Process pathway for systematic and literature reviews A chart prepared by the University of British Columbia Library listing the differences in stages and processes of literature reviews versus evidence-synthesis reviews.
Source: Yale University
Knowledge Translation Tool This tool is designed to provide guidance and supporting material to reviewers on methods for the conduct and reporting of knowledge synthesis.
What Type of Review Is Right for You? This static guide from Cornell University Library helps you in selecting the right type of review for your research project.
Which Review is Right For You? This interactive survey developed by the University of Manitoba Libraries will help you determine what type of review is suitable for your project.
Reproduced from: Bettany-Saltikov, J. (2010). Learning how to undertake a systematic review: Part 1. Nursing Standard, 24(40): 47-55.
| Systematic Review | Literature Review | |
| Question | Focused on a single question | Not necessarily focused on a single question, but may describe an overview |
| Protocol | A peer review protocol or plan is included | No protocol is included |
| Background | Both provide summaries of the available literature on a topic | |
| Objectives | Clear objectives are identified | Objectives may or may not be identified |
| Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria | Criteria stated before the review is conducted | Criteria not specified |
| Search Strategy | Comprehensive search conducted in a systematic way | Strategy not explicitly stated |
| Process of Selecting Articles | Usually clear and explicit | Not described in a literature review |
| Process of Evaluating Articles | Comprehensive evaluation of study quality | Evaluation of study quality may or may not be included |
| Process of Extracting Relevant Information | Usually clear and specific | Not clear or explicit |
| Results and Data Synthesis | Clear summaries of studies based on high quality evidence | Summary based on studies where the quality of the articles may not be specified. May also be influenced by the reviewer's theories, needs and beliefs |
| Discussion | Written by an expert or group of experts with a detailed and well grounded knowledge of the issues | |
A literature review is something most of you have done this at one time or another. As a publication type it is an article or book published after examination of previously published material on a subject. It may be comprehensive to various degrees and the time range of material scrutinized may be broad or narrow, but the reviews most often desired are reviews of the current literature. The textual material examined may be equally broad and can encompass, in medicine specifically, clinical material as well as experimental research or case reports. State-of-the-art reviews tend to address more current matters. A review of the literature must be differentiated from HISTORICAL ARTICLE on the same subject, but a review of historical literature is also within the scope of this publication type. The literature review examines published materials which provide an examination of recent or current literature. Review articles can cover a wide range of subject matter at various levels of completeness and comprehensiveness based on analyses of literature that may include research findings. The review may reflect the state of the art. It also includes reviews as a literary form.
An integrative review summarizes past research and draws overall conclusions from the body of literature on a particular topic. The body of literature comprises all studies that address related or identical hypotheses. In a properly executed integrative review, the effects of subjectivity are minimized through carefully applied criteria for evaluation. A well-done integrative review meets the same standards as primary research in regard to clarity, rigor and replication.