Types of Literature Review
- Narrative or traditional reviews: a broad, critical overview of a topic.
- Integrative reviews: combining different types of research, common in nursing.
- Systematic reviews: a structured, reproducible search and appraisal, often following PRISMA.
- Scoping reviews: mapping the extent of research on a broad question.
- Literature review chapters: the second chapter of a dissertation or thesis.
- Annotated bibliographies: summaries and evaluations of individual sources, often a first step.
Searching the Literature
A good review starts with a good search. Your expert identifies key concepts, develops search terms and synonyms, combines them with Boolean operators and searches databases suited to your discipline: CINAHL and PubMed for health, ERIC for education, PsycINFO for psychology, Business Source Complete and Scopus for business, and Google Scholar across fields. Inclusion and exclusion criteria, such as publication date, language and study type, are set in advance and explained.
For systematic and scoping reviews, the search is documented in detail so it could be repeated, and the screening process is shown in a PRISMA flow diagram.
Organising the Review
Reviews can be organised in several ways:
- Thematically: grouping studies by the issues they address. This is the most common and usually the strongest structure.
- Methodologically: comparing what different types of study have found.
- Chronologically: showing how thinking has developed over time.
- By debate: setting out competing positions and the evidence for each.
Your expert chooses the structure that best leads to your research gap.
Synthesis Versus Summary
Summary describes what each author found. Synthesis connects findings across studies: "While Smith (2021) and Lee (2022) both report improved outcomes, their samples were limited to metropolitan hospitals, and Nguyen (2023) found no effect in regional settings." Synthesis is what turns a list of sources into a review, and it is the skill markers reward most. Our experts write every paragraph around a point, with several studies brought in to support or complicate it.
Critical Appraisal
A strong review does not treat all studies as equal. It considers sample size, design, bias, context and age. In health disciplines, appraisal tools such as CASP or JBI checklists are often expected. Your expert evaluates the strength of the evidence and explains how it affects conclusions.
Identifying the Gap
The end of the review should make your research question feel inevitable. That might be a population that has not been studied, conflicting results that need resolving, a method that has not been tried or a context, such as regional Australia or a particular part of the UK, that has been overlooked. Your expert makes the gap explicit and links it to your aims.
Referencing and Managing Sources
Large reviews involve many references, and errors multiply. Your expert cites accurately in your required style and can provide the reference list in a format you can import into EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley. Our free APA citation generator is handy for single references.
Writing About Disagreement
Some of the strongest paragraphs in a literature review deal with studies that disagree. Rather than ignoring the conflict, a good review explains possible reasons for it: different populations, measures, time periods or research designs. This shows the marker you understand how evidence is produced, and it often reveals the gap your own research can address.
Using the Model Review
Look at how each paragraph is built around a theme rather than an author, and how the review narrows towards the gap. Apply the same pattern to your own reading. Please use our work as a guide, in line with our fair use policy.
Price and Timeline
A 2,500-word literature review typically takes five to seven days, and systematic reviews take longer because of screening and appraisal. Send your topic and brief for a fixed price within 30 minutes.
Keeping the Review Current
Research moves quickly in many fields, and examiners notice when a review stops a few years before submission. Your expert prioritises research from the last five to seven years unless older work is foundational, and checks for recent systematic reviews or landmark studies that should be included. If your project runs over a long period, the review can be updated before submission so it reflects the latest evidence.