question.

Formulating a strong research question for a systematic review can be a lengthy process. While you may have an idea about the topic you want to explore, your specific research question is what will drive your review and requires some consideration.

You will want to conduct preliminary or exploratory searches of the literature as you refine your question. In these searches you will want to:

Determine if a systematic review has already been conducted on your topic and if so, how yours might be different, or how you might shift or narrow your anticipated focus
Scope the literature to determine if there is enough literature on your topic to conduct a systematic review
Identify key concepts and terminology
Identify seminal or landmark studies
Identify key studies that you can test your research strategy against (more on that later)
Begin to identify databases that might be useful to your search question

Systematic review vs. other reviews

Systematic reviews required a narrow and specific research question. The goal of a systematic review is to provide an evidence synthesis of ALL research performed on one particular topic. So, your research question should be clearly answerable from the data you gather from the studies included in your review.

Ask yourself if your question even warrants a systematic review (has it been answered before?). If your question is more broad in scope or you aren't sure if it's been answered, you might look into performing a systematic map or scoping review instead.

Learn more about systematic reviews versus scoping reviews:

CEE. (2022). Section 2:Identifying the need for evidence, determining the evidence synthesis type, and establishing a Review Team. Collaboration for Environmental Evidence. https://environmentalevidence.org/information-for-authors/2-need-for-evidence-synthesis-type-and-review-team-2/
DistillerSR. (2022). The difference between systematic reviews and scoping reviews. DistillerSR. https://www.distillersr.com/resources/systematic-literature-reviews/the-difference-between-systematic-reviews-and-scoping-reviews
Nalen, CZ. (2022). What is a scoping review? AJE. https://www.aje.com/arc/what-is-a-scoping-review/

Purpose of a framework

Illustration of man holding check mark, woman holding cross, with large page in between them

Frame your entire research process
Determine the scope of your review
Provide a focus for your searches
Help you identify key concepts
Guide the selection of your papers

There are different frameworks you can use to help structure a question.

Image by jcomp on Freepik

Selecting a framework

PICO / PECO
What if my topic doesn't fit a framework?

The PICO or PECO framework is typically used in clinical and health sciences-related research, but it can also be adapted for other quantitative research.

P — Patient / Problem / Population

I / E — Intervention / Indicator / phenomenon of Interest / Exposure / Event

C — Comparison / Context / Control

O — Outcome

Example topic : Health impact of hazardous waste exposure

Fazzo, L., Minichilli, F., Santoro, M., Ceccarini, A., Della Seta, M., Bianchi, F., Comba, P., & Martuzzi, M. (2017). Hazardous waste and health impact: A systematic review of the scientific literature. Environmental Health , 16 (1), 107. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12940-017-0311-8

The SPICE framework is useful for both qualitative and mixed-method research.

S — Setting (where?)

P — Perspective (for whom?)

I — Intervention / Exposure (what?)

C — Comparison (compared with what?)

E — Evaluation (with what result?)

Learn more : Booth, A. (2006). Clear and present questions: Formulating questions for evidence based practice. Library Hi Tech , 24 (3), 355-368. https://doi.org/10.1108/07378830610692127

The SPIDER framework is useful for both qualitative and mixed-method research.

S — Sample

PI — Phenomenon of Interest

D — Design

E — Evaluation

R — Study Type

Learn more : Cooke, A., Smith, D., & Booth, A. (2012). Beyond PICO: The SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. Qualitative Health Research, 22 (10), 1435-1443. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732312452938

Click here for an exhaustive list of research question frameworks from University of Maryland Libraries.

You might find that your topic does not always fall into one of the models listed on this page. You can always modify a model to make it work for your topic, and either remove or incorporate additional elements. Be sure to document in your review the established framework that yours is based off and how it has been modified.

<< Previous: 0. Planning the systematic review
Next: 2. Developing the protocol >>
Last Updated: Mar 29, 2024 2:32 PM
URL: https://guides.library.duke.edu/systematicreviews

Services for...

Faculty & Instructors
Graduate Students
Undergraduate Students
International Students
Patrons with Disabilities

Harmful Language Statement
Re-use & Attribution / Privacy
Support the Libraries

Duke NetID Login
919.660.1100
Duke Health Badge: 24-hour access
Accounts & Access
Databases, Journals & Books
Request & Reserve
Training & Consulting
Request Articles & Books
Renew Online
Reserve Spaces
Reserve a Locker
Study & Meeting Rooms
Course Reserves
Digital Health Device Collection
Pay Fines/Fees
Recommend a Purchase
Access From Off Campus
Building Access
Computers & Equipment
Wifi Access
My Accounts
Mobile Apps
Known Access Issues
Report an Access Issue
All Databases
Article Databases
Basic Sciences
Clinical Sciences
Dissertations & Theses
Drugs, Chemicals & Toxicology
Grants & Funding
Interprofessional Education
Non-Medical Databases
Search for E-Journals
Search for Print & E-Journals
Search for E-Books
Search for Print & E-Books
E-Book Collections
Biostatistics
Global Health
MBS Program
Medical Students
MMCi Program
Occupational Therapy
Path Asst Program
Physical Therapy
Researchers
Community Partners

Conducting Research

Archival & Historical Research
Black History at Duke Health
Data Analytics & Viz Software
Data: Find and Share
Evidence-Based Practice
NIH Public Access Policy Compliance
Publication Metrics
Qualitative Research
Searching Animal Alternatives

Systematic Reviews

Test Instruments

Using Databases

JCR Impact Factors
Web of Science

Finding & Accessing

COVID-19: Core Clinical Resources
Health Literacy
Health Statistics & Data
Library Orientation

Writing & Citing

Creating Links
Getting Published
Reference Mgmt
Scientific Writing

Meet a Librarian

Request a Consultation
Find Your Liaisons
Register for a Class
Request a Class
Self-Paced Learning

Search Services

Literature Search
Systematic Review
Animal Alternatives (IACUC)
Research Impact

Citation Mgmt

Other Software

Scholarly Communications

About Scholarly Communications
Publish Your Work
Measure Your Research Impact
Engage in Open Science
Libraries and Publishers
Directions & Maps
Floor Plans

Library Updates

Annual Snapshot
Conference Presentations
Contact Information
Gifts & Donations
What is a Systematic Review?
Types of Reviews
Manuals and Reporting Guidelines
Our Service
1. Assemble Your Team

2. Develop a Research Question

3. Write and Register a Protocol
4. Search the Evidence
5. Screen Results
6. Assess for Quality and Bias
7. Extract the Data
8. Write the Review
Additional Resources
Finding Full-Text Articles

A well-developed and answerable question is the foundation for any systematic review. This process involves:

Systematic review questions typically follow a PICO-format (patient or population, intervention, comparison, and outcome)
Using the PICO framework can help team members clarify and refine the scope of their question. For example, if the population is breast cancer patients, is it all breast cancer patients or just a segment of them?
When formulating your research question, you should also consider how it could be answered. If it is not possible to answer your question (the research would be unethical, for example), you'll need to reconsider what you're asking
Typically, systematic review protocols include a list of studies that will be included in the review. These studies, known as exemplars, guide the search development but also serve as proof of concept that your question is answerable. If you are unable to find studies to include, you may need to reconsider your question

Systematic Reviews & Evidence Synthesis Methods

Formulate Question
Types of Reviews
Find Existing Reviews & Protocols
Register a Protocol
Searching Systematically
Supplementary Searching
Managing Results
Deduplication
Critical Appraisal
Glossary of terms
Librarian Support
Video tutorials This link opens in a new window
Systematic Review & Evidence Synthesis Boot Camp

Formulate your Research Question

You will want to conduct preliminary or exploratory searches of the literature as you refine your question. In these searches you will want to:

Determine if a systematic review has already been conducted on your topic and if so, how yours might be different, or how you might shift or narrow your anticipated focus.
Scope the literature to determine if there is enough literature on your topic to conduct a systematic review.
Identify key concepts and terminology.
Identify seminal or landmark studies.
Identify key studies that you can test your search strategy against (more on that later).
Begin to identify databases that might be useful to your search question.

Types of Research Questions for Systematic Reviews

A narrow and specific research question is required in order to conduct a systematic review. The goal of a systematic review is to provide an evidence synthesis of ALL research performed on one particular topic. Your research question should be clearly answerable from the studies included in your review.

Another consideration is whether the question has been answered enough to warrant a systematic review. If there have been very few studies, there won't be enough qualitative and/or quantitative data to synthesize. You then have to adjust your question... widen the population, broaden the topic, reconsider your inclusion and exclusion criteria, etc.

When developing your question, it can be helpful to consider the FINER criteria (Feasible, Interesting, Novel, Ethics, and Relevant). Read more about the FINER criteria on the Elsevier blog .

If you have a broader question or aren't certain that your question has been answered enough in the literature, you may be better served by pursuing a systematic map, also know as a scoping review . Scoping reviews are conducted to give a broad overview of a topic, to review the scope and themes of the prior research, and to identify the gaps and areas for future research.

CEE Example Questions Collaboration for Environmental Evidence Guidelines contains Table 2.2 outlining answers sought and example questions in environmental management.

Learn More . . .

Cochrane Handbook Chapter 2 - Determining the scope of the review and the questions it will address

Frameworks for Developing your Research Question

PICO : P atient/ P opulation, I ntervention, C omparison, O utcome.

PEO: P opulation, E xposure, O utcomes

SPIDER : S ample, P henomenon of I nterest, D esign, E valuation, R esearch Type

For more frameworks and guidance on developing the research question, check out:

1. Advanced Literature Search and Systematic Reviews: Selecting a Framework. City University of London Library

2. Select the Appropriate Framework for your Question. Tab "1-1" from PIECES: A guide to developing, conducting, & reporting reviews [Excel workbook ]. Margaret J. Foster, Texas A&M University. CC-BY-3.0 license .

3. Formulating a Research Question. University College London Library. Systematic Reviews .

4. Question Guidance. UC Merced Library. Systematic Reviews

Sort Link Group

Add / Reorder

Video - Formulating a Research Question (4:43 minutes)

Last Updated: Feb 27, 2024 12:53 PM
URL: https://guides.lib.utexas.edu/systematicreviews

IMAGES

Research Question: Definition, Types, Examples, Quick Tips
How to Develop a Strong Research Question
Chapter 3: How to Get Started
Research Question: Definition, Types, Examples, Quick Tips
Example of a Literature Review for a Research Paper by
15 Literature Review Examples (2024)

VIDEO

Identifying Research Problems and Formulating Problem Statements
#9- Research Process ( Finding and formulating research question )
Formulating Research Objectives
Formulating Research Question and Hypothesis
Formulating Research Question
Overview of a Research Proposal

COMMENTS

Conducting a Literature Review: Research Question
Your research question should be clear, focused, and complex enough to allow for adequate research and analysis. Most importantly, your research question should be interesting to you - you will be spending a great deal of time researching and writing so you should be eager to learn more about it. Your problem statement or research question:
Formulating a good research question: Pearls and pitfalls
The process of formulating a good research question can be challenging and frustrating. While a comprehensive literature review is compulsory, the researcher usually encounters methodological difficulties in the conduct of the study, particularly if the primary study question has not been adequately selected in accordance with the clinical dilemma that needs to be addressed.
Formulating a research question
Formulating a research question. Clarifying the review question leads to specifying what type of studies can best address that question and setting out criteria for including such studies in the review. ... gender, the timeframe of the literature, or the study designs of the research. Example. Research question: What is the impact of homework ...
Developing a Research Question
DEVELOPING A RESEARCH QUESTION. Before searching for sources, you need to formulate a Research Question — this is what you are trying to answer using the existing academic literature. The Research Question pinpoints the focus of the review. Your first step involves choosing, exploring, and focusing a topic.
Developing a Research Question
The COSMIN (COnsensus-based Standards for the selection of health status Measurement INstruments) format is used for systematic review of measurement properties.Questions based on this format identify (1) the construct or the name(s) of the outcome measurement instrument(s) of interest, (2) the target population, (3) the type of measurement instrument of interest, and (4) the measurement ...
Formulating research questions for evidence-based studies
The importance of formulating a sound and proper research question is summarized in three main motives: 1. Conducting an evidence-based study: Evidence-based studies, particularly, the systematic reviews in this case, rely on a research question developed to specifically address the problem with all required details. 2.
1. Identify the Question
Developing a Research Question. According to The Craft of Research (2003), a research question is more than a practical problem or something with a yes/no answer. A research question helps you learn more about something you don't already know and it needs to be significant enough to interest your readers. Your Curiosity + Significance to Others ...
Step 1: Formulating the research question
Step 1: Formulating the research question. The first stage in a review is formulating the research question. The research question accurately and succinctly sums up the review's line of inquiry. This page outlines approaches to developing a research question that can be used as the basis for a review.
How to Write a Literature Review
Step 1 - Search for relevant literature. Step 2 - Evaluate and select sources. Step 3 - Identify themes, debates, and gaps. Step 4 - Outline your literature review's structure. Step 5 - Write your literature review. Free lecture slides.
Define your Research Question
Your Research Question and the Literature Review Your literature review should be guided by a central research question. Remember, it is not a collection of loosely related studies in a field but instead represents background and research developments related to a specific research question, interpreted and analyzed by you in a synthesized way.
Formulation of Research Question
Abstract. Formulation of research question (RQ) is an essentiality before starting any research. It aims to explore an existing uncertainty in an area of concern and points to a need for deliberate investigation. It is, therefore, pertinent to formulate a good RQ. The present paper aims to discuss the process of formulation of RQ with stepwise ...
Formulating Your Research Question
2.1 Identifying Gaps in the Knowledge. Before you define your research question, you need to have a broad and deep understanding of your research field. In Chap. 4, you learned how to develop the literature review as your starting point for understanding, and then engaging with, the scientific output in your field.
1. Formulate the Research Question
Step 1. Formulate the Research Question. A systematic review is based on a pre-defined specific research question (Cochrane Handbook, 1.1).The first step in a systematic review is to determine its focus - you should clearly frame the question(s) the review seeks to answer (Cochrane Handbook, 2.1).It may take you a while to develop a good review question - it is an important step in your review.
Back to the basics: Guidance for formulating good research questions
A research question with high levels of interest is ultimately more competitive for funding and publication. The third component (N) ensures that the research question furthers knowledge in the current field, and fills a clear knowledge gap. The most important way to evaluate novelty is by conducting a rigorous literature review to evaluate ...
Formulating a Research Question
Formulating a Research Question As noted in Module 1: Types of Reviews, conducting a "pre-search" is a crucial first step in devising the research question.A well-formulated research question informs the research process. It can focus your information needs (i.e. identify inclusion and exclusion criteria), help to identify key search concepts, and guide you in the direction of relevant ...
Formulating a good research question: Pearls and pitfalls
The process of formulating a good research question can be challenging and frustrating. While a comprehensive literature review is compulsory, the researcher usually encounters methodological difficulties in the conduct of the study, particularly if the primary study question has not been adequately selected in accordance with the clinical dilemma that needs to be addressed.
Step 1
If a systematic review, covering the question you are considering, has already been published or has been registered and it is in the process of being completed. If that is the case, you need to modify your research question. If the systematic review was completed over five years ago, you can perform an update of the same question.
Formulating a researchable question: A critical step for facilitating
The framework presented in this paper can be helpful for a clinician to formulate a question and search for an answer and for a researcher to develop a new research project. The classical approach is to identify a research question followed by a thorough literature search keeping in mind the PICO and FINER criteria.
The Process of Scientific Writing: Developing a Research Question
Some additional tips for creating a quality literature review include: use clear and concise language to describe the research question and the methods used to select and analyze the studies, use tables, graphs, and other visual aids to present the data in a clear and concise manner, provide a critical evaluation of the quality and relevance of ...
Systematic Reviews: Formulating Your Research Question
evidence-based practice process. One way to streamline and improve the research process for nurses and researchers of all backgrounds is to utilize the PICO search strategy. PICO is a format for developing a good clinical research question prior to starting one's research. It is a mnemonic used to describe the four elements
1. Formulating the research question
Systematic reviews required a narrow and specific research question. The goal of a systematic review is to provide an evidence synthesis of ALL research performed on one particular topic. So, your research question should be clearly answerable from the data you gather from the studies included in your review.
LibGuides: Systematic Reviews: 2. Develop a Research Question
2. Develop a Research Question. A well-developed and answerable question is the foundation for any systematic review. This process involves: Using the PICO framework can help team members clarify and refine the scope of their question. For example, if the population is breast cancer patients, is it all breast cancer patients or just a segment ...
Formulate Question
Formulating a strong research question for a systematic review can be a lengthy process. While you may have an idea about the topic you want to explore, your specific research question is what will drive your review and requires some consideration. ... You will want to conduct preliminary or exploratory searches of the literature as you refine ...

UCL LIBRARY SERVICES

Formulating a research question

Examples of review questions

Example of eligibility criteria

Consider the research boundaries

Mnemonics for structuring questions

Literature Reviews

Developing a Research Question

Goldilocker Tool

DEVELOPING A RESEARCH QUESTION

REFINING YOUR RESEARCH QUESTION

USING DATABASE FILTER TOOLS

LIT REVIEWS INSIDE ARTICLES

EXAMPLE REVIEW ARTICLES

How to Conduct a Literature Review (Health Sciences and Beyond)

The Research Questions

Background vs. Foreground Questions

How to Write a Literature Review

Identify the question

From Topic to Question (Infographic)

A few suggestions

Your Curiosity + Significance to Others = Research Question

Ask yourself these 6 questions

Systematic and systematic-like review toolkit: Step 1: Formulating the research question

Step 1: Formulating the research question

Research question frameworks

PICO example

Alternative frameworks

Question type

Structuring qualitative questions?

Question about aetiology or risk?

Evaluating an intervention, policy or service?

Investigating the outcome of a service or policy?

Working out prevalence or incidence?

Determining prognosis?

Conducting an economic evaluation?

Further Readings

Search for existing reviews

Protocols and Guidelines for reviews

Further reading

Systematic Review guidelines

Integrative Review guidelines

Rapid Review guidelines

Scoping Review guidelines

Umbrella reviews

Meta-syntheses

Living reviews

Qualitative systematic reviews

Mixed methods systematic review

Realist reviews

Further Reading

Have a language expert improve your writing

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Table of contents

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Make a list of keywords

Search for relevant sources

Take notes and cite your sources

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Chronological

Methodological

Theoretical

Cite this Scribbr article

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Conducting a Literature Review

Additional Resources

Develop your Research Question

University of Tasmania, Australia

Step 1. Formulate the Research Question

PICO - to search for quantitative review questions

SPIDER - to search for qualitative and mixed methods research studies

SPICE - to search for qualitative evidence

ECLIPSE - to search for health policy/management information

Need More Help? Book a consultation with a Learning and Research Librarian or contact [email protected] .

Formulating a Research Question

Types of Research Questions

Quantitative Research Questions

Qualitative Research Questions