word count of literature review

• Learning Tips
• Exam Guides
• School Life

Best Length for Literature Review: Thesis, Essays or Papers

• by Joseph Kenas
• November 30, 2023
• Writing Tips

Literature reviews are surveys on different topics using scholarly sources. Literature reviews help understand the current knowledge on different topics and hence identify gaps, methods, and relevant theories existing in an area of study.

To write a literature review, one needs to search for relevant literature, evaluate sources, identify themes and gaps, and outline structures. A good literature review will analyze, synthesize, and evaluate a study critically to give a clear picture of knowledge on that subject. 

How Long Should a Literature Review Be?

The length of a literature review depends on the audience and its purpose. The level of study also determines the length of a literature review.

Literature reviews of topics done by undergraduate students are expected to be shorter than literature reviews of postgraduate students.

Literature reviews of essays are also expected to be shorter than literature reviews done for a thesis or dissertation. But how long should it be?

Overall, The length of a literature review should be between 20% and 40% of the total project. This is because the length of your paper also determines the length of the literature review.

Papers with a lot of content have longer literature reviews than papers with lesser amounts of content.

There is a general rule that the length of the literature review should be proportional to the length of your paper.

Optimal Length of a Literature Review for Different Projects

1. optimal literature for thesis.

A thesis can be defined as a long essay that includes personal research done by undergraduate and post-graduate students. The length of a thesis depends on the level of study.

A thesis written by bachelor’s degree students should be between 40-60 pages, while a thesis written for master’s and doctorate studies should be between 60-100 pages.

The length of the literature review for a thesis should be at least 8 pages to the minimum. The optimal length of the literature review for this should be 20% of the total length of the thesis project.

The length varies with the length of the thesis a student is writing. For example, in a 40-page thesis, the literature review should be not less than 8 pages.

Not less than 12 pages for a 60-page thesis and not less than 16 pages for an 80-page thesis. The literature review for a thesis should at least be a whole chapter. 

2. Literature Review Length for Dissertation

A dissertation is a research project that is completed as part of a postgraduate or undergraduate degree. Dissertations allow students to present their findings on areas of research that they choose themselves. The length of a dissertation varies depending on the field of study.

The discipline, type of analysis, and area of research all determine the length of a dissertation.

The general length of a dissertation is usually between 150-300 pages. 

A literature review for a dissertation should at least be between 40-60 pages. There is no specific set length for dissertation literature reviews. The length depends largely on your area of study.

If you have a short literature review, ask yourself whether there is other relevant research that you have not explored or if the information you have provided for what you explored is enough. 

For proper preparation when writing a dissertation literature review, do the following:

• Search using key terms

Using key terms will help you do proper research and find many key terms to search. You will also find articles that are directly related to your area of study. 

• Immerse yourself in literature

Immersing yourself in literature helps you massively explore your area of study and choose the right approach for your dissertation. 

• Consider the research gaps

Focus on an area that has not been studied for your research. Recommendations made by authors can help you identify gaps in different areas of study. 

• Organize what you find

Note down what you find in sections to avoid mixing of ideas. Copy and paste your findings to avoid losing them. Note the references of each researched work to avoid inconveniences later. 

To write a literature review of your dissertations, create an outline, write the paragraphs, analyze the study, and justify the methodology.

3. Literature review length for Published Journal Articles

These are articles that are shorter than books and are written about very specific topics.

Journal articles are written regularly throughout the year and are written by experts for experts.

Journal articles can be original research, short reports or letters, review articles, case studies, or methodologies.

A published journal article should have an average of 5000 words. 

The best length of the literature review section of published journal articles should be at least 2 pages or a few pages. This depends on t he length of the journal. Different topics vary in content which determines the length of the journal article.

The literature review of a 5000-word journal article should be between 1200 and 2000 words. 

4. Literature review length for Research Paper

A research paper argues a point and analyses perspectives. It is centered on the writer’s thinking which is backed by other ideas and information. To write a research paper , pick a topic if you are not provided with one, do research, and present it.

Conduct the research, organize the research, form a thesis, create an outline, and then write your research. After writing, edit the content and re-read it to make sure that your research is ready for submission.

The length of a research paper should be at least 25% of the research paper or term paper. However, this usually depends on the area of study. There are also short research papers and long research papers. Short research papers are between 5 and 8 pages long and are usually direct to the point.

The literature review of research papers depends on the length of the research papers. Short research papers can have 2-3-page research reviews. The longer the research paper gets, the longer the literature review should be.

Research papers are common and instructors can give a maximum length of the literature review. In such cases, the instructions of the instructor have to be followed. 

5. Best length for Capstone Paper Literature

This is a form of academic paper that students write to summarize their experiences. They are usually written in the last year of high school or middle school as part of a university or college course.

To write a capstone research paper, think of the topic you want to write, create a capstone project proposal, gather information, and come up with a structure.

After writing your paper, proofread the text and prepare the defense. The average length of a capstone paper is between 20-25 pages. A capstone paper should not exceed the length of 45 pages. 

A literature review of a capstone paper depends on its length and the instructions given by your faculty. For instance, a 20-25-page capstone paper should have a 5 to 6-page long literature review. The longer the paper gets, the longer the literature review should be.

After writing the literature review, submit a draft to your capstone adviser for corrections before proceeding. 

Optimal Length for Essays

An essay is a piece of writing that can be used to support an argument, present an idea, express emotion, or initiate debate. Ideas are presented in essays in a non-fictional way. There are many different types of essays. Essays can be as short as 500 words and as long as 10,00 words.

The length of the literature review section for an essay depends on the length of your essay. A 15-page essay can have a 3-page long literature review. The lesser the pages the lesser the literature review. Therefore, there is no universal length for the literature review of an essay.

The more the pages, the longer the literature review. Literature reviews of essays should have an introduction, main body, and conclusion.

The introduction part should introduce your topic, introduce your point of view, review the literature and state the scope of the literature.

The main body should organize the literature into themes, show the relation between the chosen topic and the wider subject, and move from a general view to a specific view.

The conclusion should summarize the important aspects of the main body, identify areas for future study, and link your research to existing knowledge. 

Factors Determining the Length of a Literature Review

1. type of the project.

The type of project you have determines the length of your literature review.

Dissertations have longer literature reviews than published journal articles.

A thesis has a longer literature review compared to essays.

One, therefore, will need to know the type of project at hand before starting and writing the literature review to avoid making mistakes.

Each type of project has its specified length of the literature review. 

2. The Number of Sources

The number of sources one has regarding a certain topic will determine the length of the work they right. Longer writings have longer literature reviews and shorter writing has shorter literature reviews.

Sources of information determine the content one will gather before writing an essay. It is the sources of information that will help you gain knowledge of the topic you are handling.

The less content and knowledge about a topic one has, the lesser the content and knowledge one will write. Without content and knowledge about a topic, even formulating a literature review becomes hard.

When one has many sources of information, ideas will flow and understanding of the area of study will increase. This helps one formulate accurate literature reviews and include the majority of information obtained from the sources in them. 

3. Your Experience in Writing

You can have everything needed to write a literature review of the required length, but without experience writing, it may prove to be hard. If one has never written a literature review before, he or she will experience difficulties in writing it.

In most cases, one may write literature reviews that are too short or too long. Transforming the information gathered into a literature review is hard.

This is why one may use too much or less information in the literature review. Such writers are advised to go through beginner tutorials to explain the writing of literature reviews to avoid too many mistakes.

Experienced writers, on the other hand, know how to utilize every piece of information gathered and transform it into a literature review of the required size. Amateur literature review writers are also advised to seek help from experienced writers. 

4. The Length of the Entire Project

In most academic assignments, instructors give students the length required in different projects. This length should guide students in determining the length of the literature review.

A literature review should not take the majority of your project. Longer assignments have longer literature reviews, while shorter assignments have shorter literature reviews.

Students should consider the number of words or pages provided by the instructor for certain assignments and gauge the length that the literature review.

The literature review reflects the whole content of your project. You can’t have a short literature review and a very long essay. You will probably include things that do not relate to your literature review in the essay.

Short projects like essays and term papers mostly have mini-reviews. Read this guide on how long a mini literature review is so that you can get the point.

5. The Topic Involved

Different topics usually have different sources of information. Some topics are majorly researched on the internet, and some topics are rarely researched.

The topics that many people have looked into have a lot of information that one can use in writing literature reviews. This is contrary to the topics that have been looked into by few people and have little content.

A writer will usually find it hard to write long literature reviews on such topics. When you are asked for a specific length of an essay and given the mandate to choose a topic yourself, never choose a topic that has not been majorly researched which is likely to cause you problems writing the length required by the instructor. 

6. The Technicality of the Research

Some topics are usually hard for students to understand, while others are easy for students to understand. This usually varies among students.

Some students will find history projects harder than science projects, while to other students, it is different.

It is hard for students to write long literature reviews or essays on subjects or topics that they find hard to understand. This is different in the subjects and topics that students enjoy. 

7. Level of Study

This is the most obvious reason that influences the length of literature reviews. Postgraduate students will always be required to write longer essays than undergraduate students. Their level of knowledge and understanding is different.

Though the post-graduate level is more complex, the students are expected to be able to handle the problems that the project poses. Postgraduate students are also required to conduct research that provides them with more information about their projects, unlike undergraduate students. 

8. Professor Factors

Professor factors that determine the length of the of literature review include:

• The number of words expected.

Most professors usually give the length that they expect the assignment they give to be. This length determines the length of the literature review. Some professors can be specific and give the length they expect the literature review of projects to be. 

• Availability.

If the professor feels like he will not have enough time to deal with the projects of all students, he can give shorter projects that he will be able to handle. If the professor is available, he can give longer assignments to the students. 

• Gauging students’ understanding.

Professors can give long assignments to students to establish their level of understanding of an already tackled area. They use this to find out how well can students apply the knowledge gained in different areas. 

Types of Literature Reviews

The most common types of literature reviews include argumentative reviews, integrative reviews, historical reviews, systematic reviews, systematic reviews, methodological reviews, and theoretical reviews. Argumentative and historical reviews are usually longer than the other types of reviews. 

Projects Deadlines

Shorter deadlines usually limit students from conducting enough research. The lesser the research one conducts the lesser the amount of information one has to write about.

This leads to short literature reviews. When one is given enough time to conduct research, they gather all the information needed to write full-length projects hence longer literature reviews as well.

FAQs on Optimal Literature Review

How long should a literature review be in a research proposal .

Research proposals vary in length depending on the level of study and the topics involved. Longer literature proposals should have longer literature reviews, whereas shorter research proposals should have shorter literature reviews.

Literature reviews are usually the longest part of research proposals. The introduction and the methodology parts are always shorter. If your introduction part is 2 pages long and the methodology part is 4 pages long, the research proposal should be longer than the two.

How long does it take to write a literature review?

Most students do not know how long it should take to write a literature review because the deadlines are determined by the professors.

Most believe that the time the professor sets the deadline is the time required to write a literature review. The time one uses to write a literature review usually depends on the hours allocated per day to do the work.

The more hours, the fewer days it will take. The fewer the hours, the longer it will take. A literature review can take between 2-6 months to be completed. 

How long should a literature review be for a PhD

A Ph.D. literature review is the main chapter of your Ph.D. thesis. Your Ph.D. literature review should assess your field of research critically and present the current knowledge that you have gained from previous work.

The literature review should help you identify the gaps in your knowledge of your field. Most Ph.D. literature reviews are always between 6000-12000 words. The main focus of Ph.D. literature reviews is the quality of the work and not the quantity.

Joseph is a freelance journalist and a part-time writer with a particular interest in the gig economy. He writes about schooling, college life, and changing trends in education. When not writing, Joseph is hiking or playing chess.

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

How To Write A Literature Review - A Complete Guide

Table of Contents

A literature review is much more than just another section in your research paper. It forms the very foundation of your research. It is a formal piece of writing where you analyze the existing theoretical framework, principles, and assumptions and use that as a base to shape your approach to the research question.

Curating and drafting a solid literature review section not only lends more credibility to your research paper but also makes your research tighter and better focused. But, writing literature reviews is a difficult task. It requires extensive reading, plus you have to consider market trends and technological and political changes, which tend to change in the blink of an eye.

Now streamline your literature review process with the help of SciSpace Copilot. With this AI research assistant, you can efficiently synthesize and analyze a vast amount of information, identify key themes and trends, and uncover gaps in the existing research. Get real-time explanations, summaries, and answers to your questions for the paper you're reviewing, making navigating and understanding the complex literature landscape easier.

In this comprehensive guide, we will explore everything from the definition of a literature review, its appropriate length, various types of literature reviews, and how to write one.

What is a literature review?

A literature review is a collation of survey, research, critical evaluation, and assessment of the existing literature in a preferred domain.

Eminent researcher and academic Arlene Fink, in her book Conducting Research Literature Reviews , defines it as the following:

“A literature review surveys books, scholarly articles, and any other sources relevant to a particular issue, area of research, or theory, and by so doing, provides a description, summary, and critical evaluation of these works in relation to the research problem being investigated.

Literature reviews are designed to provide an overview of sources you have explored while researching a particular topic, and to demonstrate to your readers how your research fits within a larger field of study.”

Simply put, a literature review can be defined as a critical discussion of relevant pre-existing research around your research question and carving out a definitive place for your study in the existing body of knowledge. Literature reviews can be presented in multiple ways: a section of an article, the whole research paper itself, or a chapter of your thesis.

A literature review does function as a summary of sources, but it also allows you to analyze further, interpret, and examine the stated theories, methods, viewpoints, and, of course, the gaps in the existing content.

As an author, you can discuss and interpret the research question and its various aspects and debate your adopted methods to support the claim.

What is the purpose of a literature review?

A literature review is meant to help your readers understand the relevance of your research question and where it fits within the existing body of knowledge. As a researcher, you should use it to set the context, build your argument, and establish the need for your study.

What is the importance of a literature review?

The literature review is a critical part of research papers because it helps you:

• Gain an in-depth understanding of your research question and the surrounding area
• Convey that you have a thorough understanding of your research area and are up-to-date with the latest changes and advancements
• Establish how your research is connected or builds on the existing body of knowledge and how it could contribute to further research
• Elaborate on the validity and suitability of your theoretical framework and research methodology
• Identify and highlight gaps and shortcomings in the existing body of knowledge and how things need to change
• Convey to readers how your study is different or how it contributes to the research area

How long should a literature review be?

Ideally, the literature review should take up 15%-40% of the total length of your manuscript. So, if you have a 10,000-word research paper, the minimum word count could be 1500.

Your literature review format depends heavily on the kind of manuscript you are writing — an entire chapter in case of doctoral theses, a part of the introductory section in a research article, to a full-fledged review article that examines the previously published research on a topic.

Another determining factor is the type of research you are doing. The literature review section tends to be longer for secondary research projects than primary research projects.

What are the different types of literature reviews?

All literature reviews are not the same. There are a variety of possible approaches that you can take. It all depends on the type of research you are pursuing.

Here are the different types of literature reviews:

Argumentative review

It is called an argumentative review when you carefully present literature that only supports or counters a specific argument or premise to establish a viewpoint.

Integrative review

It is a type of literature review focused on building a comprehensive understanding of a topic by combining available theoretical frameworks and empirical evidence.

Methodological review

This approach delves into the ''how'' and the ''what" of the research question —  you cannot look at the outcome in isolation; you should also review the methodology used.

Systematic review

This form consists of an overview of existing evidence pertinent to a clearly formulated research question, which uses pre-specified and standardized methods to identify and critically appraise relevant research and collect, report, and analyze data from the studies included in the review.

Meta-analysis review

Meta-analysis uses statistical methods to summarize the results of independent studies. By combining information from all relevant studies, meta-analysis can provide more precise estimates of the effects than those derived from the individual studies included within a review.

Historical review

Historical literature reviews focus on examining research throughout a period, often starting with the first time an issue, concept, theory, or phenomenon emerged in the literature, then tracing its evolution within the scholarship of a discipline. The purpose is to place research in a historical context to show familiarity with state-of-the-art developments and identify future research's likely directions.

Theoretical Review

This form aims to examine the corpus of theory accumulated regarding an issue, concept, theory, and phenomenon. The theoretical literature review helps to establish what theories exist, the relationships between them, the degree the existing approaches have been investigated, and to develop new hypotheses to be tested.

Scoping Review

The Scoping Review is often used at the beginning of an article, dissertation, or research proposal. It is conducted before the research to highlight gaps in the existing body of knowledge and explains why the project should be greenlit.

State-of-the-Art Review

The State-of-the-Art review is conducted periodically, focusing on the most recent research. It describes what is currently known, understood, or agreed upon regarding the research topic and highlights where there are still disagreements.

Can you use the first person in a literature review?

When writing literature reviews, you should avoid the usage of first-person pronouns. It means that instead of "I argue that" or "we argue that," the appropriate expression would be "this research paper argues that."

Do you need an abstract for a literature review?

Ideally, yes. It is always good to have a condensed summary that is self-contained and independent of the rest of your review. As for how to draft one, you can follow the same fundamental idea when preparing an abstract for a literature review. It should also include:

• The research topic and your motivation behind selecting it
• A one-sentence thesis statement
• An explanation of the kinds of literature featured in the review
• Summary of what you've learned
• Conclusions you drew from the literature you reviewed
• Potential implications and future scope for research

Here's an example of the abstract of a literature review

Is a literature review written in the past tense?

Yes, the literature review should ideally be written in the past tense. You should not use the present or future tense when writing one. The exceptions are when you have statements describing events that happened earlier than the literature you are reviewing or events that are currently occurring; then, you can use the past perfect or present perfect tenses.

How many sources for a literature review?

There are multiple approaches to deciding how many sources to include in a literature review section. The first approach would be to look level you are at as a researcher. For instance, a doctoral thesis might need 60+ sources. In contrast, you might only need to refer to 5-15 sources at the undergraduate level.

The second approach is based on the kind of literature review you are doing — whether it is merely a chapter of your paper or if it is a self-contained paper in itself. When it is just a chapter, sources should equal the total number of pages in your article's body. In the second scenario, you need at least three times as many sources as there are pages in your work.

Quick tips on how to write a literature review

To know how to write a literature review, you must clearly understand its impact and role in establishing your work as substantive research material.

You need to follow the below-mentioned steps, to write a literature review:

• Outline the purpose behind the literature review
• Search relevant literature
• Examine and assess the relevant resources
• Discover connections by drawing deep insights from the resources
• Structure planning to write a good literature review

1. Outline and identify the purpose of  a literature review

As a first step on how to write a literature review, you must know what the research question or topic is and what shape you want your literature review to take. Ensure you understand the research topic inside out, or else seek clarifications. You must be able to the answer below questions before you start:

• How many sources do I need to include?
• What kind of sources should I analyze?
• How much should I critically evaluate each source?
• Should I summarize, synthesize or offer a critique of the sources?
• Do I need to include any background information or definitions?

Additionally, you should know that the narrower your research topic is, the swifter it will be for you to restrict the number of sources to be analyzed.

2. Search relevant literature

Dig deeper into search engines to discover what has already been published around your chosen topic. Make sure you thoroughly go through appropriate reference sources like books, reports, journal articles, government docs, and web-based resources.

You must prepare a list of keywords and their different variations. You can start your search from any library’s catalog, provided you are an active member of that institution. The exact keywords can be extended to widen your research over other databases and academic search engines like:

• Google Scholar
• Microsoft Academic
• Science.gov

Besides, it is not advisable to go through every resource word by word. Alternatively, what you can do is you can start by reading the abstract and then decide whether that source is relevant to your research or not.

Additionally, you must spend surplus time assessing the quality and relevance of resources. It would help if you tried preparing a list of citations to ensure that there lies no repetition of authors, publications, or articles in the literature review.

3. Examine and assess the sources

It is nearly impossible for you to go through every detail in the research article. So rather than trying to fetch every detail, you have to analyze and decide which research sources resemble closest and appear relevant to your chosen domain.

While analyzing the sources, you should look to find out answers to questions like:

• What question or problem has the author been describing and debating?
• What is the definition of critical aspects?
• How well the theories, approach, and methodology have been explained?
• Whether the research theory used some conventional or new innovative approach?
• How relevant are the key findings of the work?
• In what ways does it relate to other sources on the same topic?
• What challenges does this research paper pose to the existing theory
• What are the possible contributions or benefits it adds to the subject domain?

Be always mindful that you refer only to credible and authentic resources. It would be best if you always take references from different publications to validate your theory.

Always keep track of important information or data you can present in your literature review right from the beginning. It will help steer your path from any threats of plagiarism and also make it easier to curate an annotated bibliography or reference section.

4. Discover connections

At this stage, you must start deciding on the argument and structure of your literature review. To accomplish this, you must discover and identify the relations and connections between various resources while drafting your abstract.

A few aspects that you should be aware of while writing a literature review include:

• Rise to prominence: Theories and methods that have gained reputation and supporters over time.
• Constant scrutiny: Concepts or theories that repeatedly went under examination.
• Contradictions and conflicts: Theories, both the supporting and the contradictory ones, for the research topic.
• Knowledge gaps: What exactly does it fail to address, and how to bridge them with further research?
• Influential resources: Significant research projects available that have been upheld as milestones or perhaps, something that can modify the current trends

Once you join the dots between various past research works, it will be easier for you to draw a conclusion and identify your contribution to the existing knowledge base.

5. Structure planning to write a good literature review

There exist different ways towards planning and executing the structure of a literature review. The format of a literature review varies and depends upon the length of the research.

Like any other research paper, the literature review format must contain three sections: introduction, body, and conclusion. The goals and objectives of the research question determine what goes inside these three sections.

Nevertheless, a good literature review can be structured according to the chronological, thematic, methodological, or theoretical framework approach.

Literature review samples

1. Standalone

2. As a section of a research paper

How SciSpace Discover makes literature review a breeze?

SciSpace Discover is a one-stop solution to do an effective literature search and get barrier-free access to scientific knowledge. It is an excellent repository where you can find millions of only peer-reviewed articles and full-text PDF files. Here’s more on how you can use it:

Find the right information

Find what you want quickly and easily with comprehensive search filters that let you narrow down papers according to PDF availability, year of publishing, document type, and affiliated institution. Moreover, you can sort the results based on the publishing date, citation count, and relevance.

Assess credibility of papers quickly

When doing the literature review, it is critical to establish the quality of your sources. They form the foundation of your research. SciSpace Discover helps you assess the quality of a source by providing an overview of its references, citations, and performance metrics.

Get the complete picture in no time

SciSpace Discover’s personalized suggestion engine helps you stay on course and get the complete picture of the topic from one place. Every time you visit an article page, it provides you links to related papers. Besides that, it helps you understand what’s trending, who are the top authors, and who are the leading publishers on a topic.

Make referring sources super easy

To ensure you don't lose track of your sources, you must start noting down your references when doing the literature review. SciSpace Discover makes this step effortless. Click the 'cite' button on an article page, and you will receive preloaded citation text in multiple styles — all you've to do is copy-paste it into your manuscript.

Final tips on how to write a literature review

A massive chunk of time and effort is required to write a good literature review. But, if you go about it systematically, you'll be able to save a ton of time and build a solid foundation for your research.

We hope this guide has helped you answer several key questions you have about writing literature reviews.

Would you like to explore SciSpace Discover and kick off your literature search right away? You can get started here .

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. how to start a literature review.

• What questions do you want to answer?

• What sources do you need to answer these questions?

• What information do these sources contain?

• How can you use this information to answer your questions?

2. What to include in a literature review?

• A brief background of the problem or issue

• What has previously been done to address the problem or issue

• A description of what you will do in your project

• How this study will contribute to research on the subject

3. Why literature review is important?

The literature review is an important part of any research project because it allows the writer to look at previous studies on a topic and determine existing gaps in the literature, as well as what has already been done. It will also help them to choose the most appropriate method for their own study.

4. How to cite a literature review in APA format?

To cite a literature review in APA style, you need to provide the author's name, the title of the article, and the year of publication. For example: Patel, A. B., & Stokes, G. S. (2012). The relationship between personality and intelligence: A meta-analysis of longitudinal research. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(1), 16-21

5. What are the components of a literature review?

• A brief introduction to the topic, including its background and context. The introduction should also include a rationale for why the study is being conducted and what it will accomplish.

• A description of the methodologies used in the study. This can include information about data collection methods, sample size, and statistical analyses.

• A presentation of the findings in an organized format that helps readers follow along with the author's conclusions.

6. What are common errors in writing literature review?

• Not spending enough time to critically evaluate the relevance of resources, observations and conclusions.

• Totally relying on secondary data while ignoring primary data.

• Letting your personal bias seep into your interpretation of existing literature.

• No detailed explanation of the procedure to discover and identify an appropriate literature review.

7. What are the 5 C's of writing literature review?

• Cite - the sources you utilized and referenced in your research.

• Compare - existing arguments, hypotheses, methodologies, and conclusions found in the knowledge base.

• Contrast - the arguments, topics, methodologies, approaches, and disputes that may be found in the literature.

• Critique - the literature and describe the ideas and opinions you find more convincing and why.

• Connect - the various studies you reviewed in your research.

8. How many sources should a literature review have?

When it is just a chapter, sources should equal the total number of pages in your article's body. if it is a self-contained paper in itself, you need at least three times as many sources as there are pages in your work.

9. Can literature review have diagrams?

• To represent an abstract idea or concept

• To explain the steps of a process or procedure

• To help readers understand the relationships between different concepts

10. How old should sources be in a literature review?

Sources for a literature review should be as current as possible or not older than ten years. The only exception to this rule is if you are reviewing a historical topic and need to use older sources.

11. What are the types of literature review?

• Argumentative review

• Integrative review

• Methodological review

• Systematic review

• Meta-analysis review

• Historical review

• Theoretical review

• Scoping review

• State-of-the-Art review

12. Is a literature review mandatory?

Yes. Literature review is a mandatory part of any research project. It is a critical step in the process that allows you to establish the scope of your research, and provide a background for the rest of your work.

But before you go,

• Six Online Tools for Easy Literature Review
• Evaluating literature review: systematic vs. scoping reviews
• Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review
• Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Guidelines and Examples

You might also like

Consensus GPT vs. SciSpace GPT: Choose the Best GPT for Research

Literature Review and Theoretical Framework: Understanding the Differences

Types of Essays in Academic Writing - Quick Guide (2024)

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
• PLoS Comput Biol
• v.9(7); 2013 Jul

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review

Marco pautasso.

1 Centre for Functional and Evolutionary Ecology (CEFE), CNRS, Montpellier, France

2 Centre for Biodiversity Synthesis and Analysis (CESAB), FRB, Aix-en-Provence, France

Literature reviews are in great demand in most scientific fields. Their need stems from the ever-increasing output of scientific publications [1] . For example, compared to 1991, in 2008 three, eight, and forty times more papers were indexed in Web of Science on malaria, obesity, and biodiversity, respectively [2] . Given such mountains of papers, scientists cannot be expected to examine in detail every single new paper relevant to their interests [3] . Thus, it is both advantageous and necessary to rely on regular summaries of the recent literature. Although recognition for scientists mainly comes from primary research, timely literature reviews can lead to new synthetic insights and are often widely read [4] . For such summaries to be useful, however, they need to be compiled in a professional way [5] .

When starting from scratch, reviewing the literature can require a titanic amount of work. That is why researchers who have spent their career working on a certain research issue are in a perfect position to review that literature. Some graduate schools are now offering courses in reviewing the literature, given that most research students start their project by producing an overview of what has already been done on their research issue [6] . However, it is likely that most scientists have not thought in detail about how to approach and carry out a literature review.

Reviewing the literature requires the ability to juggle multiple tasks, from finding and evaluating relevant material to synthesising information from various sources, from critical thinking to paraphrasing, evaluating, and citation skills [7] . In this contribution, I share ten simple rules I learned working on about 25 literature reviews as a PhD and postdoctoral student. Ideas and insights also come from discussions with coauthors and colleagues, as well as feedback from reviewers and editors.

Rule 1: Define a Topic and Audience

How to choose which topic to review? There are so many issues in contemporary science that you could spend a lifetime of attending conferences and reading the literature just pondering what to review. On the one hand, if you take several years to choose, several other people may have had the same idea in the meantime. On the other hand, only a well-considered topic is likely to lead to a brilliant literature review [8] . The topic must at least be:

• interesting to you (ideally, you should have come across a series of recent papers related to your line of work that call for a critical summary),
• an important aspect of the field (so that many readers will be interested in the review and there will be enough material to write it), and
• a well-defined issue (otherwise you could potentially include thousands of publications, which would make the review unhelpful).

Ideas for potential reviews may come from papers providing lists of key research questions to be answered [9] , but also from serendipitous moments during desultory reading and discussions. In addition to choosing your topic, you should also select a target audience. In many cases, the topic (e.g., web services in computational biology) will automatically define an audience (e.g., computational biologists), but that same topic may also be of interest to neighbouring fields (e.g., computer science, biology, etc.).

Rule 2: Search and Re-search the Literature

After having chosen your topic and audience, start by checking the literature and downloading relevant papers. Five pieces of advice here:

• keep track of the search items you use (so that your search can be replicated [10] ),
• keep a list of papers whose pdfs you cannot access immediately (so as to retrieve them later with alternative strategies),
• use a paper management system (e.g., Mendeley, Papers, Qiqqa, Sente),
• define early in the process some criteria for exclusion of irrelevant papers (these criteria can then be described in the review to help define its scope), and
• do not just look for research papers in the area you wish to review, but also seek previous reviews.

The chances are high that someone will already have published a literature review ( Figure 1 ), if not exactly on the issue you are planning to tackle, at least on a related topic. If there are already a few or several reviews of the literature on your issue, my advice is not to give up, but to carry on with your own literature review,

The bottom-right situation (many literature reviews but few research papers) is not just a theoretical situation; it applies, for example, to the study of the impacts of climate change on plant diseases, where there appear to be more literature reviews than research studies [33] .

• discussing in your review the approaches, limitations, and conclusions of past reviews,
• trying to find a new angle that has not been covered adequately in the previous reviews, and
• incorporating new material that has inevitably accumulated since their appearance.

When searching the literature for pertinent papers and reviews, the usual rules apply:

• be thorough,
• use different keywords and database sources (e.g., DBLP, Google Scholar, ISI Proceedings, JSTOR Search, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science), and
• look at who has cited past relevant papers and book chapters.

Rule 3: Take Notes While Reading

If you read the papers first, and only afterwards start writing the review, you will need a very good memory to remember who wrote what, and what your impressions and associations were while reading each single paper. My advice is, while reading, to start writing down interesting pieces of information, insights about how to organize the review, and thoughts on what to write. This way, by the time you have read the literature you selected, you will already have a rough draft of the review.

Of course, this draft will still need much rewriting, restructuring, and rethinking to obtain a text with a coherent argument [11] , but you will have avoided the danger posed by staring at a blank document. Be careful when taking notes to use quotation marks if you are provisionally copying verbatim from the literature. It is advisable then to reformulate such quotes with your own words in the final draft. It is important to be careful in noting the references already at this stage, so as to avoid misattributions. Using referencing software from the very beginning of your endeavour will save you time.

Rule 4: Choose the Type of Review You Wish to Write

After having taken notes while reading the literature, you will have a rough idea of the amount of material available for the review. This is probably a good time to decide whether to go for a mini- or a full review. Some journals are now favouring the publication of rather short reviews focusing on the last few years, with a limit on the number of words and citations. A mini-review is not necessarily a minor review: it may well attract more attention from busy readers, although it will inevitably simplify some issues and leave out some relevant material due to space limitations. A full review will have the advantage of more freedom to cover in detail the complexities of a particular scientific development, but may then be left in the pile of the very important papers “to be read” by readers with little time to spare for major monographs.

There is probably a continuum between mini- and full reviews. The same point applies to the dichotomy of descriptive vs. integrative reviews. While descriptive reviews focus on the methodology, findings, and interpretation of each reviewed study, integrative reviews attempt to find common ideas and concepts from the reviewed material [12] . A similar distinction exists between narrative and systematic reviews: while narrative reviews are qualitative, systematic reviews attempt to test a hypothesis based on the published evidence, which is gathered using a predefined protocol to reduce bias [13] , [14] . When systematic reviews analyse quantitative results in a quantitative way, they become meta-analyses. The choice between different review types will have to be made on a case-by-case basis, depending not just on the nature of the material found and the preferences of the target journal(s), but also on the time available to write the review and the number of coauthors [15] .

Rule 5: Keep the Review Focused, but Make It of Broad Interest

Whether your plan is to write a mini- or a full review, it is good advice to keep it focused 16 , 17 . Including material just for the sake of it can easily lead to reviews that are trying to do too many things at once. The need to keep a review focused can be problematic for interdisciplinary reviews, where the aim is to bridge the gap between fields [18] . If you are writing a review on, for example, how epidemiological approaches are used in modelling the spread of ideas, you may be inclined to include material from both parent fields, epidemiology and the study of cultural diffusion. This may be necessary to some extent, but in this case a focused review would only deal in detail with those studies at the interface between epidemiology and the spread of ideas.

While focus is an important feature of a successful review, this requirement has to be balanced with the need to make the review relevant to a broad audience. This square may be circled by discussing the wider implications of the reviewed topic for other disciplines.

Rule 6: Be Critical and Consistent

Reviewing the literature is not stamp collecting. A good review does not just summarize the literature, but discusses it critically, identifies methodological problems, and points out research gaps [19] . After having read a review of the literature, a reader should have a rough idea of:

• the major achievements in the reviewed field,
• the main areas of debate, and
• the outstanding research questions.

It is challenging to achieve a successful review on all these fronts. A solution can be to involve a set of complementary coauthors: some people are excellent at mapping what has been achieved, some others are very good at identifying dark clouds on the horizon, and some have instead a knack at predicting where solutions are going to come from. If your journal club has exactly this sort of team, then you should definitely write a review of the literature! In addition to critical thinking, a literature review needs consistency, for example in the choice of passive vs. active voice and present vs. past tense.

Rule 7: Find a Logical Structure

Like a well-baked cake, a good review has a number of telling features: it is worth the reader's time, timely, systematic, well written, focused, and critical. It also needs a good structure. With reviews, the usual subdivision of research papers into introduction, methods, results, and discussion does not work or is rarely used. However, a general introduction of the context and, toward the end, a recapitulation of the main points covered and take-home messages make sense also in the case of reviews. For systematic reviews, there is a trend towards including information about how the literature was searched (database, keywords, time limits) [20] .

How can you organize the flow of the main body of the review so that the reader will be drawn into and guided through it? It is generally helpful to draw a conceptual scheme of the review, e.g., with mind-mapping techniques. Such diagrams can help recognize a logical way to order and link the various sections of a review [21] . This is the case not just at the writing stage, but also for readers if the diagram is included in the review as a figure. A careful selection of diagrams and figures relevant to the reviewed topic can be very helpful to structure the text too [22] .

Rule 8: Make Use of Feedback

Reviews of the literature are normally peer-reviewed in the same way as research papers, and rightly so [23] . As a rule, incorporating feedback from reviewers greatly helps improve a review draft. Having read the review with a fresh mind, reviewers may spot inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and ambiguities that had not been noticed by the writers due to rereading the typescript too many times. It is however advisable to reread the draft one more time before submission, as a last-minute correction of typos, leaps, and muddled sentences may enable the reviewers to focus on providing advice on the content rather than the form.

Feedback is vital to writing a good review, and should be sought from a variety of colleagues, so as to obtain a diversity of views on the draft. This may lead in some cases to conflicting views on the merits of the paper, and on how to improve it, but such a situation is better than the absence of feedback. A diversity of feedback perspectives on a literature review can help identify where the consensus view stands in the landscape of the current scientific understanding of an issue [24] .

Rule 9: Include Your Own Relevant Research, but Be Objective

In many cases, reviewers of the literature will have published studies relevant to the review they are writing. This could create a conflict of interest: how can reviewers report objectively on their own work [25] ? Some scientists may be overly enthusiastic about what they have published, and thus risk giving too much importance to their own findings in the review. However, bias could also occur in the other direction: some scientists may be unduly dismissive of their own achievements, so that they will tend to downplay their contribution (if any) to a field when reviewing it.

In general, a review of the literature should neither be a public relations brochure nor an exercise in competitive self-denial. If a reviewer is up to the job of producing a well-organized and methodical review, which flows well and provides a service to the readership, then it should be possible to be objective in reviewing one's own relevant findings. In reviews written by multiple authors, this may be achieved by assigning the review of the results of a coauthor to different coauthors.

Rule 10: Be Up-to-Date, but Do Not Forget Older Studies

Given the progressive acceleration in the publication of scientific papers, today's reviews of the literature need awareness not just of the overall direction and achievements of a field of inquiry, but also of the latest studies, so as not to become out-of-date before they have been published. Ideally, a literature review should not identify as a major research gap an issue that has just been addressed in a series of papers in press (the same applies, of course, to older, overlooked studies (“sleeping beauties” [26] )). This implies that literature reviewers would do well to keep an eye on electronic lists of papers in press, given that it can take months before these appear in scientific databases. Some reviews declare that they have scanned the literature up to a certain point in time, but given that peer review can be a rather lengthy process, a full search for newly appeared literature at the revision stage may be worthwhile. Assessing the contribution of papers that have just appeared is particularly challenging, because there is little perspective with which to gauge their significance and impact on further research and society.

Inevitably, new papers on the reviewed topic (including independently written literature reviews) will appear from all quarters after the review has been published, so that there may soon be the need for an updated review. But this is the nature of science [27] – [32] . I wish everybody good luck with writing a review of the literature.

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to M. Barbosa, K. Dehnen-Schmutz, T. Döring, D. Fontaneto, M. Garbelotto, O. Holdenrieder, M. Jeger, D. Lonsdale, A. MacLeod, P. Mills, M. Moslonka-Lefebvre, G. Stancanelli, P. Weisberg, and X. Xu for insights and discussions, and to P. Bourne, T. Matoni, and D. Smith for helpful comments on a previous draft.

Funding Statement

This work was funded by the French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB) through its Centre for Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity data (CESAB), as part of the NETSEED research project. The funders had no role in the preparation of the manuscript.

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

How Long Should a Literature Review Be?

4-minute read

• 7th October 2023

If you’re writing a research paper or dissertation , then you know how important it is to include a thorough, comprehensive literature review. But exactly how long should your literature review be in relation to the rest of your work? While there’s no one-size-fits-all answer to that question, there are some factors that will help determine the length of your review. In this post, we’ll discuss what information to include in your literature review and how long it should be.

Keep reading to learn more.

What Is a Literature Review?

A literature review is a critical summary and evaluation of the current resources (e.g., books and journal articles) on a specific topic or research question. It is a crucial part of academic writing, such as dissertations, in all categories and fields. Essentially, literature reviews help contextualize your investigations and show how your work is building on existing research.

No matter how long your literature review is, it should generally:

●  Establish context for your research (i.e., provide relevant background information so your reader understands the historical significance of your study ).

●  Identify gaps in the existing literature (such as unaddressed questions or aspects of your topic).

●  Highlight significant concepts related to your topic.

●  Cite relevant studies.

●  Support your argument.

It’s also essential that a literature review critically analyze the sources cited in your study, considering factors such as sample size, research design, and potential biases. Be sure to structure your literature review using the same referencing style as the rest of your research paper (e.g., APA , Chicago , MLA ).

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

The length of your literature review depends on several factors, including the scope and purpose of your research. In general, the length of the review should be proportionate to your overall paper. For example, if you’re writing a fifty-thousand-word dissertation, then your literature review will likely be an entire chapter comprising about 20 pages. If it’s for a 15-page research paper, your literature review may only be a few pages.

Here are several factors that could affect the length of your literature review:

●  Institutional guidelines : Always check the guidelines provided by your institution or journal (such as an APA journal ). There may be a specific length or word count required for publication.

●  Scope : If your research topic is narrow and focused, your literature review may be shorter. Conversely, if your topic is broad and encompasses a large body of literature, your review may need to be longer.

●  Field of study : Different academic fields may have different expectations regarding the length of literature reviews. For example, literature reviews in the humanities might be longer than those in the natural sciences.

Also, consider your audience. If your literature review is for a general audience or a class assignment, it can probably be shorter and less specialized. However, if it’s for an academic audience in your field of study, you may need to be more thorough and provide an extensive review of the existing literature.

Most literature reviews follow the same basic structure of an introduction, body, and conclusion. Most of the time, they are part of a larger work, so the introduction and conclusion paragraphs will be relatively brief.

However, if the review is a standalone piece, then your introduction and conclusion will be longer since you will need to discuss your research objectives, methods, and findings as well as analyze the literature used in your study.

To ensure your literature review makes an impression, have it professionally proofread by our expert literature review editing services . Submit your free sample of 500 words or less to get started today!

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

The benefits of using an online proofreading service.

Proofreading is important to ensure your writing is clear and concise for your readers. Whether...

2-minute read

6 Online AI Presentation Maker Tools

Creating presentations can be time-consuming and frustrating. Trying to construct a visually appealing and informative...

What Is Market Research?

No matter your industry, conducting market research helps you keep up to date with shifting...

8 Press Release Distribution Services for Your Business

In a world where you need to stand out, press releases are key to being...

3-minute read

How to Get a Patent

In the United States, the US Patent and Trademarks Office issues patents. In the United...

The 5 Best Ecommerce Website Design Tools 

A visually appealing and user-friendly website is essential for success in today’s competitive ecommerce landscape....

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

• Undergraduate courses
• Postgraduate courses
• January starts
• Foundation courses
• Apprenticeships
• Part-time and short courses
• Apply undergraduate
• Apply postgraduate

Search for a course

Search by course name, subject, and more

• Undergraduate
• Postgraduate
• (suspended) - Available in Clearing Not available in Clearing location-sign UCAS

Fees and funding

• Tuition fees
• Scholarships
• Funding your studies
• Student finance
• Cost of living support

Why study at Kent

Student life.

• Careers and employability
• Student support and wellbeing
• Our locations
• Placements and internships
• Year abroad
• Student stories
• Schools and colleges
• International
• International students
• Your country
• Applicant FAQs
• International scholarships
• University of Kent International College
• Campus Tours
• Applicant Events
• Postgraduate events
• Maps and directions
• Research strengths
• Research centres
• Research impact

Research institutes

• Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology
• Institute of Cyber Security for Society
• Institute of Cultural and Creative Industries
• Institute of Health, Social Care and Wellbeing

Research students

• Graduate and Researcher College
• Research degrees
• Find a supervisor
• How to apply

Popular searches

• Visits and Open Days
• Jobs and vacancies
• Accommodation
• Student guide
• Library and IT
• Research highlights
• Signature themes
• Partner with us
• Student Guide
• Student Help
• Health & wellbeing
• Student voice
• Living at Kent
• Careers & volunteering
• Diversity at Kent
• Finance & funding
• Life after graduation

Literature reviews

Writing a literature review.

The following guide has been created for you by the  Student Learning Advisory Service . For more detailed guidance and to speak to one of our advisers, please book an  appointment  or join one of our  workshops . Alternatively, have a look at our  SkillBuilder  skills videos.   

Preparing a literature review involves:

• Searching for reliable, accurate and up-to-date material on a topic or subject
• Reading and summarising the key points from this literature
• Synthesising these key ideas, theories and concepts into a summary of what is known
• Discussing and evaluating these ideas, theories and concepts
• Identifying particular areas of debate or controversy
• Preparing the ground for the application of these ideas to new research

Finding and choosing material

Ensure you are clear on what you are looking for. ask yourself:.

• What is the specific question, topic or focus of my assignment?
• What kind of material do I need (e.g. theory, policy, empirical data)?
• What type of literature is available (e.g. journals, books, government documents)?

What kind of literature is particularly authoritative in this academic discipline (e.g. psychology, sociology, pharmacy)?

How much do you need?

This will depend on the length of the dissertation, the nature of the subject, and the level of study (undergraduate, Masters, PhD). As a very rough rule of thumb – you may choose 8-10 significant pieces (books and/or articles) for an 8,000 word dissertation, up to 20 major pieces of work for 12-15,000 words, and so on. Bear in mind that if your dissertation is based mainly around an interaction with existing scholarship you will need a longer literature review than if it is there as a prelude to new empirical research. Use your judgement or ask your supervisor for guidance.

Where to find suitable material

Your literature review should include a balance between substantial academic books, journal articles and other scholarly publications. All these sources should be as up-to-date as possible, with the exception of ‘classic texts’ such as major works written by leading scholars setting out formative ideas and theories central to your subject. There are several ways to locate suitable material:

Module bibliography: for undergraduate dissertations, look first at the bibliography provided with the module documentation. Choose one or two likely looking books or articles and then scan through the bibliographies provided by these authors. Skim read some of this material looking for clues: can you use these leads to identify key theories and authors or track down other appropriate material?

Library catalogue search engine: enter a few key words to capture a range of items, but avoid over-generalisations; if you type in something as broad as ‘social theory’ you are likely to get several thousand results. Be more specific: for example, ‘Heidegger, existentialism’. Ideally, you should narrow the field to obtain just a few dozen results. Skim through these quickly to identity texts which are most likely to contribute to your study.

Library bookshelves: browse the library shelves in the relevant subject area and examine the books that catch your eye. Check the contents and index pages, or skim through the introductions (or abstracts, in the case of journal articles) to see if they contain relevant material, and replace them if not. Don’t be afraid to ask one of the subject librarians for further help. Your supervisor may also be able to point you in the direction of some of the important literature , but remember this is your literature search, not theirs.

Online: for recent journal articles you will almost certainly need to use one of the online search engines. These can be found on the ‘Indexing Services’ button on the Templeman Library website. Kent students based at Medway still need to use the Templeman pages to access online journals, although you can get to these pages through the Drill Hall Library catalogue. Take a look as well at the Subject Guides on both the Templeman and DHL websites.

Check that you have made the right selection by asking:

• Has my search been wide enough to ensure that I have identified all the relevant material, but narrow enough to exclude irrelevant material?
• Is there a good enough sample of literature for the level (PhD, Masters, undergraduate) of my dissertation or thesis?
• Have I considered as many alternative points of view as possible?
• Will the reader find my literature review relevant and useful?

Assessing the literature

Read the material you have chosen carefully, considering the following:

• The key point discussed by the author: is this clearly defined
• What evidence has the author produced to support this central idea?
• How convincing are the reasons given for the author’s point of view?
• Could the evidence be interpreted in other ways?
• What is the author's research method (e.g. qualitative, quantitative, experimental, etc.)?
• What is the author's theoretical framework (e.g. psychological, developmental, feminist)?
• What is the relationship assumed by the author between theory and practice?
• Has the author critically evaluated the other literature in the field?
• Does the author include literature opposing their point of view?
• Is the research data based on a reliable method and accurate information?
• Can you ‘deconstruct’ the argument – identify the gaps or jumps in the logic?
• What are the strengths and limitations of this study?
• What does this book or article contribute to the field or topic?
• What does this book or article contribute to my own topic or thesis?

As you note down the key content of each book or journal article (together with the reference details of each source) record your responses to these questions. You will then be able to summarise each piece of material from two perspectives:     

Content: a brief description of the content of the book or article. Remember, an author will often make just one key point; so, what is the point they are making, and how does it relate to your own research project or assignment?

Critical analysis: an assessment of the relative strengths and weaknesses of the evidence used, and the arguments presented. Has anything conveniently been left out or skated over? Is there a counter-argument, and has the author dealt with this adequately? Can the evidence presented be interpreted another way? Does the author demonstrate any obvious bias which could affect their reliability? Overall, based on the above analysis of the author’s work, how do you evaluate its contribution to the scholarly understanding and knowledge surrounding the topic?    

Structuring the literature review

In a PhD thesis, the literature review typically comprises one chapter (perhaps 8-10,000 words), for a Masters dissertation it may be around 2-3,000 words, and for an undergraduate dissertation it may be no more than 2,000 words. In each case the word count can vary depending on a range of factors and it is always best, if in doubt, to ask your supervisor.

The overall structure of the section or chapter should be like any other: it should have a beginning, middle and end. You will need to guide the reader through the literature review, outlining the strategy you have adopted for selecting the books or articles, presenting the topic theme for the review, then using most of the word limit to analyse the chosen books or articles thoroughly before pulling everything together briefly in the conclusion.

Some people prefer a less linear approach. Instead of simply working through a list of 8-20 items on your book review list, you might want to try a thematic approach, grouping key ideas, facts, concepts or approaches together and then bouncing the ideas off each other. This is a slightly more creative (and interesting) way of producing the review, but a little more risky as it is harder to establish coherence and logical sequencing.

Whichever approach you adopt, make sure everything flows smoothly – that one idea or book leads neatly to the next. Take your reader effortlessly through a sequence of thought that is clear, accurate, precise and interesting. 

Writing up your literature review

As with essays generally, only attempt to write up the literature review when you have completed all the reading and note-taking, and carefully planned its content and structure. Find an appropriate way of introducing the review, then guide the reader through the material clearly and directly, bearing in mind the following:

• Be selective in the number of points you draw out from each piece of literature; remember that one of your objectives is to demonstrate that you can use your judgement to identify what is central and what is secondary.
• Summarise and synthesise – use your own words to sum up what you think is important or controversial about the book or article.
• Never claim more than the evidence will support. Too many dissertations and theses are let down by sweeping generalisations. Be tentative and careful in the way you interpret the evidence.
• Keep your own voice – you are entitled to your own point of view provided it is based on evidence and clear argument.
• At the same time, aim to project an objective and tentative tone by using the 3rd person, (for example, ‘this tends to suggest’, ‘it could be argued’ and so on).
• Even with a literature review you should avoid using too many, or overlong, quotes. Summarise material in your own words as much as possible. Save the quotes for ‘punch-lines’ to drive a particular point home.
• Revise, revise, revise: refine and edit the draft as much as you can. Check for fluency, structure, evidence, criticality and referencing, and don’t forget the basics of good grammar, punctuation and spelling.

How To Write An A-Grade Literature Review

3 straightforward steps (with examples) + free template.

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Expert Reviewed By: Dr. Eunice Rautenbach | October 2019

Quality research is about building onto the existing work of others , “standing on the shoulders of giants”, as Newton put it. The literature review chapter of your dissertation, thesis or research project is where you synthesise this prior work and lay the theoretical foundation for your own research.

Long story short, this chapter is a pretty big deal, which is why you want to make sure you get it right . In this post, I’ll show you exactly how to write a literature review in three straightforward steps, so you can conquer this vital chapter (the smart way).

Overview: The Literature Review Process

• Understanding the “ why “
• Finding the relevant literature
• Cataloguing and synthesising the information
• Outlining & writing up your literature review
• Example of a literature review

But first, the “why”…

Before we unpack how to write the literature review chapter, we’ve got to look at the why . To put it bluntly, if you don’t understand the function and purpose of the literature review process, there’s no way you can pull it off well. So, what exactly is the purpose of the literature review?

Well, there are (at least) four core functions:

• For you to gain an understanding (and demonstrate this understanding) of where the research is at currently, what the key arguments and disagreements are.
• For you to identify the gap(s) in the literature and then use this as justification for your own research topic.
• To help you build a conceptual framework for empirical testing (if applicable to your research topic).
• To inform your methodological choices and help you source tried and tested questionnaires (for interviews ) and measurement instruments (for surveys ).

Most students understand the first point but don’t give any thought to the rest. To get the most from the literature review process, you must keep all four points front of mind as you review the literature (more on this shortly), or you’ll land up with a wonky foundation.

Okay – with the why out the way, let’s move on to the how . As mentioned above, writing your literature review is a process, which I’ll break down into three steps:

• Finding the most suitable literature
• Understanding , distilling and organising the literature
• Planning and writing up your literature review chapter

Importantly, you must complete steps one and two before you start writing up your chapter. I know it’s very tempting, but don’t try to kill two birds with one stone and write as you read. You’ll invariably end up wasting huge amounts of time re-writing and re-shaping, or you’ll just land up with a disjointed, hard-to-digest mess . Instead, you need to read first and distil the information, then plan and execute the writing.

Step 1: Find the relevant literature

Naturally, the first step in the literature review journey is to hunt down the existing research that’s relevant to your topic. While you probably already have a decent base of this from your research proposal , you need to expand on this substantially in the dissertation or thesis itself.

Essentially, you need to be looking for any existing literature that potentially helps you answer your research question (or develop it, if that’s not yet pinned down). There are numerous ways to find relevant literature, but I’ll cover my top four tactics here. I’d suggest combining all four methods to ensure that nothing slips past you:

Method 1 – Google Scholar Scrubbing

Google’s academic search engine, Google Scholar , is a great starting point as it provides a good high-level view of the relevant journal articles for whatever keyword you throw at it. Most valuably, it tells you how many times each article has been cited, which gives you an idea of how credible (or at least, popular) it is. Some articles will be free to access, while others will require an account, which brings us to the next method.

Method 2 – University Database Scrounging

Generally, universities provide students with access to an online library, which provides access to many (but not all) of the major journals.

So, if you find an article using Google Scholar that requires paid access (which is quite likely), search for that article in your university’s database – if it’s listed there, you’ll have access. Note that, generally, the search engine capabilities of these databases are poor, so make sure you search for the exact article name, or you might not find it.

Method 3 – Journal Article Snowballing

At the end of every academic journal article, you’ll find a list of references. As with any academic writing, these references are the building blocks of the article, so if the article is relevant to your topic, there’s a good chance a portion of the referenced works will be too. Do a quick scan of the titles and see what seems relevant, then search for the relevant ones in your university’s database.

Method 4 – Dissertation Scavenging

Similar to Method 3 above, you can leverage other students’ dissertations. All you have to do is skim through literature review chapters of existing dissertations related to your topic and you’ll find a gold mine of potential literature. Usually, your university will provide you with access to previous students’ dissertations, but you can also find a much larger selection in the following databases:

• Open Access Theses & Dissertations
• Stanford SearchWorks

Keep in mind that dissertations and theses are not as academically sound as published, peer-reviewed journal articles (because they’re written by students, not professionals), so be sure to check the credibility of any sources you find using this method. You can do this by assessing the citation count of any given article in Google Scholar. If you need help with assessing the credibility of any article, or with finding relevant research in general, you can chat with one of our Research Specialists .

Alright – with a good base of literature firmly under your belt, it’s time to move onto the next step.

Need a helping hand?

Step 2: Log, catalogue and synthesise

Once you’ve built a little treasure trove of articles, it’s time to get reading and start digesting the information – what does it all mean?

While I present steps one and two (hunting and digesting) as sequential, in reality, it’s more of a back-and-forth tango – you’ll read a little , then have an idea, spot a new citation, or a new potential variable, and then go back to searching for articles. This is perfectly natural – through the reading process, your thoughts will develop , new avenues might crop up, and directional adjustments might arise. This is, after all, one of the main purposes of the literature review process (i.e. to familiarise yourself with the current state of research in your field).

As you’re working through your treasure chest, it’s essential that you simultaneously start organising the information. There are three aspects to this:

• Logging reference information
• Building an organised catalogue
• Distilling and synthesising the information

I’ll discuss each of these below:

2.1 – Log the reference information

As you read each article, you should add it to your reference management software. I usually recommend Mendeley for this purpose (see the Mendeley 101 video below), but you can use whichever software you’re comfortable with. Most importantly, make sure you load EVERY article you read into your reference manager, even if it doesn’t seem very relevant at the time.

2.2 – Build an organised catalogue

In the beginning, you might feel confident that you can remember who said what, where, and what their main arguments were. Trust me, you won’t. If you do a thorough review of the relevant literature (as you must!), you’re going to read many, many articles, and it’s simply impossible to remember who said what, when, and in what context . Also, without the bird’s eye view that a catalogue provides, you’ll miss connections between various articles, and have no view of how the research developed over time. Simply put, it’s essential to build your own catalogue of the literature.

I would suggest using Excel to build your catalogue, as it allows you to run filters, colour code and sort – all very useful when your list grows large (which it will). How you lay your spreadsheet out is up to you, but I’d suggest you have the following columns (at minimum):

• Author, date, title – Start with three columns containing this core information. This will make it easy for you to search for titles with certain words, order research by date, or group by author.
• Categories or keywords – You can either create multiple columns, one for each category/theme and then tick the relevant categories, or you can have one column with keywords.
• Key arguments/points – Use this column to succinctly convey the essence of the article, the key arguments and implications thereof for your research.
• Context – Note the socioeconomic context in which the research was undertaken. For example, US-based, respondents aged 25-35, lower- income, etc. This will be useful for making an argument about gaps in the research.
• Methodology – Note which methodology was used and why. Also, note any issues you feel arise due to the methodology. Again, you can use this to make an argument about gaps in the research.
• Quotations – Note down any quoteworthy lines you feel might be useful later.
• Notes – Make notes about anything not already covered. For example, linkages to or disagreements with other theories, questions raised but unanswered, shortcomings or limitations, and so forth.

If you’d like, you can try out our free catalog template here (see screenshot below).

2.3 – Digest and synthesise

Most importantly, as you work through the literature and build your catalogue, you need to synthesise all the information in your own mind – how does it all fit together? Look for links between the various articles and try to develop a bigger picture view of the state of the research. Some important questions to ask yourself are:

• What answers does the existing research provide to my own research questions ?
• Which points do the researchers agree (and disagree) on?
• How has the research developed over time?
• Where do the gaps in the current research lie?

To help you develop a big-picture view and synthesise all the information, you might find mind mapping software such as Freemind useful. Alternatively, if you’re a fan of physical note-taking, investing in a large whiteboard might work for you.

Step 3: Outline and write it up!

Once you’re satisfied that you have digested and distilled all the relevant literature in your mind, it’s time to put pen to paper (or rather, fingers to keyboard). There are two steps here – outlining and writing:

3.1 – Draw up your outline

Having spent so much time reading, it might be tempting to just start writing up without a clear structure in mind. However, it’s critically important to decide on your structure and develop a detailed outline before you write anything. Your literature review chapter needs to present a clear, logical and an easy to follow narrative – and that requires some planning. Don’t try to wing it!

Naturally, you won’t always follow the plan to the letter, but without a detailed outline, you’re more than likely going to end up with a disjointed pile of waffle , and then you’re going to spend a far greater amount of time re-writing, hacking and patching. The adage, “measure twice, cut once” is very suitable here.

In terms of structure, the first decision you’ll have to make is whether you’ll lay out your review thematically (into themes) or chronologically (by date/period). The right choice depends on your topic, research objectives and research questions, which we discuss in this article .

Once that’s decided, you need to draw up an outline of your entire chapter in bullet point format. Try to get as detailed as possible, so that you know exactly what you’ll cover where, how each section will connect to the next, and how your entire argument will develop throughout the chapter. Also, at this stage, it’s a good idea to allocate rough word count limits for each section, so that you can identify word count problems before you’ve spent weeks or months writing!

PS – check out our free literature review chapter template…

3.2 – Get writing

With a detailed outline at your side, it’s time to start writing up (finally!). At this stage, it’s common to feel a bit of writer’s block and find yourself procrastinating under the pressure of finally having to put something on paper. To help with this, remember that the objective of the first draft is not perfection – it’s simply to get your thoughts out of your head and onto paper, after which you can refine them. The structure might change a little, the word count allocations might shift and shuffle, and you might add or remove a section – that’s all okay. Don’t worry about all this on your first draft – just get your thoughts down on paper.

Once you’ve got a full first draft (however rough it may be), step away from it for a day or two (longer if you can) and then come back at it with fresh eyes. Pay particular attention to the flow and narrative – does it fall fit together and flow from one section to another smoothly? Now’s the time to try to improve the linkage from each section to the next, tighten up the writing to be more concise, trim down word count and sand it down into a more digestible read.

Once you’ve done that, give your writing to a friend or colleague who is not a subject matter expert and ask them if they understand the overall discussion. The best way to assess this is to ask them to explain the chapter back to you. This technique will give you a strong indication of which points were clearly communicated and which weren’t. If you’re working with Grad Coach, this is a good time to have your Research Specialist review your chapter.

Finally, tighten it up and send it off to your supervisor for comment. Some might argue that you should be sending your work to your supervisor sooner than this (indeed your university might formally require this), but in my experience, supervisors are extremely short on time (and often patience), so, the more refined your chapter is, the less time they’ll waste on addressing basic issues (which you know about already) and the more time they’ll spend on valuable feedback that will increase your mark-earning potential.

Literature Review Example

In the video below, we unpack an actual literature review so that you can see how all the core components come together in reality.

Let’s Recap

In this post, we’ve covered how to research and write up a high-quality literature review chapter. Let’s do a quick recap of the key takeaways:

• It is essential to understand the WHY of the literature review before you read or write anything. Make sure you understand the 4 core functions of the process.
• The first step is to hunt down the relevant literature . You can do this using Google Scholar, your university database, the snowballing technique and by reviewing other dissertations and theses.
• Next, you need to log all the articles in your reference manager , build your own catalogue of literature and synthesise all the research.
• Following that, you need to develop a detailed outline of your entire chapter – the more detail the better. Don’t start writing without a clear outline (on paper, not in your head!)
• Write up your first draft in rough form – don’t aim for perfection. Remember, done beats perfect.
• Refine your second draft and get a layman’s perspective on it . Then tighten it up and submit it to your supervisor.

Psst… there’s more!

This post is an extract from our bestselling Udemy Course, Literature Review Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .

You Might Also Like:

38 Comments

Thank you very much. This page is an eye opener and easy to comprehend.

This is awesome!

I wish I come across GradCoach earlier enough.

But all the same I’ll make use of this opportunity to the fullest.

Thank you for this good job.

Keep it up!

You’re welcome, Yinka. Thank you for the kind words. All the best writing your literature review.

Thank you for a very useful literature review session. Although I am doing most of the steps…it being my first masters an Mphil is a self study and one not sure you are on the right track. I have an amazing supervisor but one also knows they are super busy. So not wanting to bother on the minutae. Thank you.

You’re most welcome, Renee. Good luck with your literature review 🙂

This has been really helpful. Will make full use of it. 🙂

Thank you Gradcoach.

Really agreed. Admirable effort

thank you for this beautiful well explained recap.

Thank you so much for your guide of video and other instructions for the dissertation writing.

It is instrumental. It encouraged me to write a dissertation now.

Thank you the video was great – from someone that knows nothing thankyou

an amazing and very constructive way of presetting a topic, very useful, thanks for the effort,

It is timely

It is very good video of guidance for writing a research proposal and a dissertation. Since I have been watching and reading instructions, I have started my research proposal to write. I appreciate to Mr Jansen hugely.

I learn a lot from your videos. Very comprehensive and detailed.

Thank you for sharing your knowledge. As a research student, you learn better with your learning tips in research

I was really stuck in reading and gathering information but after watching these things are cleared thanks, it is so helpful.

Really helpful, Thank you for the effort in showing such information

This is super helpful thank you very much.

Thank you for this whole literature writing review.You have simplified the process.

I’m so glad I found GradCoach. Excellent information, Clear explanation, and Easy to follow, Many thanks Derek!

You’re welcome, Maithe. Good luck writing your literature review 🙂

Thank you Coach, you have greatly enriched and improved my knowledge

Great piece, so enriching and it is going to help me a great lot in my project and thesis, thanks so much

This is THE BEST site for ANYONE doing a masters or doctorate! Thank you for the sound advice and templates. You rock!

Thanks, Stephanie 🙂

This is mind blowing, the detailed explanation and simplicity is perfect.

I am doing two papers on my final year thesis, and I must stay I feel very confident to face both headlong after reading this article.

thank you so much.

if anyone is to get a paper done on time and in the best way possible, GRADCOACH is certainly the go to area!

This is very good video which is well explained with detailed explanation

Thank you excellent piece of work and great mentoring

Thanks, it was useful

Thank you very much. the video and the information were very helpful.

Good morning scholar. I’m delighted coming to know you even before the commencement of my dissertation which hopefully is expected in not more than six months from now. I would love to engage my study under your guidance from the beginning to the end. I love to know how to do good job

Thank you so much Derek for such useful information on writing up a good literature review. I am at a stage where I need to start writing my one. My proposal was accepted late last year but I honestly did not know where to start

Like the name of your YouTube implies you are GRAD (great,resource person, about dissertation). In short you are smart enough in coaching research work.

This is a very well thought out webpage. Very informative and a great read.

Very timely.

I appreciate.

Very comprehensive and eye opener for me as beginner in postgraduate study. Well explained and easy to understand. Appreciate and good reference in guiding me in my research journey. Thank you

Thank you. I requested to download the free literature review template, however, your website wouldn’t allow me to complete the request or complete a download. May I request that you email me the free template? Thank you.

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

Find what you need to study

Academic Paper: Literature Review

7 min read • march 13, 2023

Dylan Black

Introduction

Your Literature Review is the first formal part of your paper. It is the section that is the most detached from your actual research project because you most likely will not bring up your actual research question/topic until the end when you situate your gap in the body of knowledge relating to your topic of inquiry.

The point of your literature review is to explain what is already known about your specific topic of inquiry and establish that the gap you have chosen is truly a gap in the body of knowledge. Coming out of your introduction, your reader will be aware of the broader context of your work and the general idea of what it is you'll be talking about. The literature review takes that context and blows it up into what will eventually become approximately the first 1200-1500 words of your paper (though word count varies across discipline and paper format).

How to Write a Lit Review

The goals of your lit review.

The first goal of your literature review is to, as the name implies, conduct an extensive review of the literature through little-r research. This involves more than just listing the sources and their content because you will be explaining connections between them whether they be agreements in data, disagreements in conclusions, etc.

The biggest mistake students make in their Lit Review - and we'll discuss this in more detail in a later section - is that they just list what sources say and do little to analyze what is actually known about a certain subject. This leads to a weak review of the literature and a murky, undeveloped gap. By connecting your sources, you are able to incorporate multiple perspectives, establish credibility, and at the end of the day, simply have a better reading lit review that truly explains the body of knowledge surrounding your topic.

The second goal of your literature review is to establish your gap and explain how:

it hasn't been covered by researchers before (this is justified through the fact that you just explained what is already known!)

why it is relevant to your discipline/topic

This part of your lit review is crucial to your research paper. This part of your paper connects your literature review - all of the known stuff - to what you are doing. This goal basically addresses the question, "ok so we just looked at aaaalllll of these sources, now what are you going to do", answering it with something along the lines of "well, we see that these sources have established [something] about my discipline, but no one has addressed [your gap], so I plan on researching it."

Using phrases like "This paper provides new insight on..." and "However, [researchers, be specific!] have overlooked [your research gap]" can make this especially clear, which is important because your gap is what lays the foundation of everything to come!

Clearing the Gap , Image From GIPHY

Varying Perspectives

An especially important part of your literature review is establishing and explaining, as the CollegeBoard puts it, "relevant scholarly works of varying perspectives". This means that your lit review cannot just be a bunch of summaries of random papers strewn across a page at random, despite the content being somewhat similar.

When writing, and more specifically when planning your lit review, understanding the perspectives of each of your papers, and being able to connect them in a way that they join hands , or naturally lead into one another in a logical chain of succession is invaluable.

To use myself as an example, in my literature review I focused on three sections: "Marxism and Labor", a section about the economic foundations of my topic, "Applications of Marxism to Film", in which I described how the previous section connects to film in a broader sense, and finally "Marxist Film Theory and Moon", which took the previous two sections and explicitly connected them to my film of interest. In building my Lit Review throughout these 3 sections, not only was I able to split up topics in a meaningful way, but each section built on itself, connecting to points made by previously mentioned sources.

Connecting Your Sources To Your Topic of Inquiry

When writing your literature review, every source you mention at some point or another will have to connect to your overall topic of inquiry, otherwise what's the point? Why would they be used? Thus, when you include a source, not only do you want to explain the content and what the source actually says in terms of the literature but you want to be explicit in explaining the relevancy and credibility of the source in connection to the content of your paper.

This will help you better connect your sources to each other. This is important because the quality of your literature review hinges on how it presents the known information to your readers and helps them understand why your project A) is connected to these sources and B) is a new addition to them.

When you're explicitly building on sources to connect them to the topic of your paper, you more effectively accomplish goal A because your reader doesn't have to do much guesswork. Then, when you move onto your gap, the fact that all of your sources are established as relevant will help you effectively justify your gap.

A sample structure of a literature review. Image from the University of Hull

What Not To Do: The Source Spaghetti

We've mentioned this a few times throughout this guide, but it needs repeating. There is one thing, and one thing only, that you should never do in your literature review, and that's something called "the source spaghetti". Basically, this is a method of writing a literature review where instead of planning or connecting sources to each other, you essentially list out your sources with a brief summary, quickly moving from source to source with very little rhyme or reason making your lit review muddled and unfocused, like reading a bowl of spaghetti.

While this certainly gets some information on the page, it is not an effective way of writing a literature review for the simple reason that you won't be able to have the level of detail that a good Lit Review requires.

Image from GIPHY

Rubric Points and Logistics

Now that we've gone over some tips and tricks, let's take a look directly at the rubric and see what the CollegeBoard explicitly states are the expectations for a lit review. For reference, the full rubric can be found here , and is the source for all the following rubric screenshots.

Seen above is the row of the AP Research scoring guidelines that best correspond to your literature review. Let's move from a one to a five and see what differentiates each point.

A literature review that earns a one and a two is marked by a single perspective, that is to say, it does not cover a wide variety of sources and does not effectively describe the body of knowledge surrounding a topic of inquiry. Papers that earn a one for the literature review typically use non-scholarly works as opposed to scholarly works in their research. For example, news sources do not count as scholarly, whereas research papers that have been peer-reviewed (that bit is important) do.

Moving into the three-point category, we see that a paper with this score does have varying perspectives and scholarly works, but lacks in the connections department. A paper with this score may have done some solid little-r research, but did not structure their lit review in such a way that the sources were able to be in discussion with one another. This is why a paper that uses a spaghetti sources way of organization will not be successful. Remember that connections between your sources are just as crucial as the content of the sources themselves.

The four and five categories meld into one. In fact, the text in the rubric is exactly the same. What separates a four and a five is a degree of sophistication in your writing. Where a 4 may hit all the points and do it well, a five does that and goes above and beyond. It's a very fine line and frankly, it's pretty subjective on the part of the reader. The easiest way to figure out what separates these two is to read sample fours and sample fives to see the difference for yourself.

Final Thoughts

Congratulations! If you've made it this far you have all the skills to get started on your literature review. Your next steps from here are to get started on your little-r research, start collecting sources, and get connecting. You got this!

Key Terms to Review ( 3 )

Non-scholarly works

Peer Review

Research papers

Stay Connected

© 2024 Fiveable Inc. All rights reserved.

AP® and SAT® are trademarks registered by the College Board, which is not affiliated with, and does not endorse this website.

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

Table of contents

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.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing - try for free!

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

Try for free

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 1, 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, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation
• What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

Published on 22 February 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 7 June 2022.

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.

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 summarise sources – it analyses, synthesises, and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.

Table of contents

Why write 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, frequently asked questions about literature reviews, introduction.

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

When you write a dissertation or thesis, you will 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 scholarly context
• Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
• Position yourself in relation to other researchers and theorists
• Show how your dissertation addresses a gap or contributes to a debate

You might also have to write a literature review as a stand-alone assignment. In this case, the purpose is to evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of scholarly debates around a topic.

The content will look slightly different in each case, but the process of conducting a literature review follows the same steps. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

Correct my document today

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 objectives and questions .

If you are writing a literature review as a stand-alone assignment, you will have to choose a focus and develop a central question to direct your search. Unlike a dissertation research question, this question has to be answerable without collecting original data. You should be able to answer it based only on a review of existing publications.

Make a list of keywords

Start by creating a list of keywords related to your research topic. 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 if 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 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 use boolean operators to help narrow down your search:

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.

To identify the most important publications on your topic, take note of recurring citations. If the same authors, books or articles keep appearing in your reading, make sure to seek them out.

You probably won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on the topic – you’ll have to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your questions.

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?
• How does the publication contribute to your understanding of the topic? What are its key insights and arguments?
• 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 find out how many times an article has been cited on Google Scholar – a high citation count means the article has been influential in the field, and should certainly be included in your literature review.

The scope of your review will depend on your topic and discipline: in the sciences you usually only review recent literature, but in the humanities you might take a long historical perspective (for example, to trace how a concept has changed in meaning over time).

Remember that you can use our template to summarise and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using!

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’s important to keep track of your sources with references to avoid plagiarism . It can be helpful to make an annotated bibliography, where you compile full reference 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.

You can use our free APA Reference Generator for quick, correct, consistent citations.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

To begin organising your literature review’s argument and structure, you need to 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 organising the body of a literature review. You should have a rough idea of your strategy before you start writing.

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 summarising sources in order.

Try to analyse 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 organise 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.

If you are writing the literature review as part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate your central problem or research question and give a brief summary of the scholarly context. You can emphasise the timeliness of the topic (“many recent studies have focused on the problem of x”) or highlight a gap in the literature (“while there has been much research on x, few researchers have taken y into consideration”).

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, make sure to follow these tips:

• Summarise and synthesise: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole.
• Analyse and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations, 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 transitions and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts.

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

If the literature review is part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate how your research addresses gaps and contributes new knowledge, or discuss how you have drawn on existing theories and methods to build a framework for your research. This can lead directly into your methodology section.

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 dissertation , thesis, research paper , or proposal .

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

• To familiarise 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  dissertation . After the introduction , it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology .

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 Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2022, June 07). What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 1 April 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a dissertation proposal | a step-by-step guide, what is a theoretical framework | a step-by-step guide, what is a research methodology | steps & tips.

Honours thesis in psychology/Developing a literature review

Guidelines and tips for developing a 4th year Honours thesis in psychology literature review.

• 1 What is a literature review?
• 2.1 Topic development
• 2.2 Guided reading
• 2.4 1st draft
• 2.5 2nd draft
• 2.6 3rd draft
• 2.7 4th draft
• 2.8 Tables and figures
• 3 Marking criteria
• 4 File management
• 5 Word processing
• 6 Citation management
• 7 Relationship to the research article

What is a literature review? [ edit | edit source ]

A literature review identifies a unique topic, establishes its importance, and summarises, reviews, and critiques key theory and research. The literature review also weighs the strengths and limitations of the existing literature and recommends future directions.

The task is to present an APA style manuscript which critically reviews key theoretical and research literature about a specific topic/problem and which is ready for submission to a journal for publication.

The literature review should contribute a unique, useful review of theory and research about a particular issue/gap/problem.

Good example literature reviews can be found, among other places, in the Annual Review of Psychology (e.g., [1] ).

Drafting process [ edit | edit source ]

Here is a suggested stage-by-stage drafting process:

Topic development [ edit | edit source ]

• Brainstorm (cast the net widely initially).
• The literature review may have a broader, narrower, similar, or different focus to a subsequent original research article. Do not necessarily assume that the literature review and research article are going to be about exactly the same topic. Often the literature review has a somewhat broader focus. For more info, see relationship to the research article .
• Sort through, merge, discard, and prioritise the brainstormed ideas.
• Whittle down
• research question
• working title

Guided reading [ edit | edit source ]

• Searching and reading can go on forever, so it is important to be strategic.
• Clearly establish the review's scope (i.e., What is relevant? What is not?) so that search terms are well targeted and the relevance of sources can be quickly assessed.
• Develop a bibliography of key references about the topic.
• Major literature reviews (especially recent systematic and meta-analytic reviews).
• Highly cited, peer reviewed, published articles which address relevant psychological theory and major studies.
• Access these references regardless of the difficulties in doing so - e.g., may require inter-library loan/document delivery requests.
• Read these sources, making notes about key points relevant to the literature review topic.

Plan [ edit | edit source ]

Develop an outline of the chapter and discuss with the thesis supervisor:

• clarify the focus of the review
• ensure a balanced review which fits into the overall word count
• "chunk" the drafting process into smaller sections
• Title (working)
• Abstract and keywords (as headings)
• ~2-3 pages or 300-500 words
• Introduce and describe the topic/problem/question, establish its importance, familiarise the reader with key terminology/concepts, show familiarity with the key literature, and orient the reader to the structure and direction of the review.
• Include major citations
• By the end of this section a reader should be clear about the purpose, need for, and focus of the review.
• Headings (likely to cover critical review of key theory and research): Aim for approx. 3 to 7 main headings. Sub-headings are optional (each main heading should have 0 or 2 to 5 sub-headings)
• Conclusion (includes future directions/recommendations)
• Word-count: Allocate an estimated word count to each of the major sections and overall. Note that the literature review is worth 40% of the 10,000 to 12,000 word thesis; so, on a proportional basis, aim for approximately 4,000 to 4,800 words, but often the literature review may be longer, up to perhaps ~6,500 words.
• Questions about the plan which you'd like to flag for discussion.
• It can be helpful to model the literature review on a favourite article (or thesis) - have a close look at the heading structure of some example literature reviews.
• Consider using the " writing funnel " in which the review starts broadly and gradually narrows down to focus on a specific problem.
• Seek feedback about the plan from the thesis supervisor, discuss, and revise the plan.

1st draft [ edit | edit source ]

• Turn the plan into a first draft by fleshing out the dot points into sentences and paragraphs.
• Aim roughly for a "Pass" standard.
• Sometimes people get "stuck" producing a first draft because they try to produce top-quality work. Quality can be addressed later. The goal for a first draft is to get a rough draft out for early feedback.
• Include any specific comments or questions for the supervisor.
• Seek feedback from the supervisor (including in-text Comments, Tracked Changes/Suggestions, and verbal discussion).

2nd draft [ edit | edit source ]

• Turn the 1st draft into a 2nd draft by rewriting to address supervisor feedback.
• Often the second draft involves greater integration of concepts; it may also involve some re-organisation of the structure.
• Work on linking between sections as well as tying together the key themes through the general introduction and conclusion.
• Aim for a "Credit" standard.
• Seek supervisor feedback (including via in-text Comments, Tracked Changes/Suggestions, and discussion).

3rd draft [ edit | edit source ]

• Turn the 2nd draft into a 3rd draft by rewriting, addressing supervisor feedback.
• Aim for a "Distinction" standard.
• Seek peer/stakeholder/other feedback (e.g., much can be learnt from reading and commenting on each other's work).

4th draft [ edit | edit source ]

• Turn the 3rd draft into a 4th draft by rewriting, addressing peer/other feedback.
• Aim for a "High Distinction" standard.
• This draft (or a subsequent draft) might be best completed after leaving the 3rd draft for a while and completing the 1st draft of the research article.

Tables and figures [ edit | edit source ]

Tables and figures can be a powerful way to communicate theories or conceptual ideas (e.g., see Figure 3).

Marking criteria [ edit | edit source ]

Consider the draft against the marking criteria:

• Clear and appropriate title
• Abstract - fluent explanation and summary of the content and purpose
• Importance of topic area and LR is established with definitions of important constructs
• Overview of theoretical or conceptual framework and literature to be used
• Clear explanation of content and direction of LR
• Explanation of appropriate theoretical or conceptual framework
• Integration of theoretical or conceptual framework throughout review
• Appropriate range of current, major, original (not reviews) sources used
• Thorough and detailed descriptions and synthesis of all aspects about the the research literature
• Critical interpretation of the research and its implications
• Synthesis and links within the material that reaches original and thoughtful conclusions
• Integration of diverse viewpoints
• Clear and thoughtful summary of ideas/topics within the review
• Quality of written expression, spelling, punctuation, and grammar

File management [ edit | edit source ]

• Smart word-processing techniques from the outset will pay off down the track.
• 00 Proposal
• 10 Literature review
• 11 Research article
• 20 Appendices
• 30 Final version
• Literature review 1.docx or Literature review_2022_03_21
• Literature review 2.docx or Literature review_2022_04_04 etc.
• Make sure a regular, reliable back-up system is in place (e.g., use automated cloud-based backup storage or manually email your latest versions to peers and/or supervisor). Electronic data corruption, loss of files etc. is insufficient grounds for extension.

Word processing [ edit | edit source ]

• Using Heading 1, 2, 3 etc. styles that match APA style. This will facilitate consistent styling and allow auto-generation of Tables of Contents.
• Style-based captions for Tables and Figures can also be used.

Citation management [ edit | edit source ]

• Citations and reference lists can be managed manually or by using citation management software (such as EndNote, Zotero, RefWorks etc.).
• Regardless of approach, be organised and systematic from the outset in collecting, storing, citing, and referencing key sources.

Relationship to the research article [ edit | edit source ]

• The literature review provides a critical review of theory and research about a specific topic and makes recommendations about future directions.
• The research article identifies a gap in the literature and reports about an original study designed to address this gap.
• The literature review will be longer than the introduction to the research article.
• The literature review may be broader in scope than the introduction to the research article.
• The introduction to the research article should state specific research question(s) and/or hypotheses to guide the study.
• Avoid presenting duplicate sentences in the literature review and introduction to the research article (self-plagiarism).

See also [ edit | edit source ]

• Literature review

• Honours thesis in psychology

Navigation menu

Writing your Literature Review

[ Study Skills ] [ Writing Academically ] [ Dissertations ] [ Exams & Doing Research ] [ Plagiarism & Critical Thinking ] [ Reading & Note Taking ] [ Referencing & Scholarship ]

[ Assignment & Essay Writing ] [ Assignment Basics ] [ Writing Reflectively ]

The literature review must survey the existing research that is relevant to the question that is addressed by your research project. Your dissertation tutor may be able to give you some pointers but really it is down to you to go and find as much relevant information as possible.

It is not possible to give specific advice on writing a literature review simply because every literature review is different! However, some general guidance can be given:

For a 10,000 word piece of primary research the literature review is typically around 4,000 words in length. A piece of secondary research is usually in the form of an extended literature review.

How do you decide what is relevant? This can be tricky, but the main thing is to make decisions as you clarify the focus of your project.

It may be relevant to address:

• research that focuses on the same subject as your own;
• research that uses the same methodology as yours;
• research that does not focus on the same subject but on a related subject whose relevance you can state clearly;
• government guidance or professional frameworks that have some relationship to the subject of your study;
• definition of key terms in your study which help to clarify its purpose.

This is not an exhaustive list, but it may help you to proceed. A common problem is that no-one else has done research in your particular area. This is when it is particularly important to look into studies in related areas or with comparable methodologies.

Presentation

There is no one correct way to present a literature review (unless your dissertation tutor expresses a preference for one type of structure). The most important thing to remember is that the literature review must be structured clearly.

This usually means that you will need to think about how you intend to group the information you have found. It is often useful to include a mini-introduction that explains how the information will be structured.

Some literature reviews include sub-headings and some do not. If you want to use them check with your dissertation tutor.  Be aware that imprecise or overly  frequent sub-headings can reduce the clarity and readability of your work.

Criticality and Literature Reviews

To some extent a literature review is simply a well-organised account of the literature that you have discovered that is relevant to your study. However, it is usually appropriate to include some evaluation of this literature. This might involve:

• criticism of the methodology of other research which draws attention to its strengths and weaknesses, or similarities / differences when compared to your own study;
• commentary on the agreement or disagreement between the different sources that are contained within your literature review;
• discussion of underlying problems that are common to the different sources that you have found.

This is not an exhaustive list of the ways that you can demonstrate criticality in a literature review.

Remember that it is not normally good to anticipate your own findings in the literature review. You can refer back to the literature review in your findings section.

Conclusion in a Literature Review

It is usually good to include a brief conclusion to summarize the key points in your evaluation of the existing literature.

Useful Websites

This  excellent guide  from the Writing Centre has essentially been written for an American audience, but the advice is fairly generic. This  guide  is directed specifically at Literature Reviews in Sport’s Science.

Back to top

Research Paper Guide

How To Write A Literature Review

Last updated on: Feb 8, 2023

How to Write a Literature Review: Steps and Outline

By: Nathan D.

Reviewed By: Melisa C.

Published on: Jul 2, 2019

So you’re working on your research paper, thesis, or dissertation and you come across an unfamiliar term – “Literature Review.”

It sounds like a challenging concept; however, with the help of this guide, you will be able to understand how to write a literature review as well as its format.

Literature reviews are usually written in the field of humanities, sciences, and social sciences. They are written as a part of different lab reports and experiments in science. It is a part of  research paper writing  and every student must include it in his paper.

On this Page

What is a Literature Review

A literature review is a survey of the most relevant scholarly sources (journal articles, books, theses, etc.) that provide an insight into a particular topic. It gives a comprehensive look at the details about the topic, such as what has been said and by whom. Moreover, a literature review shows an overview of the key findings, central themes, revelations, developments, and different concepts regarding the research question.

A well-written literature review isn’t simply a listing of sources or a mere summary of different sources, instead it

• Examines, analyzes and evaluates the text
• Highlights different patterns and themes
• Explains the current state of the problem at hand.

How Does a Literature Review Differ From a Research Paper?

A research paper is a piece of academic writing based on the author’s original research on a particular issue or topic. It focuses on developing a new argument through different steps and elements – literature review is one of them. A literature review serves as a basis of gaining in-depth information about the topic at hand.

When writing a literature review, you need to present new ideas. The aim is to summarize and evaluate the existing work done by others.

It is also different from an annotated bibliography as it summarizes and synthesizes different sources including books, journals, and articles.

What is the Purpose of Literature Review?

A literature review aims to provide people with a guide about a particular topic – it presents the writer’s viewpoint about the topic and their position. It also comes in handy when people don’t have the time to carry out extensive research, going through the literature review can help understand the latest trends in the field, previous studies, advancements, etc.

It is essential that the researcher understands the existing work that has been done in his field of interest and then establishes his research question.

How to Write a Literature Review?

‘How to write a literature review for a research paper?’

‘How to write a scientific literature review?’

‘How to write a psychology literature review?’

Get all the answers in the coming sections.

Just as any other piece of writing, some steps and criteria must be followed to write a literature review. There isn’t a set word count that you must meet; the length depends upon the overall word count of the paper. Or you can ask your professor and follow their instructions.

Here are some important steps that can help you start a literature review.

1. Understand the Requirements

Before you begin writing your assignment, make sure that you clearly understand the requirements. Take your time reading the prompt and clarify different aspects, such as the number of sources that you need to include. 

What type of sources should you incorporate? Are you required to provide a brief summary of the sources or critique and evaluate them? Should the literature review have subheadings, etc?

2. Go Through Literature Review Examples

To get an idea of what literature reviews should look like, go through the ones written for the discipline that you are interested in. It will help you get an idea of how to present and organize your research.

3. Narrow your Focus

To write a literature review, you are going to get involved in exhaustive research. If you stick with a wider topic, it will be difficult for you to go through different books and articles. With a more focused topic, you can easily gather relevant information.

4. Select your Sources

There are thousands of different articles, journals, and other sources available on each topic – you can’t expect to go through each one of them. To filter out the sources that are most relevant and useful to your research question, go through their abstracts and decide if you want to use it. Ask yourself the following questions when choosing a source:

• What question is being addressed?
• What are the key points, models, methodologies?
• Are there some frameworks used?
• What is the result of the study?
• Strengths and weaknesses.
• Contribution towards the field.

5. Cite the Sources

When you select a source, it is a good practice to write them down and cite them as you go - this helps avoid plagiarism. You can use APA, MLA, or any other format according to your requirements.

6. Figure Out the Literature Review Structure

When it comes to writing a literature review, you can outline it using various ways such as:

7. Drafting

A literature review comprises three sections – introduction, body, and conclusion. In the introduction, highlight the purpose and the focal point of your research.

The body incorporates the following points:

• Brief description of the publication
• Highlights its main points
• Talks about the gaps in research
• Assesses and evaluates how it contributed towards the overall topic

Conclude the literature review by discussing their significance.

Simply follow these steps to come up with an interesting literature review for your research paper. If you need help writing the rest of the components, check out this detailed blog on  research paper outline .

Literature Review Example

LITERATURE REVIEW EXAMPLE

We hope that all of your queries were catered to in this blog, in case you are still confused about the writing process or need a professional essay writing service with your research, reach out to us. 5StarEssays is a specialized writing service that offers quality academic papers and writing assistance to students.

Get in touch with our customer support representative and place your  order  today!

Frequently Asked Questions

How long is a literature review.

Typically, a literature review is between 2000 and 3000 words. But, its length depends on the scope of the work and the number of studies and research you have studied for your paper.

How many sources should a literature review have?

While there are no hard and fast rules regarding the number of sources added in the literature. However, if it is a standalone project and you are writing a 10-page literature review then it should examine at least 30 sources.

How many pages should a literature review be?

For a thesis or dissertation, the literature review must be at least 20 pages long. But, it solely depends on the length and scope of the work.

How old should sources be in a literature review?

Roughly, the sources should be no more than 10 years old for humanities, literature, art, and history papers.

What sources are not appropriate for a literature review?

Sources that you should not include in a literature review are magazines, non-published works, websites, and newspapers.

How long does it take to write a literature review?

It takes roughly 2 to 6 months to write a literature review. However, it depends on how many hours you dedicate to it each day and the length of the review.

Masters Essay, College Admission Essay

Nathan completed his Ph.D. in journalism and has been writing articles for well-respected publications for many years now. His work is carefully researched and insightful, showing a true passion for the written word. Nathan's clients appreciate his expertise, deep understanding of the process, and ability to communicate difficult concepts clearly.

Was This Blog Helpful?

Keep reading.

• How to Write a Research Paper - Writing Guide & Examples

• 20+ Thesis Statement Examples for Research Papers

• Learn How to Write an Abstract - Steps & Examples

• How to Start a Research Paper - 9 Simple Steps

• Psychology Research Topics - 170+ Ideas for Your Paper

• How to Write a Hypothesis - A Step-by-Step Guide

• Writing a Research Proposal - Outline, Format, and Examples

• Good Research Paper Topics & Ideas for Students

• Good History Research Paper Topics For Your Help

• How to Cite a Research Paper with the Help of Examples

• How to Write a Research Methodology in 10 Simple Steps

• Research Paper Outline - Basic Format & Sample

• Research Paper Example: Samples to Write a Research Paper

• Great Sociology Research Topics & Ideas (2024)

People Also Read

• quantitative research
• personal essay
• book review
• personal statement examples
• write character analysis

Burdened With Assignments?

Advertisement

• Homework Services: Essay Topics Generator

© 2024 - All rights reserved

• What Is a PhD Literature Review?
• Doing a PhD

A literature review is a critical analysis of published academic literature, mainly peer-reviewed papers and books, on a specific topic. This isn’t just a list of published studies but is a document summarising and critically appraising the main work by researchers in the field, the key findings, limitations and gaps identified in the knowledge.

• The aim of a literature review is to critically assess the literature in your chosen field of research and be able to present an overview of the current knowledge gained from previous work.
• By the conclusion of your literature review, you as a researcher should have identified the gaps in knowledge in your field; i.e. the unanswered research questions which your PhD project will help to answer.
• Quality not quantity is the approach to use when writing a literature review for a PhD but as a general rule of thumb, most are between 6,000 and 12,000 words.

What Is the Purpose of a Literature Review?

First, to be clear on what a PhD literature review is NOT: it is not a ‘paper by paper’ summary of what others have done in your field. All you’re doing here is listing out all the papers and book chapters you’ve found with some text joining things together. This is a common mistake made by PhD students early on in their research project. This is a sign of poor academic writing and if it’s not picked up by your supervisor, it’ll definitely be by your examiners.

The biggest issue your examiners will have here is that you won’t have demonstrated an application of critical thinking when examining existing knowledge from previous research. This is an important part of the research process as a PhD student. It’s needed to show where the gaps in knowledge were, and how then you were able to identify the novelty of each research question and subsequent work.

The five main outcomes from carrying out a good literature review should be:

• An understanding of what has been published in your subject area of research,
• An appreciation of the leading research groups and authors in your field and their key contributions to the research topic,
• Knowledge of the key theories in your field,
• Knowledge of the main research areas within your field of interest,
• A clear understanding of the research gap in knowledge that will help to motivate your PhD research questions .

When assessing the academic papers or books that you’ve come across, you must think about the strengths and weaknesses of them; what was novel about their work and what were the limitations? Are different sources of relevant literature coming to similar conclusions and complementing each other, or are you seeing different outcomes on the same topic by different researchers?

When Should I Write My Literature Review?

In the structure of your PhD thesis , your literature review is effectively your first main chapter. It’s at the start of your thesis and should, therefore, be a task you perform at the start of your research. After all, you need to have reviewed the literature to work out how your research can contribute novel findings to your area of research. Sometimes, however, in particular when you apply for a PhD project with a pre-defined research title and research questions, your supervisor may already know where the gaps in knowledge are.

You may be tempted to skip the literature review and dive straight into tackling the set questions (then completing the review at the end before thesis submission) but we strongly advise against this. Whilst your supervisor will be very familiar with the area, you as a doctoral student will not be and so it is essential that you gain this understanding before getting into the research.

How Long Should the Literature Review Be?

As your literature review will be one of your main thesis chapters, it needs to be a substantial body of work. It’s not a good strategy to have a thesis writing process here based on a specific word count, but know that most reviews are typically between 6,000 and 12,000 words. The length will depend on how much relevant material has previously been published in your field.

A point to remember though is that the review needs to be easy to read and avoid being filled with unnecessary information; in your search of selected literature, consider filtering out publications that don’t appear to add anything novel to the discussion – this might be useful in fields with hundreds of papers.

How Do I Write the Literature Review?

Before you start writing your literature review, you need to be clear on the topic you are researching.

1. Evaluating and Selecting the Publications

After completing your literature search and downloading all the papers you find, you may find that you have a lot of papers to read through ! You may find that you have so many papers that it’s unreasonable to read through all of them in their entirety, so you need to find a way to understand what they’re about and decide if they’re important quickly.

A good starting point is to read the abstract of the paper to gauge if it is useful and, as you do so, consider the following questions in your mind:

• What was the overarching aim of the paper?
• What was the methodology used by the authors?
• Was this an experimental study or was this more theoretical in its approach?
• What were the results and what did the authors conclude in their paper?
• How does the data presented in this paper relate to other publications within this field?
• Does it add new knowledge, does it raise more questions or does it confirm what is already known in your field? What is the key concept that the study described?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of this study, and in particular, what are the limitations?

2. Identifying Themes

To put together the structure of your literature review you need to identify the common themes that emerge from the collective papers and books that you have read. Key things to think about are:

• Are there common methodologies different authors have used or have these changed over time?
• Do the research questions change over time or are the key question’s still unanswered?
• Is there general agreement between different research groups in the main results and outcomes, or do different authors provide differing points of view and different conclusions?
• What are the key papers in your field that have had the biggest impact on the research?
• Have different publications identified similar weaknesses or limitations or gaps in the knowledge that still need to be addressed?

Structuring and Writing Your Literature Review

There are several ways in which you can structure a literature review and this may depend on if, for example, your project is a science or non-science based PhD.

One approach may be to tell a story about how your research area has developed over time. You need to be careful here that you don’t just describe the different papers published in chronological order but that you discuss how different studies have motivated subsequent studies, how the knowledge has developed over time in your field, concluding with what is currently known, and what is currently not understood.

Alternatively, you may find from reading your papers that common themes emerge and it may be easier to develop your review around these, i.e. a thematic review. For example, if you are writing up about bridge design, you may structure the review around the themes of regulation, analysis, and sustainability.

As another approach, you might want to talk about the different research methodologies that have been used. You could then compare and contrast the results and ultimate conclusions that have been drawn from each.

As with all your chapters in your thesis, your literature review will be broken up into three key headings, with the basic structure being the introduction, the main body and conclusion. Within the main body, you will use several subheadings to separate out the topics depending on if you’re structuring it by the time period, the methods used or the common themes that have emerged.

The important thing to think about as you write your main body of text is to summarise the key takeaway messages from each research paper and how they come together to give one or more conclusions. Don’t just stop at summarising the papers though, instead continue on to give your analysis and your opinion on how these previous publications fit into the wider research field and where they have an impact. Emphasise the strengths of the studies you have evaluated also be clear on the limitations of previous work how these may have influenced the results and conclusions of the studies.

In your concluding paragraphs focus your discussion on how your critical evaluation of literature has helped you identify unanswered research questions and how you plan to address these in your PhD project. State the research problem you’re going to address and end with the overarching aim and key objectives of your work .

When writing at a graduate level, you have to take a critical approach when reading existing literature in your field to determine if and how it added value to existing knowledge. You may find that a large number of the papers on your reference list have the right academic context but are essentially saying the same thing. As a graduate student, you’ll need to take a methodological approach to work through this existing research to identify what is relevant literature and what is not.

You then need to go one step further to interpret and articulate the current state of what is known, based on existing theories, and where the research gaps are. It is these gaps in the literature that you will address in your own research project.

• Decide on a research area and an associated research question.
• Decide on the extent of your scope and start looking for literature.
• Review and evaluate the literature.
• Plan an outline for your literature review and start writing it.

Browse PhDs Now

Join thousands of students.

Join thousands of other students and stay up to date with the latest PhD programmes, funding opportunities and advice.

Reference to Published Sources of Information

Present Perfect Tense is often used when the focus of the work is on several authors.

Present Perfect Tense may also be used when you want to refer to how much or how little research has been carried out on a particular topic.

Present Tense is often used to refer to generally accepted scientific facts.

Modal Verbs may be used if you wish to introduce a degree of tentativeness into your comments about the work of an author. In this situation the reporting verb will be in the passive voice and the addition of a modal verb will indicate the degree of confidence attributed to the information.

Loading metrics

Open Access

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliations Centre for Functional and Evolutionary Ecology (CEFE), CNRS, Montpellier, France, Centre for Biodiversity Synthesis and Analysis (CESAB), FRB, Aix-en-Provence, France

• Marco Pautasso

Published: July 18, 2013

• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149
• Reader Comments

Citation: Pautasso M (2013) Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review. PLoS Comput Biol 9(7): e1003149. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149

Editor: Philip E. Bourne, University of California San Diego, United States of America

Copyright: © 2013 Marco Pautasso. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: This work was funded by the French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB) through its Centre for Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity data (CESAB), as part of the NETSEED research project. The funders had no role in the preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The author has declared that no competing interests exist.

Literature reviews are in great demand in most scientific fields. Their need stems from the ever-increasing output of scientific publications [1] . For example, compared to 1991, in 2008 three, eight, and forty times more papers were indexed in Web of Science on malaria, obesity, and biodiversity, respectively [2] . Given such mountains of papers, scientists cannot be expected to examine in detail every single new paper relevant to their interests [3] . Thus, it is both advantageous and necessary to rely on regular summaries of the recent literature. Although recognition for scientists mainly comes from primary research, timely literature reviews can lead to new synthetic insights and are often widely read [4] . For such summaries to be useful, however, they need to be compiled in a professional way [5] .

When starting from scratch, reviewing the literature can require a titanic amount of work. That is why researchers who have spent their career working on a certain research issue are in a perfect position to review that literature. Some graduate schools are now offering courses in reviewing the literature, given that most research students start their project by producing an overview of what has already been done on their research issue [6] . However, it is likely that most scientists have not thought in detail about how to approach and carry out a literature review.

Reviewing the literature requires the ability to juggle multiple tasks, from finding and evaluating relevant material to synthesising information from various sources, from critical thinking to paraphrasing, evaluating, and citation skills [7] . In this contribution, I share ten simple rules I learned working on about 25 literature reviews as a PhD and postdoctoral student. Ideas and insights also come from discussions with coauthors and colleagues, as well as feedback from reviewers and editors.

Rule 1: Define a Topic and Audience

How to choose which topic to review? There are so many issues in contemporary science that you could spend a lifetime of attending conferences and reading the literature just pondering what to review. On the one hand, if you take several years to choose, several other people may have had the same idea in the meantime. On the other hand, only a well-considered topic is likely to lead to a brilliant literature review [8] . The topic must at least be:

• interesting to you (ideally, you should have come across a series of recent papers related to your line of work that call for a critical summary),
• an important aspect of the field (so that many readers will be interested in the review and there will be enough material to write it), and
• a well-defined issue (otherwise you could potentially include thousands of publications, which would make the review unhelpful).

Ideas for potential reviews may come from papers providing lists of key research questions to be answered [9] , but also from serendipitous moments during desultory reading and discussions. In addition to choosing your topic, you should also select a target audience. In many cases, the topic (e.g., web services in computational biology) will automatically define an audience (e.g., computational biologists), but that same topic may also be of interest to neighbouring fields (e.g., computer science, biology, etc.).

Rule 2: Search and Re-search the Literature

After having chosen your topic and audience, start by checking the literature and downloading relevant papers. Five pieces of advice here:

• keep track of the search items you use (so that your search can be replicated [10] ),
• keep a list of papers whose pdfs you cannot access immediately (so as to retrieve them later with alternative strategies),
• use a paper management system (e.g., Mendeley, Papers, Qiqqa, Sente),
• define early in the process some criteria for exclusion of irrelevant papers (these criteria can then be described in the review to help define its scope), and
• do not just look for research papers in the area you wish to review, but also seek previous reviews.

The chances are high that someone will already have published a literature review ( Figure 1 ), if not exactly on the issue you are planning to tackle, at least on a related topic. If there are already a few or several reviews of the literature on your issue, my advice is not to give up, but to carry on with your own literature review,

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

The bottom-right situation (many literature reviews but few research papers) is not just a theoretical situation; it applies, for example, to the study of the impacts of climate change on plant diseases, where there appear to be more literature reviews than research studies [33] .

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149.g001

• discussing in your review the approaches, limitations, and conclusions of past reviews,
• trying to find a new angle that has not been covered adequately in the previous reviews, and
• incorporating new material that has inevitably accumulated since their appearance.

When searching the literature for pertinent papers and reviews, the usual rules apply:

• be thorough,
• use different keywords and database sources (e.g., DBLP, Google Scholar, ISI Proceedings, JSTOR Search, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science), and
• look at who has cited past relevant papers and book chapters.

Rule 3: Take Notes While Reading

If you read the papers first, and only afterwards start writing the review, you will need a very good memory to remember who wrote what, and what your impressions and associations were while reading each single paper. My advice is, while reading, to start writing down interesting pieces of information, insights about how to organize the review, and thoughts on what to write. This way, by the time you have read the literature you selected, you will already have a rough draft of the review.

Of course, this draft will still need much rewriting, restructuring, and rethinking to obtain a text with a coherent argument [11] , but you will have avoided the danger posed by staring at a blank document. Be careful when taking notes to use quotation marks if you are provisionally copying verbatim from the literature. It is advisable then to reformulate such quotes with your own words in the final draft. It is important to be careful in noting the references already at this stage, so as to avoid misattributions. Using referencing software from the very beginning of your endeavour will save you time.

Rule 4: Choose the Type of Review You Wish to Write

After having taken notes while reading the literature, you will have a rough idea of the amount of material available for the review. This is probably a good time to decide whether to go for a mini- or a full review. Some journals are now favouring the publication of rather short reviews focusing on the last few years, with a limit on the number of words and citations. A mini-review is not necessarily a minor review: it may well attract more attention from busy readers, although it will inevitably simplify some issues and leave out some relevant material due to space limitations. A full review will have the advantage of more freedom to cover in detail the complexities of a particular scientific development, but may then be left in the pile of the very important papers “to be read” by readers with little time to spare for major monographs.

There is probably a continuum between mini- and full reviews. The same point applies to the dichotomy of descriptive vs. integrative reviews. While descriptive reviews focus on the methodology, findings, and interpretation of each reviewed study, integrative reviews attempt to find common ideas and concepts from the reviewed material [12] . A similar distinction exists between narrative and systematic reviews: while narrative reviews are qualitative, systematic reviews attempt to test a hypothesis based on the published evidence, which is gathered using a predefined protocol to reduce bias [13] , [14] . When systematic reviews analyse quantitative results in a quantitative way, they become meta-analyses. The choice between different review types will have to be made on a case-by-case basis, depending not just on the nature of the material found and the preferences of the target journal(s), but also on the time available to write the review and the number of coauthors [15] .

Rule 5: Keep the Review Focused, but Make It of Broad Interest

Whether your plan is to write a mini- or a full review, it is good advice to keep it focused 16 , 17 . Including material just for the sake of it can easily lead to reviews that are trying to do too many things at once. The need to keep a review focused can be problematic for interdisciplinary reviews, where the aim is to bridge the gap between fields [18] . If you are writing a review on, for example, how epidemiological approaches are used in modelling the spread of ideas, you may be inclined to include material from both parent fields, epidemiology and the study of cultural diffusion. This may be necessary to some extent, but in this case a focused review would only deal in detail with those studies at the interface between epidemiology and the spread of ideas.

While focus is an important feature of a successful review, this requirement has to be balanced with the need to make the review relevant to a broad audience. This square may be circled by discussing the wider implications of the reviewed topic for other disciplines.

Rule 6: Be Critical and Consistent

Reviewing the literature is not stamp collecting. A good review does not just summarize the literature, but discusses it critically, identifies methodological problems, and points out research gaps [19] . After having read a review of the literature, a reader should have a rough idea of:

• the major achievements in the reviewed field,
• the main areas of debate, and
• the outstanding research questions.

It is challenging to achieve a successful review on all these fronts. A solution can be to involve a set of complementary coauthors: some people are excellent at mapping what has been achieved, some others are very good at identifying dark clouds on the horizon, and some have instead a knack at predicting where solutions are going to come from. If your journal club has exactly this sort of team, then you should definitely write a review of the literature! In addition to critical thinking, a literature review needs consistency, for example in the choice of passive vs. active voice and present vs. past tense.

Rule 7: Find a Logical Structure

Like a well-baked cake, a good review has a number of telling features: it is worth the reader's time, timely, systematic, well written, focused, and critical. It also needs a good structure. With reviews, the usual subdivision of research papers into introduction, methods, results, and discussion does not work or is rarely used. However, a general introduction of the context and, toward the end, a recapitulation of the main points covered and take-home messages make sense also in the case of reviews. For systematic reviews, there is a trend towards including information about how the literature was searched (database, keywords, time limits) [20] .

How can you organize the flow of the main body of the review so that the reader will be drawn into and guided through it? It is generally helpful to draw a conceptual scheme of the review, e.g., with mind-mapping techniques. Such diagrams can help recognize a logical way to order and link the various sections of a review [21] . This is the case not just at the writing stage, but also for readers if the diagram is included in the review as a figure. A careful selection of diagrams and figures relevant to the reviewed topic can be very helpful to structure the text too [22] .

Rule 8: Make Use of Feedback

Reviews of the literature are normally peer-reviewed in the same way as research papers, and rightly so [23] . As a rule, incorporating feedback from reviewers greatly helps improve a review draft. Having read the review with a fresh mind, reviewers may spot inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and ambiguities that had not been noticed by the writers due to rereading the typescript too many times. It is however advisable to reread the draft one more time before submission, as a last-minute correction of typos, leaps, and muddled sentences may enable the reviewers to focus on providing advice on the content rather than the form.

Feedback is vital to writing a good review, and should be sought from a variety of colleagues, so as to obtain a diversity of views on the draft. This may lead in some cases to conflicting views on the merits of the paper, and on how to improve it, but such a situation is better than the absence of feedback. A diversity of feedback perspectives on a literature review can help identify where the consensus view stands in the landscape of the current scientific understanding of an issue [24] .

Rule 9: Include Your Own Relevant Research, but Be Objective

In many cases, reviewers of the literature will have published studies relevant to the review they are writing. This could create a conflict of interest: how can reviewers report objectively on their own work [25] ? Some scientists may be overly enthusiastic about what they have published, and thus risk giving too much importance to their own findings in the review. However, bias could also occur in the other direction: some scientists may be unduly dismissive of their own achievements, so that they will tend to downplay their contribution (if any) to a field when reviewing it.

In general, a review of the literature should neither be a public relations brochure nor an exercise in competitive self-denial. If a reviewer is up to the job of producing a well-organized and methodical review, which flows well and provides a service to the readership, then it should be possible to be objective in reviewing one's own relevant findings. In reviews written by multiple authors, this may be achieved by assigning the review of the results of a coauthor to different coauthors.

Rule 10: Be Up-to-Date, but Do Not Forget Older Studies

Given the progressive acceleration in the publication of scientific papers, today's reviews of the literature need awareness not just of the overall direction and achievements of a field of inquiry, but also of the latest studies, so as not to become out-of-date before they have been published. Ideally, a literature review should not identify as a major research gap an issue that has just been addressed in a series of papers in press (the same applies, of course, to older, overlooked studies (“sleeping beauties” [26] )). This implies that literature reviewers would do well to keep an eye on electronic lists of papers in press, given that it can take months before these appear in scientific databases. Some reviews declare that they have scanned the literature up to a certain point in time, but given that peer review can be a rather lengthy process, a full search for newly appeared literature at the revision stage may be worthwhile. Assessing the contribution of papers that have just appeared is particularly challenging, because there is little perspective with which to gauge their significance and impact on further research and society.

Inevitably, new papers on the reviewed topic (including independently written literature reviews) will appear from all quarters after the review has been published, so that there may soon be the need for an updated review. But this is the nature of science [27] – [32] . I wish everybody good luck with writing a review of the literature.

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to M. Barbosa, K. Dehnen-Schmutz, T. Döring, D. Fontaneto, M. Garbelotto, O. Holdenrieder, M. Jeger, D. Lonsdale, A. MacLeod, P. Mills, M. Moslonka-Lefebvre, G. Stancanelli, P. Weisberg, and X. Xu for insights and discussions, and to P. Bourne, T. Matoni, and D. Smith for helpful comments on a previous draft.

• 1. Rapple C (2011) The role of the critical review article in alleviating information overload. Annual Reviews White Paper. Available: http://www.annualreviews.org/userimages/ContentEditor/1300384004941/Annual_Reviews_WhitePaper_Web_2011.pdf . Accessed May 2013.
• View Article
• Google Scholar
• 7. Budgen D, Brereton P (2006) Performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Proc 28th Int Conf Software Engineering, ACM New York, NY, USA, pp. 1051–1052. doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/1134285.1134500 .
• 16. Eco U (1977) Come si fa una tesi di laurea. Milan: Bompiani.
• 17. Hart C (1998) Doing a literature review: releasing the social science research imagination. London: SAGE.
• 21. Ridley D (2008) The literature review: a step-by-step guide for students. London: SAGE.

Literature reviews

• Starting your literature review
• Introduction

Structuring your reading

When to stop reading, how to organise a literature review, writing your literature review.

• Developing your literature review
• Writing systematic reviews

Useful links for literature reviews

• Study Advice Helping students to achieve study success with guides, video tutorials, seminars and one-to-one advice sessions.

• Doing your literature review (video) Watch this brief video tutorial for more on the topic.
• Doing your literature review (transcript) Read along while watching the video tutorial.
• Literature searching guide A guide to finding articles, books and other materials on your subject
• Doing your literature search video - University of Reading Brief video on literature searching from our Academic Liaison Librarians.
• Royal Literary Fund: Writing a Literature Review A guide to writing literature reviews from the Royal Literary Fund
• What it means to be a critical student A brief and very useful video tutorial from the University of Leicester.
• Reading and notemaking LibGuide Expert guidance on managing your reading and making effective notes.
• Dissertations and major projects LibGuide Expert guidance on planning, researching and writing dissertations and major projects.

If you have thought about the areas you need to research and have conducted some searches for literature, you should be ready to set down some draft topic headings to structure your literature review.

Select one of your headings and choose a few key texts to read first - three is ideal to start with. Remember that you may eventually be writing about the same text under different headings, so bear that in mind when you are reading and making notes.

When you have finished reading your chosen texts, write a draft section summarising and commenting on what you have read, taking special care to show how it is relevant to your research. Then look to see what you need to discuss further, and do more reading to enable you to plug the gaps.

Try to set limits on how long you will spend reading. Then plan backwards from your deadline and decide when you need to move on to other parts of your investigation e.g. gathering the data.

You need to show you have read the major and important texts in your topic, and that you have also explored the most up-to-date research. If you have demonstrated both of these, you are on the right lines.

If you keep coming across very similar viewpoints and your reading is no longer providing new information, this is a sign you have reached saturation point and should probably stop.

Be guided by your research questions. When reading, ask yourself, "How does this relate to my investigation?" If you are going off into unrelated areas, stop reading and refocus on your topic.

Another thing you can do is to group what you have read into different topics or themes . These can provide useful headings when you come to write up your literature review. Use different coloured highlighters to identify which topic or heading each article fits into.

Be selective - you don't have to include everything you have read in your literature review. Only include research which is relevant and which helps you understand more about your own investigation. What you leave out won't be wasted as it helped you refine your understanding of the wider issues and identify what was relevant to your own investigation.

You don't have to refer to everything in the same depth in your literature review. You are usually expected to prioritise recent research. Some scientific research that was crucial in the past is now out of date. For instance, there may be a few older studies that were important in starting research in the field, but their methods have been surpassed by more accurate methods. You only need to demonstrate your awareness of these older, dated studies in a few sentences, then move on to discussing in greater depth the up-to-date methods and why they are more accurate.

Like an essay, a literature review has an introduction, main body, and conclusion.

Introduction : This explains the broad context of your research area and the main topics you are investigating. It briefly highlights the relevant issues or debates that have characterised your field of research.

It should also include some signposting for the reader, explaining the organisation / sequence of topics covered, and the scope of your survey.

Main body : An analysis of the literature according to a number of themes or topics that overlap with your research. It may have headings.

You can write your literature review one section at a time, but make sure you read through them all to check they link together and tell a coherent "story".

This should show how your research builds on what has been done before. Based on previous research, you provide justifications for what you are doing, why you are doing it, and how you are going to do it.

Conclusion : This should summarise the current state of the research in your field as analysed in the main body. It should identify any gaps or problems with the existing research, and explain how your investigation is going to address these gaps or build on the existing research.

• The structure of a literature review (Royal Literary Fund) Guidance on structuring a literature review.
• << Previous: Starting your literature review
• Next: Developing your literature review >>
• Last Updated: Jan 29, 2024 11:27 AM
• URL: https://libguides.reading.ac.uk/literaturereview

Reviews are normally by invitation only. Unsolicited articles are rarely considered, but if you wish to enquire further about the suitability of your article, you can email the Editorial office of BMC Medicine at [email protected] .

Reviews are summaries of insights or advances in specific research areas within the scope of BMC Medicine . Key aims of BMC Medicine reviews are to provide timely, systematic and substantial coverage of a mature topic, to evaluate progress in specified areas, and/or to provide critical assessments of emerging technologies.

Reviews are usually commissioned from recognized experts in a particular field, and we ask authors to provide a balanced overview of the field and not to focus on their own work or that of their close colleagues.

Reviews should be approximately 3000 words and the abstract should not exceed 350 words and should be structured with a background, main body and short conclusion.

Preparing your manuscript

The title page should:

• "A versus B in the treatment of C: a randomized controlled trial", "X is a risk factor for Y: a case control study", "What is the impact of factor X on subject Y: A systematic review"
• or for non-clinical or non-research studies: a description of what the article reports
• if a collaboration group should be listed as an author, please list the Group name as an author. If you would like the names of the individual members of the Group to be searchable through their individual PubMed records, please include this information in the “Acknowledgements” section in accordance with the instructions below
• Large Language Models (LLMs), such as  ChatGPT , do not currently satisfy our  authorship criteria . Notably an attribution of authorship carries with it accountability for the work, which cannot be effectively applied to LLMs. Use of an LLM should be properly documented in the Methods section (and if a Methods section is not available, in a suitable alternative part) of the manuscript
• indicate the corresponding author

The Abstract should not exceed 350 words and should be structured with a background, main body of the abstract and short conclusion. Please minimize the use of abbreviations and do not cite references in the abstract.

Three to ten keywords representing the main content of the article.

The Background section should explain the background to the article, its aims, a summary of a search of the existing literature and the issue under discussion.

This should contain the body of the article, and may also be broken into subsections with short, informative headings.

Conclusions

This should state clearly the main conclusions and include an explanation of their relevance or importance to the field.

List of abbreviations

If abbreviations are used in the text they should be defined in the text at first use, and a list of abbreviations should be provided.

Declarations

All manuscripts must contain the following sections under the heading 'Declarations':

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Consent for publication, availability of data and materials, competing interests, authors' contributions, acknowledgements.

• Authors' information (optional)

Please see below for details on the information to be included in these sections.

If any of the sections are not relevant to your manuscript, please include the heading and write 'Not applicable' for that section. 

Manuscripts reporting studies involving human participants, human data or human tissue must:

• include a statement on ethics approval and consent (even where the need for approval was waived)
• include the name of the ethics committee that approved the study and the committee’s reference number if appropriate

Studies involving animals must include a statement on ethics approval and for experimental studies involving client-owned animals, authors must also include a statement on informed consent from the client or owner.

See our editorial policies for more information.

If your manuscript does not report on or involve the use of any animal or human data or tissue, please state “Not applicable” in this section.

If your manuscript contains any individual person’s data in any form (including any individual details, images or videos), consent for publication must be obtained from that person, or in the case of children, their parent or legal guardian. All presentations of case reports must have consent for publication.

You can use your institutional consent form or our consent form if you prefer. You should not send the form to us on submission, but we may request to see a copy at any stage (including after publication).

See our editorial policies for more information on consent for publication.

If your manuscript does not contain data from any individual person, please state “Not applicable” in this section.

All manuscripts must include an ‘Availability of data and materials’ statement. Data availability statements should include information on where data supporting the results reported in the article can be found including, where applicable, hyperlinks to publicly archived datasets analysed or generated during the study. By data we mean the minimal dataset that would be necessary to interpret, replicate and build upon the findings reported in the article. We recognise it is not always possible to share research data publicly, for instance when individual privacy could be compromised, and in such instances data availability should still be stated in the manuscript along with any conditions for access.

Authors are also encouraged to preserve search strings on searchRxiv https://searchrxiv.org/ , an archive to support researchers to report, store and share their searches consistently and to enable them to review and re-use existing searches. searchRxiv enables researchers to obtain a digital object identifier (DOI) for their search, allowing it to be cited. 

Data availability statements can take one of the following forms (or a combination of more than one if required for multiple datasets):

• The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are available in the [NAME] repository, [PERSISTENT WEB LINK TO DATASETS]
• The datasets used and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
• All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files].
• The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available due [REASON WHY DATA ARE NOT PUBLIC] but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
• Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
• The data that support the findings of this study are available from [third party name] but restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under license for the current study, and so are not publicly available. Data are however available from the authors upon reasonable request and with permission of [third party name].
• Not applicable. If your manuscript does not contain any data, please state 'Not applicable' in this section.

More examples of template data availability statements, which include examples of openly available and restricted access datasets, are available here .

BioMed Central strongly encourages the citation of any publicly available data on which the conclusions of the paper rely in the manuscript. Data citations should include a persistent identifier (such as a DOI) and should ideally be included in the reference list. Citations of datasets, when they appear in the reference list, should include the minimum information recommended by DataCite and follow journal style. Dataset identifiers including DOIs should be expressed as full URLs. For example:

Hao Z, AghaKouchak A, Nakhjiri N, Farahmand A. Global integrated drought monitoring and prediction system (GIDMaPS) data sets. figshare. 2014. http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.853801

With the corresponding text in the Availability of data and materials statement:

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available in the [NAME] repository, [PERSISTENT WEB LINK TO DATASETS]. [Reference number]  

If you wish to co-submit a data note describing your data to be published in BMC Research Notes , you can do so by visiting our submission portal . Data notes support open data and help authors to comply with funder policies on data sharing. Co-published data notes will be linked to the research article the data support ( example ).

All financial and non-financial competing interests must be declared in this section.

See our editorial policies for a full explanation of competing interests. If you are unsure whether you or any of your co-authors have a competing interest please contact the editorial office.

Please use the authors initials to refer to each authors' competing interests in this section.

If you do not have any competing interests, please state "The authors declare that they have no competing interests" in this section.

All sources of funding for the research reported should be declared. If the funder has a specific role in the conceptualization, design, data collection, analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript, this should be declared.

The individual contributions of authors to the manuscript should be specified in this section. Guidance and criteria for authorship can be found in our editorial policies .

Please use initials to refer to each author's contribution in this section, for example: "FC analyzed and interpreted the patient data regarding the hematological disease and the transplant. RH performed the histological examination of the kidney, and was a major contributor in writing the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript."

Please acknowledge anyone who contributed towards the article who does not meet the criteria for authorship including anyone who provided professional writing services or materials.

Authors should obtain permission to acknowledge from all those mentioned in the Acknowledgements section.

See our editorial policies for a full explanation of acknowledgements and authorship criteria.

If you do not have anyone to acknowledge, please write "Not applicable" in this section.

Group authorship (for manuscripts involving a collaboration group): if you would like the names of the individual members of a collaboration Group to be searchable through their individual PubMed records, please ensure that the title of the collaboration Group is included on the title page and in the submission system and also include collaborating author names as the last paragraph of the “Acknowledgements” section. Please add authors in the format First Name, Middle initial(s) (optional), Last Name. You can add institution or country information for each author if you wish, but this should be consistent across all authors.

Please note that individual names may not be present in the PubMed record at the time a published article is initially included in PubMed as it takes PubMed additional time to code this information.

Authors' information

This section is optional.

You may choose to use this section to include any relevant information about the author(s) that may aid the reader's interpretation of the article, and understand the standpoint of the author(s). This may include details about the authors' qualifications, current positions they hold at institutions or societies, or any other relevant background information. Please refer to authors using their initials. Note this section should not be used to describe any competing interests.

Footnotes can be used to give additional information, which may include the citation of a reference included in the reference list. They should not consist solely of a reference citation, and they should never include the bibliographic details of a reference. They should also not contain any figures or tables.

Footnotes to the text are numbered consecutively; those to tables should be indicated by superscript lower-case letters (or asterisks for significance values and other statistical data). Footnotes to the title or the authors of the article are not given reference symbols.

Always use footnotes instead of endnotes.

Examples of the Vancouver reference style are shown below.

See our editorial policies for author guidance on good citation practice

Web links and URLs: All web links and URLs, including links to the authors' own websites, should be given a reference number and included in the reference list rather than within the text of the manuscript. They should be provided in full, including both the title of the site and the URL, as well as the date the site was accessed, in the following format: The Mouse Tumor Biology Database. http://tumor.informatics.jax.org/mtbwi/index.do . Accessed 20 May 2013. If an author or group of authors can clearly be associated with a web link, such as for weblogs, then they should be included in the reference.

Example reference style:

Article within a journal

Smith JJ. The world of science. Am J Sci. 1999;36:234-5.

Article within a journal (no page numbers)

Rohrmann S, Overvad K, Bueno-de-Mesquita HB, Jakobsen MU, Egeberg R, Tjønneland A, et al. Meat consumption and mortality - results from the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. BMC Medicine. 2013;11:63.

Article within a journal by DOI

Slifka MK, Whitton JL. Clinical implications of dysregulated cytokine production. Dig J Mol Med. 2000; doi:10.1007/s801090000086.

Article within a journal supplement

Frumin AM, Nussbaum J, Esposito M. Functional asplenia: demonstration of splenic activity by bone marrow scan. Blood 1979;59 Suppl 1:26-32.

Book chapter, or an article within a book

Wyllie AH, Kerr JFR, Currie AR. Cell death: the significance of apoptosis. In: Bourne GH, Danielli JF, Jeon KW, editors. International review of cytology. London: Academic; 1980. p. 251-306.

OnlineFirst chapter in a series (without a volume designation but with a DOI)

Saito Y, Hyuga H. Rate equation approaches to amplification of enantiomeric excess and chiral symmetry breaking. Top Curr Chem. 2007. doi:10.1007/128_2006_108.

Complete book, authored

Blenkinsopp A, Paxton P. Symptoms in the pharmacy: a guide to the management of common illness. 3rd ed. Oxford: Blackwell Science; 1998.

Online document

Doe J. Title of subordinate document. In: The dictionary of substances and their effects. Royal Society of Chemistry. 1999. http://www.rsc.org/dose/title of subordinate document. Accessed 15 Jan 1999.

Online database

Healthwise Knowledgebase. US Pharmacopeia, Rockville. 1998. http://www.healthwise.org. Accessed 21 Sept 1998.

Supplementary material/private homepage

Doe J. Title of supplementary material. 2000. http://www.privatehomepage.com. Accessed 22 Feb 2000.

University site

Doe, J: Title of preprint. http://www.uni-heidelberg.de/mydata.html (1999). Accessed 25 Dec 1999.

Doe, J: Trivial HTTP, RFC2169. ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2169.txt (1999). Accessed 12 Nov 1999.

Organization site

ISSN International Centre: The ISSN register. http://www.issn.org (2006). Accessed 20 Feb 2007.

Dataset with persistent identifier

Zheng L-Y, Guo X-S, He B, Sun L-J, Peng Y, Dong S-S, et al. Genome data from sweet and grain sorghum (Sorghum bicolor). GigaScience Database. 2011. http://dx.doi.org/10.5524/100012 .

Figures, tables and additional files

See  General formatting guidelines  for information on how to format figures, tables and additional files.

Submit manuscript

• Editorial Team
• Editorial Board
• Call for papers
• Editor’s choice
• Sign up for article alerts and news from this journal
• Manuscript editing services

Annual Journal Metrics

2022 Citation Impact 9.3 - 2-year Impact Factor 10.4 - 5-year Impact Factor 3.011 - SNIP (Source Normalized Impact per Paper) 3.447 - SJR (SCImago Journal Rank)

2023 Speed 6 days submission to first editorial decision for all manuscripts (Median) 145 days submission to accept (Median)

2023 Usage  6,375,113 downloads 24,228 Altmetric mentions 

• More about our metrics

Announcements

medRxiv transfers

BMC Medicine  is happy to consider manuscripts that have been, or will be, posted on a preprint server. Authors are able to submit their manuscripts directly from  medRxiv , without having to re-upload files.

Registered reports

BMC Medicine is accepting Registered Reports. Find out more about this innovative format in our Submission Guidelines .

• Follow us on Twitter

BMC Medicine

ISSN: 1741-7015

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

Library Guides

Dissertations 2: structure: standard.

A typical dissertation in the sciences or social sciences is structured in the following way: 

Title page 

Abstract 

Table of contents 

Introduction 

Literature review 

Methodology 

Results/Findings 

Discussion 

Conclusion 

Bibliography  

Appendices 

Table of Contents

The table of contents should list all the items included in your dissertation.  

It is a good idea to use the electronic table of contents feature in Word to automatically link it to your chapter headings and page numbers. Attempting to manually create a table of contents means that you will have to adjust your page numbers every time you edit your work before submission, which may waste valuable time!  

This  video will walk you through the formatting of longer documents using the electronic table of contents feature.

Introduction

The introduction explains the how, what, where, when, why and who of the research. It introduces the reader to your dissertation and should act as a clear guide as to what it will cover.  

The introduction may include the following content: 

Introduce the topic of the dissertation

• State why the topic is of interest 
• Give background information on the subject. 
• Refer to the main debates in the field

Identify the scope of your research 

• Highlight what hasn't already been said by the literature  
• Demonstrate what you seek to investigate, and why 
• Present the aim of the dissertation. 
• Mention your research question or hypothesis 

Indicate your approach  

• Introduce your main argument (especially if you have a research question, rather than hypothesis). 
• Mention your methods/research design. 
• Outline the dissertation structure (introduce the main points that you will discuss in the order they will be presented). 

Normally, the introduction is roughly 10% of a dissertation word count. 

Literature Review

The term “literature” in “literature review” comprises scholarly articles, books, and other sources (e.g. reports) relevant to a particular issue, area of research or theory. In a dissertation, the literature review illustrates what the literature already says on your research subject, providing summary and synthesis of such literature.  

It is generally structured by topic, starting from general background and concepts, and then addressing what can be found - and cannot be found - on the specific focus of your dissertation. Indeed, the literature review should identify gaps in the literature, that your research aims to fill. This requires you to engage critically with the literature, not merely reproduce the critical understanding of others.  

In sum, literature reviews should demonstrate how your research question can be located in a wider field of inquiry. Therefore, a literature review needs to address the connections between your work and the work of others by highlighting links between them. In doing so, you will demonstrate the foundations of your project and show how you are taking the line of inquiry forwards.  

By the end of your literature review, your reader should be able to see: 

The gap in knowledge and understanding which you say exists in the field. 

How your research question will work within that gap. 

The work other researchers have carried out and the issues debated in the field. 

That you have a good understanding of the field and that you are critically engaged with the debates (Burnett, 2009). 

For more detailed guidance on how to write literature reviews, check out the Literature Review Guide.  

Methodology

The methodology chapter needs to show how the research design specifically addresses the research question.  

Overall, it should set out: 

The reasons for your choice of methods 

The how, what, why, when, who, where of your research 

The limitations of your approach 

For more detailed information on writing the methodology chapter, see the Methodology Guide. 

Use a dedicated Results chapter especially if undertaking a scientific dissertation and/or you are using quantitative research.   

In this chapter you describe what your research has discovered. Follow some tips for an effective Results chapter:   

Identify the key findings. You don't need to show everything you have collected or calculated. 

Be truthful and honest. Present the data you found - not what you wish you had found! Remember that misrepresenting data has  ethical implications .   

Be objective. You will have plenty of opportunity to discuss and interpret the data in the Discussion chapter. 

Be clear and concise. Include tables, graphs or illustrations to make it easier for the reader to understand the data. 

Quantitative Results  

In this section you present the data you have found and say if the data support, or not, your hypothesis. 

Quantitative analysis techniques  

Raw numerical data need to be processed and analysed to make them meaningful. Quantitative analysis techniques include tables, graphs and statistics (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill 2015, p496). 

Establish patterns and relationships 

The way you present your data will help identify patterns and relationships in your research. These can be (depending on the field/subject) (Cottrell, 2014, p173): 

Trends and developmental patterns over time (are there any patterns in the data? Does the data rise, fall, plateau? Where/when? How - gently or sharply?) 

Correlations and relationships between sets of data (do they sets of data move in a similar way? Or do they move in an opposite way? Or do they have no relation at all?) 

Relationships between events 

Cause and effect (can you spot any causality?) 

Graphs and Charts with Excel

Watch this Introduction to Charts and Graphs Linkedin Learning video to find out how to make the most of this feature in Excel. 

Confidence with Numbers MacMillan Module

Need to brush up on your maths and statistics? This online course will help you overcome your obstacles in working with numbers and will give you the confidence to interpret and understand numerical data.

Qualitative Results 

In qualitative research, meanings are derived from words and images - not numbers, as in quantitative research. Words and images can have multiple meanings, and need to be interpreted with care (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill 2015, p568). For more information about qualitative data see the Methodology Guide.

How to undertake qualitative data analysis: 

Group the data in themes to make sense of them (summarise, condense, code the data). 

Link these themes and categories in a way that can help you answer your research question. 

Reflect on whether the data support your original argument. If yes, make sure that when you present your data you emphasise how the data support your argument. If not, you should revise your original argument! 

Approaches to analysing qualitative data  

Qualitative data analysis can take place using specific methods such as (there are many more, depending on your field!) thematic analysis, content analysis, grounded theory, narrative analysis, discourse analysis. The most generic approach to qualitative data analysis is thematic analysis with the aim to identify patterns in qualitative data (interviews, observations, documents etc.) (Saunders, Lewis and Thornhill 2015, p579). For more information on qualitative analysis, check out this informative video.

Slides on methodology by Queen's University, Belfast.

The comprehensive lecture includes bullet points and references on the following qualitative data analysis methods: thematic analysis, content analysis, grounded theory, narrative analysis, discourse analysis.

This chapter should explore the meaning of your results and argue for their importance and relevance. In the discussion you could do the following: 

Group your findings into themes (synthesise your findings). 

Interpret the findings. What patterns do they reveal? Do they shed new light on the subject?  

If using a research question state explicitly how your research has answered the research question. Reiterate your argument.  

If using a hypothesis state explicitly if your findings support or do not support your research hypothesis. 

Present a critique of your research in terms of methodology, limitations etc. If the hypothesis was not supported, consider reasons why this was the case (Cottrell, 2014, p192).  

Critically analyse the findings by linking them to the background research. Are the findings consistent with existing research, theories, established practices? Do they present anything unusual?  

Assess the importance of your study and how it has filled a gap in your field. 

Identify possible implications of your findings for your area and other areas of study. 

Recommend future research.  

The conclusion is the final chapter of your dissertation. It should flow logically from the previously presented text; therefore, you should avoid introducing new ideas, new data, or a new direction.  

Ideally, the conclusion should leave the reader with a clear understanding of the discovery or argument you have advanced.  

This can be done by: 

Summarising and synthesising your main findings and how they relate to your research question or hypotheses  

Demonstrating the relevance and importance of your work in the wider context of your field. For example, what recommendations would you make for future research? What do we know now that we didn’t know before? 

Link your conclusion to your introduction as both frame your dissertation. 

A conclusion is roughly five to ten percent of the word count of the dissertation. 

Avoid excessive detail. Decide what your reader needs to know. 

Don’t introduce any new information such as theories, data or ideas.  

Sum up the main points of your research.  

Bibliography

While writing your dissertation, you would have referred to the works and research of many different authors and editors in your field of study. These works should be acknowledged in the bibliography where you will list writers alphabetically by surname. 

For example: 

Poloian, L.R. (2013).  Retailing principles: global, multichannel, and managerial viewpoints.  New York: Fairchild.  Biggs, J. and Tang, C. (2011).  Teaching for quality learning at university.  Maidenhead: Open University Press.  Ramsay, P., Maier, P. and Price, G. (2010).  Study skills for business and management students . Harlow: Longman. 

Unless otherwise specified by your module leader, the University uses the Harvard (author-date) style of citing and referencing. For more guidance and support on how to reference effectively check out the  Referencing Guide . You can also  book an appointment  with an Academic Engagement Librarian for extra help with referencing. 

While the main results of your study should be placed in the body of your dissertation, any extra information can be placed in the appendices chapter. This supplementary information, for instance, can consist of graphs, charts, or tables that demonstrate less significant results or interview transcripts that would disrupt the flow of the main text if they were included within it.  

You can create one long appendix section or divide it into smaller sections to make it easier to navigate. For example, you might want to have an appendix for images, an appendix for transcripts, and an appendix for graphs. Each appendix (each graph or chart, etc.) should have its own number and title. Further, the sources for all appendices should be acknowledged through referencing and listed in the bibliography. 

Don’t forget to mention each appendix at least once during your dissertation! This can be done using brackets in the following way: (see appendix 1). 

Resources and bibliography

Burnett, J. (2009).  Doing your social sciences dissertation . England: Sage Publications Ltd.

Cottrell, S. (2014).  Dissertation and project reports. A step by step guide.  England: Red Globe Press.

Saunders, M. N. K., Lewis, P. and Thornhill, A. (2015).  Research methods for business students . England: Pearson.

• << Previous: Structures
• Next: Thematic >>
• Last Updated: Nov 23, 2021 3:47 PM
• URL: https://libguides.westminster.ac.uk/c.php?g=692395

CONNECT WITH US

BENEFITS OF PALLIATIVE CARE IN ADULTS WITH A DIAGNOSIS OF HEART FAILURE: AN EXPLORATORY LITERATURE REVIEW

• Find this author on Google Scholar
• Find this author on PubMed
• Search for this author on this site
• ORCID record for Simon Andres Giraldo Oliveros Sr.
• For correspondence: [email protected]
• ORCID record for Aura Cristina Herrera Obando Jr.
• ORCID record for Jhaina Isabella Larranaga Guerrero Jr.
• ORCID record for William Antonio Mejia Montehermoso Jr.
• Info/History
• Preview PDF

Introduction: Heart Failure is a clinical syndrome characterized by a series of symptoms such as dyspnea, orthopnea and edema in the lower limbs. This pathology continues to have a high prevalence despite advances in pharmacotherapy and device therapy and given that it is a pathology that significantly impairs the quality of life of patients, the implementation of care is of vital importance. However, these are underused due to lack of knowledge on the part of health personnel and also due to poor implementation in the different health providers. Objective: An exploratory review of the literature was carried out regarding the benefits of palliative care in patients with advanced heart failure, in order to synthesize the available and updated evidence. Methodology: Searched for articles published from 2017 to 2022 related to palliative care in patients with heart failure and using the PRISMA 2020 methodology for this study. This inquiry of articles was carried out in the following databases: UpToDate, PubMed, MESH, PMC (US National Library of Medicine National Institutes of health). Results: A total of 5 articles were obtained, from which they concluded that palliative care has a positive impact on the quality of life of patients with heart failure, there was a lower rate of hospital readmissions, improvements in physical, psychological and existential.

Competing Interest Statement

The authors have declared no competing interest.

Funding Statement

This study did not receive any funding

Author Declarations

I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.

I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.

I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).

I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.

Data Availability

All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript

View the discussion thread.

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word about medRxiv.

NOTE: Your email address is requested solely to identify you as the sender of this article.

Citation Manager Formats

• EndNote (tagged)
• EndNote 8 (xml)
• RefWorks Tagged
• Ref Manager
• Tweet Widget
• Facebook Like
• Google Plus One

Subject Area

• Epidemiology
• Addiction Medicine (315)
• Allergy and Immunology (617)
• Anesthesia (159)
• Cardiovascular Medicine (2268)
• Dentistry and Oral Medicine (279)
• Dermatology (201)
• Emergency Medicine (369)
• Endocrinology (including Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Disease) (797)
• Epidemiology (11559)
• Forensic Medicine (10)
• Gastroenterology (676)
• Genetic and Genomic Medicine (3558)
• Geriatric Medicine (336)
• Health Economics (614)
• Health Informatics (2295)
• Health Policy (912)
• Health Systems and Quality Improvement (860)
• Hematology (333)
• HIV/AIDS (746)
• Infectious Diseases (except HIV/AIDS) (13132)
• Intensive Care and Critical Care Medicine (755)
• Medical Education (358)
• Medical Ethics (100)
• Nephrology (388)
• Neurology (3339)
• Nursing (191)
• Nutrition (505)
• Obstetrics and Gynecology (650)
• Occupational and Environmental Health (643)
• Oncology (1752)
• Ophthalmology (524)
• Orthopedics (208)
• Otolaryngology (284)
• Pain Medicine (223)
• Palliative Medicine (66)
• Pathology (437)
• Pediatrics (999)
• Pharmacology and Therapeutics (419)
• Primary Care Research (402)
• Psychiatry and Clinical Psychology (3048)
• Public and Global Health (5980)
• Radiology and Imaging (1217)
• Rehabilitation Medicine and Physical Therapy (712)
• Respiratory Medicine (808)
• Rheumatology (367)
• Sexual and Reproductive Health (348)
• Sports Medicine (313)
• Surgery (385)
• Toxicology (50)
• Transplantation (170)
• Urology (142)

• Case Report
• Open access
• Published: 01 April 2024

Cytomegalovirus colitis as intestinal obstruction in an immunocompetent adolescent: a case report and literature review

• Jiongshan Ge 1   na1 ,
• Yan Li 1   na1 ,
• Jiaxin Wei 1 ,
• Jing Wang 2 &
• Jihai Liu 1  

BMC Infectious Diseases volume  24 , Article number:  365 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Cytomegalovirus infection manifests varying clinical characteristics and severity in diverse populations with different immune statuses. The signs and symptoms of gastrointestinal involvement are nonspecific. Here, we present a case of cytomegalovirus colitis in an immunocompetent adolescent, which manifested as intestinal pseud-obstruction.

Case presentation

A 15-year-old man who had contracted novel coronavirus infection one month earlier was admitted to our hospital with fever, abdominal pain, and hematochezia. His abdomen was distended, and laboratory evaluation revealed a decrease in the blood count, an increase in inflammatory indicators and hepatic impairment. Imaging shows bowel wall thickening and dilatation of the colon. A diagnosis of intestinal infection combined with acute intestinal pseud-obstruction was made. Diarrhea persisted despite conservative treatment with empirical antibiotics. A colonoscopy was performed. Pathology confirmed cytomegalovirus infection. Ganciclovir therapy was initiated, and subsequent review showed a good recovery.

Conclusions

The case was diagnosed as cytomegalovirus colitis. We reviewed the reports of 9 cases of bowel obstruction, including our own, and found that the majority of the adult patients were elderly with underlying disease. Clinical and endoscopic manifestations are typically nonspecific, and imaging shows typical signs of intestinal obstruction. The final diagnosis was confirmed by pathology. Most of them have a good prognosis. We suggest that cytomegalovirus colitis can also lead to intestinal obstruction and that viral reactivation in immunocompetent individuals may be associated with inflammatory conditions and viral coinfection, particularly with the novel coronavirus.

Peer Review reports

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is common, with approximately 83% of the global population testing seropositive [ 1 ]. People with normal immune function usually have no symptoms, or they may experience fever, mononucleosis, or hepatitis. Immunodeficient individuals are susceptible to viral reactivation, which can affect end organs, such as the lungs, central nervous system, and digestive tract. Recently, there has been a notable increase in CMV colitis among immunocompetent patients, which has garnered significant attention. In healthy individuals, the most affected part of the digestive tract is the colon, exhibiting symptoms like hemorrhage, abdominal pain, and diarrhea [ 2 ]. CMV colitis with intestinal obstruction as the primary manifestation has rarely been reported before.

A 15-year-old male was admitted to the emergency room after presenting a high fever for 10 days, abdominal colic, and mucous bloody stool for 4 days. He had severe abdominal distension and a cessation of passing gas. A month ago, he was suspected of being infected with the novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) due to fever and a sore throat. He took ibuprofen to defervesce. Afterward, jaundice developed. Laboratory tests in other hospitals found that transaminase levels increased, and liver injury caused by acute infection was considered, but no additional pathogenic tests were conducted. Silybin and other hepatoprotective drugs were administered. One week later, symptoms were relieved, and transaminase levels decreased. In addition, he had no other notable medical or family history.

His complete blood count showed a white blood cell count of 0.36 × 10 9 /L (Normal range(NR): 3.50–9.50 × 10 9 /L), with neutrophils accounting for 45.8% (NR: 50%-75%), lymphocytes accounting for 42.0% (NR: 20%-40%), hemoglobin 57 g/L (NR: 120-160 g/L), and platelet count of 59 × 10 9 /L (NR: 100–350 × 10 9 /L); his C-reactive protein was 267 mg/L (NR: < 8.0 mg/L). There was also hepatic impairment, with ALT was 72U/L (NR: 9-50U/L) and AST was 54U/L (NR: 15-40U/L). The stool sample showed an elevated level of white blood cells (20–30/HPF, NR: 0–1) and red blood cells (2–3/HPF, NR: 0). Abdominal computed tomography (CT) showed thickening of the rectal and sigmoid bowel wall with dilation of the proximal colon (Supplementary Fig.  1 ).

We diagnosed as probable intestinal infection and acute intestinal pseud-obstruction. Colonoscopy is considered risky at this time. We promptly inserted an ileus catheter and initiated empirical therapy with meropenem, vancomycin, and human immunoglobulin. His abdominal pain resolved, and his blood count and liver function gradually normalized, but diarrhea continued.

The persistence of the symptoms compelled us to continue the search for the cause. Plasma metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) showed 50 Epstein‒Barr viruses; serum polymerase chain reaction showed that CMV copy was negative, and plasma CMV-IgG/IgM were also negative. Plasma SARS-CoV-2 IgG was positive, confirming a recent case of novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19). The test for Clostridium difficile, fungi, Mycobacterium tuberculosis, Salmonella, Shiga, rotavirus, and parasites in feces was negative. Other tests, such as antinuclear antibody, antiphospholipid antibody, and HIV tests, were negative. Seventeen days later, he was scheduled for a colonoscopy. Sigmoid colonic and rectal ulcers were observed (Supplementary Fig.  2 A, B). Hematoxylin–eosin (HE) staining revealed CMV inclusion bodies, and immunohistochemical (IHC) staining demonstrated positive CMV antigen (Fig.  1 ), confirming colitis caused by CMV infection.

Histopathological examination of the patient. a HE staining, × 10 magnification. Multiple cytomegalic inclusions are present. b IHC staining, × 10 magnification. A positive area of CMV antigen stained brown is visible

We started intravenous ganciclovir at a dosage of 500 mg/daily for 21 days. Meanwhile, due to the destruction of the superficial intestinal mucosa and persistent diarrhea, considering that inflammatory bowel disease cannot be definitely ruled out, he was also given oral mesalazine and prednisone (starting at 70 mg/daily) to repair the intestinal mucosa and reduce inflammatory reactions after consulting with the Department of Gastroenterology. During a follow-up examination three months later, his blood count and biochemical indicators were normal. Endoscopic findings revealed stenosis of colon lumen and histological signs of chronic inflammation (Supplementary Fig.  2 C, D). CMV was negative for the IHC test, and his stool gradually returned to normal.

This is a case of CMV colitis with acute intestinal pseud-obstruction. After the catheter was inserted, the obstructive symptoms were quickly relieved. Although there was no direct serological evidence, CMV infection was subsequently confirmed through pathological examination. However, this case occurred in an immunocompetent adolescent who was infected with the novel coronavirus one month ago. Liver injury before onset is considered most probably as one of the manifestations of CMV reactivation. After extensive evaluation, no evidence of existing immunodeficiency leading to CMV disease was found.

A total of 9 cases [ 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ], including our case, were identified by searching PubMed using the keywords "cytomegalovirus" and "colitis" and reviewing relevant literature citations to retrieve previously reported cases of CMV colitis with intestinal obstruction. Patients with inflammatory bowel disease, AIDS, organ transplantation, and treatment with steroids or immunosuppressive agents were excluded (Supplementary Table  1 ). Of these, 6 (66.7%) were male. The average age was 61 years (range: 15–91), and 66.7% of the participants were over 60 years old. 6 (66.7%) of them had multiple co-morbidities, including chronic constipation, diabetes, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and other complications. Most of the cases were diagnosed through pathology. 7 of them were treated with ganciclovir, and a total of 2 (22.2%) people died.

The retrospective analysis also revealed that the most common symptoms were fever, abdominal pain, and diarrhea. The endoscopic examination revealed mostly ulceration, while imaging findings showed dilated intestines. M. Paparoupa et al. [ 10 ] and Dinesh et al. [ 5 ] reported cases of mechanical obstruction caused by fibrotic stenosis, thickening and edema of the bowel wall. In the present case and in the remaining cases, the location of the obstructive lesion was not identified, and paralytic ileus caused by toxic megacolon or Ogilvie syndrome was considered. The most common sites involved are the sigmoid colon and rectum. Based on the results of our study, we believe that CMV colitis should increase the rare clinical presentation of intestinal obstruction, even in a population with normal immunity. For patients diagnosed as CMV colitis with normal immunity, clinicians should observe abdominal symptoms and signs in clinical practice, and be alert for acute intestinal obstruction. Similarly, the presence of CMV should be reasonably suspected in patients with intestinal obstruction. Analysis showed that conservative treatments, such as ganciclovir and placement of obstruction catheters, were usually effective for CMV colitis presenting with intestinal obstruction, without the need for surgery.

It is believed that CMV latent infection exists in early myeloid cells, particularly CD34 + hematopoietic stem cells, which can be reactivated to infect parenchymal cells of various organs [ 11 ]. Viremia is crucial for pathogenesis, and there is a threshold relationship between the viral load controlled by the body's immunity and the occurrence of end-organ invasion [ 12 ]. Therefore, virus reactivation and corresponding diseases can easily occur when immunity is inhibited or damaged. However, immunocompetent people are not always unaffected. A retrospective analysis conducted by Yoon et al. [ 2 ] revealed that the majority of immunocompetent patients diagnosed with CMV gastroenteritis were elderly (74.4%) and had underlying chronic conditions (79.1%), which is consistent with our study. Immunity is affected by both aging and the basal state, so it is reasonable to assume that CMV disease may be rare in truly immunocompetent young patients. The patient's infection occurred after COVID-19, prompting us to further explore the interaction between these two viruses. An increased incidence of herpes virus reactivation has been observed in patients with COVID-19 [ 13 ]. In addition to being associated with inflammatory responses and steroid use, SARS-CoV-2 infection results in a reduction in lymphocytes and upregulation of T-cell apoptotic processes [ 14 , 15 ]. The ACE-2 receptor of SARS-CoV-2 entering cells is highly expressed in gastrointestinal epithelial cells. The immune regulation of the lung-gut axis indirectly affects gastrointestinal endothelial cells through pulmonary infection and is susceptible to CMV [ 16 ]. These are all proposed as possible mechanisms of CMV reactivation after SARS-CoV-2 infection. The specific mechanisms of virus-immune system interactions require further investigation and validation in large cohorts.

Cytomegalovirus disease involving the digestive tract can occur in immunocompetent hosts. Aside from abdominal pain, it can also manifest as intestinal obstruction, and generally, conservative treatment is effective. Early recognition of CMV colitis presenting with intestinal obstruction helps to avoid unnecessary disease prolongation and improves prognosis. The reactivation of cytomegalovirus is associated with inflammation in healthy individuals, and novel coronavirus coinfection is considered to be one of the potential contributing factors.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article.

Abbreviations

• Cytomegalovirus

Computed tomography

Metagenomic next-generation sequencing

Hematoxylin–eosin

Immunohistochemical

Normal range

Zuhair M, et al. Estimation of the worldwide seroprevalence of cytomegalovirus: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Rev Med Virol. 2019;29(3):e2034. https://doi.org/10.1002/rmv.2034 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Yoon J, et al. Endoscopic features and clinical outcomes of cytomegalovirus gastroenterocolitis in immunocompetent patients. Sci Rep. 2021;11(1):6284. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-85845-8 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Machens A, Bloechle C, Achilles EG, Bause HW, Izbicki JR. Toxic megacolon caused by cytomegalovirus colitis in a multiply injured patient. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 1996;40(4):644.

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Lin Y-H, Yeh C-J, Chen Y-J, Chang M-C, Su I-H, Cheng H-T. Recurrent cytomegalovirus colitis with megacolon in an immunocompetent elderly man. J Med Virol. 2010;82(4):638–41. https://doi.org/10.1002/jmv.21712 .

Dinesh BV, Selvaraju K, Kumar S, Thota S. Cytomegalovirus-induced colonic stricture presenting as acute intestinal obstruction in an immunocompetent adult. BMJ Case Rep. 2013;2013:bcr2013200944. https://doi.org/10.1136/bcr-2013-200944

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Cho JH, Choi JH. Cytomegalovirus ileo-pancolitis presenting as toxic megacolon in an immunocompetent patient: a case report. World J Clin Cases. 2020;8(3):552–9. https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v8.i3.552 .

Charatcharoenwitthaya P, Pausawasdi N, Pongpaibul A. Education and imaging: gastrointestinal: Ogilvie’s syndrome: a rare complication of cytomegalovirus infection in an immunocompetent patient. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014;29(10):1752. https://doi.org/10.1111/jgh.12760 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Kim BS, et al. Cytomegalovirus colitis induced segmental colonic hypoganglionosis in an immunocompetent patient: a case report. World J Clin Cases. 2021;9(20):5631–6. https://doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v9.i20.5631 .

Lagarto M, Santos A, Freitas BD, Anastácio M, Jesus S. The overlooked agent: cytomegalovirus colitis in an immunocompetent patient. Cureus. 2023;15(3):e36926. https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.36926 .

Paparoupa M, Schmidt V, Weckauf H, Ho H, Schuppert F. CMV colitis in immunocompetent patients: 2 cases of a diagnostic challenge. Case Rep Gastrointest Med. 2016;2016:e4035637. https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/4035637 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Human Cytomegalovirus | SpringerLink. Available: https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007/978-3-540-77349-8 . Accessed 29 Jul 2023.

Griffiths P, Baraniak I, Reeves M. The pathogenesis of human cytomegalovirus. J Pathol. 2015;235(2):288–97. https://doi.org/10.1002/path.4437 .

Shafiee A, et al. Reactivation of herpesviruses during COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Rev Med Virol. 2023;33(3):e2437. https://doi.org/10.1002/rmv.2437 .

Amanati A, et al. Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 Alpha variant (B.1.1.7), original wild-type severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, and cytomegalovirus co-infection in a young adult with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, case report, and review of the possible cytomegalovirus reactivation mechanisms. J Med Case Reports. 2023;17(1):66. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13256-022-03750-8 .

Jeannet R, Daix T, Formento R, Feuillard J, François B. Severe COVID-19 is associated with deep and sustained multifaceted cellular immunosuppression. Intensive Care Med. 2020;46(9):1769–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-020-06127-x .

Carll WC, Rady MY, Salomao MA, Patel B, Singh VP, Sen A. Cytomegalovirus haemorrhagic enterocolitis associated with severe infection with COVID-19. BMJ Open Gastroenterol. 2021;8(1):e000556. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgast-2020-000556 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the patient for his consent to publish this report. We thank the reviewers for their helpful comments on this paper.

This work was supported by the National High Level Hospital Clinical Research Funding (serial number 2022-PUMCH-B-109).

Author information

Jiongshan Ge and Yan Li contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

Emergency Department, The State Key Laboratory for Complex, Severe and Rare Diseases, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science and Peking Union Medical College, No. 1 Shuaifuyuan Wangfujing Dongcheng District, Beijing, 100730, China

Jiongshan Ge, Yan Li, Di Shi, Jiaxin Wei & Jihai Liu

Pathology Department, Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Science and Peking Union Medical College, No.1 Shuaifuyuan Wangfujing Dongcheng Districtg, Beijing, 100730, China

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

JS. G. drafted the manuscript, Y.L. collected the patient’s information, JH. L., D. S., and JX. W. edited the manuscript, and J. W. provided pathological pictures. All the authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jihai Liu .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Written Informed consent was obtained from the patient and his legal guardians for publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1: supplementary figure 1..

(A, B): Abdominal computed tomography. (A) The distended transverse colon. (B) Thickening of the rectal and sigmoid colon wall with peripheral inflammatory exudation.

Additional file 2: Supplementary Figure 2.

(A, B, C, D): The first colonoscopy and three months later, sigmoid colon and rectum. (A, B) 17 days after being hospitalized. Thickening and edema of the intestinal wall, a smaller intestinal cavity, and deep ulcers were observed. (C, D) 3 months after discharge. A narrow intestinal cavity and inflammatory polyps are visible, but the ulcer has improved.

Additional file 3: Supplementary Table 1.

Clinical characteristics of 9 cases of CMV enteritis with intestinal obstruction.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Ge, J., Li, Y., Shi, D. et al. Cytomegalovirus colitis as intestinal obstruction in an immunocompetent adolescent: a case report and literature review. BMC Infect Dis 24 , 365 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-09255-7

Download citation

Received : 10 September 2023

Accepted : 26 March 2024

Published : 01 April 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-09255-7

Share this article

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

• Intestinal obstruction

BMC Infectious Diseases

ISSN: 1471-2334

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]