what is the importance of review of literature in research brainly

Why is it important to do a literature review in research?

The importance of scientific communication in the healthcare industry

The Importance and Role of Biostatistics in Clinical Research

 “A substantive, thorough, sophisticated literature review is a precondition for doing substantive, thorough, sophisticated research”. Boote and Baile 2005

Authors of manuscripts treat writing a literature review as a routine work or a mere formality. But a seasoned one knows the purpose and importance of a well-written literature review.  Since it is one of the basic needs for researches at any level, they have to be done vigilantly. Only then the reader will know that the basics of research have not been neglected.

The aim of any literature review is to summarize and synthesize the arguments and ideas of existing knowledge in a particular field without adding any new contributions.   Being built on existing knowledge they help the researcher to even turn the wheels of the topic of research.  It is possible only with profound knowledge of what is wrong in the existing findings in detail to overpower them.  For other researches, the literature review gives the direction to be headed for its success. 

The common perception of literature review and reality:

As per the common belief, literature reviews are only a summary of the sources related to the research. And many authors of scientific manuscripts believe that they are only surveys of what are the researches are done on the chosen topic.  But on the contrary, it uses published information from pertinent and relevant sources like

• Scholarly books
• Scientific papers
• Latest studies in the field
• Established school of thoughts
• Relevant articles from renowned scientific journals

and many more for a field of study or theory or a particular problem to do the following:

• Summarize into a brief account of all information
• Synthesize the information by restructuring and reorganizing
• Critical evaluation of a concept or a school of thought or ideas
• Familiarize the authors to the extent of knowledge in the particular field
• Encapsulate
• Compare & contrast

By doing the above on the relevant information, it provides the reader of the scientific manuscript with the following for a better understanding of it:

• It establishes the authors’  in-depth understanding and knowledge of their field subject
• It gives the background of the research
• Portrays the scientific manuscript plan of examining the research result
• Illuminates on how the knowledge has changed within the field
• Highlights what has already been done in a particular field
• Information of the generally accepted facts, emerging and current state of the topic of research
• Identifies the research gap that is still unexplored or under-researched fields
• Demonstrates how the research fits within a larger field of study
• Provides an overview of the sources explored during the research of a particular topic

Importance of literature review in research:

The importance of literature review in scientific manuscripts can be condensed into an analytical feature to enable the multifold reach of its significance.  It adds value to the legitimacy of the research in many ways:

• Provides the interpretation of existing literature in light of updated developments in the field to help in establishing the consistency in knowledge and relevancy of existing materials
• It helps in calculating the impact of the latest information in the field by mapping their progress of knowledge.
• It brings out the dialects of contradictions between various thoughts within the field to establish facts
• The research gaps scrutinized initially are further explored to establish the latest facts of theories to add value to the field
• Indicates the current research place in the schema of a particular field
• Provides information for relevancy and coherency to check the research
• Apart from elucidating the continuance of knowledge, it also points out areas that require further investigation and thus aid as a starting point of any future research
• Justifies the research and sets up the research question
• Sets up a theoretical framework comprising the concepts and theories of the research upon which its success can be judged
• Helps to adopt a more appropriate methodology for the research by examining the strengths and weaknesses of existing research in the same field
• Increases the significance of the results by comparing it with the existing literature
• Provides a point of reference by writing the findings in the scientific manuscript
• Helps to get the due credit from the audience for having done the fact-finding and fact-checking mission in the scientific manuscripts
• The more the reference of relevant sources of it could increase more of its trustworthiness with the readers
• Helps to prevent plagiarism by tailoring and uniquely tweaking the scientific manuscript not to repeat other’s original idea
• By preventing plagiarism , it saves the scientific manuscript from rejection and thus also saves a lot of time and money
• Helps to evaluate, condense and synthesize gist in the author’s own words to sharpen the research focus
• Helps to compare and contrast to  show the originality and uniqueness of the research than that of the existing other researches
• Rationalizes the need for conducting the particular research in a specified field
• Helps to collect data accurately for allowing any new methodology of research than the existing ones
• Enables the readers of the manuscript to answer the following questions of its readers for its better chances for publication
• What do the researchers know?
• What do they not know?
• Is the scientific manuscript reliable and trustworthy?
• What are the knowledge gaps of the researcher?

22. It helps the readers to identify the following for further reading of the scientific manuscript:

• What has been already established, discredited and accepted in the particular field of research
• Areas of controversy and conflicts among different schools of thought
• Unsolved problems and issues in the connected field of research
• The emerging trends and approaches
• How the research extends, builds upon and leaves behind from the previous research

A profound literature review with many relevant sources of reference will enhance the chances of the scientific manuscript publication in renowned and reputed scientific journals .

References:

http://www.math.montana.edu/jobo/phdprep/phd6.pdf

journal Publishing services  |  Scientific Editing Services  |  Medical Writing Services  |  scientific research writing service  |  Scientific communication services

Related Topics:

Meta Analysis

Scientific Research Paper Writing

Medical Research Paper Writing

Scientific Communication in healthcare

pubrica academy

Related posts.

Statistical analyses of case-control studies

PUB - Selecting material (e.g. excipient, active pharmaceutical ingredient) for drug development

Selecting material (e.g. excipient, active pharmaceutical ingredient, packaging material) for drug development

PUB - Health Economics of Data Modeling

Health economics in clinical trials

Comments are closed.

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

5 Reasons the Literature Review Is Crucial to Your Paper

3-minute read

• 8th November 2016

People often treat writing the literature review in an academic paper as a formality. Usually, this means simply listing various studies vaguely related to their work and leaving it at that.

But this overlooks how important the literature review is to a well-written experimental report or research paper. As such, we thought we’d take a moment to go over what a literature review should do and why you should give it the attention it deserves.

What Is a Literature Review?

Common in the social and physical sciences, but also sometimes required in the humanities, a literature review is a summary of past research in your subject area.

Sometimes this is a standalone investigation of how an idea or field of inquiry has developed over time. However, more usually it’s the part of an academic paper, thesis or dissertation that sets out the background against which a study takes place.

There are several reasons why we do this.

Reason #1: To Demonstrate Understanding

In a college paper, you can use a literature review to demonstrate your understanding of the subject matter. This means identifying, summarizing and critically assessing past research that is relevant to your own work.

Reason #2: To Justify Your Research

The literature review also plays a big role in justifying your study and setting your research question . This is because examining past research allows you to identify gaps in the literature, which you can then attempt to fill or address with your own work.

Find this useful?

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

Reason #3: Setting a Theoretical Framework

It can help to think of the literature review as the foundations for your study, since the rest of your work will build upon the ideas and existing research you discuss therein.

A crucial part of this is formulating a theoretical framework , which comprises the concepts and theories that your work is based upon and against which its success will be judged.

Reason #4: Developing a Methodology

Conducting a literature review before beginning research also lets you see how similar studies have been conducted in the past. By examining the strengths and weaknesses of existing research, you can thus make sure you adopt the most appropriate methods, data sources and analytical techniques for your own work.

Reason #5: To Support Your Own Findings

The significance of any results you achieve will depend to some extent on how they compare to those reported in the existing literature. When you come to write up your findings, your literature review will therefore provide a crucial point of reference.

If your results replicate past research, for instance, you can say that your work supports existing theories. If your results are different, though, you’ll need to discuss why and whether the difference is important.

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

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

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

4-minute read

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

How to Ace Slack Messaging for Contractors and Freelancers

Effective professional communication is an important skill for contractors and freelancers navigating remote work environments....

How to Insert a Text Box in a Google Doc

Google Docs is a powerful collaborative tool, and mastering its features can significantly enhance your...

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

Frequently asked questions

What is the purpose of a literature review.

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.

Frequently asked questions: Academic writing

A rhetorical tautology is the repetition of an idea of concept using different words.

Rhetorical tautologies occur when additional words are used to convey a meaning that has already been expressed or implied. For example, the phrase “armed gunman” is a tautology because a “gunman” is by definition “armed.”

A logical tautology is a statement that is always true because it includes all logical possibilities.

Logical tautologies often take the form of “either/or” statements (e.g., “It will rain, or it will not rain”) or employ circular reasoning (e.g., “she is untrustworthy because she can’t be trusted”).

You may have seen both “appendices” or “appendixes” as pluralizations of “ appendix .” Either spelling can be used, but “appendices” is more common (including in APA Style ). Consistency is key here: make sure you use the same spelling throughout your paper.

The purpose of a lab report is to demonstrate your understanding of the scientific method with a hands-on lab experiment. Course instructors will often provide you with an experimental design and procedure. Your task is to write up how you actually performed the experiment and evaluate the outcome.

In contrast, a research paper requires you to independently develop an original argument. It involves more in-depth research and interpretation of sources and data.

A lab report is usually shorter than a research paper.

The sections of a lab report can vary between scientific fields and course requirements, but it usually contains the following:

• Title: expresses the topic of your study
• Abstract: summarizes your research aims, methods, results, and conclusions
• Introduction: establishes the context needed to understand the topic
• Method: describes the materials and procedures used in the experiment
• Results: reports all descriptive and inferential statistical analyses
• Discussion: interprets and evaluates results and identifies limitations
• Conclusion: sums up the main findings of your experiment
• References: list of all sources cited using a specific style (e.g. APA)
• Appendices: contains lengthy materials, procedures, tables or figures

A lab report conveys the aim, methods, results, and conclusions of a scientific experiment . Lab reports are commonly assigned in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields.

The abstract is the very last thing you write. You should only write it after your research is complete, so that you can accurately summarize the entirety of your thesis , dissertation or research paper .

If you’ve gone over the word limit set for your assignment, shorten your sentences and cut repetition and redundancy during the editing process. If you use a lot of long quotes , consider shortening them to just the essentials.

If you need to remove a lot of words, you may have to cut certain passages. Remember that everything in the text should be there to support your argument; look for any information that’s not essential to your point and remove it.

To make this process easier and faster, you can use a paraphrasing tool . With this tool, you can rewrite your text to make it simpler and shorter. If that’s not enough, you can copy-paste your paraphrased text into the summarizer . This tool will distill your text to its core message.

Revising, proofreading, and editing are different stages of the writing process .

• Revising is making structural and logical changes to your text—reformulating arguments and reordering information.
• Editing refers to making more local changes to things like sentence structure and phrasing to make sure your meaning is conveyed clearly and concisely.
• Proofreading involves looking at the text closely, line by line, to spot any typos and issues with consistency and correct them.

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 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.

Avoid citing sources in your abstract . There are two reasons for this:

• The abstract should focus on your original research, not on the work of others.
• The abstract should be self-contained and fully understandable without reference to other sources.

There are some circumstances where you might need to mention other sources in an abstract: for example, if your research responds directly to another study or focuses on the work of a single theorist. In general, though, don’t include citations unless absolutely necessary.

An abstract is a concise summary of an academic text (such as a journal article or dissertation ). It serves two main purposes:

• To help potential readers determine the relevance of your paper for their own research.
• To communicate your key findings to those who don’t have time to read the whole paper.

Abstracts are often indexed along with keywords on academic databases, so they make your work more easily findable. Since the abstract is the first thing any reader sees, it’s important that it clearly and accurately summarizes the contents of your paper.

In a scientific paper, the methodology always comes after the introduction and before the results , discussion and conclusion . The same basic structure also applies to a thesis, dissertation , or research proposal .

Depending on the length and type of document, you might also include a literature review or theoretical framework before the methodology.

Whether you’re publishing a blog, submitting a research paper , or even just writing an important email, there are a few techniques you can use to make sure it’s error-free:

• Take a break : Set your work aside for at least a few hours so that you can look at it with fresh eyes.
• Proofread a printout : Staring at a screen for too long can cause fatigue – sit down with a pen and paper to check the final version.
• Use digital shortcuts : Take note of any recurring mistakes (for example, misspelling a particular word, switching between US and UK English , or inconsistently capitalizing a term), and use Find and Replace to fix it throughout the document.

If you want to be confident that an important text is error-free, it might be worth choosing a professional proofreading service instead.

Editing and proofreading are different steps in the process of revising a text.

Editing comes first, and can involve major changes to content, structure and language. The first stages of editing are often done by authors themselves, while a professional editor makes the final improvements to grammar and style (for example, by improving sentence structure and word choice ).

Proofreading is the final stage of checking a text before it is published or shared. It focuses on correcting minor errors and inconsistencies (for example, in punctuation and capitalization ). Proofreaders often also check for formatting issues, especially in print publishing.

The cost of proofreading depends on the type and length of text, the turnaround time, and the level of services required. Most proofreading companies charge per word or page, while freelancers sometimes charge an hourly rate.

For proofreading alone, which involves only basic corrections of typos and formatting mistakes, you might pay as little as $0.01 per word, but in many cases, your text will also require some level of editing , which costs slightly more.

It’s often possible to purchase combined proofreading and editing services and calculate the price in advance based on your requirements.

There are many different routes to becoming a professional proofreader or editor. The necessary qualifications depend on the field – to be an academic or scientific proofreader, for example, you will need at least a university degree in a relevant subject.

For most proofreading jobs, experience and demonstrated skills are more important than specific qualifications. Often your skills will be tested as part of the application process.

To learn practical proofreading skills, you can choose to take a course with a professional organization such as the Society for Editors and Proofreaders . Alternatively, you can apply to companies that offer specialized on-the-job training programmes, such as the Scribbr Academy .

Ask our team

Want to contact us directly? No problem.  We  are always here for you.

• Email [email protected]
• Start live chat
• Call +1 (510) 822-8066
• WhatsApp +31 20 261 6040

Our team helps students graduate by offering:

• A world-class citation generator
• Plagiarism Checker software powered by Turnitin
• Innovative Citation Checker software
• Professional proofreading services
• Over 300 helpful articles about academic writing, citing sources, plagiarism, and more

Scribbr specializes in editing study-related documents . We proofread:

• PhD dissertations
• Research proposals
• Personal statements
• Admission essays
• Motivation letters
• Reflection papers
• Journal articles
• Capstone projects

Scribbr’s Plagiarism Checker is powered by elements of Turnitin’s Similarity Checker , namely the plagiarism detection software and the Internet Archive and Premium Scholarly Publications content databases .

The add-on AI detector is powered by Scribbr’s proprietary software.

The Scribbr Citation Generator is developed using the open-source Citation Style Language (CSL) project and Frank Bennett’s citeproc-js . It’s the same technology used by dozens of other popular citation tools, including Mendeley and Zotero.

You can find all the citation styles and locales used in the Scribbr Citation Generator in our publicly accessible repository on Github .

• Library Homepage

Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide: Literature Reviews?

• Literature Reviews?
• Strategies to Finding Sources
• Keeping up with Research!
• Evaluating Sources & Literature Reviews
• Organizing for Writing
• Writing Literature Review
• Other Academic Writings

What is a Literature Review?

So, what is a literature review .

"A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available or a set of summaries." - Quote from Taylor, D. (n.d)."The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting it".

• Citation: "The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting it"

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

Each field has a particular way to do reviews for academic research literature. In the social sciences and humanities the most common are:

• Narrative Reviews: The purpose of this type of review is to describe the current state of the research on a specific research topic and to offer a critical analysis of the literature reviewed. Studies are grouped by research/theoretical categories, and themes and trends, strengths and weaknesses, and gaps are identified. The review ends with a conclusion section that summarizes the findings regarding the state of the research of the specific study, the gaps identify and if applicable, explains how the author's research will address gaps identify in the review and expand the knowledge on the topic reviewed.
• Book review essays/ Historiographical review essays : A type of literature review typical in History and related fields, e.g., Latin American studies. For example, the Latin American Research Review explains that the purpose of this type of review is to “(1) to familiarize readers with the subject, approach, arguments, and conclusions found in a group of books whose common focus is a historical period; a country or region within Latin America; or a practice, development, or issue of interest to specialists and others; (2) to locate these books within current scholarship, critical methodologies, and approaches; and (3) to probe the relation of these new books to previous work on the subject, especially canonical texts. Unlike individual book reviews, the cluster reviews found in LARR seek to address the state of the field or discipline and not solely the works at issue.” - LARR

What are the Goals of Creating a Literature Review?

• To develop a theory or evaluate an existing theory
• To summarize the historical or existing state of a research topic
• Identify a problem in a field of research 
• Baumeister, R.F. & Leary, M.R. (1997). "Writing narrative literature reviews," Review of General Psychology , 1(3), 311-320.

When do you need to write a Literature Review?

• When writing a prospectus or a thesis/dissertation
• When writing a research paper
• When writing a grant proposal

In all these cases you need to dedicate a chapter in these works to showcase what has been written about your research topic and to point out how your own research will shed new light into a body of scholarship.

Where I can find examples of Literature Reviews?

Note:  In the humanities, even if they don't use the term "literature review", they may have a dedicated  chapter that reviewed the "critical bibliography" or they incorporated that review in the introduction or first chapter of the dissertation, book, or article.

• UCSB electronic theses and dissertations In partnership with the Graduate Division, the UC Santa Barbara Library is making available theses and dissertations produced by UCSB students. Currently included in ADRL are theses and dissertations that were originally filed electronically, starting in 2011. In future phases of ADRL, all theses and dissertations created by UCSB students may be digitized and made available.

Where to Find Standalone Literature Reviews

Literature reviews are also written as standalone articles as a way to survey a particular research topic in-depth. This type of literature review looks at a topic from a historical perspective to see how the understanding of the topic has changed over time. 

• Find e-Journals for Standalone Literature Reviews The best way to get familiar with and to learn how to write literature reviews is by reading them. You can use our Journal Search option to find journals that specialize in publishing literature reviews from major disciplines like anthropology, sociology, etc. Usually these titles are called, "Annual Review of [discipline name] OR [Discipline name] Review. This option works best if you know the title of the publication you are looking for. Below are some examples of these journals! more... less... Journal Search can be found by hovering over the link for Research on the library website.

Social Sciences

• Annual Review of Anthropology
• Annual Review of Political Science
• Annual Review of Sociology
• Ethnic Studies Review

Hard science and health sciences:

• Annual Review of Biomedical Data Science
• Annual Review of Materials Science
• Systematic Review From journal site: "The journal Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct, and reporting of systematic reviews" in the health sciences.
• << Previous: Overview
• Next: Strategies to Finding Sources >>
• Last Updated: Mar 5, 2024 11:44 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.ucsb.edu/litreview

A Guide to Literature Reviews

Importance of a good literature review.

• Conducting the Literature Review
• Structure and Writing Style
• Types of Literature Reviews
• Citation Management Software This link opens in a new window
• Acknowledgements

A literature review is not only a summary of key sources, but  has an organizational pattern which combines both summary and synthesis, often within specific conceptual categories . A summary is a recap of the important information of the source, but a synthesis is a re-organization, or a reshuffling, of that information in a way that informs how you are planning to investigate a research problem. The analytical features of a literature review might:

• Give a new interpretation of old material or combine new with old interpretations,
• Trace the intellectual progression of the field, including major debates,
• Depending on the situation, evaluate the sources and advise the reader on the most pertinent or relevant research, or
• Usually in the conclusion of a literature review, identify where gaps exist in how a problem has been researched to date.

The purpose of a literature review is to:

• Place each work in the context of its contribution to understanding the research problem being studied.
• Describe the relationship of each work to the others under consideration.
• Identify new ways to interpret prior research.
• Reveal any gaps that exist in the literature.
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies.
• Identify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication of effort.
• Point the way in fulfilling a need for additional research.
• Locate your own research within the context of existing literature [very important].
• << Previous: Definition
• Next: Conducting the Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: May 10, 2024 11:34 AM
• URL: https://libguides.mcmaster.ca/litreview

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

What are literature reviews, goals of literature reviews, types of literature reviews, about this guide/licence.

• Strategies to Find Sources
• Evaluating Literature Reviews and Sources
• Tips for Writing Literature Reviews
• Writing Literature Review: Useful Sites
• Citation Resources
• Other Academic Writings
• Useful Resources

Help is Just a Click Away

Search our FAQ Knowledge base, ask a question, chat, send comments...

Go to LibAnswers

 What is a literature review? "A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries. " - Quote from Taylor, D. (n.d) "The literature review: A few tips on conducting it"

Source NC State University Libraries. This video is published under a Creative Commons 3.0 BY-NC-SA US license.

What are the goals of creating a Literature Review?

• To develop a theory or evaluate an existing theory
• To summarize the historical or existing state of a research topic
• Identify a problem in a field of research 

- Baumeister, R.F. & Leary, M.R. (1997). "Writing narrative literature reviews," Review of General Psychology , 1(3), 311-320.

When do you need to write a Literature Review?

• When writing a prospectus or a thesis/dissertation
• When writing a research paper
• When writing a grant proposal

In all these cases you need to dedicate a chapter in these works to showcase what have been written about your research topic and to point out how your own research will shed a new light into these body of scholarship.

Literature reviews are also written as standalone articles as a way to survey a particular research topic in-depth. This type of literature reviews look at a topic from a historical perspective to see how the understanding of the topic have change through time.

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

• Narrative Review: The purpose of this type of review is to describe the current state of the research on a specific topic/research and to offer a critical analysis of the literature reviewed. Studies are grouped by research/theoretical categories, and themes and trends, strengths and weakness, and gaps are identified. The review ends with a conclusion section which summarizes the findings regarding the state of the research of the specific study, the gaps identify and if applicable, explains how the author's research will address gaps identify in the review and expand the knowledge on the topic reviewed.
• Book review essays/ Historiographical review essays : This is a type of review that focus on a small set of research books on a particular topic " to locate these books within current scholarship, critical methodologies, and approaches" in the field. - LARR
• Systematic review : "The authors of a systematic review use a specific procedure to search the research literature, select the studies to include in their review, and critically evaluate the studies they find." (p. 139). Nelson, L.K. (2013). Research in Communication Sciences and Disorders . San Diego, CA: Plural Publishing.
• Meta-analysis : "Meta-analysis is a method of reviewing research findings in a quantitative fashion by transforming the data from individual studies into what is called an effect size and then pooling and analyzing this information. The basic goal in meta-analysis is to explain why different outcomes have occurred in different studies." (p. 197). Roberts, M.C. & Ilardi, S.S. (2003). Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology . Malden, MA: Blackwell Pub.
• Meta-synthesis : "Qualitative meta-synthesis is a type of qualitative study that uses as data the findings from other qualitative studies linked by the same or related topic." (p.312). Zimmer, L. (2006). "Qualitative meta-synthesis: A question of dialoguing with texts," Journal of Advanced Nursing , 53(3), 311-318.

Guide adapted from "Literature Review" , a guide developed by Marisol Ramos used under CC BY 4.0 /modified from original.

• Next: Strategies to Find Sources >>
• Last Updated: Jun 11, 2024 12:14 PM
• URL: https://lit.libguides.com/Literature-Review

The Library, Technological University of the Shannon: Midwest

• UConn Library
• Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide
• Strategies to Find Sources

Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide — Strategies to Find Sources

• Getting Started
• Introduction
• How to Pick a Topic
• Evaluating Sources & Lit. Reviews
• Tips for Writing Literature Reviews
• Writing Literature Review: Useful Sites
• Citation Resources
• Other Academic Writings

The Research Process

Planning : Before searching for articles or books, brainstorm to develop keywords that better describe your research question.

Searching : While searching, take note of what other keywords are used to describe your topic, and use them to conduct additional searches

     ♠ Most articles include a keyword section

     ♠ Key concepts may change names throughout time so make sure to check for variations

Organizing : Start organizing your results by categories/key concepts or any organizing principle that make sense for you . This will help you later when you are ready to analyze your findings

Analyzing : While reading, start making notes of key concepts and commonalities and disagreement among the research articles you find.

♠ Create a spreadsheet  to record what articles you are finding useful and why.

♠ Create fields to write summaries of articles or quotes for future citing and paraphrasing .

Writing : Synthesize your findings. Use your own voice to explain to your readers what you learned about the literature on your topic. What are its weaknesses and strengths? What is missing or ignored?

Repeat : At any given time of the process, you can go back to a previous step as necessary.

Advanced Searching

All databases have Help pages that explain the best way to search their product. When doing literature reviews, you will want to take advantage of these features since they can facilitate not only finding the articles that you really need but also controlling the number of results and how relevant they are for your search. The most common features available in the advanced search option of databases and library online catalogs are:

• Boolean Searching (AND, OR, NOT): Allows you to connect search terms in a way that can either limit or expand your search results 
• Proximity Searching (N/# or W/#): Allows you to search for two or more words that occur within a specified number of words (or fewer) of each other in the database
• Limiters/Filters : These are options that let you control what type of document you want to search: article type, date, language, publication, etc.
• Question mark (?) or a pound sign (#) for wildcard: Used for retrieving alternate spellings of a word: colo?r will retrieve both the American spelling "color" as well as the British spelling "colour." 
• Asterisk (*) for truncation: Used for retrieving multiple forms of a word: comput* retrieves computer, computers, computing, etc.

Want to keep track of updates to your searches? Create an account in the database to receive an alert when a new article is published that meets your search parameters!

• EBSCOhost Advanced Search Tutorial Tips for searching a platform that hosts many library databases
• Library's General Search Tips Check the Search tips to better used our library catalog and articles search system
• ProQuest Database Search Tips Tips for searching another platform that hosts library databases

There is no magic number regarding how many sources you are going to need for your literature review; it all depends on the topic and what type of the literature review you are doing:

► Are you working on an emerging topic? You are not likely to find many sources, which is good because you are trying to prove that this is a topic that needs more research. But, it is not enough to say that you found few or no articles on your topic in your field. You need to look broadly to other disciplines (also known as triangulation ) to see if your research topic has been studied from other perspectives as a way to validate the uniqueness of your research question.

► Are you working on something that has been studied extensively? Then you are going to find many sources and you will want to limit how far back you want to look. Use limiters to eliminate research that may be dated and opt to search for resources published within the last 5-10 years.

• << Previous: How to Pick a Topic
• Next: Evaluating Sources & Lit. Reviews >>
• Last Updated: Sep 21, 2022 2:16 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uconn.edu/literaturereview

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.

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy: exploring shared pathways and promising biomarkers for future treatments.

1. Introduction

2. materials and methods, 3.1. epidemiological data describing the comorbidity of alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy, 3.2. risk factors implicated in both alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy, 3.2.1. shared risk factors between alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy, 3.2.2. risk factors for epilepsy in individuals with alzheimer’s disease, 3.2.3. risk factors for dementia in epileptic patients, 3.3. shared pathogenetic mechanisms between alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy, 3.3.1. amyloid-β, 3.3.2. hyperphosphorylated tau protein, 3.3.3. glutamate, 3.3.4. gamma-aminobutyric acid, 3.3.5. neuroinflammation, 3.3.6. acetylcholine—noradrenaline—serotonin activity, 3.3.7. voltage-gated ion channels, 3.3.8. mitochondria–endoplasmic reticulum stress, 3.3.9. astrocytes, 3.3.10. beta-secretase 1, 3.3.11. mechanistic target of rapamycin, 3.3.12. triggering receptor expressed on myeloid cells, 3.3.13. α-synuclein, 3.3.14. neural network, 3.3.15. the role of sleep, 3.3.16. others, 3.4. seizure types, 3.5. electroencephalography, 3.6. biomarkers, 3.6.1. cerebrospinal fluid biomarkers, 3.6.2. neuroimaging findings, 3.6.3. cognitive testing, 3.6.4. genetic associations, 3.6.5. electroencephalographic markers, 3.7. therapy, 4. discussion, conflicts of interest, abbreviations.

• World Health Organization. Dementia 2023. (Updated 15 March 2023). Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/dementia (accessed on 30 May 2024).
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A Public Health Approach to Alzheimer’s and Other Dementias. 2019. Available online: https://www.cdc.gov/aging/services/pdf/Public-Health-Approach-to-Alzheimers-and-Other-Dementias-complete-course-508.pdf (accessed on 30 May 2024).
• World Health Organization. Epilepsy: A Public Health Imperative ; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2019. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vicente, M.; Addo-Osafo, K.; Vossel, K. Latest advances in mechanisms of epileptic activity in Alzheimer’s disease and dementia with Lewy Bodies. Front. Neurol. 2024 , 15 , 1277613. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lee, D.A.; Lee, H.J.; Kim, S.E.; Park, K.M. Brain networks and epilepsy development in patients with Alzheimer disease. Brain Behav. 2023 , 13 , e3152. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Helmstaedter, C.; Lutz, T.; Wolf, V.; Witt, J.A. Prevalence of dementia in a level 4 university epilepsy center: How big is the problem? Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1217594. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hickman, L.B.; Stern, J.M.; Silverman, D.H.S.; Salamon, N.; Vossel, K. Clinical, imaging, and biomarker evidence of amyloid- and tau-related neurodegeneration in late-onset epilepsy of unknown etiology. Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1241638. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tan, Z.; Wang, F.Y.; Wu, W.P.; Yu, L.Z.; Wu, J.C.; Wang, L. Bidirectional relationship between late-onset epilepsy (LOE) and dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies. Epilepsy Behav. 2024 , 153 , 109723. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, D.; Chen, S.; Xu, S.; Wu, J.; Zhuang, Y.; Cao, W.; Chen, X.; Li, X. The clinical correlation between Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy. Front. Neurol. 2022 , 13 , 922535. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhao, N.; Chen, H.; Zhang, W.; Yao, J.; Tu, Q.; Yu, X.; Sun, X. Bidirectional influences between seizures and dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Geriatr. Psychiatry 2022 , 37 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yang, F.; Chen, L.; Yu, Y.; Xu, T.; Chen, L.; Yang, W.; Wu, Q.; Han, Y. Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy: An increasingly recognized comorbidity. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2022 , 14 , 940515. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, L.; Yang, W.; Yang, F.; Yu, Y.; Xu, T.; Wang, D.; Zhao, Q.; Wu, Q.; Han, Y. The crosstalk between epilepsy and dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Epilepsy Behav. 2024 , 152 , 109640. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nous, A.; Seynaeve, L.; Feys, O.; Wens, V.; De Tiège, X.; Van Mierlo, P.; Baroumand, A.G.; Nieboer, K.; Allemeersch, G.J.; Mangelschots, S.; et al. Subclinical epileptiform activity in the Alzheimer continuum: Association with disease, cognition and detection method. Alzheimers Res. Ther. 2024 , 16 , 19. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lee, H.C.; Kim, B.K.; Kang, K.; Lee, W.W.; Yoo, I.; Kim, Y.S.; Lee, J.J. Aphasic Status Epilepticus Associated with Alzheimer’s Disease: Clinical and Electrographic Characteristics. J. Epilepsy Res. 2023 , 13 , 55–58. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lu, O.; Kouser, T.; Skylar-Scott, I.A. Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy: Shared neuropathology guides current and future treatment strategies. Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1241339. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dun, C.; Zhang, Y.; Yin, J.; Su, B.; Peng, X.; Liu, L. Bi-directional associations of epilepsy with dementia and Alzheimer’s disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Age Ageing 2022 , 51 , afac010. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zheng, S.F.; Hu, J.J.; Zhang, Y.B.; Chen, G.R.; Lin, Y.X.; Kang, D.Z.; Lin, Z.Y.; Yao, P.S. Lack of causal association between epilepsy and dementia: A Mendelian randomization analysis. Epilepsy Behav. 2024 , 150 , 109570. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kawakami, O.; Koike, Y.; Ando, T.; Sugiura, M.; Kato, H.; Hiraga, K.; Kito, H.; Kondo, H. Incidence of dementia in patients with adult-onset epilepsy of unknown causes. J. Neurol. Sci. 2018 , 395 , 71–76. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Del Pozo, A.; Knox, K.M.; Lehmann, L.M.; Davidson, S.; Rho, S.L.; Jayadev, S.; Barker-Haliski, M. Chronic evoked seizures in young pre-symptomatic APP/PS1 mice induce serotonin changes and accelerate onset of Alzheimer’s disease-related neuropathology. Prog. Neurobiol. 2024 , 235 , 102591. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Haoudy, S.; Jonveaux, T.; Puisieux, S.; Epstein, J.; Hopes, L.; Maillard, L.; Aron, O.; Tyvaert, L. Epilepsy in Early Onset Alzheimer’s Disease. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2022 , 85 , 615–626. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cano, A.; Fonseca, E.; Ettcheto, M.; Sánchez-López, E.; de Rojas, I.; Alonso-Lana, S.; Morató, X.; Souto, E.B.; Toledo, M.; Boada, M.; et al. Epilepsy in Neurodegenerative Diseases: Related Drugs and Molecular Pathways. Pharmaceuticals 2021 , 14 , 1057. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ciliento, R.; Gjini, K.; Dabbs, K.; Hermann, B.; Riedner, B.; Jones, S.; Fatima, S.; Johnson, S.; Bendlin, B.; Lam, A.D.; et al. Prevalence and localization of nocturnal epileptiform discharges in mild cognitive impairment. Brain Commun. 2023 , 5 , fcad302. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vöglein, J.; Noachtar, S.; McDade, E.; Quaid, K.A.; Salloway, S.; Ghetti, B.; Noble, J.; Berman, S.; Chhatwal, J.; Mori, H.; et al. Seizures as an early symptom of autosomal dominant Alzheimer’s disease. Neurobiol. Aging 2019 , 76 , 18–23. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cortini, F.; Cantoni, C.; Villa, C. Epileptic seizures in autosomal dominant forms of Alzheimer’s disease. Seizure—Eur. J. Epilepsy 2018 , 61 , 4–7. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nagino, N.; Kubota, Y.; Nakamoto, H.; Miyao, S.; Kodama, T.; Ito, S.; Oguni, H.; Chernov, M. Non-lesional late-onset epilepsy in the elderly Japanese patients: Presenting characteristics and seizure outcomes with regard to comorbid dementia. J. Clin. Neurosci. 2022 , 103 , 100–106. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Leitner, D.F.; Kanshin, E.; Faustin, A.; Thierry, M.; Friedman, D.; Devore, S.; Ueberheide, B.; Devinsky, O.; Wisniewski, T. Localized proteomic differences in the choroid plexus of Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy patients. Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1221775. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Altuna, M.; Olmedo-Saura, G.; Carmona-Iragui, M.; Fortea, J. Mechanisms Involved in Epileptogenesis in Alzheimer’s Disease and Their Therapeutic Implications. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022 , 23 , 4307. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kazim, S.F.; Seo, J.H.; Bianchi, R.; Larson, C.S.; Sharma, A.; Wong, R.K.S.; Gorbachev, K.Y.; Pereira, A.C. Neuronal Network Excitability in Alzheimer’s Disease: The Puzzle of Similar versus Divergent Roles of Amyloid β and Tau. eNeuro 2021 , 8 , 1–35. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Csernus, E.A.; Werber, T.; Kamondi, A.; Horvath, A.A. The Significance of Subclinical Epileptiform Activity in Alzheimer’s Disease: A Review. Front. Neurol. 2022 , 13 , 856500. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Horvath, A.A.; Papp, A.; Zsuffa, J.; Szucs, A.; Luckl, J.; Radai, F.; Nagy, F.; Hidasi, Z.; Csukly, G.; Barcs, G.; et al. Subclinical epileptiform activity accelerates the progression of Alzheimer’s disease: A long-term EEG study. Clin. Neurophysiol. 2021 , 132 , 1982–1989. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yeh, W.-C.; Hsu, C.-Y.; Li, K.-Y.; Chien, C.-F.; Huang, L.-C.; Yang, Y.-H. Association between Subclinical Epileptiform Discharge and the Severity of Cognitive Decline in Alzheimer’s Disease: A Longitudinal Cohort Study. J. Alzheimer’s Dis. 2022 , 90 , 305–312. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Devulder, A.; Macea, J.; Kalkanis, A.; De Winter, F.L.; Vandenbulcke, M.; Vandenberghe, R.; Testelmans, D.; Van Den Bossche, M.J.A.; Van Paesschen, W. Subclinical epileptiform activity and sleep disturbances in Alzheimer’s disease. Brain Behav. 2023 , 13 , e3306. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Baker, J.; Libretto, T.; Henley, W.; Zeman, A. A Longitudinal Study of Epileptic Seizures in Alzheimer’s Disease. Front. Neurol. 2019 , 10 , 1266. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lehmann, L.; Lo, A.; Knox, K.M.; Barker-Haliski, M. Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy: A Perspective on the Opportunities for Overlapping Therapeutic Innovation. Neurochem. Res. 2021 , 46 , 1895–1912. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Das, M.; Mao, W.; Voskobiynyk, Y.; Necula, D.; Lew, I.; Petersen, C.; Zahn, A.; Yu, G.Q.; Yu, X.; Smith, N.; et al. Alzheimer risk-increasing TREM2 variant causes aberrant cortical synapse density and promotes network hyperexcitability in mouse models. Neurobiol. Dis. 2023 , 186 , 106263. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fu, M.; Tran, T.; Eskin, E.; Lajonchere, C.; Pasaniuc, B.; Geschwind, D.H.; Vossel, K.; Chang, T.S. Multi-class Modeling Identifies Shared Genetic Risk for Late-onset Epilepsy and Alzheimer’s Disease. medRxiv 2024 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wijaya, A.; Setiawan, N.A.; Ahmad, A.H.; Zakaria, R.; Othman, Z. Electroencephalography and mild cognitive impairment research: A scoping review and bibliometric analysis (ScoRBA). AIMS Neurosci. 2023 , 10 , 154–171. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lyou, H.J.; Seo, K.D.; Lee, J.E.; Pak, H.Y.; Lee, J.H. Association of Alzheimer’s Disease with the Risk of Developing Epilepsy: A 10-Year Nationwide Cohort Study. Dement. Neurocogn Disord. 2018 , 17 , 156–162. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lamoureux, L.; Marottoli, F.M.; Tseng, K.Y.; Tai, L.M. APOE4 Promotes Tonic-Clonic Seizures, an Effect Modified by Familial Alzheimer’s Disease Mutations. Front. Cell Dev. Biol. 2021 , 9 , 656521. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Keret, O.; Hoang, T.D.; Xia, F.; Rosen, H.J.; Yaffe, K. Association of Late-Onset Unprovoked Seizures of Unknown Etiology with the Risk of Developing Dementia in Older Veterans. JAMA Neurol. 2020 , 77 , 710–715. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cretin, B.; Bousiges, O.; Hautecloque, G.; Philippi, N.; Blanc, F.; Dibitonto, L.; Martin-Hunyadi, C.; Sellal, F. CSF in Epileptic Prodromal Alzheimer’s Disease: No Diagnostic Contribution but a Pathophysiological One. Front. Neurol. 2021 , 12 , 623777. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Powell, G.; Ziso, B.; Larner, A.J. The overlap between epilepsy and Alzheimer’s disease and the consequences for treatment. Expert. Rev. Neurother. 2019 , 19 , 653–661. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Emsley, H.C.A.; Parkes, L.M. Seizures in the context of occult cerebrovascular disease. Epilepsy Behav. 2020 , 104 Pt B , 106396. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Turon, M.; Abraira, L.; Cazorla, S.; Fonseca, E.; Quintana, M.; Toledo, M.; Salas-Puig, X.; Santamarina, E. Vascular risk factors as independent predictors of neurocognitive impairments in patients with late-onset epilepsy who have small-vessel disease. Epilepsy Behav. 2020 , 104 Pt B , 106443. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Huang, L.; Fu, C.; Li, J.; Peng, S. Late-onset epilepsy and the risk of dementia: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 2022 , 34 , 1771–1779. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Milikovsky, D.Z.; Ofer, J.; Senatorov, V.V.; Friedman, A.R.; Prager, O.; Sheintuch, L.; Elazari, N.; Veksler, R.; Zelig, D.; Weissberg, I.; et al. Paroxysmal slow cortical activity in Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy is associated with blood-brain barrier dysfunction. Sci. Transl. Med. 2019 , 11 , eaaw8954. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sen, A.; Capelli, V.; Husain, M. Cognition and dementia in older patients with epilepsy. Brain 2018 , 141 , 1592–1608. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Paudel, Y.N.; Angelopoulou, E.; Jones, N.C.; O’Brien, T.J.; Kwan, P.; Piperi, C.; Othman, I.; Shaikh, M.F. Tau Related Pathways as a Connecting Link between Epilepsy and Alzheimer’s Disease. ACS Chem. Neurosci. 2019 , 10 , 4199–4212. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xu, Y.; Lavrencic, L.; Radford, K.; Booth, A.; Yoshimura, S.; Anstey, K.J.; Anderson, C.S.; Peters, R. Systematic review of coexistent epileptic seizures and Alzheimer’s disease: Incidence and prevalence. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2021 , 69 , 2011–2020. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Asadollahi, M.; Atazadeh, M.; Noroozian, M. Seizure in Alzheimer’s Disease: An Underestimated Phenomenon. Am. J. Alzheimer’s Dis. Other Dement. 2018 , 34 , 81–88. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Horváth, A.; Szűcs, A.; Hidasi, Z.; Csukly, G.; Barcs, G.; Kamondi, A. Prevalence, Semiology, and Risk Factors of Epilepsy in Alzheimer’s Disease: An Ambulatory EEG Study. J. Alzheimer’s Dis. 2018 , 63 , 1045–1054. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tábuas-Pereira, M.; Durães, J.; Lopes, J.; Sales, F.; Bento, C.; Duro, D.; Santiago, B.; Almeida, M.R.; Leitão, M.J.; Baldeiras, I.; et al. Increased CSF tau is associated with a higher risk of seizures in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Epilepsy Behav. 2019 , 98 , 207–209. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tai, X.Y.; Torzillo, E.; Lyall, D.M.; Manohar, S.; Husain, M.; Sen, A. Association of Dementia Risk With Focal Epilepsy and Modifiable Cardiovascular Risk Factors. JAMA Neurol. 2023 , 80 , 445–454. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hernández, G.; Sala-Padró, J.; Adell, V.; Rico, I.; Gasa-Roqué, A.; Morandeira, F.; Campdelacreu, J.; Gascon, J.; Falip, M. Cognitive decline in adult-onset temporal lobe epilepsy: Insights from aetiology. Clin. Neurol. Neurosurg. 2024 , 237 , 108159. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tsai, Z.R.; Zhang, H.W.; Tseng, C.H.; Peng, H.C.; Kok, V.C.; Li, G.P.; Hsiung, C.A.; Hsu, C.Y. Late-onset epilepsy and subsequent increased risk of dementia. Aging 2021 , 13 , 3573–3587. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xu, L.; Wang, Q. The bidirectional relationship between Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and epilepsy: A Mendelian randomization study. Brain Behav. 2023 , 13 , e3221. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mao, R.; Hu, M.; Liu, X.; Ye, L.; Xu, B.; Sun, M.; Xu, S.; Shao, W.; Tan, Y.; Xu, Y.; et al. Impairments of GABAergic transmission in hippocampus mediate increased susceptibility of epilepsy in the early stage of Alzheimer’s disease. Cell Commun. Signal 2024 , 22 , 147. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Martin, S.P.; Leeman-Markowski, B.A. Proposed mechanisms of tau: Relationships to traumatic brain injury, Alzheimer’s disease, and epilepsy. Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1287545. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Leitner, D.; Pires, G.; Kavanagh, T.; Kanshin, E.; Askenazi, M.; Ueberheide, B.; Devinsky, O.; Wisniewski, T.; Drummond, E. Similar brain proteomic signatures in Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy. Acta Neuropathol. 2024 , 147 , 27. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Szabo, A.B.; Cretin, B.; Gérard, F.; Curot, J.; Barbeau, E.J.; Pariente, J.; Dahan, L.; Valton, L. Sleep: The Tip of the Iceberg in the Bidirectional Link Between Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy. Front. Neurol. 2022 , 13 , 836292. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hector, A.; Brouillette, J. Hyperactivity Induced by Soluble Amyloid-β Oligomers in the Early Stages of Alzheimer’s Disease. Front. Mol. Neurosci. 2020 , 13 , 600084. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bosco, F.; Guarnieri, L.; Rania, V.; Palma, E.; Citraro, R.; Corasaniti, M.T.; Leo, A.; De Sarro, G. Antiseizure Medications in Alzheimer’s Disease from Preclinical to Clinical Evidence. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023 , 24 , 2639. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lemus, H.N.; Sarkis, R.A. Interictal epileptiform discharges in Alzheimer’s disease: Prevalence, relevance, and controversies. Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1261136. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Toral-Rios, D.; Pichardo-Rojas, P.S.; Alonso-Vanegas, M.; Campos-Peña, V. GSK3β and Tau Protein in Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy. Front. Cell Neurosci. 2020 , 14 , 19. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sarkis, R.A.; Willment, K.C.; Pennell, P.B.; Marshall, G. Late-onset unexplained epilepsy: What are we missing? Epilepsy Behav. 2019 , 99 , 106478. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Leo, A.; Tallarico, M.; Sciaccaluga, M.; Citraro, R.; Costa, C. Epilepsy and Alzheimer’s Disease: Current Concepts and Treatment Perspective on Two Closely Related Pathologies. Curr. Neuropharmacol. 2022 , 20 , 2029–2033. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yook, Y.; Lee, K.Y.; Kim, E.; Lizarazo, S.; Yu, X.; Tsai, N.P. Hyperfunction of post-synaptic density protein 95 promotes seizure response in early-stage aβ pathology. EMBO Rep. 2024 , 25 , 1233–1255. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Banote, R.K.; Håkansson, S.; Zetterberg, H.; Zelano, J. CSF biomarkers in patients with epilepsy in Alzheimer’s disease: A nation-wide study. Brain Commun. 2022 , 4 , fcac210. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zawar, I.; Kapur, J. Does Alzheimer’s disease with mesial temporal lobe epilepsy represent a distinct disease subtype? Alzheimers Dement. 2023 , 19 , 2697–2706. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Silva, J.C.; Vivash, L.; Malpas, C.B.; Hao, Y.; McLean, C.; Chen, Z.; O’Brien, T.J.; Jones, N.C.; Kwan, P. Low prevalence of amyloid and tau pathology in drug-resistant temporal lobe epilepsy. Epilepsia 2021 , 62 , 3058–3067. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Carello-Collar, G.; Bellaver, B.; Ferreira, P.C.L.; Ferrari-Souza, J.P.; Ramos, V.G.; Therriault, J.; Tissot, C.; De Bastiani, M.A.; Soares, C.; Pascoal, T.A.; et al. The GABAergic system in Alzheimer’s disease: A systematic review with meta-analysis. Mol. Psychiatry 2023 , 28 , 5025–5036. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tang, T.; Li, X.; Yu, E.; Li, M.; Pan, X. Identification of common core ion channel genes in epilepsy and Alzheimer’s disease. Ir. J. Med. Sci. 2024 , 193 , 417–424. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liew, Y.; Retinasamy, T.; Arulsamy, A.; Ali, I.; Jones, N.C.; O’Brien, T.J.; Shaikh, M.F. Neuroinflammation: A Common Pathway in Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2023 , 94 , S253–s265. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zheng, X.Y.; Zhang, H.C.; Lv, Y.D.; Jin, F.Y.; Wu, X.J.; Zhu, J.; Ruan, Y. Levetiracetam alleviates cognitive decline in Alzheimer’s disease animal model by ameliorating the dysfunction of the neuronal network. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2022 , 14 , 888784. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, Z.R.; Huang, J.B.; Yang, S.L.; Hong, F.F. Role of Cholinergic Signaling in Alzheimer’s Disease. Molecules 2022 , 27 , 1816. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, Y.; Tan, B.; Wang, Y.; Chen, Z. Cholinergic Signaling, Neural Excitability, and Epilepsy. Molecules 2021 , 26 , 2258. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Giorgi, F.S.; Saccaro, L.F.; Busceti, C.L.; Biagioni, F.; Fornai, F. Epilepsy and Alzheimer’s Disease: Potential mechanisms for an association. Brain Res. Bull. 2020 , 160 , 107–120. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yun, H.M.; Park, K.R.; Kim, E.C.; Kim, S.; Hong, J.T. Serotonin 6 receptor controls Alzheimer’s disease and depression. Oncotarget 2015 , 6 , 26716–26728. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tian, J.; Du, E.; Guo, L. Mitochondrial Interaction with Serotonin in Neurobiology and Its Implication in Alzheimer’s Disease. J. Alzheimers Dis. Rep. 2023 , 7 , 1165–1177. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Acquarone, E.; Argyrousi, E.K.; Arancio, O.; Watterson, D.M.; Roy, S.M. The 5HT2b Receptor in Alzheimer’s Disease: Increased Levels in Patient Brains and Antagonist Attenuation of Amyloid and Tau Induced Dysfunction. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2024 , 98 , 1349–1360. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Eremin, D.V.; Kondaurova, E.M.; Rodnyy, A.Y.; Molobekova, C.A.; Kudlay, D.A.; Naumenko, V.S. Serotonin Receptors as a Potential Target in the Treatment of Alzheimer’s Disease. Biochemistry 2023 , 88 , 2023–2042. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sayahi, Z.; Komaki, A.; Saidi Jam, M.; Karimi, S.A.; Raoufi, S.; Mardani, P.; Naderishahab, M.; Sarihi, A.; Mirnajafi-Zadeh, J. Effect of ramosetron, a 5-HT(3) receptor antagonist on the severity of seizures and memory impairment in electrical amygdala kindled rats. J. Physiol. Sci. 2022 , 72 , 1. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cai, L.; Xu, Z.; Luo, H.; He, Q.; Diao, L.; Gui, X.; Wei, L. The association between 5-HT1A binding and temporal lobe epilepsy: A meta-analysis of molecular imaging studies. Epilepsy Behav. 2023 , 145 , 109354. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rizzello, E.; Pimpinella, D.; Pignataro, A.; Titta, G.; Merenda, E.; Saviana, M.; Porcheddu, G.F.; Paolantoni, C.; Malerba, F.; Giorgi, C.; et al. Lamotrigine rescues neuronal alterations and prevents seizure-induced memory decline in an Alzheimer’s disease mouse model. Neurobiol. Dis. 2023 , 181 , 106106. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Kang, J.Q. Epileptic Mechanisms Shared by Alzheimer’s Disease: Viewed via the Unique Lens of Genetic Epilepsy. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2021 , 22 , 7133. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Bosco, D.B.; Kremen, V.; Haruwaka, K.; Zhao, S.; Wang, L.; Ebner, B.A.; Zheng, J.; Dheer, A.; Perry, J.F.; Xie, M.; et al. Impaired microglial phagocytosis promotes seizure development. bioRxiv 2024 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tosun, D.; Hausle, Z.; Iwaki, H.; Thropp, P.; Lamoureux, J.; Lee, E.B.; MacLeod, K.; McEvoy, S.; Nalls, M.; Perrin, R.J.; et al. A cross-sectional study of α-synuclein seed amplification assay in Alzheimer’s disease neuroimaging initiative: Prevalence and associations with Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers and cognitive function. Alzheimers Dement. 2024 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Horvath, A.A.; Csernus, E.A.; Lality, S.; Kaminski, R.M.; Kamondi, A. Inhibiting Epileptiform Activity in Cognitive Disorders: Possibilities for a Novel Therapeutic Approach. Front. Neurosci. 2020 , 14 , 557416. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Hanke, J.M.; Schindler, K.A.; Seiler, A. On the relationships between epilepsy, sleep, and Alzheimer’s disease: A narrative review. Epilepsy Behav. 2022 , 129 , 108609. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Sánchez, M.P.; García-Cabrero, A.M.; Sánchez-Elexpuru, G.; Burgos, D.F.; Serratosa, J.M. Tau-Induced Pathology in Epilepsy and Dementia: Notions from Patients and Animal Models. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2018 , 19 , 1092. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Fang, Y.; Si, X.; Wang, J.; Wang, Z.; Chen, Y.; Liu, Y.; Yan, Y.; Tian, J.; Zhang, B.; Pu, J. Alzheimer Disease and Epilepsy: A Mendelian Randomization Study. Neurology 2023 , 101 , e399–e409. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rey, C.; Cattaud, V.; Rampon, C.; Verret, L. What’s New on Alzheimer’s Disease? Insights From AD Mouse Models ; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019. [ Google Scholar ]
• Song, S.; Chen, J.; Xiao, P.; Duan, H.; Zhou, Y.; Wang, F.; Wang, H.; Zhao, Y.; Geng, Z. Role of Macrophages in Status Epilepticus Predisposing to Alzheimer’s Disease. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2020 , 73 , 375–382. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lin, R.; Jones, N.C.; Kwan, P. Unravelling the Role of Glycogen Synthase Kinase-3 in Alzheimer’s Disease-Related Epileptic Seizures. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2020 , 21 , 3676. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jiang, X.; Lu, H.; Liu, W.; Wu, Z.; Wu, Q.; Li, X.; Xu, Z.; Hui, F.; Zhao, Q. The overlap between Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy uncovered by transcriptome sequencing. Clin. Transl. Med. 2020 , 10 , e169. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Fu, C.H.; Iascone, D.M.; Petrof, I.; Hazra, A.; Zhang, X.; Pyfer, M.S.; Tosi, U.; Corbett, B.F.; Cai, J.; Lee, J.; et al. Early Seizure Activity Accelerates Depletion of Hippocampal Neural Stem Cells and Impairs Spatial Discrimination in an Alzheimer’s Disease Model. Cell Rep. 2019 , 27 , 3741–3751.e4. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Lehmann, L.M.; Barker-Haliski, M. Loss of normal Alzheimer’s disease-associated Presenilin 2 function alters antiseizure medicine potency and tolerability in the 6-Hz focal seizure model. Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1223472. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Cope, Z.A.; Murai, T.; Sukoff Rizzo, S.J. Emerging Electroencephalographic Biomarkers to Improve Preclinical to Clinical Translation in Alzheimer’s Disease. Front. Aging Neurosci. 2022 , 14 , 805063. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Yu, T.; Liu, X.; Wu, J.; Wang, Q. Electrophysiological Biomarkers of Epileptogenicity in Alzheimer’s Disease. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2021 , 15 , 747077. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Lam, A.D.; Sarkis, R.A.; Pellerin, K.R.; Jing, J.; Dworetzky, B.A.; Hoch, D.B.; Jacobs, C.S.; Lee, J.W.; Weisholtz, D.S.; Zepeda, R.; et al. Association of epileptiform abnormalities and seizures in Alzheimer disease. Neurology 2020 , 95 , e2259–e2270. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Musaeus, C.S.; Frederiksen, K.S.; Andersen, B.B.; Høgh, P.; Kidmose, P.; Fabricius, M.; Hribljan, M.C.; Hemmsen, M.C.; Rank, M.L.; Waldemar, G.; et al. Detection of subclinical epileptiform discharges in Alzheimer’s disease using long-term outpatient EEG monitoring. Neurobiol. Dis. 2023 , 183 , 106149. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Johnson, E.L.; Sullivan, K.J.; Schneider, A.L.C.; Simino, J.; Mosley, T.H.; Kucharska-Newton, A.; Knopman, D.S.; Gottesman, R.F. Association of Plasma Aβ(42)/Aβ(40) Ratio and Late-Onset Epilepsy: Results From the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities Study. Neurology 2023 , 101 , e1319–e1327. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Nardi Cesarini, E.; Babiloni, C.; Salvadori, N.; Farotti, L.; Del Percio, C.; Pascarelli, M.T.; Noce, G.; Lizio, R.; Da Re, F.; Isella, V.; et al. Late-Onset Epilepsy With Unknown Etiology: A Pilot Study on Neuropsychological Profile, Cerebrospinal Fluid Biomarkers, and Quantitative EEG Characteristics. Front. Neurol. 2020 , 11 , 199. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lam, A.D.; Noebels, J. Night Watch on the Titanic: Detecting Early Signs of Epileptogenesis in Alzheimer Disease. Epilepsy Curr. 2020 , 20 , 369–374. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hahm, J.; Kim, K.K.; Kim, D.W. Seizure-Related Cortical Volume Alterations in Alzheimer’s Disease: A Preliminary Study. J. Epilepsy Res. 2018 , 8 , 33–40. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Kaestner, E.; Reyes, A.; Chen, A.; Rao, J.; Macari, A.C.; Choi, J.Y.; Qiu, D.; Hewitt, K.; Wang, Z.I.; Drane, D.L.; et al. Atrophy and cognitive profiles in older adults with temporal lobe epilepsy are similar to mild cognitive impairment. Brain 2021 , 144 , 236–250. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Zhang, X.; Li, W.; Shen, W.; Zhang, L.; Pu, X.; Chen, L. (Eds.) Automatic Identification of Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy Based on MRI. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 31st International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence (ICTAI), Portland, OR, USA, 4–6 November 2019; pp. 614–620. [ Google Scholar ]
• Purushotham, M.; Tashrifwala, F.; Jena, R.; Vudugula, S.A.; Patil, R.S.; Agrawal, A. The Association Between Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy: A Narrative Review. Cureus 2022 , 14 , e30195. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Marcus, C.; Mena, E.; Subramaniam, R.M. Brain PET in the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Clin. Nucl. Med. 2014 , 39 , e413–e422, quiz e423–e426. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Colom-Cadena, M.; Spires-Jones, T.; Zetterberg, H.; Blennow, K.; Caggiano, A.; DeKosky, S.T.; Fillit, H.; Harrison, J.E.; Schneider, L.S.; Scheltens, P.; et al. The clinical promise of biomarkers of synapse damage or loss in Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s Res. Ther. 2020 , 12 , 21. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Horvath, A.; Kiss, M.; Szucs, A.; Kamondi, A. Precuneus-Dominant Degeneration of Parietal Lobe Is at Risk of Epilepsy in Mild Alzheimer’s Disease. Front. Neurol. 2019 , 10 , 878. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Novak, A.; Vizjak, K.; Gacnik, A.; Rakusa, M. Cognitive impairment in people with epilepsy: Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) as a screening tool. Acta Neurol. Belg. 2023 , 123 , 451–456. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Filippov, M.A.; Vorobyov, V.V. Detrimental and synergistic role of epilepsy — Alzheimer’s disease risk factors. Neural Regen. Res. 2019 , 14 , 1376–1377. [ Google Scholar ] [ PubMed ]
• Wu, J.; Zhu, S.; Zhao, C.; Xu, X. A Comprehensive Investigation of Molecular Signatures and Pathways Linking Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy via Bioinformatic Approaches. Curr. Alzheimer Res. 2022 , 19 , 146–160. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Juźwik, C.A.; Drake, S.S.; Zhang, Y.; Paradis-Isler, N.; Sylvester, A.; Amar-Zifkin, A.; Douglas, C.; Morquette, B.; Moore, C.S.; Fournier, A.E. microRNA dysregulation in neurodegenerative diseases: A systematic review. Progress. Neurobiol. 2019 , 182 , 101664. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jiang, X.-w.; Lu, H.-y.; Xu, Z.; Liu, T.-y.; Wu, Q.; Yang, Y.; Zhao, Q.-c.; Gao, H.-y. In Silico Analyses for Key Genes and Molecular Genetic Mechanism in Epilepsy and Alzheimer’s Disease. CNS Neurol. Disord.—Drug Targets 2018 , 17 , 608–617. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Harutyunyan, A.; Jones, N.C.; Kwan, P.; Anderson, A. Network Preservation Analysis Reveals Dysregulated Synaptic Modules and Regulatory Hubs Shared Between Alzheimer’s Disease and Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. Front. Genet. 2022 , 13 , 821343. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Vossel, K.A.; Ranasinghe, K.G.; Beagle, A.J.; Mizuiri, D.; Honma, S.M.; Dowling, A.F.; Darwish, S.M.; Van Berlo, V.; Barnes, D.E.; Mantle, M.; et al. Incidence and impact of subclinical epileptiform activity in Alzheimer’s disease. Ann. Neurol. 2016 , 80 , 858–870. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Musaeus, C.S.; Engedal, K.; Høgh, P.; Jelic, V.; Mørup, M.; Naik, M.; Oeksengaard, A.R.; Snaedal, J.; Wahlund, L.O.; Waldemar, G.; et al. EEG Theta Power Is an Early Marker of Cognitive Decline in Dementia due to Alzheimer’s Disease. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2018 , 64 , 1359–1371. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Kitchigina, V.F. Alterations of Coherent Theta and Gamma Network Oscillations as an Early Biomarker of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy and Alzheimer’s Disease. Front. Integr. Neurosci. 2018 , 12 , 36. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Tombini, M.; Boscarino, M.; Di Lazzaro, V. Tackling seizures in patients with Alzheimer’s disease. Expert. Rev. Neurother. 2023 , 23 , 1131–1145. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Hautecloque-Raysz, G.; Sellal, F.; Bousiges, O.; Phillipi, N.; Blanc, F.; Cretin, B. Epileptic Prodromal Alzheimer’s Disease Treated with Antiseizure Medications: Medium-Term Outcome of Seizures and Cognition. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2023 , 94 , 1057–1074. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Lin, C.Y.; Chang, M.C.; Jhou, H.J. Effect of Levetiracetam on Cognition: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Double-Blind Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials. CNS Drugs 2024 , 38 , 1–14. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Vossel, K.; Ranasinghe, K.G.; Beagle, A.J.; La, A.; Ah Pook, K.; Castro, M.; Mizuiri, D.; Honma, S.M.; Venkateswaran, N.; Koestler, M.; et al. Effect of Levetiracetam on Cognition in Patients With Alzheimer Disease With and Without Epileptiform Activity: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Neurol. 2021 , 78 , 1345–1354. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Isla, A.G.; Balleza-Tapia, H.; Chu, F.; Chen, G.; Johansson, J.; Nilsson, P.; Fisahn, A. Low dose of levetiracetam counteracts amyloid β-induced alterations of hippocampal gamma oscillations by restoring fast-spiking interneuron activity. Exp. Neurol. 2023 , 369 , 114545. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vossel, K. Putting the Brakes on Accelerated Cognitive Decline in Alzheimer’s Disease with Epileptic Activity. J. Alzheimers Dis. 2023 , 94 , 1075–1077. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Musaeus, C.S.; Nilsson, C.; Cooper, C.; Kramberger, M.G.; Verdelho, A.; Stefanova, E.; Religa, D.; Waldemar, G.; Frederiksen, K.S. Pharmacological Medical Treatment of Epilepsy in Patients with Dementia: A Systematic Review. Curr. Alzheimer Res. 2021 , 18 , 689–694. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Rohracher, A.; Kalss, G.; Kuchukhidze, G.; Neuray, C.; Leitinger, M.; Höfler, J.; Kreidenhuber, R.; Rossini, F.; Volna, K.; Mauritz, M.; et al. New anti-seizure medication for elderly epilepsy patients — A critical narrative review. Expert. Opin. Pharmacother. 2021 , 22 , 621–634. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Zhang, L.; Jiang, H.Y.; Liu, W.J. Anti-seizure medication exposure and the risk of dementia: A meta-analysis of observational studies. Front. Neurol. 2023 , 14 , 1133816. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dusanter, C.; Houot, M.; Mere, M.; Denos, M.; Samson, S.; Herlin, B.; Navarro, V.; Dupont, S. Cognitive effect of antiseizure medications in medial temporal lobe epilepsy. Eur. J. Neurol. 2023 , 30 , 3692–3702. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Schnier, C.; Duncan, S.; Wilkinson, T.; Mbizvo, G.K.; Chin, R.F.M. A nationwide, retrospective, data-linkage, cohort study of epilepsy and incident dementia. Neurology 2020 , 95 , e1686–e1693. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rayala, H.; Kapur, J.; El-Haija, H.A.; Parikh, P.; Zawar, I. Memantine’s double duty? Investigating its impact on epilepsy control in Alzheimer’s disease. Epileptic Disord. 2024 , 26 , 261–263. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vico Varela, E.; Etter, G.; Williams, S. Excitatory-inhibitory imbalance in Alzheimer’s disease and therapeutic significance. Neurobiol. Dis. 2019 , 127 , 605–615. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gourmaud, S.; Stewart, D.A.; Irwin, D.J.; Roberts, N.; Barbour, A.J.; Eberwine, G.; O’Brien, W.T.; Vassar, R.; Talos, D.M.; Jensen, F.E. The role of mTORC1 activation in seizure-induced exacerbation of Alzheimer’s disease. Brain 2022 , 145 , 324–339. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gourmaud, S.; Shou, H.; Irwin, D.J.; Sansalone, K.; Jacobs, L.M.; Lucas, T.H.; Marsh, E.D.; Davis, K.A.; Jensen, F.E.; Talos, D.M. Alzheimer-like amyloid and tau alterations associated with cognitive deficit in temporal lobe epilepsy. Brain 2020 , 143 , 191–209. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ranasinghe, K.G.; Kudo, K.; Hinkley, L.; Beagle, A.; Lerner, H.; Mizuiri, D.; Findlay, A.; Miller, B.L.; Kramer, J.H.; Gorno-Tempini, M.L.; et al. Neuronal synchrony abnormalities associated with subclinical epileptiform activity in early-onset Alzheimer’s disease. Brain 2022 , 145 , 744–753. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• He, M.; Kolesar, T.A.; Goertzen, A.L.; Ng, M.C.; Ko, J.H. Do Epilepsy Patients with Cognitive Impairment Have Alzheimer’s Disease-like Brain Metabolism? Biomedicines 2023 , 11 , 1108. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Fernandes, M.; Manfredi, N.; Aluisantonio, L.; Franchini, F.; Chiaravalloti, A.; Izzi, F.; Di Santo, S.; Schillaci, O.; Mercuri, N.B.; Placidi, F.; et al. Cognitive functioning, cerebrospinal fluid Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers and cerebral glucose metabolism in late-onset epilepsy of unknown aetiology: A prospective study. Eur. J. Neurosci. 2022 , 56 , 5384–5396. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Zhang, X.; Ahmed, R.; Thayer, Z.; Breen, N.; McMillan, J.; Fulham, M.; Nikpour, A. Late-onset epilepsy with cognitive symptoms: Comparison of cognitive and imaging profiles with probable Alzheimer’s disease. Epilepsy Behav. 2023 , 146 , 109371. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Kalyvas, A.-C.; Dimitriou, M.; Ioannidis, P.; Grigoriadis, N.; Afrantou, T. Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy: Exploring Shared Pathways and Promising Biomarkers for Future Treatments. J. Clin. Med. 2024 , 13 , 3879. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13133879

Kalyvas A-C, Dimitriou M, Ioannidis P, Grigoriadis N, Afrantou T. Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy: Exploring Shared Pathways and Promising Biomarkers for Future Treatments. Journal of Clinical Medicine . 2024; 13(13):3879. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13133879

Kalyvas, Athanasios-Christos, Maria Dimitriou, Panagiotis Ioannidis, Nikolaos Grigoriadis, and Theodora Afrantou. 2024. "Alzheimer’s Disease and Epilepsy: Exploring Shared Pathways and Promising Biomarkers for Future Treatments" Journal of Clinical Medicine 13, no. 13: 3879. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13133879

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals