medical literature review example pdf

Health (Nursing, Medicine, Allied Health)

• Find Articles/Databases
• Reference Resources
• Evidence Summaries & Clinical Guidelines
• Drug Information
• Health Data & Statistics
• Patient/Consumer Facing Materials
• Images and Streaming Video
• Grey Literature
• Mobile Apps & "Point of Care" Tools
• Tests & Measures This link opens in a new window
• Citing Sources
• Selecting Databases
• Framing Research Questions
• Crafting a Search
• Narrowing / Filtering a Search
• Expanding a Search
• Cited Reference Searching
• Saving Searches
• Term Glossary
• Critical Appraisal Resources
• What are Literature Reviews?
• Conducting & Reporting Systematic Reviews
• Finding Systematic Reviews
• Tutorials & Tools for Literature Reviews
• Finding Full Text

What are Systematic Reviews? (3 minutes, 24 second YouTube Video)

Systematic Literature Reviews: Steps & Resources

These steps for conducting a systematic literature review are listed below . 

Also see subpages for more information about:

• The different types of literature reviews, including systematic reviews and other evidence synthesis methods
• Tools & Tutorials

Literature Review & Systematic Review Steps

• Develop a Focused Question
• Scope the Literature  (Initial Search)
• Refine & Expand the Search
• Limit the Results
• Download Citations
• Abstract & Analyze
• Create Flow Diagram
• Synthesize & Report Results

1. Develop a Focused   Question 

Consider the PICO Format: Population/Problem, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome

Focus on defining the Population or Problem and Intervention (don't narrow by Comparison or Outcome just yet!)

"What are the effects of the Pilates method for patients with low back pain?"

Tools & Additional Resources:

• PICO Question Help
• Stillwell, Susan B., DNP, RN, CNE; Fineout-Overholt, Ellen, PhD, RN, FNAP, FAAN; Melnyk, Bernadette Mazurek, PhD, RN, CPNP/PMHNP, FNAP, FAAN; Williamson, Kathleen M., PhD, RN Evidence-Based Practice, Step by Step: Asking the Clinical Question, AJN The American Journal of Nursing : March 2010 - Volume 110 - Issue 3 - p 58-61 doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000368959.11129.79

2. Scope the Literature

A "scoping search" investigates the breadth and/or depth of the initial question or may identify a gap in the literature. 

Eligible studies may be located by searching in:

• Background sources (books, point-of-care tools)
• Article databases
• Trial registries
• Grey literature
• Cited references
• Reference lists

When searching, if possible, translate terms to controlled vocabulary of the database. Use text word searching when necessary.

Use Boolean operators to connect search terms:

• Combine separate concepts with AND  (resulting in a narrower search)
• Connecting synonyms with OR  (resulting in an expanded search)

Search:  pilates AND ("low back pain"  OR  backache )

Video Tutorials - Translating PICO Questions into Search Queries

• Translate Your PICO Into a Search in PubMed (YouTube, Carrie Price, 5:11) 
• Translate Your PICO Into a Search in CINAHL (YouTube, Carrie Price, 4:56)

3. Refine & Expand Your Search

Expand your search strategy with synonymous search terms harvested from:

• database thesauri
• reference lists
• relevant studies

Example: 

(pilates OR exercise movement techniques) AND ("low back pain" OR backache* OR sciatica OR lumbago OR spondylosis)

As you develop a final, reproducible strategy for each database, save your strategies in a:

• a personal database account (e.g., MyNCBI for PubMed)
• Log in with your NYU credentials
• Open and "Make a Copy" to create your own tracker for your literature search strategies

4. Limit Your Results

Use database filters to limit your results based on your defined inclusion/exclusion criteria.  In addition to relying on the databases' categorical filters, you may also need to manually screen results.  

• Limit to Article type, e.g.,:  "randomized controlled trial" OR multicenter study
• Limit by publication years, age groups, language, etc.

NOTE: Many databases allow you to filter to "Full Text Only".  This filter is  not recommended . It excludes articles if their full text is not available in that particular database (CINAHL, PubMed, etc), but if the article is relevant, it is important that you are able to read its title and abstract, regardless of 'full text' status. The full text is likely to be accessible through another source (a different database, or Interlibrary Loan).  

• Filters in PubMed
• CINAHL Advanced Searching Tutorial

5. Download Citations

Selected citations and/or entire sets of search results can be downloaded from the database into a citation management tool. If you are conducting a systematic review that will require reporting according to PRISMA standards, a citation manager can help you keep track of the number of articles that came from each database, as well as the number of duplicate records.

In Zotero, you can create a Collection for the combined results set, and sub-collections for the results from each database you search.  You can then use Zotero's 'Duplicate Items" function to find and merge duplicate records.

• Citation Managers - General Guide

6. Abstract and Analyze

• Migrate citations to data collection/extraction tool
• Screen Title/Abstracts for inclusion/exclusion
• Screen and appraise full text for relevance, methods, 
• Resolve disagreements by consensus

Covidence is a web-based tool that enables you to work with a team to screen titles/abstracts and full text for inclusion in your review, as well as extract data from the included studies.

• Covidence Support
• Critical Appraisal Tools
• Data Extraction Tools

7. Create Flow Diagram

The PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) flow diagram is a visual representation of the flow of records through different phases of a systematic review.  It depicts the number of records identified, included and excluded.  It is best used in conjunction with the PRISMA checklist .

Example from: Stotz, S. A., McNealy, K., Begay, R. L., DeSanto, K., Manson, S. M., & Moore, K. R. (2021). Multi-level diabetes prevention and treatment interventions for Native people in the USA and Canada: A scoping review. Current Diabetes Reports, 2 (11), 46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11892-021-01414-3

• PRISMA Flow Diagram Generator (ShinyApp.io, Haddaway et al. )
• PRISMA Diagram Templates  (Word and PDF)
• Make a copy of the file to fill out the template
• Image can be downloaded as PDF, PNG, JPG, or SVG
• Covidence generates a PRISMA diagram that is automatically updated as records move through the review phases

8. Synthesize & Report Results

There are a number of reporting guideline available to guide the synthesis and reporting of results in systematic literature reviews.

It is common to organize findings in a matrix, also known as a Table of Evidence (ToE).

• Reporting Guidelines for Systematic Reviews
• Download a sample template of a health sciences review matrix  (GoogleSheets)

Steps modified from: 

Cook, D. A., & West, C. P. (2012). Conducting systematic reviews in medical education: a stepwise approach.   Medical Education , 46 (10), 943–952.

• << Previous: Critical Appraisal Resources
• Next: What are Literature Reviews? >>
• Last Updated: Jul 9, 2024 6:57 PM
• URL: https://guides.nyu.edu/health

Academia.edu no longer supports Internet Explorer.

To browse Academia.edu and the wider internet faster and more securely, please take a few seconds to  upgrade your browser .

Enter the email address you signed up with and we'll email you a reset link.

• We're Hiring!
• Help Center

Conducting a Literature Review in Health Research: Basics of the Approach, Typology and Methodology Corresponding Author

Review Typology

Background: Literature reviews play a significant role in healthcare practice. There are different types of reviews available depending on the nature of the research question and the extent of reviewing that is conducted. In this article, we have summarized the major types of literature reviews, their strength and weakness, and provide representative examples. Methods: We have examined the different types of common reviews that have been used in the health research literature. We collected the information on these review types and have summarized them with providing corresponding examples. Results: We have discussed the major types of reviews: literature review, critical review, scoping review, systematic review, meta-analysis, qualitative systematic review, realist review, and review of reviews. We have mentioned the usability, strengths and weaknesses, utilizing the Search, Appraisal, Synthesis, Analysis (SALSA) framework, and have provided corresponding examples for each of these types of reviews in different tables. Conclusion: This article is a summary of different types of reviews and their implication in practice. This paper is thus intended for beginners who want to know about literature reviews. Introduction Literature reviews are becoming more and more important and favoured in the evidencebased practice (EBP) of health and social care 1. Healthcare professionals require updated information regarding research and development to inform their practice. However, with such large amounts of materials being published, it is impossible for anyone to cover every single piece of information or evidence on any given topic. A literature review thus gives audiences the opportunity to have summarized information on any topic without reading all of the evidence published in that specific area. Although the culture of the review article began more than two centuries ago, it wasn't until the 20th century that an explicit method was devised to carry out review research 2. In addition, the emergence of EBP instigated more rigorous and quality controlled approaches of review articles so that the synthesized summary results could be utilized with confidence 3 .

Related Papers

journal johe

Background: We are living in an era in which different branches of science are growing very rapidly. Therefore, retrieving and summarizing all new valid findings on a specific subject is one of the most important priorities of scientists. The aim of the present article is to categorize different review studies within the health domain based on their approach to retrieving and summarizing original findings. Methods: The most relevant articles have been selected and summarized in order to accomplish the aim of the study. Results: Narrative reviews, systematic reviews, meta-analyses from published data, and individual participant data meta-analyses are different types of review studies. More recently, prospectively planned pooled analyses have also been introduced. Conclusions: Diverse types of review studies have been developed one by one over the course of time based on their approaches to retrieving and summarizing original findings. Therefore, they have their own especial applications and scientists of different disciplines need to know their advantages and disadvantages.

Mohsen Rezaeian

Paula L Bush

Sri Lanka Library Review

Sriyani Perera

Systematic Reviews (SRs) are considered as a useful tool to be adopted in the approaches of Evidence-Based Practice (EBP) in Social Sciences & Humanities, and more widely in Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) in Healthcare. In these processes of EBM and EBP, where ‘informed decision making’ based on the ‘best evidence’ is the key factor, Systematic Reviews are found to be an important source of information. The methodology of conducting a systematic review, involves several steps where Assessing Quality of the studies that are selected to include in the review is one of the most important steps, as it is the vital element which determines the validity and the creditability of the end product or the conclusion of a systematic review. Therefore, in SRs where assessing quality is not included in the procedure, the validity of the findings of the SR will be questionable. The quality of a research study can be evaluated through various facts and measures. This paper attempts to emphasize on t...

Judith Gomersall

Kenneth Bond

Rapid reviews (RR), using abbreviated systematic review (SR) methods, are becoming more popular among decision-makers. This World Health Organization commissioned study sought to summarize RR methods, identify differences, and highlight potential biases between RR and SR. Review of RR methods (Key Question 1 [KQ1]), meta-epidemiologic studies comparing reliability/ validity of RR and SR methods (KQ2), and their potential associated biases (KQ3). We searched Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, grey literature, and checked reference lists, used personal contacts, and crowdsourcing (e.g. email listservs). Selection and data extraction was conducted by one reviewer (KQ1) or two reviewers independently (KQ2-3). Across all KQs, we identified 42,743 citations through the literature searches. KQ1: RR methods from 29 organizations were reviewed. There was no consensus on which aspects of the SR process to abbreviate. KQ2: Studies comparing the conclusions of RR and SR (n = 9) found them to be...

The American Journal of Nursing

Edoardo Aromataris

Brandy Maynard

Julia Littell

Loading Preview

Sorry, preview is currently unavailable. You can download the paper by clicking the button above.

RELATED PAPERS

Frontiers in Public Health

Ruitai SHAO

Patricia Vella Bonanno

BMC Medical Research …

Declan Devane

Campbell Systematic Reviews

Manoj Kumar

Systematic reviews

Alex Todhunter-Brown

Miradas Johnson

Clinics in Plastic Surgery

Pacific Rim International Journal of Nursing Research

Patraporn Bhatarasakoon

Sao Paulo Medical Journal

Antonio Jose Grande

International Journal of Nursing Studies

Peter Griffiths

Journal of Thoracic Disease

Luca Bertolaccini

Kusnadi Jaya

Journal of Evidence Based Dental Practice

Roberto Rotundo

Journal of the College of Physicians and Surgeons--Pakistan: JCPSP

Muhammad Irfan

Research Square (Research Square)

Dr Mukdarut Bangpan

Evidence Based Mental …

Shirley Reynolds

BMC medical research methodology

Cindy Stern

RELATED TOPICS

•   We're Hiring!
•   Help Center
• Find new research papers in:
• Health Sciences
• Earth Sciences
• Cognitive Science
• Mathematics
• Computer Science
• Academia ©2024

Further reading & examples

Journal articles.

• Examples of literature reviews
• Articles on literature reviews
• Family needs and involvement in the intensive care unit: a literature review Al-Mutair, A. S., Plummer, V., O'Brien, A., & Clerehan, R. (2013). Family needs and involvement in the intensive care unit: a literature review. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 22(13/14), 1805-1817. doi:10.1111/jocn.12065
• A literature review exploring how healthcare professionals contribute to the assessment and control of postoperative pain in older people Brown, D. (2004). A literature review exploring how healthcare professionals contribute to the assessment and control of postoperative pain in older people. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 13(6b), 74-90. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2004.01047.x
• Effects of team coordination during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A systematic review of the literature Castelao, E. F., Russo, S. G., Riethmüller, M., & Boos, M. (2013). Effects of team coordination during cardiopulmonary resuscitation: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Critical Care, 28(4), 504-521. doi:10.1016/j.jcrc.2013.01.005
• Literature review: Eating and drinking in labour Hunt, L. (2013). Literature review: Eating and drinking in labour. British Journal of Midwifery, 21(7), 499-502.
• Collaboration between hospital physicians and nurses: An integrated literature review Tang, C. J., Chan, S. W., Zhou, W. T., & Liaw, S. Y. (2013). Collaboration between hospital physicians and nurses: An integrated literature review. International Nursing Review, 60(3), 291-302. doi:10.1111/inr.12034
• A systematic literature review of Releasing Time to Care: The Productive Ward Wright, S., & McSherry, W. (2013). A systematic literature review of Releasing Time to Care: The Productive Ward. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 22(9/10), 1361-1371. doi:10.1111/jocn.12074
• Learning how to undertake a systematic review: part 1. Bettany-Saltikov, J. (2010). Learning how to undertake a systematic review: part 1. Nursing Standard, 24(50), 47-56.
• Users' guide to the surgical literature: how to use a systematic literature review and meta-analysis Bhandari, M., Devereaux, P. J., Montori, V., Cinà, C., Tandan, V., & Guyatt, G. H. (2004). Users' guide to the surgical literature: how to use a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. Canadian Journal of Surgery, 47(1), 60-67.
• Strategies for the construction of a critical review of the literature Carnwell, R., & Daly, W. (2001). Strategies for the construction of a critical review of the literature. Nurse Education in Practice, 1(2), 57-63.
• Thoughts about conceptual models, theories, and literature reviews Fawcett, J. (2013). Thoughts about conceptual models, theories, and literature reviews. Nursing Science Quarterly, 26(3), 285-288. doi:10.1177/0894318413489156
• Turn a stack of papers into a literature review: useful tools for beginners Talbot, L., & Verrinder, G. (2008). Turn a Stack of Papers into a Literature Review: Useful Tools for Beginners. Focus on health professional education: a multi-disciplinary journal, 10(1), 51-58.

• << Previous: Evaluation templates
• Next: Referencing and further help >>

• University of Detroit Mercy
• Health Professions

Health Services Administration

• Writing a Literature Review
• Find Articles (Databases)
• Evidence-based Practice
• eBooks & Articles
• General Writing Support
• Creating & Printing Posters
• Research Project Web Resources
• Statistics: Health / Medical
• Searching Tips
• Streaming Video
• Database & Library Help
• Medical Apps & Mobile Sites
• Faculty Publications

Literature Review Overview

What is a Literature Review? Why Are They Important?

A literature review is important because it presents the "state of the science" or accumulated knowledge on a specific topic. It summarizes, analyzes, and compares the available research, reporting study strengths and weaknesses, results, gaps in the research, conclusions, and authors’ interpretations.

Tips and techniques for conducting a literature review are described more fully in the subsequent boxes:

• Literature review steps
• Strategies for organizing the information for your review
• Literature reviews sections
• In-depth resources to assist in writing a literature review
• Templates to start your review
• Literature review examples

Literature Review Steps

Graphic used with permission: Torres, E. Librarian, Hawai'i Pacific University

1. Choose a topic and define your research question

• Try to choose a topic of interest. You will be working with this subject for several weeks to months.
• Ideas for topics can be found by scanning medical news sources (e.g MedPage Today), journals / magazines, work experiences, interesting patient cases, or family or personal health issues.
• Do a bit of background reading on topic ideas to familiarize yourself with terminology and issues. Note the words and terms that are used.
• Develop a focused research question using PICO(T) or other framework (FINER, SPICE, etc - there are many options) to help guide you.
• Run a few sample database searches to make sure your research question is not too broad or too narrow.
• If possible, discuss your topic with your professor. 

2. Determine the scope of your review

The scope of your review will be determined by your professor during your program. Check your assignment requirements for parameters for the Literature Review.

• How many studies will you need to include?
• How many years should it cover? (usually 5-7 depending on the professor)
• For the nurses, are you required to limit to nursing literature?

3. Develop a search plan

• Determine which databases to search. This will depend on your topic. If you are not sure, check your program specific library website (Physician Asst / Nursing / Health Services Admin) for recommendations.
• Create an initial search string using the main concepts from your research (PICO, etc) question. Include synonyms and related words connected by Boolean operators
• Contact your librarian for assistance, if needed.

4. Conduct searches and find relevant literature

• Keep notes as you search - tracking keywords and search strings used in each database in order to avoid wasting time duplicating a search that has already been tried
• Read abstracts and write down new terms to search as you find them
• Check MeSH or other subject headings listed in relevant articles for additional search terms
• Scan author provided keywords if available
• Check the references of relevant articles looking for other useful articles (ancestry searching)
• Check articles that have cited your relevant article for more useful articles (descendancy searching). Both PubMed and CINAHL offer Cited By links
• Revise the search to broaden or narrow your topic focus as you peruse the available literature
• Conducting a literature search is a repetitive process. Searches can be revised and re-run multiple times during the process.
• Track the citations for your relevant articles in a software citation manager such as RefWorks, Zotero, or Mendeley

5. Review the literature

• Read the full articles. Do not rely solely on the abstracts. Authors frequently cannot include all results within the confines of an abstract. Exclude articles that do not address your research question.
• While reading, note research findings relevant to your project and summarize. Are the findings conflicting? There are matrices available than can help with organization. See the Organizing Information box below.
• Critique / evaluate the quality of the articles, and record your findings in your matrix or summary table. Tools are available to prompt you what to look for. (See Resources for Appraising a Research Study box on the HSA, Nursing , and PA guides )
• You may need to revise your search and re-run it based on your findings.

6. Organize and synthesize

• Compile the findings and analysis from each resource into a single narrative.
• Using an outline can be helpful. Start broad, addressing the overall findings and then narrow, discussing each resource and how it relates to your question and to the other resources.
• Cite as you write to keep sources organized.
• Write in structured paragraphs using topic sentences and transition words to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.
• Don't present one study after another, but rather relate one study's findings to another. Speak to how the studies are connected and how they relate to your work.

Organizing Information

Options to assist in organizing sources and information :

1. Synthesis Matrix

• helps provide overview of the literature
• information from individual sources is entered into a grid to enable writers to discern patterns and themes
• article summary, analysis, or results
• thoughts, reflections, or issues
• each reference gets its own row
• mind maps, concept maps, flowcharts
• at top of page record PICO or research question
• record major concepts / themes from literature
• list concepts that branch out from major concepts underneath - keep going downward hierarchically, until most specific ideas are recorded
• enclose concepts in circles and connect the concept with lines - add brief explanation as needed

3. Summary Table

• information is recorded in a grid to help with recall and sorting information when writing
• allows comparing and contrasting individual studies easily
• purpose of study
• methodology (study population, data collection tool)

Efron, S. E., & Ravid, R. (2019). Writing the literature review : A practical guide . Guilford Press.

Literature Review Sections

• Lit reviews can be part of a larger paper / research study or they can be the focus of the paper
• Lit reviews focus on research studies to provide evidence
• New topics may not have much that has been published

* The sections included may depend on the purpose of the literature review (standalone paper or section within a research paper)

Standalone Literature Review (aka Narrative Review):

• presents your topic or PICO question
• includes the why of the literature review and your goals for the review.
• provides background for your the topic and previews the key points
• Narrative Reviews: tmay not have an explanation of methods.
• include where the search was conducted (which databases) what subject terms or keywords were used, and any limits or filters that were applied and why - this will help others re-create the search
• describe how studies were analyzed for inclusion or exclusion
• review the purpose and answer the research question
• thematically - using recurring themes in the literature
• chronologically - present the development of the topic over time
• methodological - compare and contrast findings based on various methodologies used to research the topic (e.g. qualitative vs quantitative, etc.)
• theoretical - organized content based on various theories
• provide an overview of the main points of each source then synthesize the findings into a coherent summary of the whole
• present common themes among the studies
• compare and contrast the various study results
• interpret the results and address the implications of the findings
• do the results support the original hypothesis or conflict with it
• provide your own analysis and interpretation (eg. discuss the significance of findings; evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the studies, noting any problems)
• discuss common and unusual patterns and offer explanations
•  stay away from opinions, personal biases and unsupported recommendations
• summarize the key findings and relate them back to your PICO/research question
• note gaps in the research and suggest areas for further research
• this section should not contain "new" information that had not been previously discussed in one of the sections above
• provide a list of all the studies and other sources used in proper APA 7

Literature Review as Part of a Research Study Manuscript:

• Compares the study with other research and includes how a study fills a gap in the research.
• Focus on the body of the review which includes the synthesized Findings and Discussion

Literature Reviews vs Systematic Reviews

Systematic Reviews are NOT the same as a Literature Review:

Literature Reviews:

• Literature reviews may or may not follow strict systematic methods to find, select, and analyze articles, but rather they selectively and broadly review the literature on a topic
• Research included in a Literature Review can be "cherry-picked" and therefore, can be very subjective

Systematic Reviews:

• Systemic reviews are designed to provide a comprehensive summary of the evidence for a focused research question
• rigorous and strictly structured, using standardized reporting guidelines (e.g. PRISMA, see link below)
• uses exhaustive, systematic searches of all relevant databases
• best practice dictates search strategies are peer reviewed
• uses predetermined study inclusion and exclusion criteria in order to minimize bias
• aims to capture and synthesize all literature (including unpublished research - grey literature) that meet the predefined criteria on a focused topic resulting in high quality evidence

Literature Review Examples

• Breastfeeding initiation and support: A literature review of what women value and the impact of early discharge (2017). Women and Birth : Journal of the Australian College of Midwives
• Community-based participatory research to promote healthy diet and nutrition and prevent and control obesity among African-Americans: A literature review (2017). Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities

• Vitamin D deficiency in individuals with a spinal cord injury: A literature review (2017). Spinal Cord

Resources for Writing a Literature Review

These sources have been used in developing this guide.

Resources Used on This Page

Aveyard, H. (2010). Doing a literature review in health and social care : A practical guide . McGraw-Hill Education.

Purdue Online Writing Lab. (n.d.). Writing a literature review . Purdue University. https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/conducting_research/writing_a_literature_review.html

Torres, E. (2021, October 21). Nursing - graduate studies research guide: Literature review. Hawai'i Pacific University Libraries. Retrieved January 27, 2022, from https://hpu.libguides.com/c.php?g=543891&p=3727230

• << Previous: General Writing Support
• Next: Creating & Printing Posters >>
• Last Updated: Jun 28, 2024 5:17 PM
• URL: https://udmercy.libguides.com/hsa

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
• Pak J Med Sci
• v.29(2); 2013 Apr

Medical literature review: Search or perish

Literature review is a cascading process of searching, reading, analyzing, and summing up of the materials about a specific topic. However, searching the literature is like searching “a needle in a haystack”, and hence has been called “Cinderella”. 1 Therefore, skills and effective pathways of searching the literature are needed to achieve high sensitive and specific results.

Importance of searching the literature:

A good review of previously published work has many advantages. Firstly, it prevents wasteful salami work, and hence saves financial resources. Secondly, it is a pathway of creating new idea from others’ work by filling the research gaps in the previous work and trying to know what is unknown about a specific topic. Steward 1 has summarized the criteria of a good literature review.

Literature search engines: pros and cons:

It is worth noting that the researchers should have a previous knowledge about the different available literature searches such as PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Google Scholar, and many others. The characteristics of the most literature searches have been previously mentioned 2 , and the comparison between the efficiency and effectiveness of the two most popular literature searches (the PubMed and Google Scholar) have been extensively studied. The question arises which literature search should the authors use to obtain an appropriate results? The answer is the knowledge that the authors must know about the pros and cons of each literature search and the complementary pathways that should be used to retrieve most of the related work about a specific topic. There is an ongoing debate about the accuracy, precision, sensitivity, and specificity of either using the PubMed or a search engine (e.g., Google Scholar) as a major tool of searching the literature. 3 - 7 However, combining the simplicity, speed, and the accessibility of the “grey” literature using the Google Scholar 8 with the strengths of the PubMed is highly recommended and will retrieve highly sensitive and specific results. The “Net Generation” prefers using the Google Scholar rather than the PubMed. However, authors must appreciate the limitations of every pathway they use and to combine different pathways is always better to get an optimal literature results.

Searching the literature: An example:

As searching the literature depends on the clinical question, selection of search terms, framing the questions, or key words, authors should spend time to consider different terms to avoid missing any article, which could be disastrous. Searching terms are the “bait fish” which are used as a bait to capture and retrieve most if not all of the related work about a specific topic.

Example of good terms formatting:

To the best of my knowledge, only two studies have investigated the level of β 3 integrin in the serum of healthy donors. To find the two papers in the “haystack” try the following luring terms, using both Google Scholar and PubMed.

• Serum β3 vs serum beta3.
• Plasma B3 vs serum B3.
• Serum beta3 and healthy vs serum beta3 and disease.

The only term which will retrieve successfully the two papers is “serum beta3 and disease” using both Google Scholar and the PubMed, however, much faster using Google.

Top tips of searching the literature:

Galaxies of tips have been suggested and many are available with videos and illustrations on the internet. Goggling the term “tips for searching the literature” will retrieve about 7.050.000 results. However, a very recent article suggested only four steps, 9 and another recommended 18 steps 10 for an effective literature searching. Having a good plan and enough time for framing the appropriate questions, as mentioned above in the example, will facilitate retrieving of the most if not all related work about a specific topic. One should always prefer combining different search terms and using the strengths of the two pals search engines (PubMed and Google Scholar) to achieve a high sensitive and specific search results. Maximum patience is desired in this stage by the authors to trap all related work, and keep in mind “keep Googling and PubMeding” will keep you on a safe side. Some additional tips for searching the literature are illustrated in Fig.1 .

Hints for literature search.

Most wanted articles: the process of weeding out:

After searching and collecting the literature, the authors need to weed out what they have collected and critically evaluate the sensitivity and specificity of the collected materials. This process is a vital to weed out the most wanted and related material about a specific topic. In addition, one can rapidly scan the dimensions of the topic and can find further key words and phrases for the future search. The collected materials can contain peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed materials; therefore, care should be taken while analyzing the search results. Further suggestions and recommendations on evaluating the collected literature have been suggested in different studies. 11 - 13

Acknowledge the chaotic or systematic search:

The term “to the best of my knowledge” can be used to describe gently the probability of inadvertently missing of one article about a specific topic. However, missing an article may result either from a chaotic searching strategy, not all medical journals are indexed in the PubMed, inappropriate searching terms and key words, or missing the articles which are published in non-English languages. The junior authors and the “Net Generation” use this term more often in their writing, however, the senior reviewers will find it out very easily. Hence, it is always worthwhile to spend more time in framing and phrasing the sound terms, questions, and key words and to use these terms for capturing all related work about a specific topic and using the right search engines.

Conclusions: Best search leads to best research:

A searching plan is a perquisite step to get high accurate and precise results. The plan should detail all necessary key words and phrases that should be tried by the authors. Evaluation of the collected material is pivotal to assess the sensitivity and the specificity of both the search terms and the search engines used. Keeping in mind the literature review is one step in the chain of publishing the authors’ work, and best searching strategies lead to best research results and hence a worthy publications.

Conflict of interest: None.

The Sheridan Libraries

• Public Health
• Sheridan Libraries
• Literature Reviews + Annotating
• How to Access Full Text
• Background Information
• Books, E-books, Dissertations
• Articles, News, Who Cited This, More
• Google Scholar and Google Books
• PUBMED and EMBASE
• Statistics -- United States
• Statistics -- Worldwide
• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Citing Sources This link opens in a new window
• Copyright This link opens in a new window
• Evaluating Information This link opens in a new window
• RefWorks Guide and Help This link opens in a new window
• Epidemic Proportions
• Environment and Your Health, AS 280.335, Spring 2024
• Honors in Public Health, AS280.495, Fall 23-Spr 2024
• Intro to Public Health, AS280.101, Spring 2024
• Research Methods in Public Health, AS280.240, Spring 2024
• Social+Behavioral Determinants of Health, AS280.355, Spring 2024
• Feedback (for class use only)

Literature Reviews

• Organizing/Synthesizing
• Peer Review
• Ulrich's -- One More Way To Find Peer-reviewed Papers

"Literature review," "systematic literature review," "integrative literature review" -- these are terms used in different disciplines for basically the same thing -- a rigorous examination of the scholarly literature about a topic (at different levels of rigor, and with some different emphases).  

1. Our library's guide to Writing a Literature Review

2. Other helpful sites

• Writing Center at UNC (Chapel Hill) -- A very good guide about lit reviews and how to write them
• Literature Review: Synthesizing Multiple Sources (LSU, June 2011 but good; PDF) -- Planning, writing, and tips for revising your paper

3. Welch Library's list of the types of expert reviews

Doing a good job of organizing your information makes writing about it a lot easier.

You can organize your sources using a citation manager, such as refworks , or use a matrix (if you only have a few references):.

• Use Google Sheets, Word, Excel, or whatever you prefer to create a table
• The column headings should include the citation information, and the main points that you want to track, as shown

Synthesizing your information is not just summarizing it. Here are processes and examples about how to combine your sources into a good piece of writing:

• Purdue OWL's Synthesizing Sources
• Synthesizing Sources (California State University, Northridge)

Annotated Bibliography  

An "annotation" is a note or comment. An "annotated bibliography" is a "list of citations to books, articles, and [other items]. Each citation is followed by a brief...descriptive and evaluative paragraph, [whose purpose is] to inform the reader of the relevance, accuracy, and quality of the sources cited."*

• Sage Research Methods (database) --> Empirical Research and Writing (ebook) -- Chapter 3: Doing Pre-research  
• Purdue's OWL (Online Writing Lab) includes definitions and samples of annotations  
• Cornell's guide * to writing annotated bibliographies  

* Thank you to Olin Library Reference, Research & Learning Services, Cornell University Library, Ithaca, NY, USA https://guides.library.cornell.edu/annotatedbibliography

What does "peer-reviewed" mean?

• If an article has been peer-reviewed before being published, it means that the article has been read by other people in the same field of study ("peers").
• The author's reviewers have commented on the article, not only noting typos and possible errors, but also giving a judgment about whether or not the article should be published by the journal to which it was submitted.

How do I find "peer-reviewed" materials?

• Most of the the research articles in scholarly journals are peer-reviewed.
• Many databases allow you to check a box that says "peer-reviewed," or to see which results in your list of results are from peer-reviewed sources. Some of the databases that provide this are Academic Search Ultimate, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Sociological Abstracts.

What kinds of materials are *not* peer-reviewed?

• open web pages
• most newspapers, newsletters, and news items in journals
• letters to the editor
• press releases
• columns and blogs
• book reviews
• anything in a popular magazine (e.g., Time, Newsweek, Glamour, Men's Health)

If a piece of information wasn't peer-reviewed, does that mean that I can't trust it at all?

No; sometimes you can. For example, the preprints submitted to well-known sites such as  arXiv  (mainly covering physics) and  CiteSeerX (mainly covering computer science) are probably trustworthy, as are the databases and web pages produced by entities such as the National Library of Medicine, the Smithsonian Institution, and the American Cancer Society.

Is this paper peer-reviewed? Ulrichsweb will tell you.

1) On the library home page , choose "Articles and Databases" --> "Databases" --> Ulrichsweb

2) Put in the title of the JOURNAL (not the article), in quotation marks so all the words are next to each other

3) Mouse over the black icon, and you'll see that it means "refereed" (which means peer-reviewed, because it's been looked at by referees or reviewers). This journal is not peer-reviewed, because none of the formats have a black icon next to it:

• << Previous: Evaluating Information
• Next: RefWorks Guide and Help >>
• Last Updated: Jul 1, 2024 1:51 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.jhu.edu/public-health