is literature review effective

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.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

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.

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students. Free citation check included.

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 July 14, 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, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels and plays). When we say “literature review” or refer to “the literature,” we are talking about the research ( scholarship ) in a given field. You will often see the terms “the research,” “the scholarship,” and “the literature” used mostly interchangeably.

Where, when, and why would I write a lit review?

There are a number of different situations where you might write a literature review, each with slightly different expectations; different disciplines, too, have field-specific expectations for what a literature review is and does. For instance, in the humanities, authors might include more overt argumentation and interpretation of source material in their literature reviews, whereas in the sciences, authors are more likely to report study designs and results in their literature reviews; these differences reflect these disciplines’ purposes and conventions in scholarship. You should always look at examples from your own discipline and talk to professors or mentors in your field to be sure you understand your discipline’s conventions, for literature reviews as well as for any other genre.

A literature review can be a part of a research paper or scholarly article, usually falling after the introduction and before the research methods sections. In these cases, the lit review just needs to cover scholarship that is important to the issue you are writing about; sometimes it will also cover key sources that informed your research methodology.

Lit reviews can also be standalone pieces, either as assignments in a class or as publications. In a class, a lit review may be assigned to help students familiarize themselves with a topic and with scholarship in their field, get an idea of the other researchers working on the topic they’re interested in, find gaps in existing research in order to propose new projects, and/or develop a theoretical framework and methodology for later research. As a publication, a lit review usually is meant to help make other scholars’ lives easier by collecting and summarizing, synthesizing, and analyzing existing research on a topic. This can be especially helpful for students or scholars getting into a new research area, or for directing an entire community of scholars toward questions that have not yet been answered.

What are the parts of a lit review?

Most lit reviews use a basic introduction-body-conclusion structure; if your lit review is part of a larger paper, the introduction and conclusion pieces may be just a few sentences while you focus most of your attention on the body. If your lit review is a standalone piece, the introduction and conclusion take up more space and give you a place to discuss your goals, research methods, and conclusions separately from where you discuss the literature itself.

Introduction:

• An introductory paragraph that explains what your working topic and thesis is
• A forecast of key topics or texts that will appear in the review
• Potentially, a description of how you found sources and how you analyzed them for inclusion and discussion in the review (more often found in published, standalone literature reviews than in lit review sections in an article or research paper)
• 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 sentence to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.

Conclusion:

• Summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance
• Connect it back to your primary research question

How should I organize my lit review?

Lit reviews can take many different organizational patterns depending on what you are trying to accomplish with the review. Here are some examples:

• Chronological : The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time, which helps familiarize the audience with the topic (for instance if you are introducing something that is not commonly known in your field). If you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. Try to analyze the patterns, turning points, and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred (as mentioned previously, this may not be appropriate in your discipline — check with a teacher or mentor if you’re unsure).
• Thematic : If you have found some recurring central themes that you will continue working with throughout your piece, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic. For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women.
• Qualitative versus quantitative research
• Empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the research by sociological, historical, or cultural sources
• Theoretical : In many humanities articles, the literature review is the foundation for the theoretical framework. You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts. You can argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach or combine various theorical concepts to create a framework for your research.

What are some strategies or tips I can use while writing my lit review?

Any lit review is only as good as the research it discusses; make sure your sources are well-chosen and your research is thorough. Don’t be afraid to do more research if you discover a new thread as you’re writing. More info on the research process is available in our "Conducting Research" resources .

As you’re doing your research, create an annotated bibliography ( see our page on the this type of document ). Much of the information used in an annotated bibliography can be used also in a literature review, so you’ll be not only partially drafting your lit review as you research, but also developing your sense of the larger conversation going on among scholars, professionals, and any other stakeholders in your topic.

Usually you will need to synthesize research rather than just summarizing it. This means drawing connections between sources to create a picture of the scholarly conversation on a topic over time. Many student writers struggle to synthesize because they feel they don’t have anything to add to the scholars they are citing; here are some strategies to help you:

• It often helps to remember that the point of these kinds of syntheses is to show your readers how you understand your research, to help them read the rest of your paper.
• Writing teachers often say synthesis is like hosting a dinner party: imagine all your sources are together in a room, discussing your topic. What are they saying to each other?
• Look at the in-text citations in each paragraph. Are you citing just one source for each paragraph? This usually indicates summary only. When you have multiple sources cited in a paragraph, you are more likely to be synthesizing them (not always, but often
• Read more about synthesis here.

The most interesting literature reviews are often written as arguments (again, as mentioned at the beginning of the page, this is discipline-specific and doesn’t work for all situations). Often, the literature review is where you can establish your research as filling a particular gap or as relevant in a particular way. You have some chance to do this in your introduction in an article, but the literature review section gives a more extended opportunity to establish the conversation in the way you would like your readers to see it. You can choose the intellectual lineage you would like to be part of and whose definitions matter most to your thinking (mostly humanities-specific, but this goes for sciences as well). In addressing these points, you argue for your place in the conversation, which tends to make the lit review more compelling than a simple reporting of other sources.

Get science-backed answers as you write with Paperpal's Research feature

What is a Literature Review? How to Write It (with Examples)

A literature review is a critical analysis and synthesis of existing research on a particular topic. It provides an overview of the current state of knowledge, identifies gaps, and highlights key findings in the literature. 1 The purpose of a literature review is to situate your own research within the context of existing scholarship, demonstrating your understanding of the topic and showing how your work contributes to the ongoing conversation in the field. Learning how to write a literature review is a critical tool for successful research. Your ability to summarize and synthesize prior research pertaining to a certain topic demonstrates your grasp on the topic of study, and assists in the learning process. 

Table of Contents

• What is the purpose of literature review? 
• a. Habitat Loss and Species Extinction: 
• b. Range Shifts and Phenological Changes: 
• c. Ocean Acidification and Coral Reefs: 
• d. Adaptive Strategies and Conservation Efforts: 

How to write a good literature review 

• Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question: 
• Decide on the Scope of Your Review: 
• Select Databases for Searches: 
• Conduct Searches and Keep Track: 
• Review the Literature: 
• Organize and Write Your Literature Review: 
• How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal? 
• Frequently asked questions 

What is a literature review?

A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with the existing literature, establishes the context for their own research, and contributes to scholarly conversations on the topic. One of the purposes of a literature review is also to help researchers avoid duplicating previous work and ensure that their research is informed by and builds upon the existing body of knowledge.

What is the purpose of literature review?

A literature review serves several important purposes within academic and research contexts. Here are some key objectives and functions of a literature review: 2  

1. Contextualizing the Research Problem: The literature review provides a background and context for the research problem under investigation. It helps to situate the study within the existing body of knowledge. 

2. Identifying Gaps in Knowledge: By identifying gaps, contradictions, or areas requiring further research, the researcher can shape the research question and justify the significance of the study. This is crucial for ensuring that the new research contributes something novel to the field. 

Find academic papers related to your research topic faster. Try Research on Paperpal  

3. Understanding Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks: Literature reviews help researchers gain an understanding of the theoretical and conceptual frameworks used in previous studies. This aids in the development of a theoretical framework for the current research. 

4. Providing Methodological Insights: Another purpose of literature reviews is that it allows researchers to learn about the methodologies employed in previous studies. This can help in choosing appropriate research methods for the current study and avoiding pitfalls that others may have encountered. 

5. Establishing Credibility: A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with existing scholarship, establishing their credibility and expertise in the field. It also helps in building a solid foundation for the new research. 

6. Informing Hypotheses or Research Questions: The literature review guides the formulation of hypotheses or research questions by highlighting relevant findings and areas of uncertainty in existing literature. 

Literature review example

Let’s delve deeper with a literature review example: Let’s say your literature review is about the impact of climate change on biodiversity. You might format your literature review into sections such as the effects of climate change on habitat loss and species extinction, phenological changes, and marine biodiversity. Each section would then summarize and analyze relevant studies in those areas, highlighting key findings and identifying gaps in the research. The review would conclude by emphasizing the need for further research on specific aspects of the relationship between climate change and biodiversity. The following literature review template provides a glimpse into the recommended literature review structure and content, demonstrating how research findings are organized around specific themes within a broader topic. 

Literature Review on Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity:

Climate change is a global phenomenon with far-reaching consequences, including significant impacts on biodiversity. This literature review synthesizes key findings from various studies: 

a. Habitat Loss and Species Extinction:

Climate change-induced alterations in temperature and precipitation patterns contribute to habitat loss, affecting numerous species (Thomas et al., 2004). The review discusses how these changes increase the risk of extinction, particularly for species with specific habitat requirements. 

b. Range Shifts and Phenological Changes:

Observations of range shifts and changes in the timing of biological events (phenology) are documented in response to changing climatic conditions (Parmesan & Yohe, 2003). These shifts affect ecosystems and may lead to mismatches between species and their resources. 

c. Ocean Acidification and Coral Reefs:

The review explores the impact of climate change on marine biodiversity, emphasizing ocean acidification’s threat to coral reefs (Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2007). Changes in pH levels negatively affect coral calcification, disrupting the delicate balance of marine ecosystems. 

d. Adaptive Strategies and Conservation Efforts:

Recognizing the urgency of the situation, the literature review discusses various adaptive strategies adopted by species and conservation efforts aimed at mitigating the impacts of climate change on biodiversity (Hannah et al., 2007). It emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary approaches for effective conservation planning. 

Strengthen your literature review with factual insights. Try Research on Paperpal for free!    

Writing a literature review involves summarizing and synthesizing existing research on a particular topic. A good literature review format should include the following elements. 

Introduction: The introduction sets the stage for your literature review, providing context and introducing the main focus of your review. 

• Opening Statement: Begin with a general statement about the broader topic and its significance in the field. 
• Scope and Purpose: Clearly define the scope of your literature review. Explain the specific research question or objective you aim to address. 
• Organizational Framework: Briefly outline the structure of your literature review, indicating how you will categorize and discuss the existing research. 
• Significance of the Study: Highlight why your literature review is important and how it contributes to the understanding of the chosen topic. 
• Thesis Statement: Conclude the introduction with a concise thesis statement that outlines the main argument or perspective you will develop in the body of the literature review. 

Body: The body of the literature review is where you provide a comprehensive analysis of existing literature, grouping studies based on themes, methodologies, or other relevant criteria. 

• Organize by Theme or Concept: Group studies that share common themes, concepts, or methodologies. Discuss each theme or concept in detail, summarizing key findings and identifying gaps or areas of disagreement. 
• Critical Analysis: Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each study. Discuss the methodologies used, the quality of evidence, and the overall contribution of each work to the understanding of the topic. 
• Synthesis of Findings: Synthesize the information from different studies to highlight trends, patterns, or areas of consensus in the literature. 
• Identification of Gaps: Discuss any gaps or limitations in the existing research and explain how your review contributes to filling these gaps. 
• Transition between Sections: Provide smooth transitions between different themes or concepts to maintain the flow of your literature review. 

Write and Cite as you go with Paperpal Research. Start now for free.   

Conclusion: The conclusion of your literature review should summarize the main findings, highlight the contributions of the review, and suggest avenues for future research. 

• Summary of Key Findings: Recap the main findings from the literature and restate how they contribute to your research question or objective. 
• Contributions to the Field: Discuss the overall contribution of your literature review to the existing knowledge in the field. 
• Implications and Applications: Explore the practical implications of the findings and suggest how they might impact future research or practice. 
• Recommendations for Future Research: Identify areas that require further investigation and propose potential directions for future research in the field. 
• Final Thoughts: Conclude with a final reflection on the importance of your literature review and its relevance to the broader academic community. 

Conducting a literature review

Conducting a literature review is an essential step in research that involves reviewing and analyzing existing literature on a specific topic. It’s important to know how to do a literature review effectively, so here are the steps to follow: 1  

Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question:

• Select a topic that is relevant to your field of study. 
• Clearly define your research question or objective. Determine what specific aspect of the topic do you want to explore? 

Decide on the Scope of Your Review:

• Determine the timeframe for your literature review. Are you focusing on recent developments, or do you want a historical overview? 
• Consider the geographical scope. Is your review global, or are you focusing on a specific region? 
• Define the inclusion and exclusion criteria. What types of sources will you include? Are there specific types of studies or publications you will exclude? 

Select Databases for Searches:

• Identify relevant databases for your field. Examples include PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. 
• Consider searching in library catalogs, institutional repositories, and specialized databases related to your topic. 

Conduct Searches and Keep Track:

• Develop a systematic search strategy using keywords, Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT), and other search techniques. 
• Record and document your search strategy for transparency and replicability. 
• Keep track of the articles, including publication details, abstracts, and links. Use citation management tools like EndNote, Zotero, or Mendeley to organize your references. 

Review the Literature:

• Evaluate the relevance and quality of each source. Consider the methodology, sample size, and results of studies. 
• Organize the literature by themes or key concepts. Identify patterns, trends, and gaps in the existing research. 
• Summarize key findings and arguments from each source. Compare and contrast different perspectives. 
• Identify areas where there is a consensus in the literature and where there are conflicting opinions. 
• Provide critical analysis and synthesis of the literature. What are the strengths and weaknesses of existing research? 

Organize and Write Your Literature Review:

• Literature review outline should be based on themes, chronological order, or methodological approaches. 
• Write a clear and coherent narrative that synthesizes the information gathered. 
• Use proper citations for each source and ensure consistency in your citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.). 
• Conclude your literature review by summarizing key findings, identifying gaps, and suggesting areas for future research. 

Whether you’re exploring a new research field or finding new angles to develop an existing topic, sifting through hundreds of papers can take more time than you have to spare. But what if you could find science-backed insights with verified citations in seconds? That’s the power of Paperpal’s new Research feature!  

How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal?

Paperpal, an AI writing assistant, integrates powerful academic search capabilities within its writing platform. With the Research feature, you get 100% factual insights, with citations backed by 250M+ verified research articles, directly within your writing interface with the option to save relevant references in your Citation Library. By eliminating the need to switch tabs to find answers to all your research questions, Paperpal saves time and helps you stay focused on your writing.   

Here’s how to use the Research feature:  

• Ask a question: Get started with a new document on paperpal.com. Click on the “Research” feature and type your question in plain English. Paperpal will scour over 250 million research articles, including conference papers and preprints, to provide you with accurate insights and citations. 
• Review and Save: Paperpal summarizes the information, while citing sources and listing relevant reads. You can quickly scan the results to identify relevant references and save these directly to your built-in citations library for later access. 
• Cite with Confidence: Paperpal makes it easy to incorporate relevant citations and references into your writing, ensuring your arguments are well-supported by credible sources. This translates to a polished, well-researched literature review. 

The literature review sample and detailed advice on writing and conducting a review will help you produce a well-structured report. But remember that a good literature review is an ongoing process, and it may be necessary to revisit and update it as your research progresses. By combining effortless research with an easy citation process, Paperpal Research streamlines the literature review process and empowers you to write faster and with more confidence. Try Paperpal Research now and see for yourself.  

Frequently asked questions

A literature review is a critical and comprehensive analysis of existing literature (published and unpublished works) on a specific topic or research question and provides a synthesis of the current state of knowledge in a particular field. A well-conducted literature review is crucial for researchers to build upon existing knowledge, avoid duplication of efforts, and contribute to the advancement of their field. It also helps researchers situate their work within a broader context and facilitates the development of a sound theoretical and conceptual framework for their studies.

Literature review is a crucial component of research writing, providing a solid background for a research paper’s investigation. The aim is to keep professionals up to date by providing an understanding of ongoing developments within a specific field, including research methods, and experimental techniques used in that field, and present that knowledge in the form of a written report. Also, the depth and breadth of the literature review emphasizes the credibility of the scholar in his or her field.  

Before writing a literature review, it’s essential to undertake several preparatory steps to ensure that your review is well-researched, organized, and focused. This includes choosing a topic of general interest to you and doing exploratory research on that topic, writing an annotated bibliography, and noting major points, especially those that relate to the position you have taken on the topic. 

Literature reviews and academic research papers are essential components of scholarly work but serve different purposes within the academic realm. 3 A literature review aims to provide a foundation for understanding the current state of research on a particular topic, identify gaps or controversies, and lay the groundwork for future research. Therefore, it draws heavily from existing academic sources, including books, journal articles, and other scholarly publications. In contrast, an academic research paper aims to present new knowledge, contribute to the academic discourse, and advance the understanding of a specific research question. Therefore, it involves a mix of existing literature (in the introduction and literature review sections) and original data or findings obtained through research methods. 

Literature reviews are essential components of academic and research papers, and various strategies can be employed to conduct them effectively. If you want to know how to write a literature review for a research paper, here are four common approaches that are often used by researchers.  Chronological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the chronological order of publication. It helps to trace the development of a topic over time, showing how ideas, theories, and research have evolved.  Thematic Review: Thematic reviews focus on identifying and analyzing themes or topics that cut across different studies. Instead of organizing the literature chronologically, it is grouped by key themes or concepts, allowing for a comprehensive exploration of various aspects of the topic.  Methodological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the research methods employed in different studies. It helps to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of various methodologies and allows the reader to evaluate the reliability and validity of the research findings.  Theoretical Review: A theoretical review examines the literature based on the theoretical frameworks used in different studies. This approach helps to identify the key theories that have been applied to the topic and assess their contributions to the understanding of the subject.  It’s important to note that these strategies are not mutually exclusive, and a literature review may combine elements of more than one approach. The choice of strategy depends on the research question, the nature of the literature available, and the goals of the review. Additionally, other strategies, such as integrative reviews or systematic reviews, may be employed depending on the specific requirements of the research.

The literature review format can vary depending on the specific publication guidelines. However, there are some common elements and structures that are often followed. Here is a general guideline for the format of a literature review:  Introduction:   Provide an overview of the topic.  Define the scope and purpose of the literature review.  State the research question or objective.  Body:   Organize the literature by themes, concepts, or chronology.  Critically analyze and evaluate each source.  Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the studies.  Highlight any methodological limitations or biases.  Identify patterns, connections, or contradictions in the existing research.  Conclusion:   Summarize the key points discussed in the literature review.  Highlight the research gap.  Address the research question or objective stated in the introduction.  Highlight the contributions of the review and suggest directions for future research.

Both annotated bibliographies and literature reviews involve the examination of scholarly sources. While annotated bibliographies focus on individual sources with brief annotations, literature reviews provide a more in-depth, integrated, and comprehensive analysis of existing literature on a specific topic. The key differences are as follows: 

References 

• Denney, A. S., & Tewksbury, R. (2013). How to write a literature review.  Journal of criminal justice education ,  24 (2), 218-234. 
• Pan, M. L. (2016).  Preparing literature reviews: Qualitative and quantitative approaches . Taylor & Francis. 
• Cantero, C. (2019). How to write a literature review.  San José State University Writing Center . 

Paperpal is an AI writing assistant that help academics write better, faster with real-time suggestions for in-depth language and grammar correction. Trained on millions of research manuscripts enhanced by professional academic editors, Paperpal delivers human precision at machine speed.  

Try it for free or upgrade to  Paperpal Prime , which unlocks unlimited access to premium features like academic translation, paraphrasing, contextual synonyms, consistency checks and more. It’s like always having a professional academic editor by your side! Go beyond limitations and experience the future of academic writing.  Get Paperpal Prime now at just US$19 a month!

Related Reads:

• Empirical Research: A Comprehensive Guide for Academics 
• How to Write a Scientific Paper in 10 Steps 
• How Long Should a Chapter Be?
• How to Use Paperpal to Generate Emails & Cover Letters?

6 Tips for Post-Doc Researchers to Take Their Career to the Next Level

Self-plagiarism in research: what it is and how to avoid it, you may also like, five things authors need to know when using..., 7 best referencing tools and citation management software..., maintaining academic integrity with paperpal’s generative ai writing..., research funding basics: what should a grant proposal..., how to write an abstract in research papers..., how to write dissertation acknowledgements, how to structure an essay, leveraging generative ai to enhance student understanding of..., what’s the best chatgpt alternative for academic writing, how to write a good hook for essays,....

How to Write a Literature Review: Six Steps to Get You from Start to Finish

Writing-a-literature-review-six-steps-to-get-you-from-start-to-finish.

Tanya Golash-Boza, Associate Professor of Sociology, University of California

February 03, 2022

Writing a literature review is often the most daunting part of writing an article, book, thesis, or dissertation. “The literature” seems (and often is) massive. I have found it helpful to be as systematic as possible when completing this gargantuan task.

Sonja Foss and William Walters* describe an efficient and effective way of writing a literature review. Their system provides an excellent guide for getting through the massive amounts of literature for any purpose: in a dissertation, an M.A. thesis, or preparing a research article for publication  in any field of study. Below is a  summary of the steps they outline as well as a step-by-step method for writing a literature review.

How to Write a Literature Review

Step One: Decide on your areas of research:

Before you begin to search for articles or books, decide beforehand what areas you are going to research. Make sure that you only get articles and books in those areas, even if you come across fascinating books in other areas. A literature review I am currently working on, for example, explores barriers to higher education for undocumented students.

Step Two: Search for the literature:

Conduct a comprehensive bibliographic search of books and articles in your area. Read the abstracts online and download and/or print those articles that pertain to your area of research. Find books in the library that are relevant and check them out. Set a specific time frame for how long you will search. It should not take more than two or three dedicated sessions.

Step Three: Find relevant excerpts in your books and articles:

Skim the contents of each book and article and look specifically for these five things:

1. Claims, conclusions, and findings about the constructs you are investigating

2. Definitions of terms

3. Calls for follow-up studies relevant to your project

4. Gaps you notice in the literature

5. Disagreement about the constructs you are investigating

When you find any of these five things, type the relevant excerpt directly into a Word document. Don’t summarize, as summarizing takes longer than simply typing the excerpt. Make sure to note the name of the author and the page number following each excerpt. Do this for each article and book that you have in your stack of literature. When you are done, print out your excerpts.

Step Four: Code the literature:

Get out a pair of scissors and cut each excerpt out. Now, sort the pieces of paper into similar topics. Figure out what the main themes are. Place each excerpt into a themed pile. Make sure each note goes into a pile. If there are excerpts that you can’t figure out where they belong, separate those and go over them again at the end to see if you need new categories. When you finish, place each stack of notes into an envelope labeled with the name of the theme.

Step Five: Create Your Conceptual Schema:

Type, in large font, the name of each of your coded themes. Print this out, and cut the titles into individual slips of paper. Take the slips of paper to a table or large workspace and figure out the best way to organize them. Are there ideas that go together or that are in dialogue with each other? Are there ideas that contradict each other? Move around the slips of paper until you come up with a way of organizing the codes that makes sense. Write the conceptual schema down before you forget or someone cleans up your slips of paper.

Step Six: Begin to Write Your Literature Review:

Choose any section of your conceptual schema to begin with. You can begin anywhere, because you already know the order. Find the envelope with the excerpts in them and lay them on the table in front of you. Figure out a mini-conceptual schema based on that theme by grouping together those excerpts that say the same thing. Use that mini-conceptual schema to write up your literature review based on the excerpts that you have in front of you. Don’t forget to include the citations as you write, so as not to lose track of who said what. Repeat this for each section of your literature review.

Once you complete these six steps, you will have a complete draft of your literature review. The great thing about this process is that it breaks down into manageable steps something that seems enormous: writing a literature review.

I think that Foss and Walter’s system for writing the literature review is ideal for a dissertation, because a Ph.D. candidate has already read widely in his or her field through graduate seminars and comprehensive exams.

It may be more challenging for M.A. students, unless you are already familiar with the literature. It is always hard to figure out how much you need to read for deep meaning, and how much you just need to know what others have said. That balance will depend on how much you already know.

For people writing literature reviews for articles or books, this system also could work, especially when you are writing in a field with which you are already familiar. The mere fact of having a system can make the literature review seem much less daunting, so I recommend this system for anyone who feels overwhelmed by the prospect of writing a literature review.

*Destination Dissertation: A Traveler's Guide to a Done Dissertation

Image Credit/Source: Goldmund Lukic/Getty Images

Watch our Webinar to help you get published

Please enter your Email Address

Please enter valid email address

Please Enter your First Name

Please enter your Last Name

Please enter your Questions or Comments.

Please enter the Privacy

Please enter the Terms & Conditions

Leveraging user research to improve author guidelines at the Council of Science Editors Annual Meeting

How research content supports academic integrity

Finding time to publish as a medical student: 6 tips for Success

Software to Improve Reliability of Research Image Data: Wiley, Lumina, and Researchers at Harvard Medical School Work Together on Solutions

Driving Research Outcomes: Wiley Partners with CiteAb

ISBN, ISSN, DOI: what they are and how to find them

Image Collections for Medical Practitioners with TDS Health

How do you Discover Content?

Writing for Publication for Nurses (Mandarin Edition)

Get Published - Your How to Webinar

Related articles.

User Experience (UX) Research is the process of discovering and understanding user requirements, motivations, and behaviours 

Learn how Wiley partners with plagiarism detection services to support academic integrity around the world

Medical student Nicole Foley shares her top tips for writing and getting your work published.

Wiley and Lumina are working together to support the efforts of researchers at Harvard Medical School to develop and test new machine learning tools and artificial intelligence (AI) software that can

Learn more about our relationship with a company that helps scientists identify the right products to use in their research

What is ISBN? ISSN? DOI? Learn about some of the unique identifiers for book and journal content.

Learn how medical practitioners can easily access and search visual assets from our article portfolio

Explore free-to-use services that can help you discover new content

Watch this webinar to help you learn how to get published.

Finding time to publish as a medical student: 6 tips for success

How to Easily Access the Most Relevant Research: A Q&A With the Creator of Scitrus

Atypon launches Scitrus, a personalized web app that allows users to create a customized feed of the latest research.

FOR INDIVIDUALS

FOR INSTITUTIONS & BUSINESSES

WILEY NETWORK

ABOUT WILEY

Corporate Responsibility

Corporate Governance

Leadership Team

Cookie Preferences

Copyright @ 2000-2024  by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., or related companies. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies.

Rights & Permissions

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

• 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)

How To Structure Your Literature Review

3 options to help structure your chapter.

By: Amy Rommelspacher (PhD) | Reviewer: Dr Eunice Rautenbach | November 2020 (Updated May 2023)

Writing the literature review chapter can seem pretty daunting when you’re piecing together your dissertation or thesis. As  we’ve discussed before , a good literature review needs to achieve a few very important objectives – it should:

• Demonstrate your knowledge of the research topic
• Identify the gaps in the literature and show how your research links to these
• Provide the foundation for your conceptual framework (if you have one)
• Inform your own  methodology and research design

To achieve this, your literature review needs a well-thought-out structure . Get the structure of your literature review chapter wrong and you’ll struggle to achieve these objectives. Don’t worry though – in this post, we’ll look at how to structure your literature review for maximum impact (and marks!).

But wait – is this the right time?

Deciding on the structure of your literature review should come towards the end of the literature review process – after you have collected and digested the literature, but before you start writing the chapter. 

In other words, you need to first develop a rich understanding of the literature before you even attempt to map out a structure. There’s no use trying to develop a structure before you’ve fully wrapped your head around the existing research.

Equally importantly, you need to have a structure in place before you start writing , or your literature review will most likely end up a rambling, disjointed mess. 

Importantly, don’t feel that once you’ve defined a structure you can’t iterate on it. It’s perfectly natural to adjust as you engage in the writing process. As we’ve discussed before , writing is a way of developing your thinking, so it’s quite common for your thinking to change – and therefore, for your chapter structure to change – as you write. 

Need a helping hand?

Like any other chapter in your thesis or dissertation, your literature review needs to have a clear, logical structure. At a minimum, it should have three essential components – an  introduction , a  body   and a  conclusion . 

Let’s take a closer look at each of these.

1: The Introduction Section

Just like any good introduction, the introduction section of your literature review should introduce the purpose and layout (organisation) of the chapter. In other words, your introduction needs to give the reader a taste of what’s to come, and how you’re going to lay that out. Essentially, you should provide the reader with a high-level roadmap of your chapter to give them a taste of the journey that lies ahead.

Here’s an example of the layout visualised in a literature review introduction:

Your introduction should also outline your topic (including any tricky terminology or jargon) and provide an explanation of the scope of your literature review – in other words, what you  will   and  won’t   be covering (the delimitations ). This helps ringfence your review and achieve a clear focus . The clearer and narrower your focus, the deeper you can dive into the topic (which is typically where the magic lies). 

Depending on the nature of your project, you could also present your stance or point of view at this stage. In other words, after grappling with the literature you’ll have an opinion about what the trends and concerns are in the field as well as what’s lacking. The introduction section can then present these ideas so that it is clear to examiners that you’re aware of how your research connects with existing knowledge .

2: The Body Section

The body of your literature review is the centre of your work. This is where you’ll present, analyse, evaluate and synthesise the existing research. In other words, this is where you’re going to earn (or lose) the most marks. Therefore, it’s important to carefully think about how you will organise your discussion to present it in a clear way. 

The body of your literature review should do just as the description of this chapter suggests. It should “review” the literature – in other words, identify, analyse, and synthesise it. So, when thinking about structuring your literature review, you need to think about which structural approach will provide the best “review” for your specific type of research and objectives (we’ll get to this shortly).

There are (broadly speaking)  three options  for organising your literature review.

Option 1: Chronological (according to date)

Organising the literature chronologically is one of the simplest ways to structure your literature review. You start with what was published first and work your way through the literature until you reach the work published most recently. Pretty straightforward.

The benefit of this option is that it makes it easy to discuss the developments and debates in the field as they emerged over time. Organising your literature chronologically also allows you to highlight how specific articles or pieces of work might have changed the course of the field – in other words, which research has had the most impact . Therefore, this approach is very useful when your research is aimed at understanding how the topic has unfolded over time and is often used by scholars in the field of history. That said, this approach can be utilised by anyone that wants to explore change over time .

For example , if a student of politics is investigating how the understanding of democracy has evolved over time, they could use the chronological approach to provide a narrative that demonstrates how this understanding has changed through the ages.

Here are some questions you can ask yourself to help you structure your literature review chronologically.

• What is the earliest literature published relating to this topic?
• How has the field changed over time? Why?
• What are the most recent discoveries/theories?

In some ways, chronology plays a part whichever way you decide to structure your literature review, because you will always, to a certain extent, be analysing how the literature has developed. However, with the chronological approach, the emphasis is very firmly on how the discussion has evolved over time , as opposed to how all the literature links together (which we’ll discuss next ).

Option 2: Thematic (grouped by theme)

The thematic approach to structuring a literature review means organising your literature by theme or category – for example, by independent variables (i.e. factors that have an impact on a specific outcome).

As you’ve been collecting and synthesising literature , you’ll likely have started seeing some themes or patterns emerging. You can then use these themes or patterns as a structure for your body discussion. The thematic approach is the most common approach and is useful for structuring literature reviews in most fields.

For example, if you were researching which factors contributed towards people trusting an organisation, you might find themes such as consumers’ perceptions of an organisation’s competence, benevolence and integrity. Structuring your literature review thematically would mean structuring your literature review’s body section to discuss each of these themes, one section at a time.

Here are some questions to ask yourself when structuring your literature review by themes:

• Are there any patterns that have come to light in the literature?
• What are the central themes and categories used by the researchers?
• Do I have enough evidence of these themes?

PS – you can see an example of a thematically structured literature review in our literature review sample walkthrough video here.

Option 3: Methodological

The methodological option is a way of structuring your literature review by the research methodologies used . In other words, organising your discussion based on the angle from which each piece of research was approached – for example, qualitative , quantitative or mixed  methodologies.

Structuring your literature review by methodology can be useful if you are drawing research from a variety of disciplines and are critiquing different methodologies. The point of this approach is to question  how  existing research has been conducted, as opposed to  what  the conclusions and/or findings the research were.

For example, a sociologist might centre their research around critiquing specific fieldwork practices. Their literature review will then be a summary of the fieldwork methodologies used by different studies.

Here are some questions you can ask yourself when structuring your literature review according to methodology:

• Which methodologies have been utilised in this field?
• Which methodology is the most popular (and why)?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the various methodologies?
• How can the existing methodologies inform my own methodology?

3: The Conclusion Section

Once you’ve completed the body section of your literature review using one of the structural approaches we discussed above, you’ll need to “wrap up” your literature review and pull all the pieces together to set the direction for the rest of your dissertation or thesis.

The conclusion is where you’ll present the key findings of your literature review. In this section, you should emphasise the research that is especially important to your research questions and highlight the gaps that exist in the literature. Based on this, you need to make it clear what you will add to the literature – in other words, justify your own research by showing how it will help fill one or more of the gaps you just identified.

Last but not least, if it’s your intention to develop a conceptual framework for your dissertation or thesis, the conclusion section is a good place to present this.

Example: Thematically Structured Review

In the video below, we unpack a literature review chapter so that you can see an example of a thematically structure review in practice.

Let’s Recap

In this article, we’ve  discussed how to structure your literature review for maximum impact. Here’s a quick recap of what  you need to keep in mind when deciding on your literature review structure:

• Just like other chapters, your literature review needs a clear introduction , body and conclusion .
• The introduction section should provide an overview of what you will discuss in your literature review.
• The body section of your literature review can be organised by chronology , theme or methodology . The right structural approach depends on what you’re trying to achieve with your research.
• The conclusion section should draw together the key findings of your literature review and link them to your research questions.

If you’re ready to get started, be sure to download our free literature review template to fast-track your chapter outline.

Psst… there’s more!

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

27 Comments

Great work. This is exactly what I was looking for and helps a lot together with your previous post on literature review. One last thing is missing: a link to a great literature chapter of an journal article (maybe with comments of the different sections in this review chapter). Do you know any great literature review chapters?

I agree with you Marin… A great piece

I agree with Marin. This would be quite helpful if you annotate a nicely structured literature from previously published research articles.

Awesome article for my research.

I thank you immensely for this wonderful guide

It is indeed thought and supportive work for the futurist researcher and students

Very educative and good time to get guide. Thank you

Great work, very insightful. Thank you.

Thanks for this wonderful presentation. My question is that do I put all the variables into a single conceptual framework or each hypothesis will have it own conceptual framework?

Thank you very much, very helpful

This is very educative and precise . Thank you very much for dropping this kind of write up .

Pheeww, so damn helpful, thank you for this informative piece.

I’m doing a research project topic ; stool analysis for parasitic worm (enteric) worm, how do I structure it, thanks.

comprehensive explanation. Help us by pasting the URL of some good “literature review” for better understanding.

great piece. thanks for the awesome explanation. it is really worth sharing. I have a little question, if anyone can help me out, which of the options in the body of literature can be best fit if you are writing an architectural thesis that deals with design?

I am doing a research on nanofluids how can l structure it?

Beautifully clear.nThank you!

Lucid! Thankyou!

Brilliant work, well understood, many thanks

I like how this was so clear with simple language 😊😊 thank you so much 😊 for these information 😊

Insightful. I was struggling to come up with a sensible literature review but this has been really helpful. Thank you!

You have given thought-provoking information about the review of the literature.

Thank you. It has made my own research better and to impart your work to students I teach

I learnt a lot from this teaching. It’s a great piece.

I am doing research on EFL teacher motivation for his/her job. How Can I structure it? Is there any detailed template, additional to this?

You are so cool! I do not think I’ve read through something like this before. So nice to find somebody with some genuine thoughts on this issue. Seriously.. thank you for starting this up. This site is one thing that is required on the internet, someone with a little originality!

I’m asked to do conceptual, theoretical and empirical literature, and i just don’t know how to structure it

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

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
• Clinics (Sao Paulo)

Approaching literature review for academic purposes: The Literature Review Checklist

Debora f.b. leite.

I Departamento de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, Faculdade de Ciencias Medicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, SP, BR

II Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Pernambuco, PE, BR

III Hospital das Clinicas, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Pernambuco, PE, BR

Maria Auxiliadora Soares Padilha

Jose g. cecatti.

A sophisticated literature review (LR) can result in a robust dissertation/thesis by scrutinizing the main problem examined by the academic study; anticipating research hypotheses, methods and results; and maintaining the interest of the audience in how the dissertation/thesis will provide solutions for the current gaps in a particular field. Unfortunately, little guidance is available on elaborating LRs, and writing an LR chapter is not a linear process. An LR translates students’ abilities in information literacy, the language domain, and critical writing. Students in postgraduate programs should be systematically trained in these skills. Therefore, this paper discusses the purposes of LRs in dissertations and theses. Second, the paper considers five steps for developing a review: defining the main topic, searching the literature, analyzing the results, writing the review and reflecting on the writing. Ultimately, this study proposes a twelve-item LR checklist. By clearly stating the desired achievements, this checklist allows Masters and Ph.D. students to continuously assess their own progress in elaborating an LR. Institutions aiming to strengthen students’ necessary skills in critical academic writing should also use this tool.

INTRODUCTION

Writing the literature review (LR) is often viewed as a difficult task that can be a point of writer’s block and procrastination ( 1 ) in postgraduate life. Disagreements on the definitions or classifications of LRs ( 2 ) may confuse students about their purpose and scope, as well as how to perform an LR. Interestingly, at many universities, the LR is still an important element in any academic work, despite the more recent trend of producing scientific articles rather than classical theses.

The LR is not an isolated section of the thesis/dissertation or a copy of the background section of a research proposal. It identifies the state-of-the-art knowledge in a particular field, clarifies information that is already known, elucidates implications of the problem being analyzed, links theory and practice ( 3 - 5 ), highlights gaps in the current literature, and places the dissertation/thesis within the research agenda of that field. Additionally, by writing the LR, postgraduate students will comprehend the structure of the subject and elaborate on their cognitive connections ( 3 ) while analyzing and synthesizing data with increasing maturity.

At the same time, the LR transforms the student and hints at the contents of other chapters for the reader. First, the LR explains the research question; second, it supports the hypothesis, objectives, and methods of the research project; and finally, it facilitates a description of the student’s interpretation of the results and his/her conclusions. For scholars, the LR is an introductory chapter ( 6 ). If it is well written, it demonstrates the student’s understanding of and maturity in a particular topic. A sound and sophisticated LR can indicate a robust dissertation/thesis.

A consensus on the best method to elaborate a dissertation/thesis has not been achieved. The LR can be a distinct chapter or included in different sections; it can be part of the introduction chapter, part of each research topic, or part of each published paper ( 7 ). However, scholars view the LR as an integral part of the main body of an academic work because it is intrinsically connected to other sections ( Figure 1 ) and is frequently present. The structure of the LR depends on the conventions of a particular discipline, the rules of the department, and the student’s and supervisor’s areas of expertise, needs and interests.

Interestingly, many postgraduate students choose to submit their LR to peer-reviewed journals. As LRs are critical evaluations of current knowledge, they are indeed publishable material, even in the form of narrative or systematic reviews. However, systematic reviews have specific patterns 1 ( 8 ) that may not entirely fit with the questions posed in the dissertation/thesis. Additionally, the scope of a systematic review may be too narrow, and the strict criteria for study inclusion may omit important information from the dissertation/thesis. Therefore, this essay discusses the definition of an LR is and methods to develop an LR in the context of an academic dissertation/thesis. Finally, we suggest a checklist to evaluate an LR.

WHAT IS A LITERATURE REVIEW IN A THESIS?

Conducting research and writing a dissertation/thesis translates rational thinking and enthusiasm ( 9 ). While a strong body of literature that instructs students on research methodology, data analysis and writing scientific papers exists, little guidance on performing LRs is available. The LR is a unique opportunity to assess and contrast various arguments and theories, not just summarize them. The research results should not be discussed within the LR, but the postgraduate student tends to write a comprehensive LR while reflecting on his or her own findings ( 10 ).

Many people believe that writing an LR is a lonely and linear process. Supervisors or the institutions assume that the Ph.D. student has mastered the relevant techniques and vocabulary associated with his/her subject and conducts a self-reflection about previously published findings. Indeed, while elaborating the LR, the student should aggregate diverse skills, which mainly rely on his/her own commitment to mastering them. Thus, less supervision should be required ( 11 ). However, the parameters described above might not currently be the case for many students ( 11 , 12 ), and the lack of formal and systematic training on writing LRs is an important concern ( 11 ).

An institutional environment devoted to active learning will provide students the opportunity to continuously reflect on LRs, which will form a dialogue between the postgraduate student and the current literature in a particular field ( 13 ). Postgraduate students will be interpreting studies by other researchers, and, according to Hart (1998) ( 3 ), the outcomes of the LR in a dissertation/thesis include the following:

• To identify what research has been performed and what topics require further investigation in a particular field of knowledge;
• To determine the context of the problem;
• To recognize the main methodologies and techniques that have been used in the past;
• To place the current research project within the historical, methodological and theoretical context of a particular field;
• To identify significant aspects of the topic;
• To elucidate the implications of the topic;
• To offer an alternative perspective;
• To discern how the studied subject is structured;
• To improve the student’s subject vocabulary in a particular field; and
• To characterize the links between theory and practice.

A sound LR translates the postgraduate student’s expertise in academic and scientific writing: it expresses his/her level of comfort with synthesizing ideas ( 11 ). The LR reveals how well the postgraduate student has proceeded in three domains: an effective literature search, the language domain, and critical writing.

Effective literature search

All students should be trained in gathering appropriate data for specific purposes, and information literacy skills are a cornerstone. These skills are defined as “an individual’s ability to know when they need information, to identify information that can help them address the issue or problem at hand, and to locate, evaluate, and use that information effectively” ( 14 ). Librarian support is of vital importance in coaching the appropriate use of Boolean logic (AND, OR, NOT) and other tools for highly efficient literature searches (e.g., quotation marks and truncation), as is the appropriate management of electronic databases.

Language domain

Academic writing must be concise and precise: unnecessary words distract the reader from the essential content ( 15 ). In this context, reading about issues distant from the research topic ( 16 ) may increase students’ general vocabulary and familiarity with grammar. Ultimately, reading diverse materials facilitates and encourages the writing process itself.

Critical writing

Critical judgment includes critical reading, thinking and writing. It supposes a student’s analytical reflection about what he/she has read. The student should delineate the basic elements of the topic, characterize the most relevant claims, identify relationships, and finally contrast those relationships ( 17 ). Each scientific document highlights the perspective of the author, and students will become more confident in judging the supporting evidence and underlying premises of a study and constructing their own counterargument as they read more articles. A paucity of integration or contradictory perspectives indicates lower levels of cognitive complexity ( 12 ).

Thus, while elaborating an LR, the postgraduate student should achieve the highest category of Bloom’s cognitive skills: evaluation ( 12 ). The writer should not only summarize data and understand each topic but also be able to make judgments based on objective criteria, compare resources and findings, identify discrepancies due to methodology, and construct his/her own argument ( 12 ). As a result, the student will be sufficiently confident to show his/her own voice .

Writing a consistent LR is an intense and complex activity that reveals the training and long-lasting academic skills of a writer. It is not a lonely or linear process. However, students are unlikely to be prepared to write an LR if they have not mastered the aforementioned domains ( 10 ). An institutional environment that supports student learning is crucial.

Different institutions employ distinct methods to promote students’ learning processes. First, many universities propose modules to develop behind the scenes activities that enhance self-reflection about general skills (e.g., the skills we have mastered and the skills we need to develop further), behaviors that should be incorporated (e.g., self-criticism about one’s own thoughts), and each student’s role in the advancement of his/her field. Lectures or workshops about LRs themselves are useful because they describe the purposes of the LR and how it fits into the whole picture of a student’s work. These activities may explain what type of discussion an LR must involve, the importance of defining the correct scope, the reasons to include a particular resource, and the main role of critical reading.

Some pedagogic services that promote a continuous improvement in study and academic skills are equally important. Examples include workshops about time management, the accomplishment of personal objectives, active learning, and foreign languages for nonnative speakers. Additionally, opportunities to converse with other students promotes an awareness of others’ experiences and difficulties. Ultimately, the supervisor’s role in providing feedback and setting deadlines is crucial in developing students’ abilities and in strengthening students’ writing quality ( 12 ).

HOW SHOULD A LITERATURE REVIEW BE DEVELOPED?

A consensus on the appropriate method for elaborating an LR is not available, but four main steps are generally accepted: defining the main topic, searching the literature, analyzing the results, and writing ( 6 ). We suggest a fifth step: reflecting on the information that has been written in previous publications ( Figure 2 ).

First step: Defining the main topic

Planning an LR is directly linked to the research main question of the thesis and occurs in parallel to students’ training in the three domains discussed above. The planning stage helps organize ideas, delimit the scope of the LR ( 11 ), and avoid the wasting of time in the process. Planning includes the following steps:

• Reflecting on the scope of the LR: postgraduate students will have assumptions about what material must be addressed and what information is not essential to an LR ( 13 , 18 ). Cooper’s Taxonomy of Literature Reviews 2 systematizes the writing process through six characteristics and nonmutually exclusive categories. The focus refers to the reviewer’s most important points of interest, while the goals concern what students want to achieve with the LR. The perspective assumes answers to the student’s own view of the LR and how he/she presents a particular issue. The coverage defines how comprehensive the student is in presenting the literature, and the organization determines the sequence of arguments. The audience is defined as the group for whom the LR is written.
• Designating sections and subsections: Headings and subheadings should be specific, explanatory and have a coherent sequence throughout the text ( 4 ). They simulate an inverted pyramid, with an increasing level of reflection and depth of argument.
• Identifying keywords: The relevant keywords for each LR section should be listed to guide the literature search. This list should mirror what Hart (1998) ( 3 ) advocates as subject vocabulary . The keywords will also be useful when the student is writing the LR since they guide the reader through the text.
• Delineating the time interval and language of documents to be retrieved in the second step. The most recently published documents should be considered, but relevant texts published before a predefined cutoff year can be included if they are classic documents in that field. Extra care should be employed when translating documents.

Second step: Searching the literature

The ability to gather adequate information from the literature must be addressed in postgraduate programs. Librarian support is important, particularly for accessing difficult texts. This step comprises the following components:

• Searching the literature itself: This process consists of defining which databases (electronic or dissertation/thesis repositories), official documents, and books will be searched and then actively conducting the search. Information literacy skills have a central role in this stage. While searching electronic databases, controlled vocabulary (e.g., Medical Subject Headings, or MeSH, for the PubMed database) or specific standardized syntax rules may need to be applied.

In addition, two other approaches are suggested. First, a review of the reference list of each document might be useful for identifying relevant publications to be included and important opinions to be assessed. This step is also relevant for referencing the original studies and leading authors in that field. Moreover, students can directly contact the experts on a particular topic to consult with them regarding their experience or use them as a source of additional unpublished documents.

Before submitting a dissertation/thesis, the electronic search strategy should be repeated. This process will ensure that the most recently published papers will be considered in the LR.

• Selecting documents for inclusion: Generally, the most recent literature will be included in the form of published peer-reviewed papers. Assess books and unpublished material, such as conference abstracts, academic texts and government reports, are also important to assess since the gray literature also offers valuable information. However, since these materials are not peer-reviewed, we recommend that they are carefully added to the LR.

This task is an important exercise in time management. First, students should read the title and abstract to understand whether that document suits their purposes, addresses the research question, and helps develop the topic of interest. Then, they should scan the full text, determine how it is structured, group it with similar documents, and verify whether other arguments might be considered ( 5 ).

Third step: Analyzing the results

Critical reading and thinking skills are important in this step. This step consists of the following components:

• Reading documents: The student may read various texts in depth according to LR sections and subsections ( defining the main topic ), which is not a passive activity ( 1 ). Some questions should be asked to practice critical analysis skills, as listed below. Is the research question evident and articulated with previous knowledge? What are the authors’ research goals and theoretical orientations, and how do they interact? Are the authors’ claims related to other scholars’ research? Do the authors consider different perspectives? Was the research project designed and conducted properly? Are the results and discussion plausible, and are they consistent with the research objectives and methodology? What are the strengths and limitations of this work? How do the authors support their findings? How does this work contribute to the current research topic? ( 1 , 19 )
• Taking notes: Students who systematically take notes on each document are more readily able to establish similarities or differences with other documents and to highlight personal observations. This approach reinforces the student’s ideas about the next step and helps develop his/her own academic voice ( 1 , 13 ). Voice recognition software ( 16 ), mind maps ( 5 ), flowcharts, tables, spreadsheets, personal comments on the referenced texts, and note-taking apps are all available tools for managing these observations, and the student him/herself should use the tool that best improves his/her learning. Additionally, when a student is considering submitting an LR to a peer-reviewed journal, notes should be taken on the activities performed in all five steps to ensure that they are able to be replicated.

Fourth step: Writing

The recognition of when a student is able and ready to write after a sufficient period of reading and thinking is likely a difficult task. Some students can produce a review in a single long work session. However, as discussed above, writing is not a linear process, and students do not need to write LRs according to a specific sequence of sections. Writing an LR is a time-consuming task, and some scholars believe that a period of at least six months is sufficient ( 6 ). An LR, and academic writing in general, expresses the writer’s proper thoughts, conclusions about others’ work ( 6 , 10 , 13 , 16 ), and decisions about methods to progress in the chosen field of knowledge. Thus, each student is expected to present a different learning and writing trajectory.

In this step, writing methods should be considered; then, editing, citing and correct referencing should complete this stage, at least temporarily. Freewriting techniques may be a good starting point for brainstorming ideas and improving the understanding of the information that has been read ( 1 ). Students should consider the following parameters when creating an agenda for writing the LR: two-hour writing blocks (at minimum), with prespecified tasks that are possible to complete in one section; short (minutes) and long breaks (days or weeks) to allow sufficient time for mental rest and reflection; and short- and long-term goals to motivate the writing itself ( 20 ). With increasing experience, this scheme can vary widely, and it is not a straightforward rule. Importantly, each discipline has a different way of writing ( 1 ), and each department has its own preferred styles for citations and references.

Fifth step: Reflecting on the writing

In this step, the postgraduate student should ask him/herself the same questions as in the analyzing the results step, which can take more time than anticipated. Ambiguities, repeated ideas, and a lack of coherence may not be noted when the student is immersed in the writing task for long periods. The whole effort will likely be a work in progress, and continuous refinements in the written material will occur once the writing process has begun.

LITERATURE REVIEW CHECKLIST

In contrast to review papers, the LR of a dissertation/thesis should not be a standalone piece or work. Instead, it should present the student as a scholar and should maintain the interest of the audience in how that dissertation/thesis will provide solutions for the current gaps in a particular field.

A checklist for evaluating an LR is convenient for students’ continuous academic development and research transparency: it clearly states the desired achievements for the LR of a dissertation/thesis. Here, we present an LR checklist developed from an LR scoring rubric ( 11 ). For a critical analysis of an LR, we maintain the five categories but offer twelve criteria that are not scaled ( Figure 3 ). The criteria all have the same importance and are not mutually exclusive.

First category: Coverage

1. justified criteria exist for the inclusion and exclusion of literature in the review.

This criterion builds on the main topic and areas covered by the LR ( 18 ). While experts may be confident in retrieving and selecting literature, postgraduate students must convince their audience about the adequacy of their search strategy and their reasons for intentionally selecting what material to cover ( 11 ). References from different fields of knowledge provide distinct perspective, but narrowing the scope of coverage may be important in areas with a large body of existing knowledge.

Second category: Synthesis

2. a critical examination of the state of the field exists.

A critical examination is an assessment of distinct aspects in the field ( 1 ) along with a constructive argument. It is not a negative critique but an expression of the student’s understanding of how other scholars have added to the topic ( 1 ), and the student should analyze and contextualize contradictory statements. A writer’s personal bias (beliefs or political involvement) have been shown to influence the structure and writing of a document; therefore, the cultural and paradigmatic background guide how the theories are revised and presented ( 13 ). However, an honest judgment is important when considering different perspectives.

3. The topic or problem is clearly placed in the context of the broader scholarly literature

The broader scholarly literature should be related to the chosen main topic for the LR ( how to develop the literature review section). The LR can cover the literature from one or more disciplines, depending on its scope, but it should always offer a new perspective. In addition, students should be careful in citing and referencing previous publications. As a rule, original studies and primary references should generally be included. Systematic and narrative reviews present summarized data, and it may be important to cite them, particularly for issues that should be understood but do not require a detailed description. Similarly, quotations highlight the exact statement from another publication. However, excessive referencing may disclose lower levels of analysis and synthesis by the student.

4. The LR is critically placed in the historical context of the field

Situating the LR in its historical context shows the level of comfort of the student in addressing a particular topic. Instead of only presenting statements and theories in a temporal approach, which occasionally follows a linear timeline, the LR should authentically characterize the student’s academic work in the state-of-art techniques in their particular field of knowledge. Thus, the LR should reinforce why the dissertation/thesis represents original work in the chosen research field.

5. Ambiguities in definitions are considered and resolved

Distinct theories on the same topic may exist in different disciplines, and one discipline may consider multiple concepts to explain one topic. These misunderstandings should be addressed and contemplated. The LR should not synthesize all theories or concepts at the same time. Although this approach might demonstrate in-depth reading on a particular topic, it can reveal a student’s inability to comprehend and synthesize his/her research problem.

6. Important variables and phenomena relevant to the topic are articulated

The LR is a unique opportunity to articulate ideas and arguments and to purpose new relationships between them ( 10 , 11 ). More importantly, a sound LR will outline to the audience how these important variables and phenomena will be addressed in the current academic work. Indeed, the LR should build a bidirectional link with the remaining sections and ground the connections between all of the sections ( Figure 1 ).

7. A synthesized new perspective on the literature has been established

The LR is a ‘creative inquiry’ ( 13 ) in which the student elaborates his/her own discourse, builds on previous knowledge in the field, and describes his/her own perspective while interpreting others’ work ( 13 , 17 ). Thus, students should articulate the current knowledge, not accept the results at face value ( 11 , 13 , 17 ), and improve their own cognitive abilities ( 12 ).

Third category: Methodology

8. the main methodologies and research techniques that have been used in the field are identified and their advantages and disadvantages are discussed.

The LR is expected to distinguish the research that has been completed from investigations that remain to be performed, address the benefits and limitations of the main methods applied to date, and consider the strategies for addressing the expected limitations described above. While placing his/her research within the methodological context of a particular topic, the LR will justify the methodology of the study and substantiate the student’s interpretations.

9. Ideas and theories in the field are related to research methodologies

The audience expects the writer to analyze and synthesize methodological approaches in the field. The findings should be explained according to the strengths and limitations of previous research methods, and students must avoid interpretations that are not supported by the analyzed literature. This criterion translates to the student’s comprehension of the applicability and types of answers provided by different research methodologies, even those using a quantitative or qualitative research approach.

Fourth category: Significance

10. the scholarly significance of the research problem is rationalized.

The LR is an introductory section of a dissertation/thesis and will present the postgraduate student as a scholar in a particular field ( 11 ). Therefore, the LR should discuss how the research problem is currently addressed in the discipline being investigated or in different disciplines, depending on the scope of the LR. The LR explains the academic paradigms in the topic of interest ( 13 ) and methods to advance the field from these starting points. However, an excess number of personal citations—whether referencing the student’s research or studies by his/her research team—may reflect a narrow literature search and a lack of comprehensive synthesis of ideas and arguments.

11. The practical significance of the research problem is rationalized

The practical significance indicates a student’s comprehensive understanding of research terminology (e.g., risk versus associated factor), methodology (e.g., efficacy versus effectiveness) and plausible interpretations in the context of the field. Notably, the academic argument about a topic may not always reflect the debate in real life terms. For example, using a quantitative approach in epidemiology, statistically significant differences between groups do not explain all of the factors involved in a particular problem ( 21 ). Therefore, excessive faith in p -values may reflect lower levels of critical evaluation of the context and implications of a research problem by the student.

Fifth category: Rhetoric

12. the lr was written with a coherent, clear structure that supported the review.

This category strictly relates to the language domain: the text should be coherent and presented in a logical sequence, regardless of which organizational ( 18 ) approach is chosen. The beginning of each section/subsection should state what themes will be addressed, paragraphs should be carefully linked to each other ( 10 ), and the first sentence of each paragraph should generally summarize the content. Additionally, the student’s statements are clear, sound, and linked to other scholars’ works, and precise and concise language that follows standardized writing conventions (e.g., in terms of active/passive voice and verb tenses) is used. Attention to grammar, such as orthography and punctuation, indicates prudence and supports a robust dissertation/thesis. Ultimately, all of these strategies provide fluency and consistency for the text.

Although the scoring rubric was initially proposed for postgraduate programs in education research, we are convinced that this checklist is a valuable tool for all academic areas. It enables the monitoring of students’ learning curves and a concentrated effort on any criteria that are not yet achieved. For institutions, the checklist is a guide to support supervisors’ feedback, improve students’ writing skills, and highlight the learning goals of each program. These criteria do not form a linear sequence, but ideally, all twelve achievements should be perceived in the LR.

CONCLUSIONS

A single correct method to classify, evaluate and guide the elaboration of an LR has not been established. In this essay, we have suggested directions for planning, structuring and critically evaluating an LR. The planning of the scope of an LR and approaches to complete it is a valuable effort, and the five steps represent a rational starting point. An institutional environment devoted to active learning will support students in continuously reflecting on LRs, which will form a dialogue between the writer and the current literature in a particular field ( 13 ).

The completion of an LR is a challenging and necessary process for understanding one’s own field of expertise. Knowledge is always transitory, but our responsibility as scholars is to provide a critical contribution to our field, allowing others to think through our work. Good researchers are grounded in sophisticated LRs, which reveal a writer’s training and long-lasting academic skills. We recommend using the LR checklist as a tool for strengthening the skills necessary for critical academic writing.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Leite DFB has initially conceived the idea and has written the first draft of this review. Padilha MAS and Cecatti JG have supervised data interpretation and critically reviewed the manuscript. All authors have read the draft and agreed with this submission. Authors are responsible for all aspects of this academic piece.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are grateful to all of the professors of the ‘Getting Started with Graduate Research and Generic Skills’ module at University College Cork, Cork, Ireland, for suggesting and supporting this article. Funding: DFBL has granted scholarship from Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education (CAPES) to take part of her Ph.D. studies in Ireland (process number 88881.134512/2016-01). There is no participation from sponsors on authors’ decision to write or to submit this manuscript.

No potential conflict of interest was reported.

1 The questions posed in systematic reviews usually follow the ‘PICOS’ acronym: Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Study design.

2 In 1988, Cooper proposed a taxonomy that aims to facilitate students’ and institutions’ understanding of literature reviews. Six characteristics with specific categories are briefly described: Focus: research outcomes, research methodologies, theories, or practices and applications; Goals: integration (generalization, conflict resolution, and linguistic bridge-building), criticism, or identification of central issues; Perspective: neutral representation or espousal of a position; Coverage: exhaustive, exhaustive with selective citations, representative, central or pivotal; Organization: historical, conceptual, or methodological; and Audience: specialized scholars, general scholars, practitioners or policymakers, or the general public.

15 Literature Review Examples

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

Learn about our Editorial Process

Literature reviews are a necessary step in a research process and often required when writing your research proposal . They involve gathering, analyzing, and evaluating existing knowledge about a topic in order to find gaps in the literature where future studies will be needed.

Ideally, once you have completed your literature review, you will be able to identify how your research project can build upon and extend existing knowledge in your area of study.

Generally, for my undergraduate research students, I recommend a narrative review, where themes can be generated in order for the students to develop sufficient understanding of the topic so they can build upon the themes using unique methods or novel research questions.

If you’re in the process of writing a literature review, I have developed a literature review template for you to use – it’s a huge time-saver and walks you through how to write a literature review step-by-step:

Get your time-saving templates here to write your own literature review.

Literature Review Examples

For the following types of literature review, I present an explanation and overview of the type, followed by links to some real-life literature reviews on the topics.

1. Narrative Review Examples

Also known as a traditional literature review, the narrative review provides a broad overview of the studies done on a particular topic.

It often includes both qualitative and quantitative studies and may cover a wide range of years.

The narrative review’s purpose is to identify commonalities, gaps, and contradictions in the literature .

I recommend to my students that they should gather their studies together, take notes on each study, then try to group them by themes that form the basis for the review (see my step-by-step instructions at the end of the article).

Example Study

Title: Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations

Citation: Vermeir, P., Vandijck, D., Degroote, S., Peleman, R., Verhaeghe, R., Mortier, E., … & Vogelaers, D. (2015). Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations. International journal of clinical practice , 69 (11), 1257-1267.

Source: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/ijcp.12686  

Overview: This narrative review analyzed themes emerging from 69 articles about communication in healthcare contexts. Five key themes were found in the literature: poor communication can lead to various negative outcomes, discontinuity of care, compromise of patient safety, patient dissatisfaction, and inefficient use of resources. After presenting the key themes, the authors recommend that practitioners need to approach healthcare communication in a more structured way, such as by ensuring there is a clear understanding of who is in charge of ensuring effective communication in clinical settings.

Other Examples

• Burnout in United States Healthcare Professionals: A Narrative Review (Reith, 2018) – read here
• Examining the Presence, Consequences, and Reduction of Implicit Bias in Health Care: A Narrative Review (Zestcott, Blair & Stone, 2016) – read here
• A Narrative Review of School-Based Physical Activity for Enhancing Cognition and Learning (Mavilidi et al., 2018) – read here
• A narrative review on burnout experienced by medical students and residents (Dyrbye & Shanafelt, 2015) – read here

2. Systematic Review Examples

This type of literature review is more structured and rigorous than a narrative review. It involves a detailed and comprehensive plan and search strategy derived from a set of specified research questions.

The key way you’d know a systematic review compared to a narrative review is in the methodology: the systematic review will likely have a very clear criteria for how the studies were collected, and clear explanations of exclusion/inclusion criteria. 

The goal is to gather the maximum amount of valid literature on the topic, filter out invalid or low-quality reviews, and minimize bias. Ideally, this will provide more reliable findings, leading to higher-quality conclusions and recommendations for further research.

You may note from the examples below that the ‘method’ sections in systematic reviews tend to be much more explicit, often noting rigid inclusion/exclusion criteria and exact keywords used in searches.

Title: The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review  

Citation: Roman, S., Sánchez-Siles, L. M., & Siegrist, M. (2017). The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review. Trends in food science & technology , 67 , 44-57.

Source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092422441730122X  

Overview: This systematic review included 72 studies of food naturalness to explore trends in the literature about its importance for consumers. Keywords used in the data search included: food, naturalness, natural content, and natural ingredients. Studies were included if they examined consumers’ preference for food naturalness and contained empirical data. The authors found that the literature lacks clarity about how naturalness is defined and measured, but also found that food consumption is significantly influenced by perceived naturalness of goods.

• A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018 (Martin, Sun & Westine, 2020) – read here
• Where Is Current Research on Blockchain Technology? (Yli-Huumo et al., 2016) – read here
• Universities—industry collaboration: A systematic review (Ankrah & Al-Tabbaa, 2015) – read here
• Internet of Things Applications: A Systematic Review (Asghari, Rahmani & Javadi, 2019) – read here

3. Meta-analysis

This is a type of systematic review that uses statistical methods to combine and summarize the results of several studies.

Due to its robust methodology, a meta-analysis is often considered the ‘gold standard’ of secondary research , as it provides a more precise estimate of a treatment effect than any individual study contributing to the pooled analysis.

Furthermore, by aggregating data from a range of studies, a meta-analysis can identify patterns, disagreements, or other interesting relationships that may have been hidden in individual studies.

This helps to enhance the generalizability of findings, making the conclusions drawn from a meta-analysis particularly powerful and informative for policy and practice.

Title: Cholesterol and Alzheimer’s Disease Risk: A Meta-Meta-Analysis

Citation: Sáiz-Vazquez, O., Puente-Martínez, A., Ubillos-Landa, S., Pacheco-Bonrostro, J., & Santabárbara, J. (2020). Cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease risk: a meta-meta-analysis. Brain sciences, 10(6), 386.

Source: https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10060386  

O verview: This study examines the relationship between cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Researchers conducted a systematic search of meta-analyses and reviewed several databases, collecting 100 primary studies and five meta-analyses to analyze the connection between cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease. They find that the literature compellingly demonstrates that low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels significantly influence the development of Alzheimer’s disease.

• The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research (Wisniewski, Zierer & Hattie, 2020) – read here
• How Much Does Education Improve Intelligence? A Meta-Analysis (Ritchie & Tucker-Drob, 2018) – read here
• A meta-analysis of factors related to recycling (Geiger et al., 2019) – read here
• Stress management interventions for police officers and recruits (Patterson, Chung & Swan, 2014) – read here

Other Types of Reviews

• Scoping Review: This type of review is used to map the key concepts underpinning a research area and the main sources and types of evidence available. It can be undertaken as stand-alone projects in their own right, or as a precursor to a systematic review.
• Rapid Review: This type of review accelerates the systematic review process in order to produce information in a timely manner. This is achieved by simplifying or omitting stages of the systematic review process.
• Integrative Review: This review method is more inclusive than others, allowing for the simultaneous inclusion of experimental and non-experimental research. The goal is to more comprehensively understand a particular phenomenon.
• Critical Review: This is similar to a narrative review but requires a robust understanding of both the subject and the existing literature. In a critical review, the reviewer not only summarizes the existing literature, but also evaluates its strengths and weaknesses. This is common in the social sciences and humanities .
• State-of-the-Art Review: This considers the current level of advancement in a field or topic and makes recommendations for future research directions. This type of review is common in technological and scientific fields but can be applied to any discipline.

How to Write a Narrative Review (Tips for Undergrad Students)

Most undergraduate students conducting a capstone research project will be writing narrative reviews. Below is a five-step process for conducting a simple review of the literature for your project.

• Search for Relevant Literature: Use scholarly databases related to your field of study, provided by your university library, along with appropriate search terms to identify key scholarly articles that have been published on your topic.
• Evaluate and Select Sources: Filter the source list by selecting studies that are directly relevant and of sufficient quality, considering factors like credibility , objectivity, accuracy, and validity.
• Analyze and Synthesize: Review each source and summarize the main arguments  in one paragraph (or more, for postgrad). Keep these summaries in a table.
• Identify Themes: With all studies summarized, group studies that share common themes, such as studies that have similar findings or methodologies.
• Write the Review: Write your review based upon the themes or subtopics you have identified. Give a thorough overview of each theme, integrating source data, and conclude with a summary of the current state of knowledge then suggestions for future research based upon your evaluation of what is lacking in the literature.

Literature reviews don’t have to be as scary as they seem. Yes, they are difficult and require a strong degree of comprehension of academic studies. But it can be feasibly done through following a structured approach to data collection and analysis. With my undergraduate research students (who tend to conduct small-scale qualitative studies ), I encourage them to conduct a narrative literature review whereby they can identify key themes in the literature. Within each theme, students can critique key studies and their strengths and limitations , in order to get a lay of the land and come to a point where they can identify ways to contribute new insights to the existing academic conversation on their topic.

Ankrah, S., & Omar, A. T. (2015). Universities–industry collaboration: A systematic review. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 31(3), 387-408.

Asghari, P., Rahmani, A. M., & Javadi, H. H. S. (2019). Internet of Things applications: A systematic review. Computer Networks , 148 , 241-261.

Dyrbye, L., & Shanafelt, T. (2016). A narrative review on burnout experienced by medical students and residents. Medical education , 50 (1), 132-149.

Geiger, J. L., Steg, L., Van Der Werff, E., & Ünal, A. B. (2019). A meta-analysis of factors related to recycling. Journal of environmental psychology , 64 , 78-97.

Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & education , 159 , 104009.

Mavilidi, M. F., Ruiter, M., Schmidt, M., Okely, A. D., Loyens, S., Chandler, P., & Paas, F. (2018). A narrative review of school-based physical activity for enhancing cognition and learning: The importance of relevancy and integration. Frontiers in psychology , 2079.

Patterson, G. T., Chung, I. W., & Swan, P. W. (2014). Stress management interventions for police officers and recruits: A meta-analysis. Journal of experimental criminology , 10 , 487-513.

Reith, T. P. (2018). Burnout in United States healthcare professionals: a narrative review. Cureus , 10 (12).

Ritchie, S. J., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2018). How much does education improve intelligence? A meta-analysis. Psychological science , 29 (8), 1358-1369.

Roman, S., Sánchez-Siles, L. M., & Siegrist, M. (2017). The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review. Trends in food science & technology , 67 , 44-57.

Sáiz-Vazquez, O., Puente-Martínez, A., Ubillos-Landa, S., Pacheco-Bonrostro, J., & Santabárbara, J. (2020). Cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease risk: a meta-meta-analysis. Brain sciences, 10(6), 386.

Vermeir, P., Vandijck, D., Degroote, S., Peleman, R., Verhaeghe, R., Mortier, E., … & Vogelaers, D. (2015). Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations. International journal of clinical practice , 69 (11), 1257-1267.

Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology , 10 , 3087.

Yli-Huumo, J., Ko, D., Choi, S., Park, S., & Smolander, K. (2016). Where is current research on blockchain technology?—a systematic review. PloS one , 11 (10), e0163477.

Zestcott, C. A., Blair, I. V., & Stone, J. (2016). Examining the presence, consequences, and reduction of implicit bias in health care: a narrative review. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations , 19 (4), 528-542

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 15 Body Language Signs He Likes You
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 25 Classroom Wall Decoration Ideas
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 31 Cute & Cozy Play Corner Ideas
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 24 Steiner-Waldorf Classroom Design Ideas

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

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

Libraries | Research Guides

Literature reviews, what is a literature review, learning more about how to do a literature review.

• Planning the Review
• The Research Question
• Choosing Where to Search
• Organizing the Review
• Writing the Review

A literature review is a review and synthesis of existing research on a topic or research question. A literature review is meant to analyze the scholarly literature, make connections across writings and identify strengths, weaknesses, trends, and missing conversations. A literature review should address different aspects of a topic as it relates to your research question. A literature review goes beyond a description or summary of the literature you have read. 

• Sage Research Methods Core This link opens in a new window SAGE Research Methods supports research at all levels by providing material to guide users through every step of the research process. SAGE Research Methods is the ultimate methods library with more than 1000 books, reference works, journal articles, and instructional videos by world-leading academics from across the social sciences, including the largest collection of qualitative methods books available online from any scholarly publisher. – Publisher

• Next: Planning the Review >>
• Last Updated: Jul 8, 2024 11:22 AM
• URL: https://libguides.northwestern.edu/literaturereviews

• Process: Literature Reviews
• Literature Review
• Managing Sources

Ask a Librarian

Does your assignment or publication require that you write a literature review? This guide is intended to help you understand what a literature is, why it is worth doing, and some quick tips composing one.

Understanding Literature Reviews

What is a literature review  .

Typically, a literature review is a written discussion that examines publications about  a particular subject area or topic. Depending on disciplines, publications, or authors a literature review may be: 

A summary of sources An organized presentation of sources A synthesis or interpretation of sources An evaluative analysis of sources

A Literature Review may be part of a process or a product. It may be:

A part of your research process A part of your final research publication An independent publication

Why do a literature review?

The Literature Review will place your research in context. It will help you and your readers:  

Locate patterns, relationships, connections, agreements, disagreements, & gaps in understanding Identify methodological and theoretical foundations Identify landmark and exemplary works Situate your voice in a broader conversation with other writers, thinkers, and scholars

The Literature Review will aid your research process. It will help you to:

Establish your knowledge Understand what has been said Define your questions Establish a relevant methodology Refine your voice Situate your voice in the conversation

What does a literature review look like?

The Literature Review structure and organization may include sections such as:  

An introduction or overview A body or organizational sub-divisions A conclusion or an explanation of significance

The body of a literature review may be organized in several ways, including:

Chronologically: organized by date of publication Methodologically: organized by type of research method used Thematically: organized by concept, trend, or theme Ideologically: organized by belief, ideology, or school of thought

• Find a focus
• Find models
• Review your target publication
• Track citations
• Read critically
• Manage your citations
• Ask friends, faculty, and librarians

Additional Sources

• Reviewing the literature. Project Planner.
• Literature Review: By UNC Writing Center
• PhD on Track
• CU Graduate Students Thesis & Dissertation Guidance
• CU Honors Thesis Guidance

• Next: Managing Sources >>
• University of Colorado Boulder Libraries
• Research Guides
• Research Strategies
• Last Updated: Jun 20, 2024 3:23 PM
• URL: https://libguides.colorado.edu/strategies/litreview
• © Regents of the University of Colorado

Penn State University Libraries

Soc 001: introductory sociology.

• Literature Reviews: Strategies for Writing
• Fake News and Evaluating Sources

Literature Reviews

What is a Literature Review? The literature review is a critical look at the existing research that is significant to the work that you are carrying out. This overview identifies prominent research trends in addition to assessing the overall strengths and weaknesses of the existing research.

Purpose of the Literature Review

• To provide background information about a research topic.
• To establish the importance of a topic.
• To demonstrate familiarity with a topic/problem.
• To “carve out a space” for further work and allow you to position yourself in a scholarly conversation.

Characteristics of an effective literature review In addition to fulfilling the purposes outlined above, an effective literature review provides a critical overview of existing research by

• Outlining important research trends.
• Assessing strengths and weaknesses (of individual studies as well the existing research as a whole).
• Identifying potential gaps in knowledge.
• Establishing a need for current and/or future research projects.

Steps of the Literature Review Process

1) Planning: identify the focus, type, scope and discipline of the review you intend to write. 2) Reading and Research: collect and read current research on your topic. Select only those sources that are most relevant to your project. 3) Analyzing: summarize, synthesize, critique, and compare your sources in order to assess the field of research as a whole. 4) Drafting: develop a thesis or claim to make about the existing research and decide how to organize your material. 5) Revising: revise and finalize the structural, stylistic, and grammatical issues of your paper.

This process is not always a linear process; depending on the size and scope of your literature review, you may find yourself returning to some of these steps repeatedly as you continue to focus your project.

These steps adapted from the full workshop offered by the Graduate Writing Center at Penn State. 

Literature Review Format

 Introduction

• Provide an overview of the topic, theme, or issue.
• Identify your specific area of focus.
• Describe your methodology and rationale. How did you decide which sources to include and which to exclude? Why? How is your review organized?
• Briefly discuss the overall trends in the published scholarship in this area.
•  Establish your reason for writing the review.
•  Find the best organizational method for your review.
•  Summarize sources by providing the most relevant information.
•  Respectfully and objectively critique and evaluate the studies.
•  Use direct quotations sparingly and only if appropriate.

 Conclusion

•  Summarize the major findings of the sources that you reviewed, remembering to keep the focus on your topic.
•  Evaluate the current state of scholarship in this area (ex. flaws or gaps in the research, inconsistencies in findings) 
•  Identify any areas for further research.
•  Conclude by making a connection between your topic and some larger area of study such as the discipline. 
• << Previous: Home
• Next: Fake News and Evaluating Sources >>
• Last Updated: Oct 20, 2023 10:48 AM
• URL: https://guides.libraries.psu.edu/shenangosoc001

Log in using your username and password

• Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
• Latest content
• Current issue
• Write for Us
• BMJ Journals

You are here

• Volume 24, Issue 2
• Five tips for developing useful literature summary tables for writing review articles
• Article Text
• Article info
• Citation Tools
• Rapid Responses
• Article metrics

• http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0157-5319 Ahtisham Younas 1 , 2 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7839-8130 Parveen Ali 3 , 4
• 1 Memorial University of Newfoundland , St John's , Newfoundland , Canada
• 2 Swat College of Nursing , Pakistan
• 3 School of Nursing and Midwifery , University of Sheffield , Sheffield , South Yorkshire , UK
• 4 Sheffield University Interpersonal Violence Research Group , Sheffield University , Sheffield , UK
• Correspondence to Ahtisham Younas, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John's, NL A1C 5C4, Canada; ay6133{at}mun.ca

https://doi.org/10.1136/ebnurs-2021-103417

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

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

Introduction

Literature reviews offer a critical synthesis of empirical and theoretical literature to assess the strength of evidence, develop guidelines for practice and policymaking, and identify areas for future research. 1 It is often essential and usually the first task in any research endeavour, particularly in masters or doctoral level education. For effective data extraction and rigorous synthesis in reviews, the use of literature summary tables is of utmost importance. A literature summary table provides a synopsis of an included article. It succinctly presents its purpose, methods, findings and other relevant information pertinent to the review. The aim of developing these literature summary tables is to provide the reader with the information at one glance. Since there are multiple types of reviews (eg, systematic, integrative, scoping, critical and mixed methods) with distinct purposes and techniques, 2 there could be various approaches for developing literature summary tables making it a complex task specialty for the novice researchers or reviewers. Here, we offer five tips for authors of the review articles, relevant to all types of reviews, for creating useful and relevant literature summary tables. We also provide examples from our published reviews to illustrate how useful literature summary tables can be developed and what sort of information should be provided.

Tip 1: provide detailed information about frameworks and methods

• Download figure
• Open in new tab
• Download powerpoint

Tabular literature summaries from a scoping review. Source: Rasheed et al . 3

The provision of information about conceptual and theoretical frameworks and methods is useful for several reasons. First, in quantitative (reviews synthesising the results of quantitative studies) and mixed reviews (reviews synthesising the results of both qualitative and quantitative studies to address a mixed review question), it allows the readers to assess the congruence of the core findings and methods with the adapted framework and tested assumptions. In qualitative reviews (reviews synthesising results of qualitative studies), this information is beneficial for readers to recognise the underlying philosophical and paradigmatic stance of the authors of the included articles. For example, imagine the authors of an article, included in a review, used phenomenological inquiry for their research. In that case, the review authors and the readers of the review need to know what kind of (transcendental or hermeneutic) philosophical stance guided the inquiry. Review authors should, therefore, include the philosophical stance in their literature summary for the particular article. Second, information about frameworks and methods enables review authors and readers to judge the quality of the research, which allows for discerning the strengths and limitations of the article. For example, if authors of an included article intended to develop a new scale and test its psychometric properties. To achieve this aim, they used a convenience sample of 150 participants and performed exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the same sample. Such an approach would indicate a flawed methodology because EFA and CFA should not be conducted on the same sample. The review authors must include this information in their summary table. Omitting this information from a summary could lead to the inclusion of a flawed article in the review, thereby jeopardising the review’s rigour.

Tip 2: include strengths and limitations for each article

Critical appraisal of individual articles included in a review is crucial for increasing the rigour of the review. Despite using various templates for critical appraisal, authors often do not provide detailed information about each reviewed article’s strengths and limitations. Merely noting the quality score based on standardised critical appraisal templates is not adequate because the readers should be able to identify the reasons for assigning a weak or moderate rating. Many recent critical appraisal checklists (eg, Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool) discourage review authors from assigning a quality score and recommend noting the main strengths and limitations of included studies. It is also vital that methodological and conceptual limitations and strengths of the articles included in the review are provided because not all review articles include empirical research papers. Rather some review synthesises the theoretical aspects of articles. Providing information about conceptual limitations is also important for readers to judge the quality of foundations of the research. For example, if you included a mixed-methods study in the review, reporting the methodological and conceptual limitations about ‘integration’ is critical for evaluating the study’s strength. Suppose the authors only collected qualitative and quantitative data and did not state the intent and timing of integration. In that case, the strength of the study is weak. Integration only occurred at the levels of data collection. However, integration may not have occurred at the analysis, interpretation and reporting levels.

Tip 3: write conceptual contribution of each reviewed article

While reading and evaluating review papers, we have observed that many review authors only provide core results of the article included in a review and do not explain the conceptual contribution offered by the included article. We refer to conceptual contribution as a description of how the article’s key results contribute towards the development of potential codes, themes or subthemes, or emerging patterns that are reported as the review findings. For example, the authors of a review article noted that one of the research articles included in their review demonstrated the usefulness of case studies and reflective logs as strategies for fostering compassion in nursing students. The conceptual contribution of this research article could be that experiential learning is one way to teach compassion to nursing students, as supported by case studies and reflective logs. This conceptual contribution of the article should be mentioned in the literature summary table. Delineating each reviewed article’s conceptual contribution is particularly beneficial in qualitative reviews, mixed-methods reviews, and critical reviews that often focus on developing models and describing or explaining various phenomena. Figure 2 offers an example of a literature summary table. 4

Tabular literature summaries from a critical review. Source: Younas and Maddigan. 4

Tip 4: compose potential themes from each article during summary writing

While developing literature summary tables, many authors use themes or subthemes reported in the given articles as the key results of their own review. Such an approach prevents the review authors from understanding the article’s conceptual contribution, developing rigorous synthesis and drawing reasonable interpretations of results from an individual article. Ultimately, it affects the generation of novel review findings. For example, one of the articles about women’s healthcare-seeking behaviours in developing countries reported a theme ‘social-cultural determinants of health as precursors of delays’. Instead of using this theme as one of the review findings, the reviewers should read and interpret beyond the given description in an article, compare and contrast themes, findings from one article with findings and themes from another article to find similarities and differences and to understand and explain bigger picture for their readers. Therefore, while developing literature summary tables, think twice before using the predeveloped themes. Including your themes in the summary tables (see figure 1 ) demonstrates to the readers that a robust method of data extraction and synthesis has been followed.

Tip 5: create your personalised template for literature summaries

Often templates are available for data extraction and development of literature summary tables. The available templates may be in the form of a table, chart or a structured framework that extracts some essential information about every article. The commonly used information may include authors, purpose, methods, key results and quality scores. While extracting all relevant information is important, such templates should be tailored to meet the needs of the individuals’ review. For example, for a review about the effectiveness of healthcare interventions, a literature summary table must include information about the intervention, its type, content timing, duration, setting, effectiveness, negative consequences, and receivers and implementers’ experiences of its usage. Similarly, literature summary tables for articles included in a meta-synthesis must include information about the participants’ characteristics, research context and conceptual contribution of each reviewed article so as to help the reader make an informed decision about the usefulness or lack of usefulness of the individual article in the review and the whole review.

In conclusion, narrative or systematic reviews are almost always conducted as a part of any educational project (thesis or dissertation) or academic or clinical research. Literature reviews are the foundation of research on a given topic. Robust and high-quality reviews play an instrumental role in guiding research, practice and policymaking. However, the quality of reviews is also contingent on rigorous data extraction and synthesis, which require developing literature summaries. We have outlined five tips that could enhance the quality of the data extraction and synthesis process by developing useful literature summaries.

• Aromataris E ,
• Rasheed SP ,

Twitter @Ahtisham04, @parveenazamali

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

Competing interests None declared.

Patient consent for publication Not required.

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Read the full text or download the PDF:

Literature Review - what is a Literature Review, why it is important and how it is done

• Strategies to Find Sources

Evaluating Literature Reviews and Sources

Reading critically, tips to evaluate sources.

• Tips for Writing Literature Reviews
• Writing Literature Review: Useful Sites
• Citation Resources
• Other Academic Writings
• Useful Resources

A good literature review evaluates a wide variety of sources (academic articles, scholarly books, government/NGO reports). It also evaluates literature reviews that study similar topics. This page offers you a list of resources and tips on how to evaluate the sources that you may use to write your review.

• A Closer Look at Evaluating Literature Reviews Excerpt from the book chapter, “Evaluating Introductions and Literature Reviews” in Fred Pyrczak’s Evaluating Research in Academic Journals: A Practical Guide to Realistic Evaluation , (Chapter 4 and 5). This PDF discusses and offers great advice on how to evaluate "Introductions" and "Literature Reviews" by listing questions and tips. First part focus on Introductions and in page 10 in the PDF, 37 in the text, it focus on "literature reviews".
• Tips for Evaluating Sources (Print vs. Internet Sources) Excellent page that will guide you on what to ask to determine if your source is a reliable one. Check the other topics in the guide: Evaluating Bibliographic Citations and Evaluation During Reading on the left side menu.

To be able to write a good Literature Review, you need to be able to read critically. Below are some tips that will help you evaluate the sources for your paper.

Reading critically (summary from How to Read Academic Texts Critically)

• Who is the author? What is his/her standing in the field.
• What is the author’s purpose? To offer advice, make practical suggestions, solve a specific problem, to critique or clarify?
• Note the experts in the field: are there specific names/labs that are frequently cited?
• Pay attention to methodology: is it sound? what testing procedures, subjects, materials were used?
• Note conflicting theories, methodologies and results. Are there any assumptions being made by most/some researchers?
• Theories: have they evolved overtime?
• Evaluate and synthesize the findings and conclusions. How does this study contribute to your project?

Useful links:

• How to Read a Paper (University of Waterloo, Canada) This is an excellent paper that teach you how to read an academic paper, how to determine if it is something to set aside, or something to read deeply. Good advice to organize your literature for the Literature Review or just reading for classes.

Criteria to evaluate sources:

• Authority : Who is the author? what is his/her credentials--what university he/she is affliliated? Is his/her area of expertise?
• Usefulness : How this source related to your topic? How current or relevant it is to your topic?
• Reliability : Does the information comes from a reliable, trusted source such as an academic journal?

Useful site - Critically Analyzing Information Sources (Cornell University Library)

• << Previous: Strategies to Find Sources
• Next: Tips for Writing Literature Reviews >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 10:56 AM
• URL: https://lit.libguides.com/Literature-Review

The Library, Technological University of the Shannon: Midwest

Beyond Belief and Practice: An Exploratory Literature Review and Discussion of the Differential Impact of Spirituality and Religiosity on Mental Health Disorders

• PHILOSOPHICAL EXPLORATION
• Published: 14 July 2024

Cite this article

• Mahua Jana Dubey 1 ,
• Ritwik Ghosh 2 ,
• Gautam Das 3 ,
• Dipayan Roy 4 ,
• Shambaditya Das 3 ,
• Arka Prava Chakraborty 3 ,
• Subham Chatterjee 5 ,
• Souvik Dubey 3 &
• Julián Benito-León   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1769-4809 6 , 7 , 8 , 9  

The relationship between spirituality and religiosity and their impact on mental health is intricate and underexplored. This exploratory review aims to elucidate the distinct effects of these constructs, highlighting their contributions to psychological well-being and clinical practices. By dissecting the impacts of spirituality and religiosity on mental health, the study focuses on their individual and combined roles in shaping therapeutic approaches and theoretical understandings in the field. A literature review was conducted using PubMed, focusing on articles discussing spirituality, religiosity, and their intersection with mental health and psychopathology. Out of 312 identified articles, 69 peer-reviewed articles were included after screening for relevance. The results indicate that spirituality and religiosity significantly influence mental health yet are often conflated, leading to research inconsistencies and clinical challenges. Spirituality, as a broad and individualistic pathway, enhances personal well-being and resilience, often transcending organized religious practices. In contrast, religiosity, with its structured community support, sometimes imposes constraints that exacerbate stress under specific doctrinal pressures. Neurobiological evidence suggests that both constructs interact with cognitive processes and brain function, influencing emotional regulation and stress response. The study concludes that distinguishing between spirituality and religiosity is essential for precise academic discourse and effective clinical practice. This differentiation allows for more personalized therapeutic approaches, accommodating an individual’s spiritual and religious contexts. The authors propose a refined framework for future research and therapeutic applications to be sensitive to the nuanced experiences of individuals and to better tailor interventions in clinical settings.

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

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Agorastos, A., Demiralay, C., & Huber, C. G. (2014). Influence of religious aspects and personal beliefs on psychological behavior: Focus on anxiety disorders. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 7 , 93–101. https://doi.org/10.2147/PRBM.S43666

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Agorastos, A., Metscher, T., Huber, C. G., Jelinek, L., Vitzthum, F., Muhtz, C., Kellner, M., & Moritz, S. (2012). Religiosity, magical ideation, and paranormal beliefs in anxiety disorders and obsessive-compulsive disorder: A cross-sectional study. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 200 (10), 876–884. https://doi.org/10.1097/NMD.0b013e31826b6e92

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Azorin, J. M., Kaladjian, A., Fakra, E., Adida, M., Belzeaux, R., Hantouche, E., & Lancrenon, S. (2013). Religious involvement in major depression: Protective or risky behavior? The relevance of bipolar spectrum. Journal of Affective Disorders, 150 (3), 753–759. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2013.02.034

Beerse, M. E., Van Lith, T., Pickett, S. M., & Stanwood, G. D. (2020a). Biobehavioral utility of mindfulness-based art therapy: Neurobiological underpinnings and mental health impacts. Experimental Biology and Medicine, 245 (2), 122–130. https://doi.org/10.1177/1535370219883634

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Beerse, M. E., Van Lith, T., & Stanwood, G. (2020b). Therapeutic psychological and biological responses to mindfulness-based art therapy. Stress and Health, 36 (4), 419–432. https://doi.org/10.1002/smi.2937

Beraldo, L., Gil, F., Ventriglio, A., de Andrade, A. G., da Silva, A. G., Torales, J., Gonçalves, P. D., Bhugra, D., & Castaldelli-Maia, J. M. (2019). Spirituality, religiosity and addiction recovery: Current perspectives. Current Drug Research Reviews, 11 (1), 26–32. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874473711666180612075954

Bonelli, R. M. (2016). Religiosität und psychische Gesundheit–was ist wissenschaftlich belegt? DMW-Deutsche Medizinische Wochenschrift, 141 (25), 1863–1867. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-109665

Article   Google Scholar  

Bonelli, R. M., & Koenig, H. G. (2013). Mental disorders, religion and spirituality 1990 to 2010: A systematic evidence-based review. Journal of Religion and Health, 52 (2), 657–673. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-013-9691-4

Brito, M. A., Amad, A., Rolland, B., Geoffroy, P. A., Peyre, H., Roelandt, J. L., Benradia, I., Thomas, P., Vaiva, G., Schürhoff, F., & Pignon, B. (2021). Religiosity and prevalence of suicide, psychiatric disorders and psychotic symptoms in the French general population. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience, 271 (8), 1547–1557. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00406-021-01233-3

Cefalu, P. (2010). The doubting disease: Religious scrupulosity and obsessive-compulsive disorder in historical context. The Journal of Medical Humanities, 31 (2), 111–125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10912-010-9107-3

Decety, J., Bartal, I. B., Uzefovsky, F., & Knafo-Noam, A. (2016). Empathy as a driver of prosocial behaviour: Highly conserved neurobehavioural mechanisms across species. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series b, Biological Sciences, 371 (1686), 20150077. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0077

Dutton, E., & Madison, G. (2022). Blessed are the nations with high levels of schizophrenia: National level schizophrenia prevalence and its relationship with national levels of religiosity. Journal of Religion and Health, 61 (1), 6–22. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-021-01353-z

Duñó, R., Oliva, J. C., Tobeña, A., Palao, D., & Labad, J. (2020). Religiosity and psychotic ideation in stable schizophrenia: A role for empathic perspective-taking. Behavioral Sciences, 10 (2), 53. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs10020053

Ferreira-Valente, A., Pimenta, F., Costa, R. M., Day, M. A., Pais-Ribeiro, J., & Jensen, M. P. (2021). COPAHS study: Protocol of a randomised experimental study comparing the effects of hypnosis, mindfulness meditation, and spiritual practices on experimental pain in healthy adults. British Medical Journal Open, 11 (2), e040068. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-040068

Grossoehme, D. H., Friebert, S., Baker, J. N., Tweddle, M., Needle, J., Chrastek, J., Thompkins, J., Wang, J., Cheng, Y. I., & Lyon, M. E. (2020). Association of religious and spiritual factors with patient-reported outcomes of anxiety, depressive symptoms, fatigue, and pain interference among adolescents and young adults with cancer. JAMA Network Open, 3 (6), e206696. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.6696

Grover, S., Davuluri, T., & Chakrabarti, S. (2014). Religion, spirituality, and schizophrenia: A review. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 36 (2), 119–124. https://doi.org/10.4103/0253-7176.130962

Grover, S., Dua, D., Chakrabarti, S., & Avasthi, A. (2021). Religiosity and spirituality of patients with severe mental disorders. Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 63 (2), 162–170. https://doi.org/10.4103/psychiatry.IndianJPsychiatry_87_20

Grover, S., Hazari, N., Aneja, J., Chakrabarti, S., & Avasthi, A. (2016). Influence of religion and supernatural beliefs on clinical manifestation and treatment practices in patients with bipolar disorder. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 70 (6), 442–449. https://doi.org/10.3109/08039488.2016.1151930

Inozu, M., Kahya, Y., & Yorulmaz, O. (2020). Neuroticism and religiosity: The role of obsessive beliefs, thought-control strategies, and guilt in scrupulosity and obsessive-compulsive symptoms among Muslim undergraduates. Journal of Religion and Health, 59 (3), 1144–1160. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-018-0603-5

Jackson, D. C., McLawhorn, D. E., Slutzky, A. R., Glatt, S. J., & Daly, R. W. (2022). Bipolar disorder, religion, and spirituality: A scoping review. Journal of Religion and Health, 61 (5), 3589–3614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-022-01502-y

Jennings, T. L., Lyng, T., Gleason, N., Finotelli, I., & Coleman, E. (2021). Compulsive sexual behavior, religiosity, and spirituality: A systematic review. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 10 (4), 854–878. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.2021.00084

Johnson, K. S., Tulsky, J. A., Hays, J. C., Arnold, R. M., Olsen, M. K., Lindquist, J. H., & Steinhauser, K. E. (2011). Which domains of spirituality are associated with anxiety and depression in patients with advanced illness? Journal of General Internal Medicine, 26 (7), 751–758. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-011-1656-2

King, P. E., Abo-Zena, M. M., & Weber, J. D. (2017). Varieties of social experience: The religious cultural context of diverse spiritual exemplars. The British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 35 (1), 127–141. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12181

Kioulos, K. T., Bergiannaki, J. D., Glaros, A., Vassiliadou, M., Alexandri, Z., & Papadimitriou, G. (2015). Religiosity dimensions and subjective health status in Greek students. Psychiatriki, 26 (1), 38–44.

CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Koenig, H. G. (2009). Research on religion, spirituality, and mental health: A review. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. Revue Canadienne De Psychiatrie, 54 (5), 283–291. https://doi.org/10.1177/070674370905400502

Koenig, H. G. (2015). Religion, spirituality, and health: A review and update. Advances in Mind-Body Medicine, 29 (3), 19–26.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Koenig, H. G., George, L. K., & Peterson, B. L. (1998). Religiosity and remission of depression in medically ill older patients. American Journal of Psychiatry, 155 (4), 536–542. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.155.4.536

Kéri, S., & Kelemen, O. (2020). Christianity and schizophrenia redux: An empirical study. Journal of Religion and Health, 59 (1), 452–469. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-016-0227-6

Lewczuk, K., Nowakowska, I., Lewandowska, K., Potenza, M. N., & Gola, M. (2021). Frequency of use, moral incongruence and religiosity and their relationships with self-perceived addiction to pornography, internet use, social networking and online gaming. Addiction, 116 (4), 889–899. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.15272

Miller, L., Warner, V., Wickramaratne, P., & Weissman, M. (1997). Religiosity and depression: Ten-year follow-up of depressed mothers and offspring. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 36 (10), 1416–1425. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-199710000-00024

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Mishra, A., Das, B., & Goyal, N. (2018). Religiosity and religious delusions in schizophrenia—An observational study in a Hindu population. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 32 , 35–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajp.2017.11.011

Mizuno, Y., Hofer, A., Frajo-Apor, B., Wartelsteiner, F., Kemmler, G., Pardeller, S., Suzuki, T., Mimura, M., Fleischhacker, W. W., & Uchida, H. (2018). Religiosity and psychological resilience in patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder: An international cross-sectional study. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 137 (4), 316–327. https://doi.org/10.1111/acps.12838

Modrego, P. J. (2009). Depression in the prodromal phase of Alzheimer disease and the reverse causal hypothesis. Archives of General Psychiatry, 66 (1), 107. https://doi.org/10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2008.502

Mohr, S., Brandt, P. Y., Borras, L., Gilliéron, C., & Huguelet, P. (2006). Toward an integration of spirituality and religiousness into the psychosocial dimension of schizophrenia. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 163 (11), 1952–1959. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.2006.163.11.1952

Nicolini, H., Salin-Pascual, R., Cabrera, B., & Lanzagorta, N. (2017). Influence of culture in obsessive-compulsive disorder and its treatment. Current Psychiatry Reviews, 13 (4), 285–292. https://doi.org/10.2174/2211556007666180115105935

Passie, T., Warncke, J., Peschel, T., & Ott, U. (2013). Neurotheologie: Neurobiologische Modelle religiöser Erfahrungen [Neurotheology: Neurobiological models of religious experience]. Der Nervenarzt, 84 (3), 283–293. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00115-011-3384-6

Sayadmansour, A. (2014). Neurotheology: The relationship between brain and religion. Iranian Journal of Neurology, 13 (1), 52–55.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Schultz, M., Bentur, N., Rei Koren, Z., & Bar Sela, G. (2017). From pastoral care to spiritual care—transforming the conception of the role of the spiritual care provider. Harefuah, 156 (11), 735–739.

Smolak, A., Gearing, R. E., Alonzo, D., Baldwin, S., Harmon, S., & McHugh, K. (2013). Social support and religion: Mental health service use and treatment of schizophrenia. Community Mental Health Journal, 49 (4), 444–450. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10597-012-9536-8

Stein, D. J., Fineberg, N. A., Bienvenu, O. J., Denys, D., Lochner, C., Nestadt, G., Leckman, J. F., Rauch, S. L., & Phillips, K. A. (2010). Should OCD be classified as an anxiety disorder in DSM-V? Depression and Anxiety, 27 (6), 495–506. https://doi.org/10.1002/da.20699

Steinhorn, D. M., Din, J., & Johnson, A. (2017). Healing, spirituality and integrative medicine. Annals of Palliative Medicine, 6 (3), 237–247. https://doi.org/10.21037/apm.2017.05.01

Stroppa, A., Colugnati, F. A., Koenig, H. G., & Moreira-Almeida, A. (2018). Religiosity, depression, and quality of life in bipolar disorder: A two-year prospective study. Revista Brasileira De Psiquiatria, 40 (3), 238–243. https://doi.org/10.1590/1516-4446-2017-2365

Stroppa, A., & Moreira-Almeida, A. (2013). Religiosity, mood symptoms, and quality of life in bipolar disorder. Bipolar Disorders, 15 (4), 385–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/bdi.12069

Stuart, S. (2013). On being certain: Believing you are right even when you’re not [Book review]. The Australian Humanist, 111 (111), 22.

Google Scholar  

Subramaniam, M., Abdin, E., Vaingankar, J. A., & Chong, S. A. (2012). Obsessive-compulsive disorder: Prevalence, correlates, help-seeking and quality of life in a multiracial Asian population. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 47 (12), 2035–2043. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-012-0507-8

Vago, D. R., & Silbersweig, D. A. (2012). Self-awareness, self-regulation, and self-transcendence (S-ART): A framework for understanding the neurobiological mechanisms of mindfulness. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 6 , 296. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2012.00296

Williams, A. D., Lau, G., & Grisham, J. R. (2013). Thought-action fusion as a mediator of religiosity and obsessive-compulsive symptoms. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 44 (2), 207–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbtep.2012.09.004

Witzig, T. F., Jr., & Pollard, C. A. (2013). Obsessional beliefs, religious beliefs, and scrupulosity among fundamental Protestant Christians. Journal of Obsessive-Compulsive and Related Disorders, 2 (3), 331–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jocrd.2013.06.002

Yorulmaz, O., Gençöz, T., & Woody, S. (2009). OCD cognitions and symptoms in different religious contexts. Journal of Anxiety Disorders, 23 (3), 401–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.janxdis.2008.11.001

Zimmer, F., & Imhoff, R. (2020). Abstinence from masturbation and hypersexuality. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 49 (4), 1333–1343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-019-01623-8

Download references

Acknowledgements

J. Benito-León is supported by the National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD, USA (NINDS #R01 NS39422), the Spanish Health Research Agency (Grant FIS PI12/01602 and Grant FIS PI16/00451), and The Recovery, Transformation and Resilience Plan at the Ministry of Science and Innovation (Grant TED2021-130174B-C33, NETremor).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Psychiatry, Berhampur Mental Hospital, Berhampur, Murshidabad, West Bengal, India

Mahua Jana Dubey

Department of General Medicine, Burdwan Medical College and Hospital, Burdwan, West Bengal, India

Ritwik Ghosh

Department of Neuromedicine, Bangur Institute of Neurosciences (BIN), Kolkata, West Bengal, India

Gautam Das, Shambaditya Das, Arka Prava Chakraborty & Souvik Dubey

Department of Biochemistry, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), Patna, Bihar, India

Dipayan Roy

Department of Psychiatry, Institute of Psychiatry (IOP), Kolkata, West Bengal, India

Subham Chatterjee

Department of Neurology, University Hospital “12 de Octubre”, Madrid, Spain

Julián Benito-León

Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria Hospital 12 de Octubre (imas12), Madrid, Spain

Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red Sobre Enfermedades Neurodegenerativas (CIBERNED), Madrid, Spain

Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Complutense University, Madrid, Spain

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors contributed significantly to the creation of this manuscript; each fulfilled the criteria as established by the ICMJE.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Souvik Dubey or Julián Benito-León .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

None of the authors has relevant financial or non-financial competing interests to report.

Ethical Approval

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

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

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Dubey, M.J., Ghosh, R., Das, G. et al. Beyond Belief and Practice: An Exploratory Literature Review and Discussion of the Differential Impact of Spirituality and Religiosity on Mental Health Disorders. J Relig Health (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-024-02090-9

Download citation

Accepted : 01 July 2024

Published : 14 July 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10943-024-02090-9

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

• Spirituality
• Religiosity
• Mental health
• Psychopathology
• Neurobiology
• Literature review
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Introduction
• Conclusions
• Article Information

This algorithm has not been validated for clinical use. IUD indicates intrauterine device; PATH, Pregnancy Attitudes, Timing, and How important is pregnancy prevention.

This algorithm has not been validated for clinical use. BMI indicates body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared); MEC, Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use.

• Selection, Effectiveness, and Adverse Effects of Contraception—Reply JAMA Comment & Response April 19, 2022 Stephanie Teal, MD, MPH; Alison Edelman, MD, MPH
• Selection, Effectiveness, and Adverse Effects of Contraception JAMA Comment & Response April 19, 2022 Ekaterina Skaritanov, BS; Gianna Wilkie, MD; Lara C. Kovell, MD
• Contraception in Women With Cardiovascular Disease JAMA JAMA Insights August 9, 2022 This JAMA Insights in Women’s Health series summarizes the prevalence of cardiovascular disease among women of childbearing age, the most effective forms of contraception based on the patient’s medical condition and preference, and the risks and adverse effects associated with contraindicated forms of contraception. Kathryn J. Lindley, MD; Stephanie B. Teal, MD, MPH
• Patient Information: Long-Acting Reversible Contraception JAMA JAMA Patient Page October 4, 2022 This JAMA Patient Page describes types of long-acting reversible contraception, how they are placed and removed, and their potential side effects. Elisabeth L. Stark, MD; Aileen M. Gariepy, MD, MPH, MHS; Moeun Son, MD, MSCI
• Patient Information: Medication Abortion JAMA JAMA Patient Page November 1, 2022 This JAMA Patient Page describes medication abortion and its risks and effectiveness. Rebecca H. Cohen, MD, MPH; Stephanie B. Teal, MD, MPH

See More About

Select your interests.

Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.

• Academic Medicine
• Acid Base, Electrolytes, Fluids
• Allergy and Clinical Immunology
• American Indian or Alaska Natives
• Anesthesiology
• Anticoagulation
• Art and Images in Psychiatry
• Artificial Intelligence
• Assisted Reproduction
• Bleeding and Transfusion
• Caring for the Critically Ill Patient
• Challenges in Clinical Electrocardiography
• Climate and Health
• Climate Change
• Clinical Challenge
• Clinical Decision Support
• Clinical Implications of Basic Neuroscience
• Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Consensus Statements
• Coronavirus (COVID-19)
• Critical Care Medicine
• Cultural Competency
• Dental Medicine
• Dermatology
• Diabetes and Endocrinology
• Diagnostic Test Interpretation
• Drug Development
• Electronic Health Records
• Emergency Medicine
• End of Life, Hospice, Palliative Care
• Environmental Health
• Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion
• Facial Plastic Surgery
• Gastroenterology and Hepatology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Genomics and Precision Health
• Global Health
• Guide to Statistics and Methods
• Hair Disorders
• Health Care Delivery Models
• Health Care Economics, Insurance, Payment
• Health Care Quality
• Health Care Reform
• Health Care Safety
• Health Care Workforce
• Health Disparities
• Health Inequities
• Health Policy
• Health Systems Science
• History of Medicine
• Hypertension
• Images in Neurology
• Implementation Science
• Infectious Diseases
• Innovations in Health Care Delivery
• JAMA Infographic
• Law and Medicine
• Leading Change
• Less is More
• LGBTQIA Medicine
• Lifestyle Behaviors
• Medical Coding
• Medical Devices and Equipment
• Medical Education
• Medical Education and Training
• Medical Journals and Publishing
• Mobile Health and Telemedicine
• Narrative Medicine
• Neuroscience and Psychiatry
• Notable Notes
• Nutrition, Obesity, Exercise
• Obstetrics and Gynecology
• Occupational Health
• Ophthalmology
• Orthopedics
• Otolaryngology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Care
• Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
• Patient Care
• Patient Information
• Performance Improvement
• Performance Measures
• Perioperative Care and Consultation
• Pharmacoeconomics
• Pharmacoepidemiology
• Pharmacogenetics
• Pharmacy and Clinical Pharmacology
• Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
• Physical Therapy
• Physician Leadership
• Population Health
• Primary Care
• Professional Well-being
• Professionalism
• Psychiatry and Behavioral Health
• Public Health
• Pulmonary Medicine
• Regulatory Agencies
• Reproductive Health
• Research, Methods, Statistics
• Resuscitation
• Rheumatology
• Risk Management
• Scientific Discovery and the Future of Medicine
• Shared Decision Making and Communication
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports Medicine
• Stem Cell Transplantation
• Substance Use and Addiction Medicine
• Surgical Innovation
• Surgical Pearls
• Teachable Moment
• Technology and Finance
• The Art of JAMA
• The Arts and Medicine
• The Rational Clinical Examination
• Tobacco and e-Cigarettes
• Translational Medicine
• Trauma and Injury
• Treatment Adherence
• Ultrasonography
• Users' Guide to the Medical Literature
• Vaccination
• Venous Thromboembolism
• Veterans Health
• Women's Health
• Workflow and Process
• Wound Care, Infection, Healing

Others Also Liked

• Download PDF
• X Facebook More LinkedIn
• CME & MOC

Teal S , Edelman A. Contraception Selection, Effectiveness, and Adverse Effects : A Review . JAMA. 2021;326(24):2507–2518. doi:10.1001/jama.2021.21392

Manage citations:

© 2024

• Permissions

Contraception Selection, Effectiveness, and Adverse Effects : A Review

• 1 Department of OB/GYN, University Hospitals Medical Center and Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio
• 2 Department of OB/GYN, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland
• Comment & Response Selection, Effectiveness, and Adverse Effects of Contraception—Reply Stephanie Teal, MD, MPH; Alison Edelman, MD, MPH JAMA
• Comment & Response Selection, Effectiveness, and Adverse Effects of Contraception Ekaterina Skaritanov, BS; Gianna Wilkie, MD; Lara C. Kovell, MD JAMA
• JAMA Insights Contraception in Women With Cardiovascular Disease Kathryn J. Lindley, MD; Stephanie B. Teal, MD, MPH JAMA
• JAMA Patient Page Patient Information: Long-Acting Reversible Contraception Elisabeth L. Stark, MD; Aileen M. Gariepy, MD, MPH, MHS; Moeun Son, MD, MSCI JAMA
• JAMA Patient Page Patient Information: Medication Abortion Rebecca H. Cohen, MD, MPH; Stephanie B. Teal, MD, MPH JAMA

Importance   Many women spend a substantial proportion of their lives preventing or planning for pregnancy, and approximately 87% of US women use contraception during their lifetime.

Observations   Contraceptive effectiveness is determined by a combination of drug or device efficacy, individual fecundability, coital frequency, and user adherence and continuation. In the US, oral contraceptive pills are the most commonly used reversible method of contraception and comprise 21.9% of all contraception in current use. Pregnancy rates of women using oral contraceptives are 4% to 7% per year. Use of long-acting methods, such as intrauterine devices and subdermal implants, has increased substantially, from 6% of all contraceptive users in 2008 to 17.8% in 2016; these methods have failure rates of less than 1% per year. Estrogen-containing methods, such as combined oral contraceptive pills, increase the risk of venous thrombosis from 2 to 10 venous thrombotic events per 10 000 women-years to 7 to 10 venous thrombotic events per 10 000 women-years, whereas progestin-only and nonhormonal methods, such as implants and condoms, are associated with rare serious risks. Hormonal contraceptives can improve medical conditions associated with hormonal changes related to the menstrual cycle, such as acne, endometriosis, and premenstrual dysphoric disorder. Optimal contraceptive selection requires patient and clinician discussion of the patient’s tolerance for risk of pregnancy, menstrual bleeding changes, other risks, and personal values and preferences.

Conclusions and Relevance   Oral contraceptive pills are the most commonly used reversible contraceptives, intrauterine devices and subdermal implants have the highest effectiveness, and progestin-only and nonhormonal methods have the lowest risks. Optimal contraceptive selection incorporates patient values and preferences.

Contraception is defined as an intervention that reduces the chance of pregnancy after sexual intercourse. According to a report from 2013, an estimated 99% of women who have ever had sexual intercourse used at least 1 contraceptive method in their lifetime. 1 Approximately 88% of sexually active women not seeking pregnancy report using contraception at any given time. 2 All nonbarrier contraceptive methods require a prescription or initiation by a clinician. Therefore, contraception is a common reason women 15 to 50 years of age seek health care. 3 This review summarizes current evidence regarding efficacy, adverse effects, and optimal selection of reversible contraceptives. This review uses the terms women and men when the biological expectation for the individual is ovulation or sperm production, respectively.

A search of OVID Medline All, Embase.com, and Ovid Evidence-Based Medicine Reviews–Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for English-language studies was conducted for articles published between January 1, 2000, and June 28, 2021, to identify randomized clinical trials, systematic reviews, and practice guidelines related to contraception or contraceptives. After excluding duplicates and articles not relevant to this review, 2188 articles were identified as potentially relevant via title or abstract content. Thirty-seven articles, consisting of 13 randomized clinical trials, 22 systematic reviews, and 2 guidelines were included. Evidence-based guidelines that used GRADE and systematic reviews were selected for inclusion over individual studies. Clinical practice guidelines from the Society of Family Planning, the World Health Organization, and the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists on selected topic areas were reviewed to identify additional key evidence.

The mean age of first sexual intercourse among females in the US is 17 years. 4 Many women typically use contraceptives for approximately 3 decades. 2 The choice of contraceptive is determined by patient preferences, tolerance for contraceptive failure, and adverse effects. Clinicians should elicit patient preferences, identify possible contraindications to specific contraceptives, and facilitate contraceptive initiation and continuation. Clinicians should also be prepared to address misperceptions ( Box ). Some experts recommend screening for contraceptive need at each visit. Two validated screening options, with toolkits available online, are One Key Question and the PATH questions (Pregnancy Attitudes, Timing, and How important is pregnancy prevention). 5 , 6

Commonly Asked Questions About Contraception

What options are available for male contraception? There are currently no Food and Drug Administration–approved contraceptive options for men except condoms. Current male contraceptive methods under evaluation attempt to suppress sperm count to <1 million/mL and include a testosterone plus progestin topical gel.

Are contraceptives associated with increased rates of cancer? Combined hormonal contraceptives, such as combined oral contraceptive pills, protect against endometrial and ovarian cancer. They are associated with an increased risk of early breast cancer diagnosis in current or recent users (ie, within the past 6 mo). The incidence is 68 cases per 100 000 person-years compared with 55 cases per 100 000 nonuser-years. There are no associations of past contraceptive use with increased rates of cancer and there is no association of past contraceptive use and mortality.

Can teenagers use intrauterine devices (IUDs)? Prior guidance suggested restricted use of IUDs by teenagers, nonmonogamous or unmarried, and nulliparous women, but there is no high-quality evidence to support this recommendation. None of these characteristics are true contraindications.

Should all women use the most effective form of contraception? The choice of contraceptive is determined by patient preferences and tolerance for failure. Patients may value other attributes of a method (such as route of administration or bleeding patterns) more highly than effectiveness, and may prefer to have a slightly higher risk of unplanned pregnancy to avoid other adverse effects.

Is the pill as effective for individuals with obesity? Obesity adversely influences contraceptive steroid levels but determining whether this affects contraceptive effectiveness is difficult. The primary reason for contraceptive failure is suboptimal adherence. The use of any method for individuals no matter their weight will prevent more pregnancies than not using a method.

Why are pills not available over the counter (OTC)? Combined hormonal contraceptives are unlikely to be available OTC in the US due to concerns regarding increased rates of thrombosis. Efforts to bring progestin-only pills OTC are progressing.

Quiz Ref ID Reversible contraceptive methods are typically grouped as hormonal (such as progestin-only pills or estrogen-progestin patches) or nonhormonal (condoms, diaphragms) and long-acting (such as intrauterine devices [IUDs]) or short-acting (such as pills). Reversible contraceptive methods can also be grouped by level of effectiveness for pregnancy prevention. Except for behavioral methods, condoms, and spermicide, contraceptive methods are only available by prescription in the US.

Progestins and estrogens are steroid or lipid hormones. Hormonal contraception contains a progestin with or without an estrogen. Progesterone is the only naturally occurring progestin; most contraceptive progestins, such as levonorgestrel and norethindrone, are synthesized from testosterone. Progestins provide a contraceptive effect by suppressing gonadotropin-releasing hormone from the hypothalamus, which lowers luteinizing hormone from the pituitary, which in turn prevents ovulation. 7 , 8 In addition, progestins have direct negative effects on cervical mucus permeability. Progestins reduce endometrial receptivity and sperm survival and transport to the fallopian tube. 9 - 11 Estrogens enhance contraceptive effectiveness by suppressing gonadotropins and follicle-stimulating hormone, preventing the development of a dominant follicle. However, the most important contribution of estrogens to progestin-based contraceptives is the reduction of irregular bleeding. The estrogen component in most combined hormonal contraceptives is ethinylestradiol.

A variety of progestin-only contraceptive methods exists ( Table 1 ). Their effectiveness varies based on dose, potency, and half-life of the progestin as well as user-dependent factors, such as adherence to the prescription schedule. 12 , 13

Progestin-only pills include norethindrone- and drospirenone-containing formulations, which differ in their ability to suppress ovulation. Norethindrone pills contain 300 µg of norethindrone compared with 1000 µg in a typical combined contraceptive pill. The lower amount of progestin in norethindrone pills results in less consistent ovulation suppression and more potential for breakthrough bleeding. The contraceptive efficacy is maintained by other progestin-mediated effects. Drospirenone-only pills contain slightly more progestin than an estrogen and progestin combined hormonal contraception, which aids in ovulation suppression. In one study in which participants delayed their drospirenone-containing pill intake by 24 hours, mimicking a missed dose, ovulation suppression was maintained with only 1 participant of 127 having evidence of ovulation. 14 The benefits of progestin-only contraceptive pills include ease of initiation and discontinuation, fertility return within 1 cycle, safety profile, and minimal effect on hemostatic parameters. 15

Quiz Ref ID Depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) is an injectable progestin available in intramuscular (150 mg) and subcutaneous (104 mg) formulations, which are administered at 12- to 14-week intervals. While DMPA is associated with irregular uterine bleeding, this pattern improves with longer duration of use. A systematic review of DMPA-related bleeding patterns (13 studies with 1610 patients using DMPA) found that 46% of those using DMPA were amenorrheic in the 90 days following the fourth dose. 16 DMPA is the only contraceptive method that can delay return to fertility. The contraceptive effect and cycle irregularity can persist for up to 12 months after the last dose, 17 likely due to persistence in adipose tissue and its effectiveness in suppressing the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian (HPO) axis. DMPA may be best suited for those who benefit from amenorrhea (eg, patients with developmental disabilities, bleeding diatheses) but not by those who want to conceive quickly after discontinuation. Typical effectiveness of DMPA and progestin-only contraceptive pills is 4 to 7 pregnancies per 100 women in a year. 12 , 18

Quiz Ref ID Progestin-only long-acting methods, such as the levonorgestrel (LNG) IUD and the subdermal implant, have typical effectiveness rates of less than 1 pregnancy per 100 women per year similar to permanent methods, such as tubal ligation or vasectomy ( Table 2 ). 12 , 18 These methods are also associated with return to fertility within 1 cycle after discontinuation. The LNG IUD maintains efficacy for at least 7 years, with amenorrhea rates of up to 20% at 12 months and 40% at 24 months. 19 However, initiation requires an in-person visit with a clinician trained in IUD placement. The etonogestrel subdermal implant is effective for up to 5 years 20 and is easily placed or removed. Initiation and discontinuation also require in-person visits. The bleeding profile of the implant is less predictable and up to 11% of users remove it in the first year due to irregular bleeding. 21 An analysis of 11 studies (923 participants) from Europe, Asia, South America, and the US found that the bleeding pattern in the first 3 months (such as prolonged, frequent, or irregular episodes) is consistent with future bleeding patterns. 21 However, those with frequent or prolonged bleeding in the first 3 months have a 50% chance of improvement in the subsequent 3 months. 21

Combined hormonal methods that contain both estrogen and progestin include the daily oral pill, monthly vaginal ring, and weekly transdermal patch. With full adherence, effectiveness of these methods is 2 pregnancies per 100 users per year. However, typical effectiveness is 4 to 7 pregnancies per 100 women per year, with variability in effectiveness related to the user’s adherence. 12 , 18 The importance of patient adherence to hormonal contraception was recently demonstrated by a cohort study of approximately 10 000 individuals in the US. Pregnancy rates were 4.55 per 100 participant-years for short-acting methods (pills, patch, ring) compared with 0.27 for long-acting reversible methods (IUD, implant). 13 Women younger than 21 years using short-acting methods had higher pregnancy risk as women 21 or older (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.9 [95% CI, 1.2-2.8]). 13 No risk differences by age were observed for the long-acting reversible methods of IUD or implant. Absolute rates were not reported by age stratum.

Combined hormonal contraceptives prevent pregnancy through the same mechanisms as progestin-only methods. Their greatest advantage over progestin-only methods is their ability to produce a consistent, regular bleeding pattern. In a study that compared bleeding diaries from 5257 women using 9 different methods of contraception (nonhormonal, combined hormonal contraception, and progestin-only), approximately 90% of combined hormonal contraception pill users (n = 1003) over a 90-day standard reference period reported regular scheduled withdrawal bleeds while no one experienced amenorrhea. 22 Occasionally, patients do not have a withdrawal bleed during the placebo week. A pregnancy test can be performed if the patient or clinician is concerned about the possibility of pregnancy as the reason for not bleeding. If pregnancy is ruled out, the lack of withdrawal bleeding is due to HPO axis suppression and patients can be reassured that lack of withdrawal bleeding does not indicate a health problem or reduced fertility.

Regardless of the route of delivery, ethinylestradiol and other estrogens are metabolized by the liver and activate the hemostatic system. The most significant risk of combined hormonal contraception is estrogen-mediated increases in venous thrombotic events. 23 - 25 Large international cohort studies have identified the risk of deep vein thrombosis at baseline in reproductive-aged women to be approximately 2 to 10 per 10 000 women-years. The risk associated with combined hormonal contraception is approximately 7 to 10 venous thrombotic events per 10 000 women-years. 26 - 28 The risk of venous thromboembolism is substantially greater in pregnancy. One UK study of 972 683 reproductive-aged women with 5 361 949 person-years of follow-up found a risk of deep vein thrombosis of 20 per 100 000 in women who were not pregnant. This rate increased to 114 per 100 000 women-years in the third trimester of pregnancy and to 421 per 100 000 in the first 3 weeks postpartum. 29 The absolute risk of ischemic stroke in reproductive-aged women not taking combined hormonal contraception is 5 per 100 000 women-years. 25 Combined hormonal contraception is associated with an additional absolute risk of approximately 2 per 100 000 (ie, overall risk of 7 per 100 000). 25 This study did not exclude women who smoked cigarettes or had hypertension. 25

Clinicians who prescribe combined hormonal contraception should counsel women regarding signs and symptoms of arterial and venous thrombosis, especially for women with multiple additional risk factors, including body mass index (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared) at or over 30, smoking, and age older than 35 years. While progestins are not associated with an increase in thromboembolic risks, 30 , 31 US Food and Drug Administration package inserts for these methods contain “class labeling” or the same risks as estrogen and progestin combined hormonal contraceptive methods. Patients at increased risk of thrombosis can be provided a progestin-only, nonestrogen-containing method because this method of contraception does not increase risk of venous thromboembolism. 32

Behavioral contraceptive methods include penile withdrawal before ejaculation and fertility awareness–based methods. Imprecise terms, such as natural family planning , the rhythm method , or other euphemisms may be used by patients when referring to these methods. The effectiveness of withdrawal and fertility awareness depends on patient education, cycle regularity, patient commitment to daily evaluation of symptoms (first morning temperature, cervical mucus consistency), and the patient’s ability to avoid intercourse or ejaculation during the time of peak fertility. Data on pregnancy rates are frequently of poor quality and highly dependent on study design. 33 A meta-analysis of higher-quality prospective studies of women at risk for undesired pregnancy reported failure rates of 22 pregnancies per 100 women-years for fertility awareness methods. 34

Other nonhormonal methods prevent sperm from entering the upper reproductive tract through a physical barrier (condoms and diaphragms) or through agents that kill sperm or impair their motility (spermicides and pH modulators). First-year typical use effectiveness for these methods is 13 pregnancies per 100 women in a year. 12 , 18

The copper-bearing IUD is a highly effective nonhormonal reversible method. 12 , 18 Typical use pregnancy rates are 1% per year. 12 , 18 There is no effect on a user’s HPO axis and thus ovulation and menstrual cyclicity continues. The primary mechanism of action is spermicidal, through direct effects of copper salts and endometrial inflammatory changes. 35 The major challenge with the copper IUD is that it can increase the amount, duration, and discomfort of menses mostly during the first 3 to 6 months of use. 36 IUD use does not increase later risk of tubal infertility. 37 If sexually transmitted infection (STI) testing is indicated, testing can be performed concurrently with IUD placement. 38 - 40 This expedited process of testing for STIs at the time of IUD placement does not increase the risk of pelvic inflammatory disease. The absolute risk of pelvic inflammatory disease after IUD insertion is low in those with (0%-5%) or without (0%-2%) existing gonorrhea or chlamydial infection. 41

Emergency contraception (EC) reduces pregnancy risk when used after unprotected intercourse. The most effective method of EC is a copper IUD, which reduces pregnancy risk to 0.1% when placed within 5 days of unprotected intercourse. 42 A copper IUD also has the added advantage of providing patients with ongoing contraception. LNG IUDs were not previously considered an option for EC. However, in a recent randomized noninferiority trial, women requesting EC who had at least 1 episode of unprotected intercourse within the prior 5 days were randomized to receive a copper IUD (n = 356) or a 52-mg LNG IUD (n = 355). 43 LNG IUD was noninferior to copper IUD (between-group absolute difference, 0.3% [95% CI, −0.9% to 1.8%]). However, the proportion of study participants who had unprotected intercourse midcycle (and therefore were at risk of pregnancy) was not reported. If a patient needs EC and wishes to initiate a 52-mg LNG IUD, it is reasonable to immediately place the IUD plus give an oral EC, 44 given the limited and indirect evidence supporting the LNG IUD alone for EC.

Quiz Ref ID Oral EC consists of a single dose of either a progestin (LNG, 1.5 mg) or an antiprogestin (ulipristal acetate, 30 mg). Both of these agents work by blocking or delaying ovulation. Neither is abortifacient. LNG EC is available over-the-counter; a prescription is needed for ulipristal acetate. The medication should be taken as soon as possible after unprotected intercourse for maximum efficacy but can be taken up to 5 days afterward for ulipristal acetate. 45 - 47 LNG efficacy is diminished after 3 days. Efficacy appears similar between the 2 agents when ingested within the first 72 hours after intercourse (ulipristal acetate EC: 15 pregnancies of 844, LNG EC: 22 pregnancies of 852; reduction in pregnancy without EC use estimated to be 90% less) but pharmacodynamic and clinical studies demonstrated that the ulipristal acetate treatment effect persists up to 120 hours with no pregnancies (0/97). 46 Actual use studies of EC that included 3893 individuals found lower pregnancy prevention rates than expected, which appears to be related to multiple acts of unprotected intercourse both before and after the EC use. 48 , 49 If further acts of unprotected intercourse occur 24 hours after EC use and a regular method of contraception has not been started, EC needs to be taken again. 49 Repeat use of LNG EC results in no serious adverse events; repeat dosing for ulipristal acetate EC has not been specifically studied. 50 Clinicians should review the options for EC with all patients starting a user-controlled method, such as condoms. These patients may be prescribed oral EC to keep at home for immediate use if needed.

Two evidence-based guidelines are available to assist clinicians in evaluating the safety of contraception initiation and use. 32 , 42 These guidelines were developed by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, are updated regularly, and are freely available online and in smartphone apps.

The first is the US Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use 32 (US MEC), which provides information on the safe use of contraceptive methods for women with various medical conditions (eg, diabetes, seizure disorder) and other characteristics (eg, elevated body mass index, tobacco use disorder, postpartum). The US MEC uses a 4-tiered system to categorize level of risk for each disease/contraceptive method combination. 32 The risk tiers are (1) no restrictions exist for use of the contraceptive, (2) advantages generally outweigh theoretical or proven risks although careful follow-up might be required, (3) theoretical or proven risks outweigh advantages of the method and the method usually is not recommended unless other more appropriate methods are not available or acceptable, and (4) the condition represents an unacceptable health risk if the method is used. 32

All clinicians, including advanced practice clinicians, should be familiar with prescribing within US MEC categories 1 and 2 (no restrictions or benefits outweigh risks). For women with underlying health conditions who want to use a category 3 method, such as a woman with a history of breast cancer choosing combined hormonal contraceptives, primary care physicians or specialists should review the detailed evidence listed in the US MEC to advise their patients. Subspecialists in complex family planning who have completed extra fellowship training may provide helpful consultation for patients with multiple contraindications or unusual situations. The US MEC is a guideline, not a mandate. Situations may arise in which specialists recommend an MEC category 3 or 4 method because the alternative to the contraceptive method, pregnancy, places the patient at even greater risk. 32 The US MEC does not include conditions for which there is insufficient evidence to make recommendations, such as aortic aneurysms, Marfan syndrome, or chronic marijuana use. For these patients, clinicians should consider referral to a complex family planning specialist. If the patient needs a method immediately, a progestin-only pill should be considered as a “bridging” method, because these can be used safely by most patients 32 and are more effective than barrier methods such as condoms.

The US MEC addresses common drug interactions with hormonal contraceptives. 32 Contraceptive steroid hormones are metabolized via the hepatic cytochrome P450 pathway. 51 , 52 Drugs that induce this pathway, such as rifampin and barbiturates, or chronic alcohol can impair contraceptive efficacy and drugs that inhibit the pathway, such as valproic acid, cimetidine, or fluconazole, may increase adverse effects. The FDA recognizes a drug-drug interaction as clinically significant if it causes at least a 20% difference in drug levels 53 but an interaction does not necessarily affect contraceptive failure rates. Adherence, continuation, fecundity, and frequency of intercourse also contribute to contraceptive effectiveness. Additionally, most pharmacokinetic studies do not have sufficient statistical power to determine differences in pregnancy rates. The most common drug classes that may interact with hormonal contraceptives are antiretroviral drugs (including efavirenz and ritonavir-boosted protease inhibitors) and anticonvulsant therapies (including carbamazepine, phenytoin, and others). 54 , 55 Evidence from both clinical and pharmacokinetic studies of routinely used antibiotics do not support impaired contraceptive efficacy with concomitant antibiotic prescription, 56 except for rifampin with which ethinylestradiol and progestin area under the curve levels are at least 40% lower. 57 Because the local progestin dose in the LNG IUD is so high, its efficacy is not reduced by drugs that may affect combined hormonal contraceptives, progestin-only contraceptive pills, or the progestin implant. While hormonal contraceptive use can change concentrations of some drugs, 58 this is rarely clinically relevant, except for the reduction in serum concentration of the anticonvulsant lamotrigine.

Another major guideline is the US Selected Practice Recommendations for Contraceptive Use 42 (US SPR, available online or via a smartphone app). The US SPR is organized by contraceptive method. It includes method-specific, up-to-date guidelines, such as how to initiate the method, how to manage bleeding irregularities, and recommended follow-up. For example, the guidelines on IUDs include evidence on medications to ease IUD insertion or IUD management if a pelvic infection occurs. Recommendations related to combined hormonal contraceptives include the number of pill packs that should be provided at initial and return visits or management of vomiting or severe diarrhea while using combined oral contraceptives.

Much of the data on noncontraceptive benefits of hormonal methods come from case-control studies or small comparative trials. However, fair evidence exists that methods that suppress ovulation can be effective in reducing benign ovarian tumors 59 and functional ovarian cysts. 60 Combined hormonal contraceptives diminish hormonally mediated premenstrual dysphoric disorder, with statistically significant mean differences in symptoms, such as headaches, bloating, and fatigue, and functionality scales. 61 The estrogen component of combined hormonal contraception increases hepatic sex hormone–binding globulin, which reduces free testosterone and improves androgen-sensitive conditions, such as acne and hirsutism. Cochrane systematic reviews of combined hormonal contraceptives and both conditions show significant associations with improvement in a variety of measures of acne and hirsutism. 62 , 63 All progestin-containing contraceptives cause endometrial atrophy and, thus, reduce menstrual blood loss and menstrual pain to varying extents. 64 - 66 While progestin-only methods can promote unscheduled or breakthrough bleeding, the total amount of blood loss is reduced and in those with heavy menstrual bleeding, hemoglobin levels can rise by 10 g/L in 12 months. 67 , 68 The LNG IUD has demonstrated efficacy in reduction of heavy menstrual bleeding 69 , 70 (including for women with anticoagulation, fibroids, 71 or hemostatic disorders), primary dysmenorrhea, 36 , 72 endometriosis, 73 adenomyosis, 74 and protection against pelvic infection. 75

Screening for pregnancy is important prior to prescribing contraception. According to the US SPR, clinicians should be “reasonably certain” that the patient is not pregnant. 42 A clinician can be reasonably certain that a woman is not pregnant if she has no symptoms or signs of pregnancy and meets any 1 of the following criteria: (1) is 7 days or less after the start of normal menses; (2) has not had sexual intercourse since the start of last normal menses; (3) has been correctly and consistently using a reliable method of contraception; (4) is 7 days or less after spontaneous or induced abortion; (5) is within 4 weeks’ postpartum; and (5) is fully or nearly fully breastfeeding (exclusively breastfeeding or most [≥85%] of feeds are breastfeeds), amenorrheic, and less than 6 months postpartum.

Quiz Ref ID These criteria have a negative predictive value of 99% to 100%. 76 - 78 A urine pregnancy test (UPT) alone is not sufficient to exclude pregnancy. UPT sensitivity is dependent on when the last act of intercourse occurred, the ovulatory cycle phase, and urine concentration. Sensitivity of UPTs is 90% at the time of a missed period, but only 40% in the week prior. 79 Additionally, a UPT can remain positive up to 4 weeks after delivery, miscarriage, or abortion. 80 , 81 Few other tests are required for safe and effective use of contraception.

Clinicians can offer other indicated preventive health tests at the contraceptive initiation visit, like screening for cervical cancer or STIs. However, these tests are not required for contraceptive use and should not prevent initiation of contraception.

Generally, all methods should be started immediately on prescription regardless of menstrual cycle day—known as the Quick Start protocol. 82 If a hormonal method is initiated within 5 days of the first day of menses, no additional backup method is needed. At other times in the cycle, or when switching from a nonhormonal to a hormonal method, a backup is necessary for 7 days to ensure ovulation suppression. If switching from one hormonal method to another, the switch can occur without a withdrawal bleed or backup.

If a woman reports unprotected intercourse within the 5 days before contraceptive initiation, most sources recommend giving emergency contraception, initiating her desired method, and repeating a UPT 2 to 3 weeks later. 82 - 85 Many studies have demonstrated that exposing an early pregnancy to hormonal contraception is not harmful 86 but delayed initiation increases the risk of undesired pregnancy.

Because comparative effectiveness studies to clearly identify the superiority of one contraceptive pill formulation over another are lacking, selecting a contraceptive pill often depends on patient experience. Monophasic regimens, in which each pill has the same hormone doses, have significant advantages over bi- and triphasic regimens. Cycles can be extended easily by skipping the placebo week and starting the next pack of active pills. If this is attempted with multiphasic regimens, the drop in progestin between phases typically results in breakthrough bleeding. In terms of ethinylestradiol, few patients require a pill containing more than 35 µg/d to prevent breakthrough bleeding. 87 Many clinicians advocate starting with the lowest ethinylestradiol dose to minimize risks. However, there are no data demonstrating that 10- to 20-µg/d ethinylestradiol doses are safer than 35 µg daily, and lower ethinylestradiol doses are associated with more unscheduled vaginal bleeding. 88 Thus, starting with a monophasic preparation containing 30 µg to 35 µg of ethinylestradiol provides the greatest likelihood of a regular bleeding pattern without increasing risk. Ethinylestradiol can be reduced if patients have estrogen-associated adverse effects, such as nausea or breast tenderness.

Many different progestins exist. Progestins differ in in vitro androgenicity, effects on surrogate metabolic markers, or similarity to testosterone. 89 While molecular structures differ, there is no evidence demonstrating that a particular progestin is superior to others. Traditionally, progestins were classified into “generations” by their parent compound and decade of development. This classification is not clinically useful and should be abandoned. 90 Patients sometimes prefer a pill that they used previously, and if no contraindications exist and the cost is acceptable to the patient, it is reasonable to prescribe it ( Figure 1 and Figure 2 ).

Combined hormonal contraceptives can be dosed in a cyclic or continuous fashion. Originally, birth control pills were dosed with 21 days of active drug and a 7-day placebo week to trigger a monthly withdrawal bleed, meant to mimic the natural menstrual cycle. However, many women prefer less frequent withdrawal bleeds. 91 Some women report significant adverse effects 92 during this placebo week, such as migraine, bloating, and pelvic pain, and extended use provides an easy way to manage or eliminate these problems. 61 During the placebo week, there is less suppression of the HPO axis. 93 - 95 For these reasons, many newer contraceptive pills have shorter (eg, 4-day) placebo periods. Further, most monophasic combined hormonal contraceptives can be used as extended use (fewer withdrawal bleeds) by having a 4-day placebo period quarterly or continuously (no withdrawal bleed) by eliminating the placebo altogether. Extended and continuous use are associated with improved typical use efficacy, likely because greater overall HPO axis suppression is achieved, which may offset lapses in user adherence. 96 A new vaginal ring (segesterone acetate/ethinyl estradiol vaginal system) is also available, which is prescribed for 1 year, with the patient removing the ring each month for 7 days. 97

This review has several limitations. First, relatively few randomized clinical trials that directly compared contraceptive methods were available. Therefore, contraceptive methods are typically evaluated by their individual efficacy (pregnancies per person-cycles) and not typically by their relative effectiveness compared with another method. Second, the quality of summarized evidence was not evaluated. Third, some aspects of contraception, such as counseling, noncontraceptive health benefits, ongoing contraceptive innovations, and the effect of cultural values, and patient preferences were not covered in this review.

Oral contraceptive pills are the most commonly used reversible contraceptives, IUDs and subdermal implants have the highest effectiveness, and progestin-only and nonhormonal methods have the lowest risks. Optimal contraceptive selection incorporates patient values and preferences.

Corresponding Author: Stephanie Teal, MD, MPH, Department of OB/GYN, University Hospitals Medical Center and Case Western Reserve University, 11100 Euclid Ave, MAC-5304 Cleveland, OH 44106 ( [email protected] ).

Accepted for Publication: November 10, 2021.

Author Contributions: Drs Teal and Edelman had full access to all of the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Concept and design : Both authors.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data : Both authors.

Drafting of the manuscript : Both authors.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content : Edelman.

Administrative, technical, or material support : Both authors.

Supervision : Both authors.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Teal reported receiving grants from Merck & Co, Bayer Healthcare, Sebela, and Medicines360, and personal fees from Merck & Co and Bayer Healthcare outside the submitted work. Dr Edelman reported receiving grants from Merck, research funds from HRA Pharma, and royalties from UpToDate outside the submitted work.

• Register for email alerts with links to free full-text articles
• Access PDFs of free articles
• Manage your interests
• Save searches and receive search alerts

Addiction Treatment and Telehealth: Review of Efficacy and Provider Insights During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Information & authors, metrics & citations, view options, conclusions:, literature review, provider survey, stakeholder interviews.

Individual and group counseling.

Medication management., assessments., provider survey and stakeholder interview findings, use of telehealth to improve access., use and perceived effectiveness of telehealth for various treatment services..

Intake assessments.

Medication prescribing and medication management., benefits and challenges of telehealth for some patients., conclusions, information, published in.

• Alcohol and drug abuse
• Coronavirus/COVID-19
• Telecommunications

Affiliations

Funding information, export citations.

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download. For more information or tips please see 'Downloading to a citation manager' in the Help menu .

To download the citation to this article, select your reference manager software.

There are no citations for this item

View options

Login options.

Already a subscriber? Access your subscription through your login credentials or your institution for full access to this article.

Not a subscriber?

Subscribe Now / Learn More

PsychiatryOnline subscription options offer access to the DSM-5-TR ® library, books, journals, CME, and patient resources. This all-in-one virtual library provides psychiatrists and mental health professionals with key resources for diagnosis, treatment, research, and professional development.

Need more help? PsychiatryOnline Customer Service may be reached by emailing [email protected] or by calling 800-368-5777 (in the U.S.) or 703-907-7322 (outside the U.S.).

Share article link

Copying failed.

PREVIOUS ARTICLE

Next article, request username.

Can't sign in? Forgot your username? Enter your email address below and we will send you your username

If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to retrieve your username

Create a new account

Change password, password changed successfully.

Your password has been changed

Reset password

Can't sign in? Forgot your password?

Enter your email address below and we will send you the reset instructions

If the address matches an existing account you will receive an email with instructions to reset your password.

Your Phone has been verified

Advertisement

21 Questions About Literature and Life in the 21st Century (So Far)

Written by THE NEW YORK TIMES BOOKS STAFF July 14, 2024

• Share full article

Literature has always reflected society, and as the Book Review’s survey “100 Best Books of the 21st Century” reveals, many titles on the list are intertwined with major events and trends of the young millennium. With that in mind, this beefy quiz — a group effort by several members of the Book Review’s staff — challenges you to show how closely you’ve been paying attention to books, history and pop culture the past few decades.

All the questions are multiple choice, so tap or click your way down the quiz. And when you get to the end and collect your score, you'll get a list of links for related reading and other digital ephemera. Are you ready, Player One?

Which National Book Award-winning novel features a grieving woman’s increasingly intimate bond with a Great Dane?

“The Friend,” by Sigrid Nunez

“White Teeth,” by Zadie Smith

“We the Animals,” by Justin Torres

“Runaway,” by Alice Munro

As mentioned in his 2019 memoir “Working: Researching, Interviewing, Writing,” which device has Robert A. Caro used to write drafts of his monumental, multi-volume, as-yet-unfinished biography of Lyndon Johnson?

A MacBook Air laptop

A TRS-80 computer

A Smith Corona electric typewriter

A Linux-based Dell desktop

Although this novel about a traveling group of performers after a global plague was published in 2014 before the Covid-19 pandemic swept the world, the book’s sales jumped during the lockdowns in 2020 and in 2021, when its television adaptation was released. Which novel was it?

“A Manual for Cleaning Women,” by Lucia Berlin

“Station Eleven,” by Emily St. John Mandel

“The Fifth Season,” by N.K. Jemisin

“The Known World,” by Edward P. Jones

Jeffrey Wright received a 2024 Academy Award nomination for his role as a weary author dealing with industry racism in “American Fiction.” Which novel was the inspiration for the film?

“The Late Americans,” by Brandon Taylor

“The Unsettled,” by Ayana Mathis

“Erasure,” by Percival Everett

“Symphony of Secrets,” by Brendan Slocumb

Quick! Who is Carel Fabritius?

A 17th-century painter whose depiction of a small bird gives “The Goldfinch” its title

A 19th-century chemist whose research is described in “The Emperor of All Maladies”

A 20th-century motorcycle designer in “The Flamethrowers”

A 22nd-century actor turned cult leader in “Station Eleven”

The Statista data-analysis company projects that the global video-game industry will reach a revenue of more than $282 billion in 2024. Which novel is about three friends in the video-game business?

“The Argonauts,” by Maggie Nelson

“Detransition, Baby,” by Torrey Peters

“The Great Believers,” by Rebecca Makkai

“Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow,” by Gabrielle Zevin

Jonathan Franzen notably was disinvited from the Oprah Winfrey show after expressing discomfort with his novel “The Corrections” being chosen as her book-club pick. For which novel did he eventually make it onto her show and hug it out with the host?

“Crossroads”

“The Twenty-Seventh City”

Which Broadway show, adapted from a book, won the 2015 Tony Award for best musical?

“The Color Purple”

“Doctor Zhivago”

Which king is on the throne of England in most of Hilary Mantel’s epic trilogy about ambition, power, loyalty — and, of course, politics — that started with “Wolf Hall” in 2009?

Edward VIII

Charles III

Isabel Wilkerson’s 2010 historical study “The Warmth of Other Suns” won the National Book Critics Circle Award and has even inspired dance productions. What was the book about?

The midcentury exodus of Black writers to Paris

Climate change’s effect on rural areas

The migration of Black people from the South to the North

The Tuskegee Airmen in Italy during World War II

Reviewers praised Jennifer Egan’s “A Visit From the Goon Squad” for the innovative ways it told a linked set of stories. One chapter was famously presented as what?

A series of text messages

A manga comic

A transcribed hypnosis session

A PowerPoint presentation

Lawrence Wright’s 2006 book about the terrorist attacks on America on Sept. 11, 2001, was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for general nonfiction. What was the title?

“The Looming Tower”

“In the Shadow of No Towers”

“Falling Man”

“Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close”

Which best-selling novel begins with this sentence: “When I think of my wife, I always think of her head”?

“Trust,” by Hernan Diaz

“An American Marriage,” by Tayari Jones

“Veronica,” by Mary Gaitskill

“Gone Girl,” by Gillian Flynn

“Pachinko,” Min Jin Lee’s 2017 novel that was a finalist for the National Book Award, is about a Korean family’s experiences before and after immigrating to Japan in the early 20th century. But what is “pachinko” itself?

A tile-based game played by four players around a table

A pinball-like arcade game sometimes used for gambling

A modern version of the card game whist, but with a smaller deck

A board game played with four wooden sticks that act like dice

This century has seen a turbulent uptick in mass migration and asylum seekers around the world. Which 2017 novel used speculative fiction techniques to explore global refugee issues and emigration?

“Exit West,” by Mohsin Hamid

“The Power,” by Naomi Alderman

“Shadowbahn,” by Steve Erickson

“The Burning Girl,” by Claire Messud

In Junot Díaz’s “The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao” — which was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for fiction and the National Book Critics Circle Award — the main character Oscar is obsessed with nerd culture, including comic books. Which of these novels was all about the midcentury rise of the American comic-book industry — long before Marvel movies filled the multiplexes? (Hint: This book won the Pulitzer Prize for fiction in 2001.)

“The Last Samurai,” by Helen DeWitt

“The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay,” by Michael Chabon

“Cloud Atlas,” by David Mitchell

“Pulphead,” by John Jeremiah Sullivan

“Persepolis,” Marjane Satrapi’s autobiographical illustrated book about her childhood, was originally published in French in 2000 and 2001 before the English translation was released in 2003. But even without reading the book or seeing its 2007 film adaptation, where or what was Persepolis itself?

A site in Jordan with a temple carved into a canyon

A fantasy village that appears once every 100 years

The ancient capital of the first Persian (Achaemenid) Empire

A Zoroastrian city on the east end of the Silk Road

Which one of these novels was NOT part of Elena Ferrante’s Neapolitan quartet?

“The Lying Life of Adults”

“The Story of a New Name”

“The Story of the Lost Child”

“My Brilliant Friend”

This meteorological event runs from June 1 to Nov. 30 every year and is also the name of Fernanda Melchor’s beautiful and brutal 2020 novel. What is the title of the book?

“Mercury Retrograde”

“Hurricane Season”

OK, Nobel watchers, this one’s for you: Which of these 21st-century books was NOT written by a Nobel laureate?

“Hateship, Friendship, Courtship, Loveship, Marriage”

“Never Let Me Go”

“The Years”

Which 2005 book, at nearly 900 pages and written using research material from six languages, is one of the first modern histories to cover all of Europe — a continent that continues to have its own political upheavals to this day?

“Postwar,” by Tony Judt

“The Global Age,” by Ian Kershaw

“Modern Times,” by Paul Johnson

“The Rise and Fall of the Great Powers,” by Paul Kennedy