what is a literature review for dissertation

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

Knowledge Base

Methodology

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

Published on January 2, 2023 by Shona McCombes . Revised on September 11, 2023.

What is a literature review? A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research that you can later apply to your paper, thesis, or dissertation topic .

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

Search for relevant literature
Evaluate sources
Identify themes, debates, and gaps
Outline the structure
Write your literature review

A good literature review doesn’t just summarize sources—it analyzes, synthesizes , and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

What is the purpose of a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1 – search for relevant literature, step 2 – evaluate and select sources, step 3 – identify themes, debates, and gaps, step 4 – outline your literature review’s structure, step 5 – write your literature review, free lecture slides, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions, introduction.

Quick Run-through
Step 1 & 2

When you write a thesis , dissertation , or research paper , you will likely have to conduct a literature review to situate your research within existing knowledge. The literature review gives you a chance to:

Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and its scholarly context
Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
Position your work in relation to other researchers and theorists
Show how your research addresses a gap or contributes to a debate
Evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of the scholarly debates around your topic.

Writing literature reviews is a particularly important skill if you want to apply for graduate school or pursue a career in research. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Writing literature reviews can be quite challenging! A good starting point could be to look at some examples, depending on what kind of literature review you’d like to write.

Example literature review #1: “Why Do People Migrate? A Review of the Theoretical Literature” ( Theoretical literature review about the development of economic migration theory from the 1950s to today.)
Example literature review #2: “Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines” ( Methodological literature review about interdisciplinary knowledge acquisition and production.)
Example literature review #3: “The Use of Technology in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Thematic literature review about the effects of technology on language acquisition.)
Example literature review #4: “Learners’ Listening Comprehension Difficulties in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Chronological literature review about how the concept of listening skills has changed over time.)

You can also check out our templates with literature review examples and sample outlines at the links below.

Download Word doc Download Google doc

Before you begin searching for literature, you need a clearly defined topic .

If you are writing the literature review section of a dissertation or research paper, you will search for literature related to your research problem and questions .

Make a list of keywords

Start by creating a list of keywords related to your research question. Include each of the key concepts or variables you’re interested in, and list any synonyms and related terms. You can add to this list as you discover new keywords in the process of your literature search.

Social media, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, TikTok
Body image, self-perception, self-esteem, mental health
Generation Z, teenagers, adolescents, youth

Search for relevant sources

Use your keywords to begin searching for sources. Some useful databases to search for journals and articles include:

Your university’s library catalogue
Google Scholar
Project Muse (humanities and social sciences)
Medline (life sciences and biomedicine)
EconLit (economics)
Inspec (physics, engineering and computer science)

You can also use boolean operators to help narrow down your search.

Make sure to read the abstract to find out whether an article is relevant to your question. When you find a useful book or article, you can check the bibliography to find other relevant sources.

You likely won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on your topic, so it will be necessary to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your research question.

For each publication, ask yourself:

What question or problem is the author addressing?
What are the key concepts and how are they defined?
What are the key theories, models, and methods?
Does the research use established frameworks or take an innovative approach?
What are the results and conclusions of the study?
How does the publication relate to other literature in the field? Does it confirm, add to, or challenge established knowledge?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research?

Make sure the sources you use are credible , and make sure you read any landmark studies and major theories in your field of research.

You can use our template to summarize and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using. Click on either button below to download.

Take notes and cite your sources

As you read, you should also begin the writing process. Take notes that you can later incorporate into the text of your literature review.

It is important to keep track of your sources with citations to avoid plagiarism . It can be helpful to make an annotated bibliography , where you compile full citation information and write a paragraph of summary and analysis for each source. This helps you remember what you read and saves time later in the process.

To begin organizing your literature review’s argument and structure, be sure you understand the connections and relationships between the sources you’ve read. Based on your reading and notes, you can look for:

Trends and patterns (in theory, method or results): do certain approaches become more or less popular over time?
Themes: what questions or concepts recur across the literature?
Debates, conflicts and contradictions: where do sources disagree?
Pivotal publications: are there any influential theories or studies that changed the direction of the field?
Gaps: what is missing from the literature? Are there weaknesses that need to be addressed?

This step will help you work out the structure of your literature review and (if applicable) show how your own research will contribute to existing knowledge.

Most research has focused on young women.
There is an increasing interest in the visual aspects of social media.
But there is still a lack of robust research on highly visual platforms like Instagram and Snapchat—this is a gap that you could address in your own research.

There are various approaches to organizing the body of a literature review. Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time. However, if you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order.

Try to analyze patterns, turning points and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred.

If you have found some recurring central themes, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic.

For example, if you are reviewing literature about inequalities in migrant health outcomes, key themes might include healthcare policy, language barriers, cultural attitudes, legal status, and economic access.

Methodological

If you draw your sources from different disciplines or fields that use a variety of research methods , you might want to compare the results and conclusions that emerge from different approaches. For example:

Look at what results have emerged in qualitative versus quantitative research
Discuss how the topic has been approached by empirical versus theoretical scholarship
Divide the literature into sociological, historical, and cultural sources

Theoretical

A literature review is often the foundation for a theoretical framework . You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts.

You might argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach, or combine various theoretical concepts to create a framework for your research.

Like any other academic text , your literature review should have an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion . What you include in each depends on the objective of your literature review.

The introduction should clearly establish the focus and purpose of the literature review.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you might want to divide the body into subsections. You can use a subheading for each theme, time period, or methodological approach.

As you write, you can follow these tips:

Summarize and synthesize: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
Analyze and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers — add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
Critically evaluate: mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
Write in well-structured paragraphs: use transition words and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts

In the conclusion, you should summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance.

When you’ve finished writing and revising your literature review, don’t forget to proofread thoroughly before submitting. Not a language expert? Check out Scribbr’s professional proofreading services !

This article has been adapted into lecture slides that you can use to teach your students about writing a literature review.

Scribbr slides are free to use, customize, and distribute for educational purposes.

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

Sampling methods
Simple random sampling
Stratified sampling
Cluster sampling
Likert scales
Reproducibility

Statistics

Null hypothesis
Statistical power
Probability distribution
Effect size
Poisson distribution

Research bias

Optimism bias
Cognitive bias
Implicit bias
Hawthorne effect
Anchoring bias
Explicit bias

A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources (such as books, journal articles, and theses) related to a specific topic or research question .

It is often written as part of a thesis, dissertation , or research paper , in order to situate your work in relation to existing knowledge.

There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:

To familiarize yourself with the current state of knowledge on your topic
To ensure that you’re not just repeating what others have already done
To identify gaps in knowledge and unresolved problems that your research can address
To develop your theoretical framework and methodology
To provide an overview of the key findings and debates on the topic

Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.

The literature review usually comes near the beginning of your thesis or dissertation . After the introduction , it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology .

A literature review is a survey of credible sources on a topic, often used in dissertations , theses, and research papers . Literature reviews give an overview of knowledge on a subject, helping you identify relevant theories and methods, as well as gaps in existing research. Literature reviews are set up similarly to other academic texts , with an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion .

An annotated bibliography is a list of source references that has a short description (called an annotation ) for each of the sources. It is often assigned as part of the research process for a paper .

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved July 5, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, what is your plagiarism score.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

Knowledge Base
Dissertation
What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

Published on 22 February 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 7 June 2022.

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

Search for relevant literature
Evaluate sources
Identify themes, debates and gaps
Outline the structure
Write your literature review

A good literature review doesn’t just summarise sources – it analyses, synthesises, and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.

Why write a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1: search for relevant literature, step 2: evaluate and select sources, step 3: identify themes, debates and gaps, step 4: outline your literature review’s structure, step 5: write your literature review, frequently asked questions about literature reviews, introduction.

Quick Run-through
Step 1 & 2

When you write a dissertation or thesis, you will have to conduct a literature review to situate your research within existing knowledge. The literature review gives you a chance to:

Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and scholarly context
Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
Position yourself in relation to other researchers and theorists
Show how your dissertation addresses a gap or contributes to a debate

You might also have to write a literature review as a stand-alone assignment. In this case, the purpose is to evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of scholarly debates around a topic.

The content will look slightly different in each case, but the process of conducting a literature review follows the same steps. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

what is a literature review for dissertation

Correct my document today

Writing literature reviews can be quite challenging! A good starting point could be to look at some examples, depending on what kind of literature review you’d like to write.

Example literature review #1: “Why Do People Migrate? A Review of the Theoretical Literature” ( Theoretical literature review about the development of economic migration theory from the 1950s to today.)
Example literature review #2: “Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines” ( Methodological literature review about interdisciplinary knowledge acquisition and production.)
Example literature review #3: “The Use of Technology in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Thematic literature review about the effects of technology on language acquisition.)
Example literature review #4: “Learners’ Listening Comprehension Difficulties in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Chronological literature review about how the concept of listening skills has changed over time.)

You can also check out our templates with literature review examples and sample outlines at the links below.

Download Word doc Download Google doc

Before you begin searching for literature, you need a clearly defined topic .

If you are writing the literature review section of a dissertation or research paper, you will search for literature related to your research objectives and questions .

If you are writing a literature review as a stand-alone assignment, you will have to choose a focus and develop a central question to direct your search. Unlike a dissertation research question, this question has to be answerable without collecting original data. You should be able to answer it based only on a review of existing publications.

Make a list of keywords

Start by creating a list of keywords related to your research topic. Include each of the key concepts or variables you’re interested in, and list any synonyms and related terms. You can add to this list if you discover new keywords in the process of your literature search.

Social media, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, TikTok
Body image, self-perception, self-esteem, mental health
Generation Z, teenagers, adolescents, youth

Search for relevant sources

Use your keywords to begin searching for sources. Some databases to search for journals and articles include:

Your university’s library catalogue
Google Scholar
Project Muse (humanities and social sciences)
Medline (life sciences and biomedicine)
EconLit (economics)
Inspec (physics, engineering and computer science)

You can use boolean operators to help narrow down your search:

Read the abstract to find out whether an article is relevant to your question. When you find a useful book or article, you can check the bibliography to find other relevant sources.

To identify the most important publications on your topic, take note of recurring citations. If the same authors, books or articles keep appearing in your reading, make sure to seek them out.

You probably won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on the topic – you’ll have to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your questions.

For each publication, ask yourself:

What question or problem is the author addressing?
What are the key concepts and how are they defined?
What are the key theories, models and methods? Does the research use established frameworks or take an innovative approach?
What are the results and conclusions of the study?
How does the publication relate to other literature in the field? Does it confirm, add to, or challenge established knowledge?
How does the publication contribute to your understanding of the topic? What are its key insights and arguments?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research?

Make sure the sources you use are credible, and make sure you read any landmark studies and major theories in your field of research.

You can find out how many times an article has been cited on Google Scholar – a high citation count means the article has been influential in the field, and should certainly be included in your literature review.

The scope of your review will depend on your topic and discipline: in the sciences you usually only review recent literature, but in the humanities you might take a long historical perspective (for example, to trace how a concept has changed in meaning over time).

Remember that you can use our template to summarise and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using!

Take notes and cite your sources

As you read, you should also begin the writing process. Take notes that you can later incorporate into the text of your literature review.

It’s important to keep track of your sources with references to avoid plagiarism . It can be helpful to make an annotated bibliography, where you compile full reference information and write a paragraph of summary and analysis for each source. This helps you remember what you read and saves time later in the process.

You can use our free APA Reference Generator for quick, correct, consistent citations.

To begin organising your literature review’s argument and structure, you need to understand the connections and relationships between the sources you’ve read. Based on your reading and notes, you can look for:

Trends and patterns (in theory, method or results): do certain approaches become more or less popular over time?
Themes: what questions or concepts recur across the literature?
Debates, conflicts and contradictions: where do sources disagree?
Pivotal publications: are there any influential theories or studies that changed the direction of the field?
Gaps: what is missing from the literature? Are there weaknesses that need to be addressed?

This step will help you work out the structure of your literature review and (if applicable) show how your own research will contribute to existing knowledge.

Most research has focused on young women.
There is an increasing interest in the visual aspects of social media.
But there is still a lack of robust research on highly-visual platforms like Instagram and Snapchat – this is a gap that you could address in your own research.

There are various approaches to organising the body of a literature review. You should have a rough idea of your strategy before you start writing.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time. However, if you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarising sources in order.

Try to analyse patterns, turning points and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred.

If you have found some recurring central themes, you can organise your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic.

Methodological

Look at what results have emerged in qualitative versus quantitative research
Discuss how the topic has been approached by empirical versus theoretical scholarship
Divide the literature into sociological, historical, and cultural sources

Theoretical

A literature review is often the foundation for a theoretical framework . You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts.

You might argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach, or combine various theoretical concepts to create a framework for your research.

Like any other academic text, your literature review should have an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion . What you include in each depends on the objective of your literature review.

The introduction should clearly establish the focus and purpose of the literature review.

If you are writing the literature review as part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate your central problem or research question and give a brief summary of the scholarly context. You can emphasise the timeliness of the topic (“many recent studies have focused on the problem of x”) or highlight a gap in the literature (“while there has been much research on x, few researchers have taken y into consideration”).

Depending on the length of your literature review, you might want to divide the body into subsections. You can use a subheading for each theme, time period, or methodological approach.

As you write, make sure to follow these tips:

Summarise and synthesise: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole.
Analyse and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole.
Critically evaluate: mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources.
Write in well-structured paragraphs: use transitions and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts.

In the conclusion, you should summarise the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasise their significance.

If the literature review is part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate how your research addresses gaps and contributes new knowledge, or discuss how you have drawn on existing theories and methods to build a framework for your research. This can lead directly into your methodology section.

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 dissertation , thesis, research paper , or proposal .

There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:

To familiarise yourself with the current state of knowledge on your topic
To ensure that you’re not just repeating what others have already done
To identify gaps in knowledge and unresolved problems that your research can address
To develop your theoretical framework and methodology
To provide an overview of the key findings and debates on the topic

Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.

The literature review usually comes near the beginning of your dissertation . After the introduction , it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology .

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2022, June 07). What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 5 July 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a dissertation proposal | a step-by-step guide, what is a theoretical framework | a step-by-step guide, what is a research methodology | steps & tips.

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

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

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

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

How to write a good literature review

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

What is a literature review?

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

What is the purpose of literature review?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Literature review example

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

Literature Review on Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity:

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

a. Habitat Loss and Species Extinction:

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

b. Range Shifts and Phenological Changes:

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

c. Ocean Acidification and Coral Reefs:

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

d. Adaptive Strategies and Conservation Efforts:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conducting a literature review

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

Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question:

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

Decide on the Scope of Your Review:

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

Select Databases for Searches:

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

Conduct Searches and Keep Track:

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

Review the Literature:

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

Organize and Write Your Literature Review:

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

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

How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal?

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

Here’s how to use the Research feature:

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

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

Frequently asked questions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

	Annotated Bibliography	Literature Review
Purpose	List of citations of books, articles, and other sources with a brief description (annotation) of each source.	Comprehensive and critical analysis of existing literature on a specific topic.
Focus	Summary and evaluation of each source, including its relevance, methodology, and key findings.	Provides an overview of the current state of knowledge on a particular subject and identifies gaps, trends, and patterns in existing literature.
Structure	Each citation is followed by a concise paragraph (annotation) that describes the source’s content, methodology, and its contribution to the topic.	The literature review is organized thematically or chronologically and involves a synthesis of the findings from different sources to build a narrative or argument.
Length	Typically 100-200 words	Length of literature review ranges from a few pages to several chapters
Independence	Each source is treated separately, with less emphasis on synthesizing the information across sources.	The writer synthesizes information from multiple sources to present a cohesive overview of the topic.

References

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

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

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

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

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

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

What are the parts of a lit review?

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

Introduction:

An introductory paragraph that explains what your working topic and thesis is
A forecast of key topics or texts that will appear in the review
Potentially, a description of how you found sources and how you analyzed them for inclusion and discussion in the review (more often found in published, standalone literature reviews than in lit review sections in an article or research paper)
Summarize and synthesize: Give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
Analyze and interpret: Don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
Critically Evaluate: Mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
Write in well-structured paragraphs: Use transition words and topic sentence to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.

Conclusion:

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

How should I organize my lit review?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Reference management. Clean and simple.

How to write a literature review in 6 steps

What is a literature review?

How to write a literature review, 1. determine the purpose of your literature review, 2. do an extensive search, 3. evaluate and select literature, 4. analyze the literature, 5. plan the structure of your literature review, 6. write your literature review, other resources to help you write a successful literature review, frequently asked questions about writing a literature review, related articles.

A literature review is an assessment of the sources in a chosen topic of research.

A good literature review does not just summarize sources. It analyzes the state of the field on a given topic and creates a scholarly foundation for you to make your own intervention. It demonstrates to your readers how your research fits within a larger field of study.

In a thesis, a literature review is part of the introduction, but it can also be a separate section. In research papers, a literature review may have its own section or it may be integrated into the introduction, depending on the field.

➡️ Our guide on what is a literature review covers additional basics about literature reviews.

Identify the main purpose of the literature review.
Do extensive research.
Evaluate and select relevant sources.
Analyze the sources.
Plan a structure.
Write the review.

In this section, we review each step of the process of creating a literature review.

In the first step, make sure you know specifically what the assignment is and what form your literature review should take. Read your assignment carefully and seek clarification from your professor or instructor if needed. You should be able to answer the following questions:

How many sources do I need to include?
What types of sources should I review?
Should I evaluate the sources?
Should I summarize, synthesize or critique sources?
Do I need to provide any definitions or background information?

In addition to that, be aware that the narrower your topic, the easier it will be to limit the number of sources you need to read in order to get a good overview of the topic.

Now you need to find out what has been written on the topic and search for literature related to your research topic. Make sure to select appropriate source material, which means using academic or scholarly sources , including books, reports, journal articles , government documents and web resources.

➡️ If you’re unsure about how to tell if a source is scholarly, take a look at our guide on how to identify a scholarly source .

Come up with a list of relevant keywords and then start your search with your institution's library catalog, and extend it to other useful databases and academic search engines like:

Google Scholar
Science.gov

➡️ Our guide on how to collect data for your thesis might be helpful at this stage of your research as well as the top list of academic search engines .

Once you find a useful article, check out the reference list. It should provide you with even more relevant sources. Also, keep a note of the:

authors' names
page numbers

Keeping track of the bibliographic information for each source will save you time when you’re ready to create citations. You could also use a reference manager like Paperpile to automatically save, manage, and cite your references.

Read the literature. You will most likely not be able to read absolutely everything that is out there on the topic. Therefore, read the abstract first to determine whether the rest of the source is worth your time. If the source is relevant for your topic:

Read it critically.
Look for the main arguments.
Take notes as you read.
Organize your notes using a table, mind map, or other technique.

Now you are ready to analyze the literature you have gathered. While your are working on your analysis, you should ask the following questions:

What are the key terms, concepts and problems addressed by the author?
How is this source relevant for my specific topic?
How is the article structured? What are the major trends and findings?
What are the conclusions of the study?
How are the results presented? Is the source credible?
When comparing different sources, how do they relate to each other? What are the similarities, what are the differences?
Does the study help me understand the topic better?
Are there any gaps in the research that need to be filled? How can I further my research as a result of the review?

Tip: Decide on the structure of your literature review before you start writing.

There are various ways to organize your literature review:

Chronological method : Writing in the chronological method means you are presenting the materials according to when they were published. Follow this approach only if a clear path of research can be identified.
Thematic review : A thematic review of literature is organized around a topic or issue, rather than the progression of time.
Publication-based : You can order your sources by publication, if the way you present the order of your sources demonstrates a more important trend. This is the case when a progression revealed from study to study and the practices of researchers have changed and adapted due to the new revelations.
Methodological approach : A methodological approach focuses on the methods used by the researcher. If you have used sources from different disciplines that use a variety of research methods, you might want to compare the results in light of the different methods and discuss how the topic has been approached from different sides.

Regardless of the structure you chose, a review should always include the following three sections:

An introduction, which should give the reader an outline of why you are writing the review and explain the relevance of the topic.
A body, which divides your literature review into different sections. Write in well-structured paragraphs, use transitions and topic sentences and critically analyze each source for how it contributes to the themes you are researching.
A conclusion , which summarizes the key findings, the main agreements and disagreements in the literature, your overall perspective, and any gaps or areas for further research.

➡️ If your literature review is part of a longer paper, visit our guide on what is a research paper for additional tips.

➡️ UNC writing center: Literature reviews

➡️ How to write a literature review in 3 steps

➡️ How to write a literature review in 30 minutes or less

The goal of a literature review is to asses the state of the field on a given topic in preparation for making an intervention.

A literature review should have its own independent section. You should indicate clearly in the table of contents where it can be found, and address this section as “Literature Review.”

There is no set amount of words for a literature review; the length depends on the research. If you are working with a large amount of sources, then it will be long. If your paper does not depend entirely on references, then it will be short.

Most research papers include a literature review. By assessing the available sources in your field of research, you will be able to make a more confident argument about the topic.

Literature reviews are most commonly found in theses and dissertations. However, you find them in research papers as well.

A Guide to Writing a PhD Literature Review

Written by Ben Taylor

Most PhD projects begin with a literature review, which usually serves as the first chapter of your dissertation. This provides an opportunity for you to show that you understand the body of academic work that has already been done in relation to your topic, including books, articles, data and research papers.

You should be prepared to offer your own critical analysis of this literature, as well as illustrating where your own research lies within the field – and how it contributes something new / significant to your subject.

This page will give you an overview of what you need to know about writing a literature review, with detail on structure, length and conclusions.

What is a PhD literature review?

A literature review is usually one of the first things you’ll do after beginning your PhD . Once you’ve met with your supervisor and discussed the scope of your research project, you’ll conduct a survey of the scholarly work that’s already been done in your area.

Depending on the nature of your PhD, this work could comprise books, publications, articles, experimental data and more. This body of work is collectively known as the ‘scholarly literature’, on your subject. You won’t have to tackle any novels, poetry or drama during this review (unless, of course, you’re actually studying a PhD in English Literature, in which case that comes later).

The purpose of the PhD literature review isn’t just to summarise what other scholars have done before you. You should analyse and evaluate the current body of work , situating your own research within that context and demonstrating the significant original contribution your research will make.

Planning your PhD literature review

Your supervisor will be able to give you advice if you’re not quite sure where to begin your review, pointing you in the direction of key texts and research that you can then investigate. It’s worth paying attention to the bibliographies (and literature reviews!) of these publications, which can often lead you towards even more specialist texts that could prove invaluable in your research. At the same time, it’s important not to let yourself fall down an academic rabbit hole – make sure that the books and articles you’re surveying are genuinely relevant to your own project.

You should aim to include a broad range of literature in your review, showing the scope of your knowledge, from foundational texts to the most recent publications.

The note-taking process is crucial while you’re in the early stages of your literature review. Keep a clear record of the sources you’ve read, along with your critical analysis of their key arguments and what you think makes them relevant to your research project.

How long should a literature review be?

The length of a PhD literature review varies greatly by subject. In Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences the review will typically be around 5,000 words long, while STEM literature reviews will usually be closer to 10,000 words long. In any case, you should consult with your supervisor on the optimum length for your own literature review.

Structuring a PhD literature review

When you begin to write your PhD literature review, it’s important to have a clear idea of its outline. Roughly speaking, the literature review structure should:

Introduce your topic and explain its significance
Evaluate the existing literature with reference to your thesis
Give a conclusion that considers the implications of your research for future study

The main body of your literature review will be spent critiquing the existing work that scholars have done in your field. There are a few different ways you may want to structure this part of the review, depending on the subject and the nature of your dissertation:

Chronologically – If your research looks at how something has changed over time, it may make sense to review the literature chronologically, tracking the way that ideas, attitudes and theories have shifted. This might seem like quite a simple way to structure the review, but it’s also imperative to identify the common threads and sticking points between academics along the way, rather than merely reeling off a list of books and articles.
Thematically – If your dissertation encompasses several different themes, you might want to group the literature by these subjects, while also emphasising the connections between them.
Methodologically – If you are going to be working with experimental data or statistics, it could be a good idea to assess the different methods that previous scholars have used in your field to produce relevant literature.

Whichever technique you use to structure your literature review, you should take care not to simply list different books, articles and research papers without offering your own commentary.

Always highlight the similarities (and differences) between them, giving your analysis of the significance of these relationships, connections and contrasts.

Writing up a PhD literature review

The process of writing a literature review is different to that of writing the bulk of the dissertation itself. The aim at this point isn’t necessarily to illustrate your own original ideas and research – that’s what the dissertation is for – but rather to show the depth of your knowledge of the field and your ability to assess the work of other scholars . It’s also an opportunity for you to indicate exactly how your dissertation will make an original contribution to your subject area.

These are some tips to bear in mind when writing a literature review:

Avoid paraphrasing – instead, offer your own evaluation of a source and its assertions
Follow a logical path from one source or theme to the next – don’t make leaps between different books or articles without explaining the connection between them
Critically analyse the literature – challenge assumptions, assess the validity of argument and write with authority
Don’t be too broad in your scope – it can be easy to get carried away including every piece of related literature you come across, but it’s also important not to let your review become too sprawling or rambling

The fact that you usually begin your literature review right at the start of a PhD means that it’s likely you’ll come across plenty more relevant books and papers during the course of your research and while writing the dissertation. So, it’s useful to think of this first draft as a work-in-progress that you keep up-to-date as you write your thesis.

Finishing a PhD literature review

As you come to the end of your dissertation, it’s vital to take a close look at your initial literature review and make sure that it’s consistent with the conclusions that you’ve reached. Of course, a lot can change over the course of a PhD so it’s entirely possible that your research led you in a different direction than you imagined at the beginning.

The conclusion of your literature review should summarise the significance of the survey that you’ve just completed, explaining its relevance for the research your dissertation will undertake.

Literature reviews and PhD upgrade exams

The literature review is usually one of the first sections of a PhD to be completed, at least in its draft form. As such, it is often part of the material that you may submit for your PhD upgrade exam . This usually takes place at the end of your first year (though not all PhDs require it). Involves you discussing your work so far with academics in your department to confirm that your project is on track for a PhD. The feedback you get at this point may help shape your literature review, or reveal any areas you’ve missed.

Doing a PhD

For more information on what it’s like to do a PhD, read our guides to research proposals , dissertations and the viva . Or, search for your perfect PhD course on our website.

Our postgrad newsletter shares courses, funding news, stories and advice

Select your nearest city

You haven’t completed your profile yet. To get the most out of FindAPhD, finish your profile and receive these benefits:

Monthly chance to win one of ten £10 Amazon vouchers ; winners will be notified every month.*
The latest PhD projects delivered straight to your inbox
Access to our £6,000 scholarship competition
Weekly newsletter with funding opportunities, research proposal tips and much more
Early access to our physical and virtual postgraduate study fairs

Or begin browsing FindAPhD.com

or begin browsing FindAPhD.com

*Offer only available for the duration of your active subscription, and subject to change. You MUST claim your prize within 72 hours, if not we will redraw.

Do you want hassle-free information and advice?

Create your FindAPhD account and sign up to our newsletter:

Find out about funding opportunities and application tips
Receive weekly advice, student stories and the latest PhD news
Hear about our upcoming study fairs
Save your favourite projects, track enquiries and get personalised subject updates

Create your account

Looking to list your PhD opportunities? Log in here .

Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library

Collections
Research Help

YSN Doctoral Programs: Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

Biomedical Databases
Global (Public Health) Databases
Soc. Sci., History, and Law Databases
Grey Literature
Trials Registers
Data and Statistics
Public Policy
Google Tips
Recommended Books
Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

What is a literature review?

A literature review is an integrated analysis -- not just a summary-- of scholarly writings and other relevant evidence related directly to your research question. That is, it represents a synthesis of the evidence that provides background information on your topic and shows a association between the evidence and your research question.

A literature review may be a stand alone work or the introduction to a larger research paper, depending on the assignment. Rely heavily on the guidelines your instructor has given you.

Why is it important?

A literature review is important because it:

Explains the background of research on a topic.
Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area.
Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
Identifies critical gaps and points of disagreement.
Discusses further research questions that logically come out of the previous studies.

APA7 Style resources

APA Style Blog - for those harder to find answers

1. Choose a topic. Define your research question.

Your literature review should be guided by your central research question. The literature represents background and research developments related to a specific research question, interpreted and analyzed by you in a synthesized way.

Make sure your research question is not too broad or too narrow. Is it manageable?
Begin writing down terms that are related to your question. These will be useful for searches later.
If you have the opportunity, discuss your topic with your professor and your class mates.

2. Decide on the scope of your review

How many studies do you need to look at? How comprehensive should it be? How many years should it cover?

This may depend on your assignment. How many sources does the assignment require?

3. Select the databases you will use to conduct your searches.

Make a list of the databases you will search.

Where to find databases:

use the tabs on this guide
Find other databases in the Nursing Information Resources web page
More on the Medical Library web page
... and more on the Yale University Library web page

4. Conduct your searches to find the evidence. Keep track of your searches.

Use the key words in your question, as well as synonyms for those words, as terms in your search. Use the database tutorials for help.
Save the searches in the databases. This saves time when you want to redo, or modify, the searches. It is also helpful to use as a guide is the searches are not finding any useful results.
Review the abstracts of research studies carefully. This will save you time.
Use the bibliographies and references of research studies you find to locate others.
Check with your professor, or a subject expert in the field, if you are missing any key works in the field.
Ask your librarian for help at any time.
Use a citation manager, such as EndNote as the repository for your citations. See the EndNote tutorials for help.

Review the literature

Some questions to help you analyze the research:

What was the research question of the study you are reviewing? What were the authors trying to discover?
Was the research funded by a source that could influence the findings?
What were the research methodologies? Analyze its literature review, the samples and variables used, the results, and the conclusions.
Does the research seem to be complete? Could it have been conducted more soundly? What further questions does it raise?
If there are conflicting studies, why do you think that is?
How are the authors viewed in the field? Has this study been cited? If so, how has it been analyzed?

Tips:

Review the abstracts carefully.
Keep careful notes so that you may track your thought processes during the research process.
Create a matrix of the studies for easy analysis, and synthesis, across all of the studies.
<< Previous: Recommended Books
Last Updated: Jun 20, 2024 9:08 AM
URL: https://guides.library.yale.edu/YSNDoctoral

Writing the Dissertation - Guides for Success: The Literature Review

Writing the Dissertation Homepage
Overview and Planning
The Literature Review
The Methodology
The Results and Discussion
The Conclusion
The Abstract
Getting Started
Research Gap
What to Avoid

Overview of writing the literature review

Conducting a literature review enables you to demonstrate your understanding and knowledge of the existing work within your field of research. Doing so allows you to identify any underdeveloped areas or unexplored issues within a specific debate, dialogue or field of study. This, in turn, helps you to clearly and persuasively demonstrate how your own research will address one or more of these gaps.

Disciplinary differences

Please note: this guide is not specific to any one discipline. The literature review can vary depending on the nature of the research and the expectations of the school or department. Please adapt the following advice to meet the demands of your dissertation and the expectations of your school or department. Consult your supervisor for further guidance; you can also check out Writing Across Subjects guide .

Guide contents

As part of the Writing the Dissertation series, this guide covers the most common expectations for the literature review chapter, giving you the necessary knowledge, tips and guidance needed to impress your markers! The sections are organised as follows:

Getting Started - Defines the literature review and presents a table to help you plan.
Process - Explores choosing a topic, searching for sources and evaluating what you find.
Structure - Presents key principles to consider in terms of structure, with examples to illustrate the concepts.
Research gap - Clarifies what is meant by 'gap' and gives examples of common types of gaps.
What to Avoid - Covers a few frequent mistakes you'll want to...avoid!
FAQs - Answers to common questions about research gaps, literature availability and more.
Checklist - Includes a summary of key points and a self-evaluation checklist.

Training and tools

The Academic Skills team has recorded a Writing the Dissertation workshop series to help you with each section of a standard dissertation, including a video on writing the literature review .
Check out the library's online Literature Review: Research Methods training.
Our literature reviews summary guide provides links to further information and videos.
The dissertation planner tool can help you think through the timeline for planning, research, drafting and editing.
iSolutions offers training and a Word template to help you digitally format and structure your dissertation.

What is the literature review?

The literature review of a dissertation gives a clear, critical overview of a specific area of research. Our main Writing the Dissertation - Overview and Planning guide explains how you can refine your dissertation topic and begin your initial research; the next tab of this guide, 'Process', expands on those ideas. In summary, the process of conducting a literature review usually involves the following:

Conducting a series of strategic searches to identify the key texts within that topic.
Identifying the main argument in each source, the relevant themes and issues presented and how they relate to each other.
Critically evaluating your chosen sources and determining their strengths, weaknesses, relevance and value to your research along with their overall contribution to the broader research field.
Identifying any gaps or flaws in the literature which your research can address.

Literature review as both process and product

Writers should keep in mind that the phrase 'literature review' refers to two related, but distinct, things:

'Literature review' refers, first, to the active process of discovering and assessing relevant literature.
'Literature review' refers, second, to the written product that emerges from the above process.

This distinction is vital to note because every dissertation requires the writer to engage with and consider existing literature (i.e., to undertake the active process ). Research doesn't exist in a void, and it's crucial to consider how our work builds from or develops existing foundations of thought or discovery. Thus, even if your discipline doesn't require you to include a chapter titled 'Literature Review' in your submitted dissertation, you should expect to engage with the process of reviewing literature.

Why is it important to be aware of existing literature?

You are expected to explain how your research fits in with other research in your field and, perhaps, within the wider academic community.
You will be expected to contribute something new, or slightly different, so you need to know what has already been done.
Assessing the existing literature on your topic helps you to identify any gaps or flaws within the research field. This, in turn, helps to stimulate new ideas, such as addressing any gaps in knowledge, or reinforcing an existing theory or argument through new and focused research.

Not all literature reviews are the same. For example, in many subject areas, you are expected to include the literature review as its own chapter in your dissertation. However, in other subjects, the dissertation structure doesn't include a dedicated literature review chapter; any literature the writer has reviewed is instead incorporated in other relevant sections such as the introduction, methodology or discussion.

For this reason, there are a number of questions you should discuss with your supervisor before starting your literature review. These questions are also great to discuss with peers in your degree programme. These are outlined in the table below (see the Word document for a copy you can save and edit):

Dissertation literature review planning table

How long is the literature review expected to be? Is there a word limit?

Will the literature review be included in the final dissertation?

How many sources should be included? (This may be a rough number as opposed to an exact amount.)

What kinds of sources should you be looking at (e.g. books, published articles, data sets, market reports, governmental or NHS guidelines, creative works, etc.)?

Will you need library support/training to access any of the sources required?

How should the review be structured (e.g. should you include subheadings, is thematic/subtopic grouping or chronological grouping preferable)?

How critical should your engagement with the sources be? (Some disciplines feature literature reviews that are more expository or descriptive in nature.)

Are you required to keep a technical record of your search strategies?

Are there any other requirements specific to your discipline/research area?

Literature review: the process

Conducting a literature review requires you to stay organised and bring a systematic approach to your thinking and reading. Scroll to continue reading, or click a link below to jump immediately to that section:

Choosing a topic

The first step of any research project is to select an interesting topic. From here, the research phase for your literature review helps to narrow down your focus to a particular strand of research and to a specific research question. This process of narrowing and refining your research topic is particularly important because it helps you to maintain your focus and manage your material without becoming overwhelmed by sources and ideas.

Try to choose something that hasn’t been researched to death. This way, you stand a better chance of making a novel contribution to the research field.

Conversely, you should avoid undertaking an area of research where little to no work has been done. There are two reasons for this:

Firstly, there may be a good reason for the lack of research on a topic (e.g. is the research useful or worthwhile pursuing?).
Secondly, some research projects, particularly practice-based ones involving primary research, can be too ambitious in terms of their scope and the availability of resources. Aim to contribute to a topic, not invent one!

Searching for sources

Researching and writing a literature review is partly about demonstrating your independent research skills. Your supervisor may have some tips relating to your discipline and research topic, but you should be proactive in finding a range of relevant sources. There are various ways of tracking down the literature relevant to your project, as outlined below.

Make use of Library Search

One thing you don’t want to do is simply type your topic into Google and see what comes up. Instead, use Library Search to search the Library’s catalogue of books, media and articles.

Online training for 'Using databases' and 'Finding information' can be found here . You can also use the Library's subject pages to discover databases and resources specific to your academic discipline.

Engage with others working in your area

As well as making use of library resources, it can be helpful to discuss your work with students or academics working in similar areas. Think about attending relevant conferences and/or workshops which can help to stimulate ideas and allows you to keep track of the most current trends in your research field.

Look at the literature your sources reference

Finding relevant literature can, at times, be a long and slightly frustrating experience. However, one good source can often make all the difference. When you find a good source that is both relevant and valuable to your research, look at the material it cites throughout and follow up any sources that are useful. Also check if your source has been cited in any more recent publications.

Cartoon person with magnifying glass follows footstep patterns. Text reads 'Found a great source? Follow the trail!'

Think of the bibliography/references page of a good source as a series of breadcrumbs that you can follow to find even more great material.

Evaluating sources

It is very important to be selective when choosing the final sources to include in your literature review. Below are some of the key questions to ask yourself:

If a source is tangentially interesting but hasn’t made any particular contribution to your topic, it probably shouldn’t be included in your literature review. You need to be able to demonstrate how it fits in with the other sources under consideration, and how it has helped shape the current state of the literature.
There might be a wealth of material available on your chosen subject, but you need to make sure that the sources you use are appropriate for your assignment. The safest approach to take is to use only academic work from respected publishers. However, on occasions, you might need to deviate from traditional academic literature in order to find the information you need. In many cases, the problem is not so much the sources you use, but how you use them. Where relevant, information from newspapers, websites and even blogs are often acceptable, but you should be careful how you use that information. Do not necessarily take any information as factual. Instead be critical and interpret the material in the context of your research. Consider who the writer is and how this might influence the authority and reliability of the information presented. Consult your supervisor for more specific guidance relating to your research.
The mere fact that something has been published does not automatically guarantee its quality, even if it comes from a reputable publisher. You will need to critique the content of the source. Has the author been thorough and consistent in their methodology? Do they present their thesis coherently? Most importantly, have they made a genuine contribution to the topic?

Keeping track of your sources

Once you have selected a source to use in your literature review, it is useful to make notes on all of its key features, including where it comes from, what it says, and what its main strengths and weaknesses are. This way you can easily re-familiarise yourself with a source without having to re-read it. Keeping an annotated bibliography is one way to do this.

Alternately, below is a table you can copy and fill out for each source (see the Word document to save an editable copy for yourself). Software such as EndNote also allows you to keep an electronic record of references and your comments on them.

Source evaluation table


Full reference
Author’s background and their other notable works
Intended audience
Brief summary of the text
Main argument
Strengths of the source
Weaknesses/limitations of the source
Useful quotes (and page numbers)

Writing your literature review

As we explored in the 'Getting Started' tab, the literature review is both a process you follow and (in most cases) a written chapter you produce. Thus, having engaged the review process, you now need to do the writing itself. Please continue reading, or click a heading below to jump immediately to that section.

Guiding principles

The structure of the final piece will depend on the discipline within which you are working as well as the nature of your particular research project. However, here are a few general pieces of advice for writing a successful literature review:

Show the connections between your sources. Remember that your review should be more than merely a list of sources with brief descriptions under each one. You are constructing a narrative. Show clearly how each text has contributed to the current state of the literature, drawing connections between them.
Engage critically with your sources. This means not simply describing what they say. You should be evaluating their content: do they make sound arguments? Are there any flaws in the methodology? Are there any relevant themes or issues they have failed to address? You can also compare their relative strengths and weaknesses.
Signpost throughout to ensure your reader can follow your narrative. Keep relating the discussion back to your specific research topic.
Make a clear argument. Keep in mind that this is a chance to present your take on a topic. Your literature review showcases your own informed interpretation of a specific area of research. If you have followed the advice given in this guide you will have been careful and selective in choosing your sources. You are in control of how you present them to your reader.

There are several different ways to structure the literature review chapter of your dissertation. Two of the most common strategies are thematic structure and chronological structure (the two of which can also be combined ). However you structure the literature review, this section of the dissertation normally culminates in identifying the research gap.

Thematic structure

Variations of this structure are followed in most literature reviews. In a thematic structure , you organise the literature into groupings by theme (i.e., subtopic or focus). You then arrange the groupings in the most logical order, starting with the broadest (or most general) and moving to the narrowest (or most specific).

The funnel or inverted pyramid

To plan a thematic structure structure, it helps to imagine your themes moving down a funnel or inverted pyramid from broad to narrow. Consider the example depicted below, which responds to this research question:

What role did the iron rivets play in the sinking of the Titanic?

The topic of maritime disasters is the broadest theme, so it sits at the broad top of the funnel. The writer can establish some context about maritime disasters, generally, before narrowing to the Titanic, specifically. Next, the writer can narrow the discussion of the Titanic to the ship's structural integrity, specifically. Finally, the writer can narrow the discussion of structural integrity to the iron rivets, specifically. And voila: there's the research gap!

Funnel divided into layers. Layer 1: Research on maritime disasters. Layer 2: Research on the Titanic. Layer 3: Research on structural integrity of Titanic. Layer 4: Role of iron rivets in Titanic sinking. Layer 5: My research.

The broad-to-narrow structure is intuitive for readers. Thus, it is crucial to consider how your themes 'nest inside' one another, from the broad to the narrow. Picturing your themes as nesting dolls is another way to envision this literature review structure, as you can see in the image below.

Five nesting dolls labelled left to right: 1.1 Maritime disasters; 1.2 The Titanic; 1.3 Structural integrity; 1.4 Iron rivets; and 1.5 Research gap.

As with the funnel, remember that the first layer (or in this case, doll) is largest because it represents the broadest theme. In terms of word count and depth, the tinier dolls will warrant more attention because they are most closely related to the research gap or question(s).

The multi-funnel variation

The example above demonstrates a research project for which one major heading might suffice, in terms of outlining the literature review. However, the themes you identify for your dissertation might not relate to one another in such a linear fashion. If this is the case, you can adapt the funnel approach to match the number of major subheadings you will need.

In the three slides below, for example, a structure is depicted for a project that investigates this (fictional) dissertation research question: does gender influence the efficacy of teacher-led vs. family-led learning interventions for children with ADHD? Rather than nesting all the subtopics or themes in a direct line, the themes fall into three major headings.

The first major heading explores ADHD from clinical and diagnostic perspectives, narrowing ultimately to gender:

1.1 ADHD intro
1.2 ADHD definitions
1.3 ADHD diagnostic criteria
1.4 ADHD gender differences

The second major heading explores ADHD within the classroom environment, narrowing to intervention types:

2.1 ADHD in educational contexts
2.2 Learning interventions for ADHD
2.2.1 Teacher-led interventions
2.2.2 Family-led interventions

The final major heading articulates the research gap (gender differences in efficacy of teacher-led vs. family-led interventions for ADHD) by connecting the narrowest themes of the prior two sections.

Multi-funnel literature review structure by Academic Skills Service

To create a solid thematic structure in a literature review, the key is thinking carefully and critically about your groupings of literature and how they relate to one another. In some cases, your themes will fit in a single funnel. In other cases, it will make sense to group your broad-to-narrow themes under several major headings, and then arrange those major headings in the most logical order.

Chronological structure

Some literature reviews will follow a chronological structure . As the name suggests, a review structured chronologically will arrange sources according to their publication dates, from earliest to most recent.

This approach can work well when your priority is to demonstrate how the research field has evolved over time. For example, a chronological arrangement of articles about artificial intelligence (AI) would allow the writer to highlight how breakthroughs in AI have built upon one another in sequential order.

A chronological structure can also suit literature reviews that need to capture how perceptions or understandings have developed across a period of time (including to the present day). For example, if your dissertation involves the public perception of marijuana in the UK, it could make sense to arrange that discussion chronologically to demonstrate key turning points and changes of majority thought.

The chronological structure can work well in some situations, such as those described above. That being said, a purely chronological structure should be considered with caution. Organising sources according to date alone runs the risk of creating a fragmented reading experience. It can be more difficult in a chronological structure to properly synthesize the literature. For these reasons, the chronological approach is often blended into a thematic structure, as you will read more about, below.

Combined structures

The structures of literature reviews can vary drastically, and for any given dissertation there will be many valid ways to arrange the literature.

For example, many literature reviews will combine the thematic and chronological approaches in different ways. A writer might match their major headings to themes or subtopics, but then arrange literature chronologically within the major themes identified. Another writer might base their major headings on chronology, but then assign thematic subheadings to each of those major headings.

When considering your options, try to imagine your reader or audience. What 'flow' will allow them to best follow the discussion you are crafting? When you are reading articles, what structural approaches do you appreciate in terms of ease and clarity?

Identifying the gap

The bulk of your literature review will explore relevant points of development and scholarly thought in your research field: in other words, 'Here is what has been done so far, thus here is where the conversation now stands'. In that way, you position your project within a wider academic discussion.

Having established that context, the literature review generally culminates in an articulation of what remains to be done: the research gap your project addresses. See the next tab for further explanation and examples.

Demystifying the research gap

The term research gap is intimidating for many students, who might mistakenly believe that every single element of their research needs to be brand new and fully innovative. This isn't the case!

The gap in many projects will be rather niche or specific. You might be helping to update or re-test knowledge rather than starting from scratch. Perhaps you have repeated a study but changed one variable. Maybe you are considering a much discussed research question, but with a lesser used methodological approach.

To demonstrate the wide variety of gaps a project could address, consider the examples below. The categories used and examples included are by no means comprehensive, but they should be helpful if you are struggling to articulate the gap your literature review has identified.

***P lease note that the content of the example statements has been invented for the sake of demonstration. The example statements should not be taken as expressions of factual information.

Gaps related to population or geography

Many dissertation research questions involve the study of a specific population. Those populations can be defined by nationality, ethnicity, gender, sexuality, socioeconomic class, political beliefs, religion, health status, or other factors. Other research questions target a specific geography (e.g. a country, territory, city, or similar). Perhaps your broader research question has been pursued by many prior scholars, but few (or no) scholars have studied the question in relation to your focal population or locale: if so, that's a gap.

Example 1: As established above, the correlations between [ socioeconomic status ] and sustainable fashion purchases have been widely researched. However, few studies have investigated the potential relationship between [ sexual identity ] and attitudes toward sustainable fashion. Therefore...
Example 2: Whilst the existing literature has established a clear link between [ political beliefs ] and perceptions of socialized healthcare, the influence of [ religious belief ] is less understood, particularly in regards to [ Religion ABC ].
Example 3: Available evidence confirms that the widespread adoption of Technology XYZ in [ North America ] has improved manufacturing efficiency and reduced costs in the automotive sector. Using predictive AI models, the present research seeks to explore whether deployment of Technology XYZ could benefit the automotive sector of [ Europe ] in similar ways.

Gaps related to theoretical framework

The original contribution might involve examining something through a new lens. Theoretical framework refers, most simply, to the theory or theories a writer will use to make sense of and shape (i.e., frame ) their discussion. Perhaps your topic has been analysed in great detail through certain theoretical lenses, but you intend to frame your analysis using a theory that fewer scholars have applied to the topic: if so, that's a gap.

Example 1: Existing discussions of the ongoing revolution in Country XYZ frame the unrest in terms of [ theory A ] and [ theory B ]. The present research will instead analyse the situation using [ theory C ], allowing greater insight into...
Example 2: In the first section of this literature review, I examined the [ postmodern ], [ Marxist ], and [ pragmatist ] analyses that dominate academic discussion of The World According to Garp. By revisiting this modern classic through the lens of [ queer theory ], I intend to...

Gaps related to methodological approach

The research gap might be defined by differences of methodology (see our Writing the Methodology guide for more). Perhaps your dissertation poses a central question that other scholars have researched, but they have applied different methods to find the answer(s): if so, that's a gap.

Example 1: Previous studies have relied largely upon the [ qualitative analysis of interview transcripts ] to measure the marketing efficacy of body-positive advertising campaigns. It is problematic that little quantitative data underpins present findings in this area. Therefore, I will address this research gap by [ using algorithm XYZ to quantify and analyse social-media interactions ] to determine whether...
Example 2: Via [ quantitative and mixed-methods studies ], previous literature has explored how demographic differences influence the probability of a successful match on Dating App XYZ. By instead [ conducting a content analysis of pre-match text interactions ] on Dating App XYZ, I will...

Scarcity as a gap

Absolutes such as never and always rarely apply in academia, but here is an exception: in academia, a single study or analysis is never enough. Thus, the gap you address needn't be a literal void in the discussion. The gap could instead have to do with replicability or depth/scope. In these cases, you are adding value and contributing to the academic process by testing emerging knowledge or expanding underdeveloped discussions.

Example: Initial research points to the efficacy of Learning Strategy ABC in helping children with dyslexia build their reading confidence. However, as detailed earlier in this review, only four published studies have tested the intervention, and two of those studies were conducted in a laboratory. To expand our growing understanding of how Learning Strategy ABC functions in classroom environments, I will...

Elapsed time as a gap

Academia values up-to-date knowledge and findings, so another valid type of gap relates to elapsed time. Many factors that can influence or shape research findings are ever evolving: technology, popular culture, and political climates, to name just a few. Due to such changes, it's important for scholars in most fields to continually update findings. Perhaps your dissertation adds value by contributing to this process.

For example, imagine if a scholar today were to rely on a handbook of marketing principles published in 1998. As good as that research might have been in 1998, technology (namely, the internet) has advanced drastically since then. The handbook's discussion of online marketing strategies will be laughably outdated when compared to more recent literature.

Example: A wide array of literature has explored the ways in which perceptions of gender influence professional recruitment practices in the UK. The bulk of said literature, however, was published prior to the #MeToo movement and resultant shifts in discourse around gender, power imbalances and professional advancement. Therefore...

What to avoid

This portion of the guide will cover some common missteps you should try to avoid in writing your literature review. Scroll to continue reading, or click a heading below to jump immediately to that section.

Writing up before you have read up

Trying to write your literature review before you have conducted adequate research is a recipe for panic and frustration. The literature review, more than any other chapter in your dissertation, depends upon your critical understanding of a range of relevant literature. If you have only dipped your toe into the pool of literature (rather than diving in!), you will naturally struggle to develop this section of the writing. Focus on developing your relevant bases of knowledge before you commit too much time to drafting.

Believing you need to read everything

As established above, a literature review does require a significant amount of reading. However, you aren't expected to review everything ever written about your topic. Instead, aim to develop a more strategic approach to your research. A strategic approach to research looks different from one project to the next, but here are some questions to help you prioritise:

If your field values up-to-date research and discoveries, carefully consider the 'how' and 'what' before investing time reading older sources: how will the source function in your dissertation, and what will it add to your writing?
Try to break your research question(s) down into component parts. Then, map out where your literature review will need to provide extensive detail and where it can instead present quicker background. Allocate your research time and effort accordingly.

Omitting dissenting views or findings

While reviewing the literature, you might discover authors who disagree with your central argument or whose own findings contradict your hypothesis. Don't omit those sources: embrace them! Remember, the literature review aims to explore the academic dialogue around your topic: disagreements or conflicting findings are often part of that dialogue, and including them in your writing will create a sense of rich, critical engagement. In fact, highlighting any disagreements amongst scholars is a great way to emphasise the relevance of, and need for, your own research.

Miscalculating the scope

As shown in the funnel structure (see 'Structure' tab for more), a literature review often starts broadly and then narrows the dialogue as it progresses, ultimately bringing the reader to the dissertation's specific research topic (e.g. the funnel's narrowest point).

Within that structure, it's common for writers to miscalculate the scope required. They might open the literature review far too broadly, dedicating disproportionate space to developing background information or general theory; alternately, they might rush into the narrowest part of the discussion, failing to develop any sense of surrounding context or background, first.

It takes trial and error to determine the appropriate scope for your literature review. To help with this...

Imagine your literature review subtopics cascading down a stairwell, as in the illustration below.
Place the broadest concepts on the highest steps, then narrow down to the most specific concepts on the lowest steps: the scope 'zooms in' as you move down the stairwell.
Now, consider which step is the most logical starting place for your readers. Do they need to start all the way at the top, or should you 'zoom in'?

Stairwell sloping down with topics written on steps, top to bottom: Feminism; feminist theories; feminist literary theory (FLT); FLT and horror; FLT and Stephen King; FLT and the Stand.

The illustration above shows a stairwell diagram of a dissertation that aims to analyse Stephen King's horror novel The Stand through the lens of a specific feminist literary theory.

If the literature review began on one of the bottom two steps, this would feel rushed and inadequate. The writer needs to explore and define the relevant theoretical lens before they discuss how it has been applied by other scholars.
If the literature review began on the very top step, this would feel comically broad in terms of scope: in this writing context, the reader doesn't require a detailed account of the entire history of feminism!

The third step, therefore, represents a promising starting point: not too narrow, not too broad.

The 'islands' structure

Above all else, a literature review needs to synthesize a range of sources in a logical fashion. In this context, to synthesize means to bring together, connect, weave, and/or relate. A common mistake writers make is failing to conduct such synthesis, and instead discussing each source in isolation. This leads to a disconnected structure, with each source treated like its own little 'island'. The island approach works for very few projects.

Some writers end up with this island structure because they confuse the nature of the literature review with the nature of an annotated bibliography . The latter is a tool you can use to analyse and keep track of individual sources, and most annotated bibliographies will indeed be arranged in a source-by-source structure. That's fine for pre-writing and notetaking, but to structure the literature review, you need to think about connections and overlaps between sources rather than considering them as stand-alone works.

If you are struggling to forge connections between your sources, break down the process into tiny steps:

e.g. Air pollution from wood-burning stoves in homes.
e.g. Bryant and Dao (2022) found that X% of small particle pollution in the United Kingdom can be attributed to the use of wood-burning stoves.
e.g. A study by Williams (2023) reinforced those findings, indicating that small particle pollution has...
e.g. However, Landers (2023) cautions that factor ABC and factor XYZ may contribute equally to poor air quality, suggesting that further research...

The above exercise is not meant to suggest that you can only write one sentence per source: you can write more than that, of course! The exercise is simply designed to help you start synthesizing the literature rather than giving each source the island treatment.

Q: I still don't get it - what's the point of a literature review?

A: Let's boil it down to three key points...

The literature review provides a platform for you, as a scholar, to demonstrate your understanding of how your research area has evolved. By engaging with seminal texts or the most up-to-date findings in your field, you can situate your own research within the relevant academic context(s) or conversation(s).
The literature review allows you to identify the research gap your project addresses: in other words, what you will add to discussions in your academic field.
Finally, the literature review justifies the reason for your research. By exploring existing literature, you can highlight the relevance and purpose of your own research.

Q: What if I don't have a gap?

A: It's normal to struggle with identifying a research gap. This can be particularly true if you are working in a highly saturated research area, broadly speaking: for example, if you are studying the links between nutrition and diabetes, or if you are studying Shakespeare.

Library catalog keyword search for 'diabetes' and 'nutrition', showing about 101,000 results.

The 'What to Avoid' tab explained that miscalculating the scope is a common mistake in literature reviews. If you are struggling to identify your gap, scope might be the culprit, particularly if you are working in a saturated field. Remember that the gap is the narrowest part of the funnel, the smallest nesting doll, the lowest step: this means your contribution in that giant academic conversation will need to be quite 'zoomed in':

This is not a valid gap → Analysing Shakespeare's sonnets.

This might be a valid gap → Conducting an ecocritical analysis of the visual motifs of Shakespeare's final five procreation sonnets (e.g. sonnets number thirteen to seventeen).

In the above example, the revised attempt to articulate a gap 'zooms in' by identifying a particular theoretical lens (e.g. ecocriticism), a specific convention to analyse (e.g. use of visual motifs), and a narrower object (e.g. five sonnets rather than all 150+). The field of Shakespeare studies might be crowded, but there is nonetheless room to make an original contribution.

Conversely, it might be difficult to identify the gap if you are working not in a saturated field, but in a brand new or niche research area. How can you situate your work within a relevant academic conversation if it seems like the 'conversation' is just you talking to yourself?

Library catalog keyword search for 'hippogriffs' and 'anatomy' showing only 2 search results.

In these cases, rather than 'zooming in', you might find it helpful to 'zoom out'. If your topic is niche, think creatively about who will be interested in your results. Who would benefit from understanding your findings? Who could potentially apply them or build upon them? Thinking of this in interdisciplinary terms is helpful for some projects.

Tip: Venn diagrams and mind maps are great ways to explore how your research connects to, and diverges from, the existing literature.

Q: How many references should I use in my literature review?

A: This question is risky to answer because the variations between individual projects and disciplines make it impossible to provide a universal answer. The fact is that one dissertation might have 50 more references than another, yet the two projects could be equally rigorous and successful in fulfilling their research aims.

With that warning in mind, let's consider a 'standard' dissertation of around 10K words. In that context, referencing 30 to 40 sources in your literature review tends to work well. Again, this is not a universally accurate rule, but a ballpark figure for you to contemplate. If the 30 to 40 estimate seems frighteningly high to you, do remember that many sources will be used sparingly rather than being mulled over at length. Consider this example:

In British GP practices, pharmaceutical treatment is most often prescribed for Health Condition XYZ ( Carlos, 2019; Jones, 2020 ; Li, 2022 ). Lifestyle modifications, such as physical exercise or meditation practices, have only recently...

When writing critically, it's important to validate findings across studies rather than trusting only one source. Therefore, this writer has cited three recent studies that agree about the claim being made. The writer will delve into other sources at more length, but here, it makes sense to cite the literature and move quickly along.

As you search the databases and start following the relevant trails of 'research bread crumbs', you will be surprised how quickly your reference list grows.

Q: What if there isn't enough relevant literature on my topic?

A: Think creatively about the literature you are using and engaging with. A good start is panning out to consider your topic more broadly: you might not identify articles that discuss your exact topic, but what can you discover if you shift your focus up one level?

Imagine, for example, that Norah is researching how artificial intelligence (AI) can be used to provide dance instruction. She discovers that no one has written about this topic. Rather than panicking, she breaks down her research question into its component parts to consider what research might exist.

First, dance instruction: literature on how dance has traditionally been taught (i.e., not with AI) is still relevant because it will provide background and context. To appreciate the challenges or opportunities that transition to AI instruction might bring, we need to understand the status quo. Norah might also search for articles that analyse how other technological shifts have affected dance instruction: for example, how YouTube popularized at-home dance study, or how live video services like Zoom enabled real-time interaction between dance pupils and teachers despite physical distance.
Next, artificial intelligence used for instruction: Norah can seek out research on, and examples of, the application of AI for instructive purposes. Even if those purposes don't involve dance, such literature can contribute to illustrating the broader context around Norah's project.
Could it be relevant to discuss the technologies used to track an actor's real-life movements and convert them into the motions of a video game character? Perhaps there are parallels!
Could it be relevant to explore research on applications of AI in creative writing and visual art? Could be relevant since dance is also a creative field!

In summary, don't panic if you can't find research on your exact question or topic. Think through the broader context and parallel ideas, and you will soon find what you need.

Q: What if my discipline doesn't require a literature review chapter?

A: This is a great question. Whilst many disciplines dictate that your dissertation should include a chapter called Literature Review , not all subjects follow this convention. Those subjects will still expect you to incorporate a range of external literature, but you will nest the sources under different headings.

For example, some disciplines dictate an introductory chapter that is longer than average, and you essentially nest a miniature literature review inside the introduction, itself. Although the writing is more condensed and falls under a subheading of the introduction, the techniques and principles of writing a literature review (for example, moving from the broad to the narrow) will still prove relevant.

Some disciplines include chapters with names like Background , History , Theoretical Framework , etc. The exact functions of such chapters differ, but they have this in common: reviewing literature. You can't provide a critical background or history without synthesizing external sources. To illustrate your theoretical framework, you need to synthesize a range of literature that defines the theory or theories you intend to use.

Therefore, as stated earlier in this guide, you should be prepared to review and synthesize a range of literature regardless of your discipline. You can tailor the purpose of that synthesis to the structure and demands of writing in your subject area.

Q: Does my literature review need to include every source I plan to use in my discussion chapter?

A: The short answer is 'no' - there are some situations in which it is okay to use a source in your discussion chapter that you didn't integrate into your literature review chapter.

Imagine, for example, that your study produced a surprising result: a finding that you didn't anticipate. To make sense of that result, you might need to conduct additional research. That new research will help you explain the unexpected result in your discussion chapter.

More often, however, your discussion will draw on, or return to, sources from your literature review. After all, the literature review is where you paint a detailed picture of the conversation surrounding your research topic. Thus, it makes sense for you to relate your own work to that conversation in the discussion.

The literature review provides you an opportunity to engage with a rich range of published work and, perhaps for the first time, critically consider how your own research fits within and responds to your academic community. This can be a very invigorating process!

At the same time, it's likely that you will be juggling more academic sources than you have ever used in a single writing project. Additionally, you will need to think strategically about the focus and scope of your work: figuring out the best structure for your literature review might require several rounds of re-drafting and significant edits.

If you are usually a 'dive in without a plan and just get drafting' kind of writer, be prepared to modify your approach if you start to feel overwhelmed. Mind mapping, organising your ideas on a marker board, or creating a bullet-pointed reverse outline can help if you start to feel lost.

Alternately, if you are usually a 'create a strict, detailed outline and stick to it at all costs' kind of writer, keep in mind that long-form writing often calls for writers to modify their plans for content and structure as their work progresses and evolves. It can help such writers to schedule periodic 'audits' of their outlines, with the aim being to assess what is still working and what else needs to be added, deleted or modified.

Here’s a final checklist for writing your literature review. Remember that not all of these points will be relevant for your literature review, so make sure you cover whatever’s appropriate for your dissertation. The asterisk (*) indicates any content that might not be relevant for your dissertation. You can save your own copy of the checklist to edit using the Word document, below.

Literature review self-evaluation checklist

Aspect of Literature Review	Yes/Unsure/No
I have and a wide range of literature related to my topic.
I have verified that my sources are of an for my discipline.
I have considered both the and the relevant to my research question.*
I have throughout my review rather than discussing sources as isolated 'islands'. If I do focus on a source in isolation, I have done so for strategic and intentional reasons.
I have my literature review in a manner that .
I have used that align with the expectations of my school or style guide.
I have used my literature review to provide meaningful context, ultimately identifying the to which my own work responds.

<< Previous: Overview and Planning
Next: The Methodology >>
Last Updated: Jul 2, 2024 2:37 PM
URL: https://library.soton.ac.uk/writing_the_dissertation

How To Structure Your Literature Review

3 options to help structure your chapter.

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

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

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

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

But wait – is this the right time?

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

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

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

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

Need a helping hand?

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

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

1: The Introduction Section

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

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

Example of literature review outline structure

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

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

2: The Body Section

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

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

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

The body section of your literature review is the where you'll present, analyse, evaluate and synthesise the existing research.

Option 1: Chronological (according to date)

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

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

Adopting the chronological structure allows you to discuss the developments and debates in the field as they emerged over time.

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

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

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

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

Option 2: Thematic (grouped by theme)

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

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

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

The thematic structure allows you to organise your literature by theme or category – e.g. by independent variables.

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

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

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

Option 3: Methodological

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

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

The methodological structure allows you to organise your chapter by the analysis method used - e.g. qual, quant or mixed.

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

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

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

3: The Conclusion Section

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

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

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

In the conclusion section, you’ll need to present the key findings of your literature review and highlight the gaps that exist in the literature. Based on this, you'll need to make it clear what your study will add to the literature.

Example: Thematically Structured Review

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

Let’s Recap

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

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

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

Psst… there’s more!

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

You Might Also Like:

Literature review 101 - how to find articles

27 Comments

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

I agree with you Marin… A great piece

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

Awesome article for my research.

I thank you immensely for this wonderful guide

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

Very educative and good time to get guide. Thank you

Great work, very insightful. Thank you.

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

Thank you very much, very helpful

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

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

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

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

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

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

Beautifully clear.nThank you!

Lucid! Thankyou!

Brilliant work, well understood, many thanks

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Print Friendly

How it works

How to Write a Dissertation Literature Review – Steps & Tips

Published by Anastasia Lois at August 12th, 2021 , Revised On October 17, 2023

From an academic standpoint, a dissertation literature review can be defined as a survey of the thesis, journal articles, books, and other academic resources on any given research title . This article provides comprehensive guidelines on how to write a dissertation literature review.

A literature review in a dissertation is of critical importance primarily because it provides insight into the key concepts, advancements, theories, and results of your research questions or research problem .

However, it is essential to note that; a first-class dissertation literature review focuses on summarizing the academic sources used for research and analysing, interpreting, and assessing them to determine the gaps and differences in opinions, judgments, themes, and developments.

A good literature review will further elaborate on existing knowledge concerning the research hypothesis or questions.

View dissertation literature review examples here.

When do you Write a Dissertation Literature Review?

Depending on your university’s guidelines, you might be required to include a literature review in the theoretical framework or the introduction.

Or you could also be asked to develop a standalone literature review chapter that appears before the methodology and the findings chapters of the dissertation.

In either case, your primary aim will be to review the available literature and develop a link between your research and the existing literature on your chosen topic.

Sometimes, you might be designated a literature review as a separate assignment . Regardless of whether you need to write a literature review for your dissertation or as a standalone project, some general guidelines for conducting literature will remain unchanged.

Here are the steps you need to take to write the literature review for a dissertation if you cannot write the literature review.

Steps of Writing a Literature Review

1. gather, assess, and choose relevant literature.

The first seed to take when writing your dissertation or thesis is to choose a fascinating and manageable research topic . Once a topic has been selected, you can begin searching for relevant academic sources.

If you are writing a literature review for your dissertation, one way to do this is to find academic sources relevant to your research problem or questions.

Without fully understanding current knowledge in the chosen study area, giving the correct direction to your research aim and objectives will be hard.

On the other hand, you will be expected to guide your research by developing a central question if you are writing a literature review as an individual assignment.

A notable difference here compared to the dissertation literature review is that you must answer this central question without conducting primary research (questionnaires, surveys, interviews). You will be expected to address the question using only the existing literature.

Dissertation Literature Review Research Question

How can company “A” improve its brand value through social media marketing?

Literature Review Research Question

What is the connection between social media marketing and brand value?

Stuck on a difficult dissertation? We can help!

Our Dissertation Writing Service Features:

Expert UK Writers
Plagiarism-free
Timely Delivery
Thorough Research
Rigorous Quality Control

Use Keywords and References to Find Relevant Literature

Create a list of keywords that are relevant to the topic of research. Find journals, articles, and books using these keywords. Here are links to some recognised online academic libraries and databases;

Inspec, (Computer science, engineering, physics, chemistry)
EconLit, (Economics)
Google Scholar
Your university’s online research database

Finding relevant academic sources from “the reference list” of an article you have already found in a research database effectively discovers relevant studies.

Consider noting frequently appearing references as they are likely to be highly authentic and important publications even though they didn’t appear in the keyword search.

Journal articles or books that keep appearing with different keywords and phrases are the ones you should manually look out for.

The more times an article has been referenced, the more influential it is likely to be in any research field. Google Scholar lets users quickly determine how often a particular article has been referenced.

Also Read: How to Best Use References in a Dissertation

2. Weighing and Selecting Academic Sources

It won’t be possible for you to read every publication related to your topic. An excellent way to select academic sources for your dissertation literature review is to read the abstract , which will help you decide whether the source is supportive and relevant to your research hypothesis or research questions.

To help you select sources relevant to your study, here are some questions for you to consider before making the decision.

What research questions has the author answered with their research work?
What fundamental concepts have been defined by the author?
Did the researcher use an innovative methodology or existing frameworks to define fundamental methods, models, and theories?
What are the findings, conclusion, and recommendations in the source book or paper?
What is the relevance between the existing literature and the academic sources you are evaluating?
Does the source article challenge, confirm, or add to existing knowledge on the topic?
How does the publication contribute to your understanding of the topic? What are its key insights and arguments?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research?

Any breakthrough studies and key theories relevant to your research topic should be recorded as you search for highly credible and authentic academic sources.

The method of your review of literature depends on your academic subject. If your research topic is in the sciences, you must find and review up-to-date academic sources.

On the other hand, you might look into old and historical literature and recent literature if your research topic is in the humanities field.

Looking for dissertation help?

Researchprospect to the rescue then.

We have expert writers on our team who are skilled at helping students with dissertations across a variety disciplines. Guaranteeing 100% satisfaction!

Recording Information and Referencing Sources

It is recommended that you start to write your literature review as you read articles, journals, and books. Take notes which can be later merged into the text of the literature review. Avoid plagiarism and record all sources used along with references.

A good way of recording information is to analyse each source, summarise the key concepts or theories and compile a complete list of references in the form of an annotated bibliography.

This is a beneficial practice as it helps to remember the key points in each academic source and saves you valuable time as you start the literature review write-up.

3. Identify Key Themes and Patterns

The next step is to look for themes and patterns in the chosen sources that would enable you to establish similarities and differences between their results and interpretations .

This exercise will help you to determine the structure and argument for your literature review. Here are some questions that you can think of when reading and recording information;

Are any gaps in the existing literature?
What are the weaknesses of the current literature that should be addressed?
Were you able to identify any landmark research work and theories that resulted in the topic’s change of direction?
What are the similarities and disagreements between these sources? Were you able to identify any contradictions and conflicts?
What trends and themes were you able to identify? Are there any results, methods, or theories that lost credibility over time?

Also Read: How to Write a Dissertation – Step-by-Step Guide

4. Structure of Literature Review

There is no acclaimed literature review structure , which means that you can choose from a range of approaches (thematic, chronological, methodological, and theoretical) when deciding on the structure of the literature review .

However, before you begin to write the literature review , it is important to figure out the strategy that would work best for you. For long literature reviews, you might decide to use a combination of these strategies. For example, you could discuss each of the themes chronologically.

1: Theoretical

You can discuss various significant concepts, models, and theories in your literature review to form the basis of a theoretical framework . You could also combine a range of theoretical approaches to develop your theoretical framework or debate the significance of a particular theoretical framework.

2: Methodological

The methodological approach will require you to relate the findings of studies conducted in different research areas and use different research methods .

You might discover that results from the quantitative research approach are not the same as qualitative research.
You might split the selected academic sources based on their discipline – engineering, and sciences.

3: Thematic

You may also deploy a thematic approach, especially if you identified repeating key themes and patterns. If that is the case, you will be expected to put each aspect of the topic into different subsections within your literature review.

For example, if your research topic is “employment issues in the UK for international students,” you can divide the key themes into subsections; legal status, poor language skills, immigration policy, and economic turmoil.

4: Chronological

The most straightforward approach is to trace the development of the topic over time. However, if you choose this strategy, avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order.

Try to analyze patterns, turning points, and critical debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred.

5. Writing your Literature Review

Whether it’s a dissertation literature review or a standalone literature review assignment you have been assigned, you will be expected to divide your literature review into three larger sections – introduction, main body, and a conclusion.

What you write under these three segments will depend on the aim of your study.

Section 1 – Introduction

Here you will be required to state the objectives of the literature review clearly;

Introduction to Dissertation Literature Review Recapitulate your research problem or questions with a summary of the sources you reviewed when the literature review is for your thesis or dissertation. Consider highlighting gaps in existing knowledge and stress the suitability of your topic.

For example:

Research problem A has been debated in many recent studies.

While the topic has been explored concerning A, the B aspect has not yet been explored.

Individual Literature Review Project When reviewing literature for an individual literature review assignment, make sure that you clearly state the purpose of the research and debate the scope of the literature (how recent or old are the academic sources you are reviewing).

Section 2 – Main Body

As previously mentioned, you can divide this section into further subsections depending on your literature review’s length. You can also have a separate heading for each research method, theme, or theory to help your readers better understand your research.

Here are some tips for you to write a flawless main body of literature review;

Summarize and Combine ; Highlight the main findings from each academic source and organise them into one whole piece without losing coherence.
Evaluate and interpret; Make sure you are giving opinions and arguments of your own where possible. Simply rephrasing what others have said will undermine your work. You will be expected to debate and discuss other studies’ results about your research questions or aim.
Analytical Evaluation; It is essential to unmistakably present the literature you have reviewed and the merits and weaknesses of the literature.
Make Use of Topic Sentences and Transitions; in organized subsections within the literature review to establish conflicts, differences, similarities, and relationships.

Example of How to Write a Dissertation Literature Review

The below example belongs to the body of a literature review on the effectiveness of e-recruitment in small and medium-sized enterprises in the United Kingdom’s IT sector.

E-recruitment means explicitly using digital technologies to recruit, select, and orient employees. The benefits of e-recruitment in the literature have been studied: increased access to a pool of candidates, time and cost savings, and greater flexibility for the organisation.

In contrast, the literature states that e-recruitment might not properly achieve the goal of retaining the workforce with the required skills to participate in the work environment (Lad & Das, 2016). Also, e-recruitment might be based on a flawed website design or poor application process, which might deter potential employees (Anand & Devi, 2016) .

This section of the study will focus on the existing studies linked to the effectiveness of e-recruitment. Human resource management is an essential function of business organisations because it manages the workforce.

The goal of HR should be to develop a strategic approach in which the organisation’s strategic goals can be attained efficiently and effectively. The advent of digital technologies has helped transform human resource management’s nature concerning recruiting and selecting employees for organisations.

The Internet’s benefits have reduced search time for candidates and significant cost savings for organisations. Finally, it offers a transparent method for obtaining information about specific candidates. E-recruitment helps organisations hire people from any part of the world as it promotes opportunities and benefits the organisation efficiently.

Sharma (2014) argues that 75% of human resource professionals in developed countries are now using e-recruitment to hire employees for their organisations. Additionally, some 2 out of 4 job seekers will use the Internet to source job opportunities.

Another evidence to support the rise of e-recruitment is a study by Holm (2014), which found that all Fortune 100 companies will be using some form of e-recruitment to advertise vacant positions.

The implications are that e-recruitment is a popular strategy for various positions, from blue-collar roles to white-collar and professional positions. The benefits of e-recruitment have been identified in the literature. Girard & Fallery (2009) argues that e-recruitment helps to save time for organisations and employees.

Employers can use several methods to post jobs in as little as 20 minutes. There are no limits to ad size, and they can receive resumes immediately. In contrast, the traditional methods require some time to appear, for example, in a newspaper, and might be there for a limited period.

Section 3 – Conclusion

When writing the dissertation literature review conclusion, you should always include a summary of the key findings which emerged from the literature and their relevance and significance to your research objectives.

Literature Review for Dissertation

If you are writing a dissertation literature review, you will be required to demonstrate how your research helped to fill an evident gap in research and contributed to the current knowledge in the field. Similarly, you can explain how you used the existing patterns, themes, and theories to develop your research framework.

Literature Review as an Individual Assignment

You can summarize your review of your literature’s significance and implications and provide recommendations for future work based on the gaps in existing knowledge you acknowledged.

6. Proofread

Finally, thoroughly proofread your literature review for grammatical, structural, spelling, and factual errors before submitting it to your university.

If you are unable to proofread and edit your paper, then you could take advantage of our editing and proofreading service , which is designed to ensure that your completed literature review satisfies each of your module or project’s requirements. We have Masters and PhD qualified writers in all academic subjects, so you can be confident that they will edit and improve the quality of your to 2:1 or First Class standard, as required.

Valuable Tips for Writing Dissertation Literature Review

Your literature review must systematically comply with your research area. Underneath, we are stating some essential guidelines for a compact literature review.

Contribute to the Literature

After carefully reviewing the literature, search for the gaps in knowledge and state how you have analysed the literature with a different perspective and contributed to your research area.

Keep your Argument Systematic & Consistent

Your arguments must be consistent and systematic while discussing theories and controversial and debatable content. Be logical in your review and avoid vague statements, not to make it complex for the readers.

Provide Adequate References

Don’t forget to provide references, as they are the soul of the dissertation. While discussing different aspects of the research, provide a reasonable number of references, as your discussion and interpretations must be backed up by relevant evidence. You can see an example provided in the sample paragraph above.

Be Precise While Writing a Review

You aren’t required to write every inch of information you have studied while reviewing the literature. You will be able to find tons of information that will correlate with your research area.

Be precise while writing the review, as writing unnecessary, irrelevant information won’t give a good impression. State the most reliable sources in your review without jumping into every possible source.

Don’t go Excessively for Direct Quotes

Direct quoting is required to make a point more impactful, but you should opt for it to a specific limit. Making excessive use of it won’t be a good idea.

The direct quote is mainly used when you think that the words being used by the actual author are so authentic in their meaning that you can’t replace or rephrase them. Try to avoid relying too much on a single author/s work.

Discussing their contributions and keeping the review going briefly would be better. While mentioning the points discussed by the prior researchers – link your arguments with their discussion. Don’t write the crux of their discussion, yet tell if your argument goes along with them.

Express your Analysis

The literature review is written to summarize your perspective, which should be backed up in light of the literature. Critically analyze literature with a rational approach and express your opinion on it.

Use the Correct Referencing Style

While referencing, one must use proper referencing styles, i.e., Harvard reference style, etc. Different referencing styles are used for in-text citations, while different for end-text citations.

Feeling overwhelmed by your literature review? Still unsure about how to write a dissertation literature review? There is no need to panic. Whether you are an undergraduate, postgraduate, or PhD student, our literature review writing service can help you have your literature review to the highest academic quality.

All papers completed by our writers are delivered along with a free anti-plagiarism report. We will amend your paper for free as many times as needed until you are delighted with the contents and the works’ quality as long as your original instructions and requirements remain unchanged.

FAQs About Dissertation Literature Review

How to find relevant literature for reference in a dissertation.

You must note down keywords related to the title of your dissertation and search journals, articles, and books using them.

How to select academic sources?

If you have found plenty of academic resources, you can select a few of them by reading the abstract of all the papers and separating the most relevant ones.

How to quote academic references?

It is recommended that you start to write your literature review as you read articles, journals and books. Take notes which can be later merged into the text of the literature review.

How should a literature review dissertation be written?

You should divide your literature review into three sections:

Introduction, main body, and conclusion.

Literature review

A general guide on how to conduct and write a literature review.

Please check course or programme information and materials provided by teaching staff, including your project supervisor, for subject-specific guidance.

What is a literature review?

A literature review is a piece of academic writing demonstrating knowledge and understanding of the academic literature on a specific topic placed in context. A literature review also includes a critical evaluation of the material; this is why it is called a literature review rather than a literature report. It is a process of reviewing the literature, as well as a form of writing.

To illustrate the difference between reporting and reviewing, think about television or film review articles. These articles include content such as a brief synopsis or the key points of the film or programme plus the critic’s own evaluation. Similarly the two main objectives of a literature review are firstly the content covering existing research, theories and evidence, and secondly your own critical evaluation and discussion of this content.

Usually a literature review forms a section or part of a dissertation, research project or long essay. However, it can also be set and assessed as a standalone piece of work.

What is the purpose of a literature review?

…your task is to build an argument, not a library. Rudestam, K.E. and Newton, R.R. (1992) Surviving your dissertation: A comprehensive guide to content and process. California: Sage, p49.

In a larger piece of written work, such as a dissertation or project, a literature review is usually one of the first tasks carried out after deciding on a topic. Reading combined with critical analysis can help to refine a topic and frame research questions. Conducting a literature review establishes your familiarity with and understanding of current research in a particular field before carrying out a new investigation. After doing a literature review, you should know what research has already been done and be able to identify what is unknown within your topic.

When doing and writing a literature review, it is good practice to:

summarise and analyse previous research and theories;
identify areas of controversy and contested claims;
highlight any gaps that may exist in research to date.

Conducting a literature review

Focusing on different aspects of your literature review can be useful to help plan, develop, refine and write it. You can use and adapt the prompt questions in our worksheet below at different points in the process of researching and writing your review. These are suggestions to get you thinking and writing.

Developing and refining your literature review (pdf)

Developing and refining your literature review (Word)

Developing and refining your literature review (Word rtf)

Writing a literature review has a lot in common with other assignment tasks. There is advice on our other pages about thinking critically, reading strategies and academic writing. Our literature review top tips suggest some specific things you can do to help you submit a successful review.

Literature review top tips (pdf)

Literature review top tips (Word rtf)

Our reading page includes strategies and advice on using books and articles and a notes record sheet grid you can use.

Reading at university

The Academic writing page suggests ways to organise and structure information from a range of sources and how you can develop your argument as you read and write.

Academic writing

The Critical thinking page has advice on how to be a more critical researcher and a form you can use to help you think and break down the stages of developing your argument.

Critical thinking

As with other forms of academic writing, your literature review needs to demonstrate good academic practice by following the Code of Student Conduct and acknowledging the work of others through citing and referencing your sources.

Good academic practice

As with any writing task, you will need to review, edit and rewrite sections of your literature review. The Editing and proofreading page includes tips on how to do this and strategies for standing back and thinking about your structure and checking the flow of your argument.

Editing and proofreading

Guidance on literature searching from the University Library

The Academic Support Librarians have developed LibSmart I and II, Learn courses to help you develop and enhance your digital research skills and capabilities; from getting started with the Library to managing data for your dissertation.

Searching using the library’s DiscoverEd tool: DiscoverEd

Finding resources in your subject: Subject guides

The Academic Support Librarians also provide one-to-one appointments to help you develop your research strategies.

1 to 1 support for literature searching and systematic reviews

Advice to help you optimise use of Google Scholar, Google Books and Google for your research and study: Using Google

Managing and curating your references

A referencing management tool can help you to collect and organise and your source material to produce a bibliography or reference list.

Referencing and reference management

Information Services provide access to Cite them right online which is a guide to the main referencing systems and tells you how to reference just about any source (EASE log-in may be required).

Cite them right

Published study guides

There are a number of scholarship skills books and guides available which can help with writing a literature review. Our Resource List of study skills guides includes sections on Referencing, Dissertation and project writing and Literature reviews.

Study skills guides

This article was published on 2024-02-26

+44 (0) 207 391 9032

How to write a dissertation literature review

(Last updated: 11 November 2021)

Since 2006, Oxbridge Essays has been the UK’s leading paid essay-writing and dissertation service

We have helped 10,000s of undergraduate, Masters and PhD students to maximise their grades in essays, dissertations, model-exam answers, applications and other materials. If you would like a free chat about your project with one of our UK staff, then please just reach out on one of the methods below.

Are you tired of hearing the phrase 'literature review' every five minutes at university and having no idea what it means, let alone where to start? Not to worry - we've got you covered with this step-by-step guide to creating a great dissertation literature review.

What is a literature review?

In short, a dissertation literature review provides a critical assessment of the sources (literature) you have gathered and read surrounding your subject area, and then identifies a “gap” in that literature that your research will attempt to address.

There are a lot of misunderstandings about what exactly a dissertation literature review entails, as it can vary. Whilst in some cases a dissertation literature review can be a simple summary of important sources, most often it requires you to critically engage with the text to convey your positive or negative opinions of it. What is your interpretation of a particular source? Does this interpretation differ considerably from other viewpoints in the literature? This is the sort of critical engagement expected from you in a literature review.

Whereas a summary will most likely provide a simple recap of the general arguments of the source(s), the expectations concerning a literature review extend beyond this. A literature review may provide a new perspective on a classic research paper or it may combine both new and old interpretations (this is the “gap” – more on this later). A literature review may also provide a thorough and critical outline of the intellectual developments in a field with a focus on major, and often polemical, debates. In other scenarios, a literature review may also provide an assessment of a source and inform a reader about its validity, pertinence and relevance to the research subject.

"In a literature review, you're aiming to summarise and provide a critical analysis of the research arguments you have found in your readings, without making new contributions to the literature. Hence the term: “literature review ”."

There tends to be confusion between literature reviews and academic papers in general, but they are not one and the same. Generally, academic papers aim to provide new research material about a particular subject, and a literature review features as part of this objective. In a research paper, the literature review forms the basis of the research – it helps to highlight any research gaps as support for a new argument or insights you intend to provide. In a literature review, you're aiming to summarise and provide a critical analysis of the research arguments you have found in your readings, without making new contributions to the literature. Hence the term: “literature review ”.

Is a literature review really necessary?

Now that we know what a literature review is, the next step is to understand the point of writing one in the first place. Like it or not, a literature review is an essential part of any academic piece of writing, as it demonstrates to your tutor or reader that you have a nuanced understanding of the sources concerning your research area or question.

Although it may seem arbitrary, the literature review helps to persuade the person reading and marking your assignment that what you have written about is relevant and your arguments are justified and worthwhile. So, in short, a literature review is essential, and you need to put the necessary time into getting it right.

How do you write a dissertation literature review?

As the next section of this blog is quite lengthy, we've broken it down into several key steps which should make it easier to follow when writing your own dissertation literature review. You start by identifying your sources, then you read and re-read them. Next, you think about any gaps in the research or literature you have used, and finally, you write your review using all the preparation and information gathered in the steps prior.

Identify sources

To write a good dissertation literature review, you need to have a fair idea of what sources you would like to review. If you haven’t been given a formal reference list by your tutor, refer back to the techniques we recommended earlier.

Make sure that your sources are balanced; include enough books and academic journals and any useful published work from reputable scholars. To help you choose your sources appropriately, you might want to think about the parameters and objectives of your research. What are you hoping to find out? In your literature review , what theoretical issues or perspectives do you aim to tackle? How about your methodology? Will you focus on mainly qualitative or quantitative studies, or a mixture of both? These general questions should help guide you in selecting your sources and again, remember that the abstract of a source is a very useful tool. Having a quick scan of the abstract and its ‘keywords’ will often give you an indication of the whether the source will be useful for your research or not.

As you’re identifying your sources, ensure you a keep a list as it’s very easy to lose focus given the wide scope of the Internet. Reference tools such as Mendeley allow you to store your sources online and via a desktop app, and are a great way to keep your bibliography organised. The citation tools attached to these programmes will also allow you to simply export citations in a format of your choice when required later. They will save you countless hours trying to figure out how to use Harvard or APA referencing correctly.

Read your sources

Now that you have organised your sources efficiently, it’s time to read through them. As unnatural as it may feel, it’s most effective to read in a few stages, as detailed below:

First, go through all the texts to get a sense of their general content and arguments. This will also help you judge which sources you mainly want to focus on in your review. During the second stage of your reading, you can then take a more critical, in-depth look at your sources. Make a lot of notes, be critical, ask questions. What is your academic opinion on the text? Do you have any comments on the methodological approach, the theoretical argument or the general hypothesis? Note these down. It will ensure that your literature review is not merely a summary of your readings, and will encourage a clear line of argument so that your work is logical and coherent.

Consider gaps in the research

When writing a dissertation literature review, an essential thing to consider is identifying the research gap. Identifying the gap is particularly important if your review forms part of a research proposal, as it will highlight the pertinence of your research – assuming that your research has been designed to fill this gap. In other instances, identifying the gap is an indication of good critical analysis and can score you extra points.

To identify the “gap” it is important that we know what this “gap” is. A research gap is essentially the existence of a research question, perspective or problem that has not been answered in the existing literature on any field of study. Identifying the research gap is important for highlighting the originality of your research; it proves you’re not simply recounting or regurgitating existing research. It also shows that you are very much aware of the status of the literature in your chosen field of study, which in turn, demonstrates the amount of research and effort you have put into your review.

Many students, especially at post-graduate level, find it extremely difficult to identify research gaps in their subject area. For post-graduate research papers, identifying research gaps and formulating research questions that can address these gaps form the very essence of a research paper. Identifying research gaps does not have to be a difficult endeavour and there are several ways to overcome this difficulty:

Start by reading A simple approach will be to read important parts of key articles in your research area. First, note that you’ll have to sift through many articles to identify the ones that are most suitable for your research. A quick search using keywords on Google Scholar will often give you a quick overview of the available literature. Other useful sources include databases such as JSTOR or Wiley Online Library . You can then snowball additional articles by clicking on ‘related articles’ or checking out which other papers have cited your source.

Abstracts and recommendations Whichever avenue you choose, reading the abstract is often a good starting point to get a sense of what the articles entails. You should also do a quick examination of the introductory and concluding paragraphs of the paper as these sections always provide some information on the aims and outcomes of the research, as well as ‘recommendations for future studies.’ These recommendations typically provide some insight on the research gaps in the literature. Another route would be to simply read as much as you can on your research subject while considering which research areas still need addressing in the literature – this is usually an indication of research gaps.

Write your review

Now you’re well prepared to start putting fingers to keyboard. Consider the following pointers:

1. Use sample literature reviews Have a look at sample dissertation literature reviews in your subject area and read them thoroughly to familiarise yourself with existing key debates and themes. This can be a good starting point for framing and structuring your own review. If you are not familiar with academic writing, going through samples will help you to get a sense of what is expected in this regard. Pay attention to the academic language and formal style used. Also, remember that the bibliography or reference section of your selected texts will help you to snowball further references if you need any.

2. Keep it simple Keep your topic as narrowed down as possible. Remember that there are hundreds – or in some instances, thousands – of sources or perspectives concerning any subject area or topic. Researchers investigate research problems in many divergent ways and the literature available on any given subject is extremely broad. In your literature review, you won’t be expected to address every argument or perspective concerning your topic – this might actually undermine your ability to write a coherent and focused piece. You’ll make your work easier if you limit the scope of your work. In your review, ensure that you clearly state what the focus of your work will be.

3. Make sure your sources are as current as possible If you are reviewing scientific work, it’s essential your sources are as current as possible given the advancements in the field over the years. In the medical field particularly, research is constantly evolving and a source that’s only three years old may be even out-dated. In the social sciences this rule may not apply, as many theoretical works are classics and you will be expected to be familiar with these perspectives. You might have to the review the work of Marx, or Hobbes, or any other classic scholar. You still need to balance theory with current approaches, as you will need to demonstrate the ways in which perspectives in the literature have changed over the years, or you may even want to demonstrate how scholars have used classic theories to inform their work.

4. Consider the organisation of your work In a dissertation literature review, organising your work goes beyond having an introduction, body and conclusion. You’ll be reviewing a number of texts, so you’ll also have to think clearly about how to organise themes, topics and your argument in general. Below is a detailed guide on how to do this:

Like any other academic paper, a dissertation literature review will comprise a basic introduction, body, and conclusion.

The introduction of a literature review should be clear, short and focused. It should outline the focus of the review – in other words, it should clearly state the main topics to be covered. A good literature review will also state the arguments to be made, as well as underlying rationale that underpins these arguments.

The body of your literature review will include an in-depth discussion of the academic sources you have chosen to review. You may choose to organise your sources according to themes, methodology or even based on a chronological order. In the body of your review, ensure that your arguments are presented clearly and that you link these arguments with the literature. Is there a scholar that agrees with your view? Say so, in a way that the reader will understand easily. This demonstrates that you are very familiar with the academic research in your field. Remember to also make note of any views that do not agree with your position; excluding these arguments will reduce the methodological robustness of your piece. You can use direct quotations in your literature review, however do so sparingly so you don’t appear lazy. Most tutors will not approach it kindly; the purpose of a literature review is to demonstrate your ability to critically engage with a piece of text, and littering your review with direct quotes isn’t a good indication of this. Instead, try to paraphrase quotations and only use direct quotes if it really helps to illustrate your argument.

In the summary of your dissertation literature review, it’s important to give a summary of the conclusions you’ve drawn from your readings. If your literature review forms part of a broader research proposal, reiterate the gaps in the literature here, and clearly state how your proposed research will fill these gaps. Make recommendations for future research in this section too, which demonstrates your analytical skills and will score you some extra points.

You now have the basic structure of your research in place, however it’s worth dedicating some time to what the body of your work should entail. The body is the main core of your work, so it’s important to consider how you will frame and organise it. You have options here – you can choose to organise the content of your work based on a chronological method, based on themes, trends or methodology, or based on arguments.

To structure the body of work chronologically, you will have to organise your sources based on when they were published. A limitation of this approach is that it inhibits continuity in your arguments and in some instances, can undermine the coherence of your work. Use with caution.

A more coherent way of organising your work is to group your sources based on the arguments they make in a ‘for versus against’ manner. This enables you to present your work in a more dynamic way and what’s more, makes the key debates in the literature more obvious. Say you were trying to convey the debates on European migration policy, you might want to start by writing something along these lines:

"While scholars such as X argue that migration policies must be made more stringent to counteract the increased flow of Syrian refugees to Europe, other scholars such as Y offer a divergent perspective. They specifically espouse a perspective based on a human rights approach…"

This approach also leaves room for you to insert your voice into the literature. Consider this statement:

"While X argues for the enactment of more stringent migration policies, this paper argues along the lines of Y that migration policies should be based on human rights considerations."

Using this technique also allows you to introduce additional literature that supports your position.

Another way of organising your content is according to theme; or sub-themes, if your review focuses on one overarching topic. This method of organisation still allows you to present an overview of any polemical debates within these sub-themes. A thematic review can easily shift between chronological periods within each sub-section too.

Structuring work using a methodological approach is quite a common approach, however it’s often used in tandem with other ways of organising sources. This method is particularly evident in introductory sections whereby researchers may simply want to state that a particular subject has been mostly studied from a qualitative or quantitative perspective (they will often then cite a number of scholars or studies to support this claim). In scientific reviews however, a methodological approach may form the basis of the discussions in the body. If this is the case for you, focus on the methods used by various researchers. How did they go about answering a particular research question? Were there any limitations to this method? If so, what method(s) would have been better?

You’ll soon realise that organising the body of your literature review is an iterative process and you’ll more often than not use all of these approaches in your write-up. The body of your research may also include additional sections that do not necessarily form a part of its organisational structure. For instance, you might want to include a ‘context section’ that provides some insight on any background detail required for understanding the focus of the literature review. It may also focus on historical considerations. You could include a short methodology section that details the approach you used in selecting and analysing your sources.

5. Write the paragraphs of the body Once you have settled on the approach to writing your body, you must now write each of its paragraphs in a way that is in keeping with academic conventions. Consider this paragraph from a literature review about stakeholder participation for environmental management, to clarify the discussion that follows:

As the example above suggests, a dissertation literature review must be written using a formal and academic style . Also, note how sources have been grouped according to both arguments and themes. Remember we noted that the process of grouping sources in the body of your literature review is never a linear one? You will often use a combination of the approaches that we have discussed. Ensure that your writing is concise, coherent and devoid of any personal or strong language. Avoid any phrases like, “I hate X’s work”; a more academic way of stating your disagreement would be to simply state: “I would argue against X’s position that…”, or “X’s argument is inconsistent with the evidence because...”, or “X’s arguments are based on false assumptions because...”.

In the sample paragraph above, notice the use of words like “argue” – this is a good academic alternative to more commonplace words such as “says”. Other good alternatives include “states”, “asserts”, “proposes” or “claims”. More academic options include “opine”, “posit”, “postulate”, or “promulgate”, however some tutors and readers find these words to be too ‘heavy’ and archaic, so ensure that you are familiar with the writing standards in your institution.

If your writing is tailored to a peer-reviewed journal, it’s worth having a look at articles within that journal to get a sense of the writing style. Most tutors will provide a guideline on writing styles, and it’s important you adhere to this brief. You will often be required to also use the third person when writing a literature review, thus phrases such as “this paper argues” or “this paper is of the view that…” are appropriate.

There are exceptions at post-graduate level or generally – like when you have conducted your own primary research or published your work widely – which give you the academic authority to boldly make claims. In cases like these, the use of first person is suitable and you may use phrases such as “I argue” or “I propose”.

Remember also to generally use present tense when referring to opinions and theories (although in the context of specific research experiments, the use of the past tense is better).

Beyond the use of the academic terms suggested above, ‘linking’ words are also particularly important when writing a literature review, since you’ll be grouping a lot of writers together with either similar or divergent opinions. Useful linking words and phrases include: similarly, there are parallels, in convergence with…

When there is disagreement, you may want to use any of the following: However, conversely, on the other hand, diverges from, antithetical to, differential from…

6. Write the conclusion The conclusion of a dissertation literature review should always include a summary of the implications of the literature, which you should then link to your argument or general research question.

Some final notes

The overall structure of your literature review will be largely based on your research area and the academic conventions that are in line with it. Nevertheless, there are some essential steps that apply across all disciplines and that you should ensure you follow:

Do not simply describe the opinions of writers Analyse, analyse, analyse, and ensure that your analysis is critical (what have the writers missed; where does your opinion sit with theirs, etc.).

Structure the body of your argument using various techniques Your structure should be organised based on thematic areas, key debates or controversial issues, and according to methodological approaches. Keep your review dynamic, but coherent. Remember to identify literature gaps and link this to your own research.

Use ample evidence This is extremely important and forms the very essence of a dissertation literature review. You must refer to various sources when making a point; see the sample paragraph above for an example of this. Your arguments and interpretation of a research topic must be backed by evidence. Do not make baseless claims, as a literature review is an academic piece of writing and not an opinion piece.

Be very selective Not every piece of research has to be reviewed. If you are determined to show that you aware of the available literature out there, try writing techniques such as: There is robust literature available concerning the migration patterns of Syrian refugees. Notable works include: X(2015), y (2013), Z (2014). Once you have acknowledged these works, you do not have to review them in detail. Be selective about the sources that you will discuss in detail in your review.

Do not rely too much on direct quotes Only use them to emphasise a point. Similarly, don’t rely too heavily on the work of a single author. Instead, highlight the importance of that author in your research and move on. If you need to keep going back to the work of that author, then you need to link those discussions with your work. Do not simply provide a summary of the author’s work. In what ways does your work agree or disagree with his/hers? Be critical.

Make your voice heard Yes, the whole point of the literature review is to provide a critical analysis and summary of the viewpoints out there, but a critical analysis does include the fact that you need to make your opinion known in the context of the literature. Note how skilfully, in the earlier sample paragraph by Reed (2008), he weaves his opinions with references. Read back over the sample and try to perfect this skill.

Ensure that you reference your work correctly And make sure you use the appropriate referencing style. For more help on this, click here .

Dissertation findings and discussion sections

Writing your dissertation methodology

10 tips on writing a dissertation literature review

dissertation help
literature review
literature review example
study skills
undergraduate
writing tips

Writing Services

Essay Plans
Critical Reviews
Literature Reviews
Presentations
Dissertation Title Creation
Dissertation Proposals
Dissertation Chapters
PhD Proposals
Journal Publication
CV Writing Service
Business Proofreading Services

Editing Services

Proofreading Service
Editing Service
Academic Editing Service

Additional Services

Marking Services
Consultation Calls
Personal Statements
Tutoring Services

Our Company

Frequently Asked Questions
Become a Writer

Terms & Policies

Fair Use Policy
Policy for Students in England
Privacy Policy
Terms & Conditions
[email protected]
Contact Form

Payment Methods

Cryptocurrency payments.

Undergraduate courses
Postgraduate courses
Foundation courses
Apprenticeships
Part-time and short courses
Apply undergraduate
Apply postgraduate

Search for a course

Search by course name, subject, and more

Undergraduate
Postgraduate
(suspended) - Available in Clearing Not available in Clearing location-sign UCAS

Fees and funding

Tuition fees
Scholarships
Funding your studies
Student finance
Cost of living support

Why study at Kent

Student life.

Careers and employability
Student support and wellbeing
Our locations
Placements and internships
Year abroad
Student stories
Schools and colleges
International
International students
Your country
Applicant FAQs
International scholarships
University of Kent International College
Campus Tours
Applicant Events
Postgraduate events
Maps and directions
Research strengths
Research centres
Research impact

Research institutes

Durrell Institute of Conservation and Ecology
Institute of Cyber Security for Society
Institute of Cultural and Creative Industries
Institute of Health, Social Care and Wellbeing

Research students

Graduate and Researcher College
Research degrees
Find a supervisor
How to apply

Literature reviews

Writing a literature review.

The following guide has been created for you by the Student Learning Advisory Service . For more detailed guidance and to speak to one of our advisers, please book an appointment or join one of our workshops . Alternatively, have a look at our SkillBuilder skills videos.

Preparing a literature review involves:

Searching for reliable, accurate and up-to-date material on a topic or subject
Reading and summarising the key points from this literature
Synthesising these key ideas, theories and concepts into a summary of what is known
Discussing and evaluating these ideas, theories and concepts
Identifying particular areas of debate or controversy
Preparing the ground for the application of these ideas to new research

Finding and choosing material

Ensure you are clear on what you are looking for. ask yourself:.

What is the specific question, topic or focus of my assignment?
What kind of material do I need (e.g. theory, policy, empirical data)?
What type of literature is available (e.g. journals, books, government documents)?

What kind of literature is particularly authoritative in this academic discipline (e.g. psychology, sociology, pharmacy)?

How much do you need?

This will depend on the length of the dissertation, the nature of the subject, and the level of study (undergraduate, Masters, PhD). As a very rough rule of thumb – you may choose 8-10 significant pieces (books and/or articles) for an 8,000 word dissertation, up to 20 major pieces of work for 12-15,000 words, and so on. Bear in mind that if your dissertation is based mainly around an interaction with existing scholarship you will need a longer literature review than if it is there as a prelude to new empirical research. Use your judgement or ask your supervisor for guidance.

Where to find suitable material

Your literature review should include a balance between substantial academic books, journal articles and other scholarly publications. All these sources should be as up-to-date as possible, with the exception of ‘classic texts’ such as major works written by leading scholars setting out formative ideas and theories central to your subject. There are several ways to locate suitable material:

Module bibliography: for undergraduate dissertations, look first at the bibliography provided with the module documentation. Choose one or two likely looking books or articles and then scan through the bibliographies provided by these authors. Skim read some of this material looking for clues: can you use these leads to identify key theories and authors or track down other appropriate material?

Library catalogue search engine: enter a few key words to capture a range of items, but avoid over-generalisations; if you type in something as broad as ‘social theory’ you are likely to get several thousand results. Be more specific: for example, ‘Heidegger, existentialism’. Ideally, you should narrow the field to obtain just a few dozen results. Skim through these quickly to identity texts which are most likely to contribute to your study.

Library bookshelves: browse the library shelves in the relevant subject area and examine the books that catch your eye. Check the contents and index pages, or skim through the introductions (or abstracts, in the case of journal articles) to see if they contain relevant material, and replace them if not. Don’t be afraid to ask one of the subject librarians for further help. Your supervisor may also be able to point you in the direction of some of the important literature , but remember this is your literature search, not theirs.

Online: for recent journal articles you will almost certainly need to use one of the online search engines. These can be found on the ‘Indexing Services’ button on the Templeman Library website. Kent students based at Medway still need to use the Templeman pages to access online journals, although you can get to these pages through the Drill Hall Library catalogue. Take a look as well at the Subject Guides on both the Templeman and DHL websites.

Check that you have made the right selection by asking:

Has my search been wide enough to ensure that I have identified all the relevant material, but narrow enough to exclude irrelevant material?
Is there a good enough sample of literature for the level (PhD, Masters, undergraduate) of my dissertation or thesis?
Have I considered as many alternative points of view as possible?
Will the reader find my literature review relevant and useful?

Assessing the literature

Read the material you have chosen carefully, considering the following:

The key point discussed by the author: is this clearly defined
What evidence has the author produced to support this central idea?
How convincing are the reasons given for the author’s point of view?
Could the evidence be interpreted in other ways?
What is the author's research method (e.g. qualitative, quantitative, experimental, etc.)?
What is the author's theoretical framework (e.g. psychological, developmental, feminist)?
What is the relationship assumed by the author between theory and practice?
Has the author critically evaluated the other literature in the field?
Does the author include literature opposing their point of view?
Is the research data based on a reliable method and accurate information?
Can you ‘deconstruct’ the argument – identify the gaps or jumps in the logic?
What are the strengths and limitations of this study?
What does this book or article contribute to the field or topic?
What does this book or article contribute to my own topic or thesis?

As you note down the key content of each book or journal article (together with the reference details of each source) record your responses to these questions. You will then be able to summarise each piece of material from two perspectives:

Content: a brief description of the content of the book or article. Remember, an author will often make just one key point; so, what is the point they are making, and how does it relate to your own research project or assignment?

Critical analysis: an assessment of the relative strengths and weaknesses of the evidence used, and the arguments presented. Has anything conveniently been left out or skated over? Is there a counter-argument, and has the author dealt with this adequately? Can the evidence presented be interpreted another way? Does the author demonstrate any obvious bias which could affect their reliability? Overall, based on the above analysis of the author’s work, how do you evaluate its contribution to the scholarly understanding and knowledge surrounding the topic?

Structuring the literature review

In a PhD thesis, the literature review typically comprises one chapter (perhaps 8-10,000 words), for a Masters dissertation it may be around 2-3,000 words, and for an undergraduate dissertation it may be no more than 2,000 words. In each case the word count can vary depending on a range of factors and it is always best, if in doubt, to ask your supervisor.

The overall structure of the section or chapter should be like any other: it should have a beginning, middle and end. You will need to guide the reader through the literature review, outlining the strategy you have adopted for selecting the books or articles, presenting the topic theme for the review, then using most of the word limit to analyse the chosen books or articles thoroughly before pulling everything together briefly in the conclusion.

Some people prefer a less linear approach. Instead of simply working through a list of 8-20 items on your book review list, you might want to try a thematic approach, grouping key ideas, facts, concepts or approaches together and then bouncing the ideas off each other. This is a slightly more creative (and interesting) way of producing the review, but a little more risky as it is harder to establish coherence and logical sequencing.

Whichever approach you adopt, make sure everything flows smoothly – that one idea or book leads neatly to the next. Take your reader effortlessly through a sequence of thought that is clear, accurate, precise and interesting.

Writing up your literature review

As with essays generally, only attempt to write up the literature review when you have completed all the reading and note-taking, and carefully planned its content and structure. Find an appropriate way of introducing the review, then guide the reader through the material clearly and directly, bearing in mind the following:

Be selective in the number of points you draw out from each piece of literature; remember that one of your objectives is to demonstrate that you can use your judgement to identify what is central and what is secondary.
Summarise and synthesise – use your own words to sum up what you think is important or controversial about the book or article.
Never claim more than the evidence will support. Too many dissertations and theses are let down by sweeping generalisations. Be tentative and careful in the way you interpret the evidence.
Keep your own voice – you are entitled to your own point of view provided it is based on evidence and clear argument.
At the same time, aim to project an objective and tentative tone by using the 3rd person, (for example, ‘this tends to suggest’, ‘it could be argued’ and so on).
Even with a literature review you should avoid using too many, or overlong, quotes. Summarise material in your own words as much as possible. Save the quotes for ‘punch-lines’ to drive a particular point home.
Revise, revise, revise: refine and edit the draft as much as you can. Check for fluency, structure, evidence, criticality and referencing, and don’t forget the basics of good grammar, punctuation and spelling.

Engineering: The Literature Review Process

How to Use This Guide

What is a literature review and why is it important?

Libraries | Research Guides

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

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

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

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

Next: Planning the Review >>
Last Updated: May 2, 2024 10:39 AM
URL: https://libguides.northwestern.edu/literaturereviews

Research for Thesis & Dissertation Literature Reviews: What is a Literature Review?

What is a Literature Review?
Understand Scope of Search Tools
Search Strategies
Research Article Databases
Gray Literature
Find Thesis & Dissertation Models
Stay Up to Date
Citation Managers & Info Organization

What's a Literature Review?

A Literature Review...

Provides comprehensive discussion of the scholarly research that has already been done on a topic.
Includes some summary of important articles on a topic.
Includes comparison: between how different authors discuss the same topic and how the topic has been handled over time.
Synthesizes previous ideas on a topic, but also looks for gaps in the literature: what needs to be investigated further?

What Should a Literature Review Do?

A Literature Review should...

Relate directly and clearly to your thesis or research question.
Synthesize and contextualize results, not just report them.
Identify areas of controversy in the literature.
Formulate questions that need further research.

Adapted from “The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting It”, by Dena Taylor and Margaret Procter, University of Toronto: www.writing.utoronto.ca (file linked below)

The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting It This two-page PDF handout created by Dena Taylor and Margaret Procter at the University of Toronto has excellent guidance on conducting a literature review.

Literature Reviews: An Overview for Graduate Students

This excellent overview of the literature review explains what a literature review and outlines processes and best practices for doing one. It includes input from an NCSU professor on what a literature review is and what it should do. (Shared under a CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 US license, attributed to North Carolina State University Libraries ).

<< Previous: Home
Next: Understand Scope of Search Tools >>
Last Updated: May 23, 2024 8:08 PM
URL: https://guides.library.pdx.edu/literaturereviews

University Libraries

Literature review.

What is a Literature Review?
What is Its Purpose?
1. Select a Topic
2. Set the Topic in Context
3. Types of Information Sources
4. Use Information Sources
5. Get the Information
6. Organize / Manage the Information
7. Position the Literature Review
8. Write the Literature Review

A literature review is a comprehensive summary of previous research on a topic. The literature review surveys scholarly articles, books, and other sources relevant to a particular area of research. The review should enumerate, describe, summarize, objectively evaluate and clarify this previous research. It should give a theoretical base for the research and help you (the author) determine the nature of your research. The literature review acknowledges the work of previous researchers, and in so doing, assures the reader that your work has been well conceived. It is assumed that by mentioning a previous work in the field of study, that the author has read, evaluated, and assimiliated that work into the work at hand.

A literature review creates a "landscape" for the reader, giving her or him a full understanding of the developments in the field. This landscape informs the reader that the author has indeed assimilated all (or the vast majority of) previous, significant works in the field into her or his research.

"In writing the literature review, the purpose is to convey to the reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. The literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (eg. 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.( http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/advice/specific-types-of-writing/literature-review )

Skills for Learning : Dissertations & Literature Reviews

Dissertations are extended projects in which you choose, research and write about a specific topic. They provide an opportunity to explore an aspect of your subject in detail. You are responsible for managing your dissertation, though you will be assigned a supervisor. Dissertations are typically empirical (based on your own research) or theoretical (based on others’ research/arguments).

The Dissertation IT Kit contains information about formatting your dissertation document in Word.

Look at the Library Subject Guides for your area. These have information on finding high quality resources for your dissertation.

We run interactive workshops to help you prepare for your dissertation. Find out more on the Skills for Learning Workshops page.

We have online academic skills modules within MyBeckett for all levels of university study. These modules will help your academic development and support your success at LBU. You can work through the modules at your own pace, revisiting them as required. Find out more from our FAQ What academic skills modules are available?

Dissertation proposals

What are dissertation proposals.

A dissertation proposal is an outline of your proposed research project. It is what you imagine your dissertation might look like before you start. Consider it a temporary document which might change during the negotiation process between you and your dissertation supervisor. The proposal can help you clarify exactly what you want to cover in your dissertation. It can also outline how you are going to approach it. Your dissertation plan and structure might change throughout this process as you develop your ideas. Your proposal is the first step towards your goal: a completed dissertation.

Structuring your dissertation proposal

The structure, content, and length of your dissertation proposal will depend on your course requirements. Some courses may require that your aims and objectives are separate from the main body of the proposal. You might be expected to write a literature review, and/or provide a detailed methodology. You might also be asked to include an extensive context for your proposed study. Consult your module handbook or assignment brief for the specific requirements of your course.

Give each section of your proposal a heading You can also experiment with giving your proposed dissertation a title. Both of these approaches may help you focus and stay on topic. Most dissertation proposals will have a fairly standard structure, under the following headings:

Sections of a dissertation proposal

Aims and objectives
Rationale for your study
Methodology
Brief literature review
Benefits of your research

Describe what you plan to investigate. You could write a statement of your topic, a research question(s), or a hypothesis.

Explain why you want to do this research.
Write a justification as to why the project is worth undertaking.
Reasons might include: a gap in existing research; questioning or extending the findings of earlier research; replicating a piece of research to test its reliability.
Describe and justify how you plan to do the research.
You might be reviewing the work of others, which mainly involves secondary, or desk-based, research. Or you might plan to collect data yourself, which is primary research. It is common for undergraduate dissertations to involve a mixture of these.
If you are doing secondary research, describe how you will select your sources. For primary research, describe how you will collect your data. This might include using questionnaires, interviews, archival research, or other methods.
Others will have researched this topic before, or something similar.
The literature review allows you to outline what they have found and where your project fits in. For example, you could highlight disagreements or discrepancies in the existing research.

Outline who might potentially gain from your research and what you might find out or expand upon. For example, there could be implications for practice in a particular profession.

Dissertation style and language

A dissertation is a logical, structured, argument-based exploration of a topic. The style of your writing may vary slightly in each chapter. For example, your results chapter should display factual information, whereas your analysis chapter might be more argument-based. Make sure your language, tone and abbreviations are consistent within each section. Your language should be formal and contain terminology relevant to your subject area. Dissertations have a large word count. It is important to structure your work with headings and a contents page. Use signposting language to help your reader understand the flow of your writing. Charts, tables or images may help you communicate specific information.

Top tip! To signpost in your dissertation, use the ‘Signalling Transition’ section of the Manchester Academic Phrasebank .

Download the Dissertation Project Checklist Worksheet to help with planning your dissertation work.

Dissertation Project Checklist Worksheet

The Dissertation IT Kit also contains information about formatting your dissertation document in Microsoft Word.

Past dissertations

Exploring past dissertations within your academic field can give you an idea as to how to structure your dissertation and find similar research methodologies. You can access dissertations and theses completed by students at Leeds Beckett and other universities. To find external dissertations, look at our FAQ answer ' Are there other dissertations I can look at?' . To find dissertations completed by Leeds Beckett students, use the FAQ answer ' Can I find copies of past dissertations in the Library? '

Sections of a dissertation

Not all dissertations will follow the same structure. Your style can change depending on your school. Check your module handbook, assignment brief or speak with your course tutor for further guidance.

To decide what to include:

Think about your project from an outsider’s perspective. What do they need to know and in what order? What is the most clear and logical way for you to present your research?
Discuss your project with your supervisor. Be open about ideas or concerns you have around the structure and content.

Each section of a dissertation has a different purpose. Think about whether you're doing an empirical or theoretical dissertation and use the headings below to find out what you should be including.

You can also use the Leeds Beckett Dissertation Template to help you understand what your dissertation should look like.

Leeds Beckett Dissertation Template

Empirical (research-based)

1. Abstract
2. Contents Page
3. Introduction
4. Literature Review
5. Methodology
6. Findings / Results
7. Discussion
8. Conclusion
9. Reference List / Bibliography
10. Appendices

Abstract : provides a brief summary of your whole dissertation.

The abstract outlines the purpose of your research and your methodology (where necessary). You should summarise your main findings and conclusion.

Top tips! Give the reader a sense of why your project is interesting and valuable. Write in the past tense. Aim for about half a page.

Contents page : lists all the sections of your dissertation with the page numbers. Do this last by using the automatic function in Word.

Introduction: introduces the reader to your research project.

Provide context to the topic and define key terms. Ensure that the scope of your investigation is clear. Outline your aims and objectives, and provide a brief description of your research methods. Finally, give an indication of your conclusion/findings.

Top tips! Start broad (background information) and get more specific (your research aims and findings). Try writing the introduction after the literature review and methodology chapters. This way, you will have a better idea of your research aims.

Literature Review : positions your research in relation to what has come before it.

The literature review will summarise prior research on the topic, such as journal articles, books, government reports and data. You should introduce key themes, concepts, theories or methods that provide context for your own research. Analyse and evaluate the literature by drawing comparisons and highlighting strengths and weaknesses. Download the Critical Analysis Questions and Evidence Matrix Worksheets to help you with this process and for more information on literature searching see Finding Information .

Critical Analysis Questions Worksheet
Evidence Matrix Worksheet

The literature review should justify the need for your research and highlight areas for further investigation. Avoid introducing your own ideas at this point; instead, compare and comment on existing ideas.

Top tips! Your literature review is not a descriptive summary of various sources. You need to synthesise (bring together) and critically analyse prior research. Sophisticated use of reporting verbs is important for this process. Download our Reporting Verbs Worksheet to help you with this.

Reporting Verbs Worksheet

Find out more about literature reviews elsewhere on this topic page.

Find out more about critical thinking.

Methodology : provides a succinct and accurate record of the methodology used and justifies your choice of methods.

In this section, you describe the qualitative and/or quantitative methods* used to carry out your research/experiment. You must justify your chosen research methodology and explain how it helps you answer your research question. Where appropriate, explain the rationale behind choices such as procedures, equipment, participants and sample size. You may need to reference specific guidelines that you have used, especially in subjects such as healthcare. If your research involves people, you may also need to demonstrate how it fulfils ethical guidelines.

Top tips! Your account should be sufficiently detailed so that someone else could replicate your research. Write in the passive voice. Remember, at this point you are not reporting any findings.

*Qualitative research is based on opinions and ideas, while quantitative research is based on numerical data.

Find out more about the research process.

Findings/Results : presents the data collected from your research in a suitable format.

Provide a summary of the results of your research/experiment. Consider the most effective methods for presenting your data, such as charts, graphs or tables. Present all your findings honestly. Do not change any data, even if it is not what you expected to find.

Top tips! Whilst you might acknowledge trends or themes in the data, at this stage, you won’t be analysing it closely. If you are conducting qualitative research, this section may be combined with the discussion section. Important additional documents, such as transcriptions or questionnaires, can be added to your appendices.

Discussion : addresses your research aims by analysing your findings.

In this chapter, you interpret and discuss your results and draw conclusions. Identify trends, themes or issues that arise from the findings and discuss their significance in detail. These themes can also provide the basis for the structure of this section. You can draw upon information and concepts from your literature review to help interpret your findings. For example, you can show how your findings build upon or contradict earlier research.

Top tips! Ensure that the points you make are backed up with evidence from your findings. Refer back to relevant information from your literature review to discuss and interpret your findings.

Conclusion : summarises your main points.

Provide an overview of your main findings and demonstrate how you have met your research objectives. Set your research into a wider context by showing how it contributes to current academic debates. Discuss the implications of your research and put forward any recommendations.

Top tips! Do not introduce any new information in this section. Your conclusion should mirror the content of your introduction but offer more conclusive answers.

Reference List / Bibliography : a complete list of all sources used.

List all the sources that you have consulted in the process of your research. Your Reference List or Bibliography must follow specific guidelines for your discipline (e.g. Harvard or OSCOLA). Look through your module handbook or speak to your supervisor for more information.

Find out more about referencing and academic integrity .

Appendix (single) or Appendices (plural): presents raw data and/or transcripts that aren’t in the main body of your dissertation.

You may have to be selective in the data you present in your findings section. If this is the case, you may choose to present the raw data/extended version in an appendix. If you conduct qualitative research, such as interviews, you will include the transcripts in your appendix. Appendices are not usually included in the word count.

Top tips! Discuss with your supervisor whether you will need an appendix and what to include.

Theoretical (argument based)

Contents page
Introduction
Literature Review
Main body (divided into chapters)
Reference list / Bibliography

Provides a brief summary of your whole dissertation.

The abstract outlines the purpose of your research and your methodology (where necessary). You should summarise your main findings and conclusion.

Top tip! Give the reader a sense of why your project is interesting and valuable. Write in the past tense. Aim for about half a page.

Contents page : lists all the sections of your dissertation with the page numbers. Using the automatic table of contents feature in Microsoft Word can help you format this.

The Dissertation IT kit provides guidance on how to use these tools.

Introduces the reader to your research project.

Provide context to the topic and define key terms. Ensure that the scope of your investigation is clear. Outline your aims and objectives, and provide a brief description of your research methods. Introduce your argument and explain why your research topic is important. Finally, give an indication of your conclusion/findings.

Top tip! Start broad (background information) and get more specific (your research aims and findings). Try writing the introduction after the literature review and methodology chapters. This way, you will have a better idea of your research aims.

Summarises prior research on the topic, such as journal articles, books, and other information sources. You should introduce key themes, concepts, theories or methods that provide context for your own research. You should also analyse and evaluate the literature by drawing comparisons and highlighting strengths and weaknesses.

Many (although not all) theoretical dissertations will include a separate literature review. You may decide to include this as a separate chapter. Otherwise, you can integrate it into your introduction or first themed chapter.

Find out more about literature reviews on the Literature Reviews page.

Divide the main body of your research into chapters organised by chronology or themes. Each chapter should be like a mini-essay that helps you answer your research questions. Like an essay, each chapter should have an introduction, main body and conclusion. Develop your argument and demonstrate critical thinking by drawing on relevant sources. Compare and contrast ideas, and make suggestions or recommendations where relevant. Explain how each chapter helps answer your main research question.

Top tip! Divide each chapter into chunks and use subheadings where necessary to structure your work.

Find out more on the Critical Thinking pages.

Top tip! Do not introduce any new information in this section. Your conclusion should mirror the content of your introduction but offer more conclusive answers.

List all the sources that you have consulted in the process of your research. Your Reference List or Bibliography must follow specific guidelines for your discipline (Harvard, APA or OSCOLA). Look through your module handbook or speak to your supervisor for more information.

Find out more about referencing and academic integrity .

Appendix (single) or Appendices (plural): presents any data, such as images or tables, that aren’t in the main body of your dissertation.

You may have to be selective about the information you include in the main body of your dissertation. If this is the case, you may place data such as images or tables in the appendix. Appendices are not usually included in the word count.

Top tip! Discuss with your supervisor whether you will need any appendices and what to include.

Your browser does not support iframes.

Skills for Learning home

Artificial intelligence tools

Before using any generative artificial intelligence or paraphrasing tools in your assessments, you should check if this is permitted on your course.

If their use is permitted on your course, you must acknowledge any use of generative artificial intelligence tools such as ChatGPT or paraphrasing tools (e.g., Grammarly, Quillbot, etc.), even if you have only used them to generate ideas for your assignment or for proofreading.

Academic Integrity Module in MyBeckett
Assignment Calculator
Building on Feedback
Disability Advice
Essay X-ray tool
International Students' Academic Introduction
Manchester Academic Phrasebank
Quote, Unquote
Skills and Subject Suppor t
Turnitin Grammar Checker

{{You can add more boxes below for links specific to this page [this note will not appear on user pages] }}

Topic Links

Academic Integrity Module
Dissertation IT Kit
Dissertation Process and Planning Video
Writing your Literature Review Video
Dissertations Methodology Chapter Video
Dissertations Results and Analysis Chapter Video
Dissertations Editing Video

Resources & Worksheets

Annotated Bibliographies Worksheet
CRAAP Test Worksheet
Literature Review Planning Worksheet
Paraphrasing and Summarising Information
Synthesising Sources in Writing Worksheet

Skills for Learning FAQs

0113 812 1000

University Disclaimer
Accessibility

Conducting a Literature Review

Literature Review
Developing a Topic
Planning Your Literature Review
Developing a Search Strategy
Managing Citations
Critical Appraisal Tools
Writing a Literature Review

Before You Begin to Write.....

Do you have enough information? If you are not sure,

Ask yourself these questions:

Has my search been wide enough to insure I've found all the relevant material?
Has it been narrow enough to exclude irrelevant material?
Is the number of sources I've used appropriate for the length of my paper?

You may have enough information for your literature review when:

You've used multiple databases and other resources (web portals, repositories, etc.) to get a variety of perspectives on the research topic.
The same citations are showing up in a variety of databases.
Your advisor and other trusted experts say you have enough!

You have to stop somewhere and get on with the writing process!

Writing Tips

A literature review is not a list describing or summarizing one piece of literature after another. It’s usually a bad sign to see every paragraph beginning with the name of a researcher. Instead, organize the literature review into sections that present themes or identify trends, including relevant theory. You are not trying to list all the material published, but to synthesize and evaluate it according to the guiding concept of your thesis or research question

If you are writing an annotated bibliography , you may need to summarize each item briefly, but should still follow through themes and concepts and do some critical assessment of material. Use an overall introduction and conclusion to state the scope of your coverage and to formulate the question, problem, or concept your chosen material illuminates. Usually you will have the option of grouping items into sections—this helps you indicate comparisons and relationships. You may be able to write a paragraph or so to introduce the focus of each section

Layout of Writing a Literature Review

Generally, the purpose of a review is to analyze critically a segment of a published body of knowledge through summary, classification, and comparison of prior research studies, reviews of literature, and theoretical articles.

Writing the introduction:

In the introduction, you should:

Define or identify the general topic, issue, or area of concern, thus providing an appropriate context for reviewing the literature.
Point out overall trends in what has been published about the topic; or conflicts in theory, methodology, evidence, and conclusions; or gaps in research and scholarship; or a single problem or new perspective of immediate interest.
Establish the writer’s reason (point of view) for reviewing the literature; explain the criteria to be used in analyzing and comparing literature and the organization of the review (sequence); and, when necessary, state why certain literature is or is not included (scope).

Writing the body:

In the body, you should:

Group research studies and other types of literature (reviews, theoretical articles, case studies, etc.) according to common denominators such as qualitative versus quantitative approaches, conclusions of authors, specific purpose or objective, chronology, etc.
Summarize individual studies or articles with as much or as little detail as each merits according to its comparative importance in the literature, remembering that space (length) denotes significance.
Provide the reader with strong “umbrella” sentences at beginnings of paragraphs, “signposts” throughout, and brief “so what” summary sentences at intermediate points in the review to aid in understanding comparisons and analyses.

WRITING TIP: As you are writing the literature review you will mention the author names and the publication years in your text, but you will still need to compile comprehensive list citations for each entry at the end of your review. Follow APA, MLA, or Chicago style guidelines , as your course requires.

Writing the conclusion:

In the conclusion, you should:

Summarize major contributions of significant studies and articles to the body of knowledge under review, maintaining the focus established in the introduction.
Evaluate the current “state of the art” for the body of knowledge reviewed, pointing out major methodological flaws or gaps in research, inconsistencies in theory and findings, and areas or issues pertinent to future study.
Conclude by providing some insight into the relationship between the central topic of the literature review and a larger area of study such as a discipline, a scientific endeavor, or a profession.
The Interprofessional Health Sciences Library
123 Metro Boulevard
Nutley, NJ 07110
[email protected]
Student Services
Parents and Families
Career Center
Web Accessibility
Visiting Campus
Public Safety
Disability Support Services
Campus Security Report
Report a Problem
Login to LibApps

UCL School of Management

University college london, ashleigh topping | 4 july 2024, student blog: how to select your research topic, set research questions and conduct a literature review.

To support students during their final term at UCL School of Management, Student Journalist Ho Man Hee shares his top tips for dissertation writing.

As noted in my previous article, high-quality work often takes time, but the clock is certainly ticking. Hopefully by now, you will be roughly half-way through your dissertation and, for those who haven’t, I’ve compiled a list of my personal tips that might be helpful in getting you going.

choosing your research topic

Interest and passion: Interest is always a key factor that often leads to your passion and, consequently, the quality of your work. Your research topic should align with your interests. The thesis requires extensive research from the first step. If you choose a topic you are not really interested in, you will not enjoy the research process. Your curiosity will drive you to conduct an in-depth analysis.

Relevance and Significance: As mentioned in the previous column, select a topic that is related to your future development. Make the most use of your dissertation as a powerful tool to distinguish yourself. It is a valuable opportunity to enrich your knowledge in the area you really want to explore.

Feasibility: Never choose a topic with tight restrictions. For postgraduate students, the topic should not have data scope limitations and should not be too niche or too broad. Students are expected to manage their work well within time constraints.

Originality: Aim for originality, which is the most challenging element. Remember, students are expected to add original or innovative elements to their dissertations or business plans. It is worth spending some time on various scholarly platforms and taking advantage of those publications to create your own originality.

Setting Research Questions

The next step is to formulate research questions. These questions guide your investigation and frame the direction of your study.

Clarity and Precision: Setting clear and precise research questions helps avoid common mistakes. A well-defined question narrows your focus and maintains a structured approach.

Specificity: Specific questions highlight the analysis perspective. Students should address particular aspects, such as the target audience, for further in-depth examination in the upcoming parts.

Researchable and Practical: Research questions must be answered through qualitative or quantitative methodology. This is the first part for researchers to gain insights from data analysis and literature review. Ensure that the research questions align with the subsequent parts.

Conducting a Literature Review

Generally, the literature review is vital to understanding the current level of knowledge and understanding on your topic. In the literature review, students are expected to highlight research gaps and potential areas for further exploration.

Comprehensive Search: Utilise a wide range of sources such as academic journals, books, conference papers, and reputable online databases. Use effective keywords related to your topic to save time finding relevant literature. This process is essential because a poor literature review often harms the subsequent parts (theoretical framework, research design, and methodology).

Critical Analysis: Use your own critical analysis to review each piece of literature. Previous researchers can make wrong conclusions even after conducting literature reviews, analyses, or experiments. In the academic world, especially in the sciences, this sometimes happens. Do not just reference existing research. Students are responsible for critically analysing the methodologies, findings, and conclusions of each literature review to identify strengths, weaknesses, and biases. This helps in identifying research gaps, trends, patterns, debates, and controversies in the theme.

Identify Gaps and Opportunities: Once you find any limitations or insufficient research areas, you can use them as research gaps to formulate a theoretical framework and conduct an in-depth analysis.

How to Develop a High-Quality Theoretical Framework

After completing the literature review, you are expected to define the theoretical framework, which can differ from existing formulas or be a “re-defined” theoretical framework for your research. The first step is to select relevant theories: choosing theories and models that are relevant to your research questions. Students are responsible for building models and diagrams to illustrate the correlation between concepts and variables.

After that, the theoretical framework usually integrates with your research design and methodology, including hypotheses and research questions. Then, students should demonstrate the rationale of the framework to formulate their particular hypotheses and research questions. Of course, you need to understand the limitations and strengths of the framework before choosing the appropriate theoretical framework.

To sum up, choosing a good research topic, setting clear and precise research questions, conducting an in-depth literature review, and formulating a theoretical framework are crucial steps in the research process. Stay tuned for past 2 of Ho Man Hee’s tips on dissertation writing.

Please note: Ho Man Hee is a current MSc student at UCL School of Management. If you have any questions surrounding your current dissertation project, please speak to your advisor.

The 1 00 Best Books of the 21st Century

Today! 100-81

As voted on by 503 novelists, nonfiction writers, poets, critics and other book lovers — with a little help from the staff of The New York Times Book Review.

Many of us find joy in looking back and taking stock of our reading lives, which is why we here at The New York Times Book Review decided to mark the first 25 years of this century with an ambitious project: to take a first swing at determining the most important, influential books of the era. In collaboration with the Upshot, we sent a survey to hundreds of literary luminaries , asking them to name the 10 best books published since Jan. 1, 2000.

Stephen King took part. So did Bonnie Garmus, Claudia Rankine, James Patterson, Sarah Jessica Parker, Karl Ove Knausgaard, Elin Hilderbrand, Thomas Chatterton Williams, Roxane Gay, Marlon James, Sarah MacLean, Min Jin Lee, Jonathan Lethem and Jenna Bush Hager, to name just a few.

As we publish the list over the course of this week, we hope you’ll discover a book you’ve always meant to read, or encounter a beloved favorite you’d like to pick up again. Above all, we hope you’re as inspired and dazzled as we are by the breadth of subjects, voices, opinions, experiences and imagination represented here.

Be first to see what’s new. Every day this week, the Book Review will unveil 20 more books on our Best Books of the 21st Century list. You can get notified when they’re up — and hear about book reviews, news and features each week — when you receive the Book Review’s newsletter. Sign up here.

Tree of Smoke

Denis Johnson 2007

Like the project of the title — an intelligence report that the newly minted C.I.A. operative William “Skip” Sands comes to find both quixotic and useless — the Vietnam-era warfare of Johnson’s rueful, soulful novel lives in shadows, diversions and half-truths. There are no heroes here among the lawless colonels, assassinated priests and faith-stricken NGO nurses; only villainy and vast indifference.

Liked it? Try “ Missionaries ,” by Phil Klay or “ Hystopia ,” by David Means.

Read our review . Then reserve it at your local library or buy it from Amazon , Apple , Barnes & Noble or Bookshop .

How to Be Both

Ali Smith 2014

This elegant double helix of a novel entwines the stories of a fictional modern-day British girl and a real-life 15th-century Italian painter. A more conventional book might have explored the ways the past and present mirror each other, but Smith is after something much more radical. “How to Be Both” is a passionate, dialectical critique of the binaries that define and confine us. Not only male and female, but also real and imaginary, poetry and prose, living and dead. The way to be “both” is to recognize the extent to which everything already is. — A.O. Scott, critic at large for The Times

Liked it? Try “ Jeff in Venice, Death in Varanasi ,” by Geoff Dyer or “ The Argonauts ,” by Maggie Nelson.

Ann Patchett 2001

A famed opera singer performs for a Japanese executive’s birthday at a luxe private home in South America; it’s that kind of party. But when a group of young guerrillas swoops in and takes everyone in the house hostage, Patchett’s exquisitely calibrated novel — inspired by a real incident — becomes a piano wire of tension, vibrating on high.

My wife and I share books we love with our kids, and after I raved about “Bel Canto” — the voice, the setting, the way romance and suspense are so perfectly braided — I gave copies to my kids, and they all loved it, too. My son was in high school then, and he became a kind of lit-pusher, pressing his beloved copy into friends’ hands. We used to call him the Keeper of the Bel Canto. — Jess Walter, author of “Beautiful Ruins”

Liked it? Try “ Nocturnes ,” by Kazuo Ishiguro or “ The Piano Tuner ,” by Daniel Mason.

Men We Reaped

Jesmyn Ward 2013

Sandwiched between her two National Book Award-winning novels, Ward’s memoir carries more than fiction’s force in its aching elegy for five young Black men (a brother, a cousin, three friends) whose untimely exits from her life came violently and without warning. Their deaths — from suicide and homicide, addiction and accident — place the hidden contours of race, justice and cruel circumstance in stark relief.

Liked it? Try “ Breathe: A Letter to My Sons ,” by Imani Perry or “ Memorial Drive: A Daughter’s Memoir ,” by Natasha Trethewey.

Wayward Lives, Beautiful Experiments

Saidiya Hartman 2019

A beautiful, meticulously researched exploration of the lives of Black girls whom early-20th-century laws designated as “wayward” for such crimes as having serial lovers, or an excess of desire, or a style of comportment that was outside white norms. Hartman grapples with “the power and authority of the archive and the limits it sets on what can be known” about poor Black women, but from the few traces she uncovers in the historical record, she manages to sketch moving portraits, restoring joy and freedom and movement to what, in other hands, might have been mere statistics. — Laila Lalami, author of “The Other Americans”

Liked it? Try “In the Wake: On Blackness and Being,” by Christina Sharpe or “ All That She Carried: The Journey of Ashley’s Sack, A Black Family Keepsake ,” by Tiya Miles.

Bring Up the Bodies

Hilary Mantel 2012

The title comes from an old English legal phrase for summoning men who have been accused of treason to trial; in the court’s eyes, effectively, they are already dead. But Mantel’s tour-de-force portrait of Thomas Cromwell, the second installment in her vaunted “Wolf Hall” series, thrums with thrilling, obstinate life: a lowborn statesman on the rise; a king in love (and out of love, and in love again); a mad roundelay of power plays, poisoned loyalties and fateful realignments. It’s only empires, after all.

Liked it? Try “ This Is Happiness ,” by Niall Williams or “ The Western Wind ,” by Samantha Harvey.

Zadie Smith 2005

Consider it a bold reinvention of “Howards End,” or take Smith’s sprawling third novel as its own golden thing: a tale of two professors — one proudly liberal, the other staunchly right-wing — whose respective families’ rivalries and friendships unspool over nearly 450 provocative, subplot-mad pages.

“You don’t have favorites among your children, but you do have allies.”

Let’s admit it: Family is often a kind of war, even if telepathically conducted. — Alexandra Jacobs, book critic for The Times

Liked it? Try “ Crossroads ,” by Jonathan Franzen.

Station Eleven

Emily St. John Mandel 2014

Increasingly, and for obvious reasons, end-times novels are not hard to find. But few have conjured the strange luck of surviving an apocalypse — civilization preserved via the ad hoc Shakespeare of a traveling theater troupe; entire human ecosystems contained in an abandoned airport — with as much spooky melancholic beauty as Mandel does in her beguiling fourth novel.

Liked it? Try “ Severance ,” by Ling Ma or “ The Passage ,” by Justin Cronin.

The Days of Abandonment

Elena Ferrante; translated by Ann Goldstein 2005

There is something scandalous about this picture of a sensible, adult woman almost deranged by the breakup of her marriage, to the point of neglecting her children. The psychodrama is naked — sometimes hard to read, at other moments approaching farce. Just as Ferrante drew an indelible portrait of female friendship in her quartet of Neapolitan novels, here, she brings her all-seeing eye to female solitude.

“The circle of an empty day is brutal, and at night it tightens around your neck like a noose.”

It so simply encapsulates how solitude can, with the inexorable passage of time, calcify into loneliness and then despair. — Alexandra Jacobs

Liked it? Try “ Eileen ,” by Ottessa Moshfegh or “ Aftermath: On Marriage and Separation ,” by Rachel Cusk.

The Human Stain

Philip Roth 2000

Set during the Clinton impeachment imbroglio, this is partly a furious indictment of what would later be called cancel culture, partly an inquiry into the paradoxes of class, sex and race in America. A college professor named Coleman Silk is persecuted for making supposedly racist remarks in class. Nathan Zuckerman, his neighbor (and Roth’s trusty alter ego), learns that Silk, a fellow son of Newark, is a Black man who has spent most of his adult life passing for white. Of all the Zuckerman novels, this one may be the most incendiary, and the most unsettling. — A.O. Scott

Liked it? Try “ Vladimir ,” by Julia May Jonas or “ Blue Angel ,” by Francine Prose.

The Sympathizer

Viet Thanh Nguyen 2015

Penned as a book-length confession from a nameless North Vietnamese spy as Saigon falls and new duties in America beckon, Nguyen’s richly faceted novel seems to swallow multiple genres whole, like a satisfied python: political thriller and personal history, cracked metafiction and tar-black comedy.

Liked it? Try “ Man of My Time ,” by Dalia Sofer or “ Tomás Nevinson ,” by Javier Marías; translated by Margaret Jull Costa.

Book cover for The Return: Fathers, Sons and the Land in Between

Hisham Matar 2016

Though its Pulitzer Prize was bestowed in the category of biography, Matar’s account of searching for the father he lost to a 1990 kidnapping in Cairo functions equally as absorbing detective story, personal elegy and acute portrait of doomed geopolitics — all merged, somehow, with the discipline and cinematic verve of a novel.

Liked it? Try “ A Day in the Life of Abed Salama: Anatomy of a Jerusalem Tragedy ,” by Nathan Thrall, “ House of Stone: A Memoir of Home, Family, and a Lost Middle East ,” by Anthony Shadid or “ My Father’s Fortune ,” by Michael Frayn.

The Collected Stories of Lydia Davis

Brevity, thy name is Lydia Davis. If her work has become a byword for short (nay, microdose) fiction, this collection proves why it is also hard to shake; a conflagration of odd little umami bombs — sometimes several pages, sometimes no more than a sentence — whose casual, almost careless wordsmithery defies their deadpan resonance.

Liked it? Try “ Ninety-Nine Stories of God ,” by Joy Williams or “ Tell Me: Thirty Stories ,” by Mary Robison.

Detransition, Baby

Torrey Peters 2021

Love is lost, found and reconfigured in Peters’s penetrating, darkly humorous debut novel. But when the novel’s messy triangular romance — between two trans characters and a cis-gendered woman — becomes an unlikely story about parenthood, the plot deepens, and so does its emotional resonance: a poignant and gratifyingly cleareyed portrait of found family.

Peters’s sly wit and observational genius, her ability to balance so many intimate realities, cultural forces and zeitgeisty happenings made my head spin. It got me hot, cracked me up, punched my heart with grief and understanding. I’m in awe of her abilities, and will re-read this book periodically just to remember how it’s done. — Michelle Tea, author of “Against Memoir”

Liked it? Try “ I Heard Her Call My Name: A Memoir of Transition ,” by Lucy Sante or “ Didn’t Nobody Give a Shit What Happened to Carlotta ,” by James Hannaham.

Frederick Douglass

David W. Blight 2018

It is not hard to throw a rock and hit a Great Man biography; Blight’s earns its stripes by smartly and judiciously excavating the flesh-and-bone man beneath the myth. Though Douglass famously wrote three autobiographies of his own, there turned out to be much between the lines that is illuminated here with rigor, flair and refreshing candor.

Liked it? Try “ The Grimkes: The Legacy of Slavery in an American Family ,” by Kerri K. Greenidge or “Freedom National: The Destruction of Slavery in the United States, 1861-1865,” by James Oakes.

George Saunders 2000

An ersatz caveman languishes at a theme park; a dead maiden aunt comes back to screaming, scatological life; a bachelor barber born with no toes dreams of true love, or at least of getting his toe-nubs licked. The stories in Saunders’s second collection are profane, unsettling and patently absurd. They’re also freighted with bittersweet humanity, and rendered in language so strange and wonderful, it sings.

Liked it? Try “ Swamplandia! ,” by Karen Russell or “ Friday Black ,” by Nana Kwame Adjei-Brenyah.

The Emperor of All Maladies

Siddhartha Mukherjee 2010

The subtitle, “A Biography of Cancer,” provides some helpful context for what lies between the covers of Mukherjee’s Pulitzer Prize-winning book, though it hardly conveys the extraordinary ambition and empathy of his telling, as the trained oncologist weaves together disparate strands of large-scale history, biology and devastating personal anecdote.

Liked it? Try “ Being Mortal: Medicine and What Matters in the End ,” by Atul Gawande, “ Do No Harm: Stories of Life, Death, and Brain Surgery ,” by Henry Marsh or “ I Contain Multitudes: The Microbes Within Us and a Grander View of Life ,” by Ed Yong.

When We Cease to Understand the World

Benjamín Labatut; translated by Adrian Nathan West 2021

You don’t have to know anything about quantum theory to start reading this book, a deeply researched, exquisitely imagined group portrait of tormented geniuses. By the end, you’ll know enough to be terrified. Labatut is interested in how the pursuit of scientific certainty can lead to, or arise from, states of extreme psychological and spiritual upheaval. His characters — Niels Bohr, Werner Heisenberg and Erwin Schrödinger, among others — discover a universe that defies rational comprehension. After them, “scientific method and its object could no longer be prised apart.” That may sound abstract, but in Labatut’s hands the story of quantum physics is violent, suspenseful and finally heartbreaking. — A.O. Scott

Liked it? Try “ The Rigor of Angels: Borges, Heisenberg, Kant, and the Ultimate Nature of Reality ,” by William Egginton, “ The Noise of Time ,” by Julian Barnes or “The End of Days,” by Jenny Erpenbeck; translated by Susan Bernofsky.

Hurricane Season

Fernanda Melchor; translated by Sophie Hughes 2020

Her sentences are sloping hills; her paragraphs, whole mountains. It’s no wonder that Melchor was dubbed a sort of south-of-the-border Faulkner for her baroque and often brutally harrowing tale of poverty, paranoia and murder (also: witches, or at least the idea of them) in a fictional Mexican village. When a young girl impregnated by her pedophile stepfather unwittingly lands there, her arrival is the spark that lights a tinderbox.

Liked it? Try “ Liliana’s Invincible Summer: A Sister’s Search for Justice ,” by Cristina Rivera Garza or “ Fever Dream ,” by Samanta Schweblin; translated by Megan McDowell.

John Jeremiah Sullivan 2011

When this book of essays came out, it bookended a fading genre: collected pieces written on deadline by “pulpheads,” or magazine writers. Whether it’s Sullivan’s visit to a Christian rock festival, his profile of Axl Rose or a tribute to an early American botanist, he brings to his subjects not just depth, but an open-hearted curiosity. Indeed, if this book feels as if it’s from a different time, perhaps that’s because of its generous receptivity to other ways of being, which offers both reader and subject a kind of grace.

Liked it? Try “ Sunshine State ,” by Sarah Gerard, “ Consider the Lobster ,” by David Foster Wallace or “ Yoga for People Who Can’t Be Bothered to Do It ,” by Geoff Dyer.

See you tomorrow for books 80-61 . Every day this week, the Book Review will unveil 20 more books on our Best Books of the 21st Century list. You can get notified when they’re up — and hear about book reviews, news and features each week — when you receive the Book Review’s newsletter. Sign up here.

I haven’t read any of these books yet ...

If you’ve read a book on the list, be sure to check the box under its entry, and your final count will appear here. (We’ll save your progress day to day.)

... but I’m sure there’s something for me.

Keep track of the books you want to read by checking the box under their entries.

Methodology

In collaboration with the Upshot — the department at The Times focused on data and analytical journalism — the Book Review sent a survey to hundreds of novelists, nonfiction writers, academics, book editors, journalists, critics, publishers, poets, translators, booksellers, librarians and other literary luminaries, asking them to pick their 10 best books of the 21st century.

We let them each define “best” in their own way. For some, this simply meant “favorite.” For others, it meant books that would endure for generations.

The only rules: Any book chosen had to be published in the United States, in English, on or after Jan. 1, 2000. (Yes, translations counted!)

After casting their ballots, respondents were given the option to answer a series of prompts where they chose their preferred book between two randomly selected titles. We combined data from these prompts with the vote tallies to create the list of the top 100 books.

Share full article

Search Menu
Sign in through your institution
Advance Articles
Editor's Choice
Collections
Supplements
InSight Papers
BSR Registers Papers
Virtual Roundtables
Author Guidelines
Submission Site
Open Access Options
Self-Archiving Policy
About Rheumatology
About the British Society for Rheumatology
Editorial Board
Advertising and Corporate Services
Journals Career Network
Dispatch Dates
Terms and Conditions
Journals on Oxford Academic
Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Introduction, supplementary material, data availability, acknowledgements.

< Previous

Comparative efficacy and safety of bimekizumab in psoriatic arthritis: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis

Article contents
Figures & tables
Supplementary Data

Philip J Mease, Dafna D Gladman, Joseph F Merola, Peter Nash, Stacy Grieve, Victor Laliman-Khara, Damon Willems, Vanessa Taieb, Adam R Prickett, Laura C Coates, Comparative efficacy and safety of bimekizumab in psoriatic arthritis: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis, Rheumatology , Volume 63, Issue 7, July 2024, Pages 1779–1789, https://doi.org/10.1093/rheumatology/kead705

Permissions Icon Permissions

To understand the relative efficacy and safety of bimekizumab, a selective inhibitor of IL-17F in addition to IL-17A, vs other biologic and targeted synthetic DMARDs (b/tsDMARDs) for PsA using network meta-analysis (NMA).

A systematic literature review (most recent update conducted on 1 January 2023) identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of b/tsDMARDs in PsA. Bayesian NMAs were conducted for efficacy outcomes at Weeks 12–24 for b/tsDMARD-naïve and TNF inhibitor (TNFi)-experienced patients. Safety at Weeks 12–24 was analysed in a mixed population. Odds ratios (ORs) and differences of mean change with the associated 95% credible interval (CrI) were calculated for the best-fitting models, and the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) values were calculated to determine relative rank.

The NMA included 41 RCTs for 22 b/tsDMARDs. For minimal disease activity (MDA), bimekizumab ranked 1st in b/tsDMARD-naïve patients and 2nd in TNFi-experienced patients. In b/tsDMARD-naïve patients, bimekizumab ranked 6th, 5th and 3rd for ACR response ACR20/50/70, respectively. In TNFi-experienced patients, bimekizumab ranked 1st, 2nd and 1st for ACR20/50/70, respectively. For Psoriasis Area and Severity Index 90/100, bimekizumab ranked 2nd and 1st in b/tsDMARD-naïve patients, respectively, and 1st and 2nd in TNFi-experienced patients, respectively. Bimekizumab was comparable to b/tsDMARDs for serious adverse events.

Bimekizumab ranked favourably among b/tsDMARDs for efficacy on joint, skin and MDA outcomes, and showed comparable safety, suggesting it may be a beneficial treatment option for patients with PsA.

For joint efficacy, bimekizumab ranked highly among approved biologic/targeted synthetic DMARDs (b/tsDMARDs).

Bimekizumab provides better skin efficacy (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index, PASI100 and PASI90) than many other available treatments in PsA.

For minimal disease activity, bimekizumab ranked highest of all available b/tsDMARDs in b/tsDMARD-naïve and TNF inhibitor–experienced patients.

PsA is a chronic, systemic, inflammatory disease in which patients experience a high burden of illness [ 1–3 ]. PsA has multiple articular and extra-articular disease manifestations including peripheral arthritis, axial disease, enthesitis, dactylitis, skin psoriasis (PSO) and psoriatic nail disease [ 4 , 5 ]. Patients with PsA can also suffer from related inflammatory conditions, uveitis and IBD [ 4 , 5 ]. Approximately one fifth of all PSO patients, increasing to one quarter of patients with moderate to severe PSO, will develop PsA over time [ 6 , 7 ].

The goal of treatment is to control inflammation and prevent structural damage to minimize disease burden, normalize function and social participation, and maximize the quality of life of patients [ 1 , 4 ]. As PsA is a heterogeneous disease, the choice of treatment is guided by individual patient characteristics, efficacy against the broad spectrum of skin and joint symptoms, and varying contraindications to treatments [ 1 , 4 ]. There are a number of current treatments classed as conventional DMARDs such as MTX, SSZ, LEF; biologic (b) DMARDs such as TNF inhibitors (TNFi), IL inhibitors and cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4 (CTLA4)-immunoglobulin; and targeted synthetic (ts) DMARDs which include phosphodiesterase-4 (PDE4) and Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors [ 1 , 8 ].

Despite the number of available treatment options, the majority of patients with PsA report that they do not achieve remission and additional therapeutic options are needed [ 9 , 10 ]. Thus, the treatment landscape for PsA continues to evolve and treatment decisions increase in complexity, especially as direct comparative data are limited [ 2 ].

Bimekizumab is a monoclonal IgG1 antibody that selectively inhibits IL-17F in addition to IL-17A, which is approved for the treatment of adults with active PsA in Europe [ 11 , 12 ]. Both IL-17A and IL-17F are pro-inflammatory cytokines implicated in PsA [ 11 , 13 ]. IL-17F is structurally similar to IL-17A and expressed by the same immune cells; however, the mechanisms that regulate expression and kinetics differ [ 13 , 14 ]. IL-17A and IL-17F are expressed as homodimers and as IL-17A–IL-17F heterodimers that bind to and signal via the same IL-17 receptor A/C complex [ 13 , 15 ].

In vitro studies have demonstrated that the dual inhibition of both IL-17A and IL-17F with bimekizumab was more effective at suppressing PsA inflammatory genes and T cell and neutrophil migration, and periosteal new bone formation, than blocking IL-17A alone [ 11 , 14 , 16 , 17 ]. Furthermore, IL-17A and IL-17F protein levels are elevated in psoriatic lesions and the superiority of bimekizumab 320 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) or every 8 weeks (Q8W) over the IL-17A inhibitor, secukinumab, in complete clearance of psoriatic skin was demonstrated in a head-to-head trial in PSO [ 16 , 18 ]. Collectively, this evidence suggests that neutralizing both IL-17F and IL-17A may provide more potent abrogation of IL-17-mediated inflammation than IL-17A alone.

Bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W demonstrated significant improvements in efficacy outcomes compared with placebo, and an acceptable safety profile in adults with PsA in the phase 3 RCTs BE OPTIMAL (NCT03895203) (b/tsDMARD-naïve patients) and BE COMPLETE (NCT03896581) (TNFi inadequate responders) [ 19 , 20 ].

The objective of this study was to establish the comparative efficacy and safety of bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W vs other available PsA treatments, using network meta-analysis (NMA).

Search strategy

A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) guidelines [ 21 ] and adhered to the principles outlined in the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination’s Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Healthcare, and Methods for the Development of National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Public Health Guidance [ 22–24 ]. The SLR of English-language publications was originally conducted on 3 December 2015, with updates on 7 January 2020, 2 May 2022 and 1 January 2023 in Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE ® ), Excerpta Medica Database (Embase ® ) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) for literature published from January 1991 onward using the Ovid platform. Additionally, bibliographies of SLRs and meta-analyses identified through database searches were reviewed to ensure any publications not identified in the initial search were included in this SLR. Key clinical conference proceedings not indexed in Ovid (from October 2019 to current) and ClinicalTrials.gov were also manually searched. The search strategy is presented in Supplementary Table S1 (available at Rheumatology online).

Study inclusion

Identified records were screened independently and in duplicate by two reviewers and any discrepancies were reconciled via discussion or a third reviewer. The SLR inclusion criteria were defined by the Patient populations, Interventions, Comparators, Outcome measures, and Study designs (PICOS) Statement ( Supplementary Table S2 , available at Rheumatology online). The SLR included published studies assessing approved therapies for the treatment of PsA. Collected data included study and patient population characteristics, interventions, comparators, and reported clinical and patient-reported outcomes relevant to PsA. For efficacy outcomes, pre-crossover data were extracted in studies where crossover occurred. All publications included in the analysis were evaluated according to the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials as described in the Cochrane Handbook [ 25 ].

Network meta-analysis methods

NMA is the quantitative assessment of relative treatment effects and associated uncertainty of two or more interventions [ 26 , 27 ]. It is used frequently in health technology assessment, guideline development and to inform treatment decision making in clinical practice [ 26 ].

Bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W was compared with current b/tsDMARDs at regulatory-approved doses ( Table 1 ) by NMA. All comparators were selected on the basis they were relevant to clinical practice, i.e. recommended by key clinical guidelines, licensed by key regulatory bodies and/or routinely used.

NMA intervention and comparators

Therapeutic class .	Drug dose and frequency of administration .
Intervention
IL-17A/17Fi	Bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W
Comparators
IL-17Ai	Secukinumab 150 mg with or without loading dose Q4W or 300 mg Q4W, ixekizumab 80 mg Q4W
IL-23i	Guselkumab 100 mg every Q4W or Q8W, risankizumab 150 mg Q4W
IL-12/23i	Ustekinumab 45 mg or 90 mg Q12W
TNFi	Adalimumab 40 mg Q2W, certolizumab pegol 200 mg Q2W or 400 mg Q4W pooled, etanercept 25 mg twice a week, golimumab 50 mg s.c. Q4W or 2 mg/kg i.v. Q8W, infliximab 5 mg/kg on weeks 0, 2, 6, 14, 22
CTLA4-Ig	Abatacept 150 mg Q1W
JAKi	Tofacitinib 5 mg BID, upadacitinib 15 mg QD
PDE-4i	Apremilast 30 mg BID
Other	Placebo

Therapeutic class .	Drug dose and frequency of administration .
Intervention
IL-17A/17Fi	Bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W
Comparators
IL-17Ai	Secukinumab 150 mg with or without loading dose Q4W or 300 mg Q4W, ixekizumab 80 mg Q4W
IL-23i	Guselkumab 100 mg every Q4W or Q8W, risankizumab 150 mg Q4W
IL-12/23i	Ustekinumab 45 mg or 90 mg Q12W
TNFi	Adalimumab 40 mg Q2W, certolizumab pegol 200 mg Q2W or 400 mg Q4W pooled, etanercept 25 mg twice a week, golimumab 50 mg s.c. Q4W or 2 mg/kg i.v. Q8W, infliximab 5 mg/kg on weeks 0, 2, 6, 14, 22
CTLA4-Ig	Abatacept 150 mg Q1W
JAKi	Tofacitinib 5 mg BID, upadacitinib 15 mg QD
PDE-4i	Apremilast 30 mg BID
Other	Placebo

See Supplementary Table S4 , available at Rheumatology online for additional dosing schedules used in included studies. BID: twice daily; CTLA4-Ig: cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen 4-immunoglobulin; IL-17A/17Fi: IL-17A/17F inhibitor; IL-17Ai: IL-17A inhibitor; IL-12/23i: IL-12/23 inhibitor; IL-23i: IL-23 inhibitor; JAKi: Janus kinase inhibitor; NMA: network meta-analysis; PDE-4i: phosphodiesterase-4 inhibitor; Q1W: once weekly; Q2W: every 2 weeks; Q4W: every 4 weeks; Q8W: every 8 weeks; Q12W: every 12 weeks; QD: once daily; TNFi: TNF inhibitor.

Two sets of primary analyses were conducted, one for a b/tsDMARD-naïve PsA population and one for a TNFi-experienced PsA population. Prior treatment with TNFis has been shown to impact the response to subsequent bDMARD treatments [ 28 ]. In addition, most trials involving b/tsDMARDs for the treatment of PsA (including bimekizumab) report separate data on both b/tsDMARD-naïve and TNFi-experienced subgroups, making NMA in each of these patient populations feasible.

For each population the following outcomes were analysed: American College of Rheumatology response (ACR20/50/70), Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI90/100), and minimal disease activity (MDA). The analysis of serious adverse events (SAE) was conducted using a mixed population (i.e. b/tsDMARD-naïve, TNFi-experienced and mixed population data all were included) as patients’ previous TNFI exposure was not anticipated to impact safety outcomes following discussions with clinicians. The NMA included studies for which data were available at week 16, if 16-week data were not available (or earlier crossover occurred), data available at weeks 12, 14 or 24 were included. Pre-crossover data were included in the analyses for efficacy outcomes to avoid intercurrent events.

Heterogeneity between studies for age, sex, ethnicity, mean time since diagnosis, concomitant MTX, NSAIDs or steroid use was assessed using Grubb’s test, also called the extreme Studentized deviate method, to identify outlier studies.

All univariate analyses involved a 10 000 run-in iteration phase and a 10 000-iteration phase for parameter estimation. All calculations were performed using the R2JAGS package to run Just Another Gibbs Sampler (JAGS) 3.2.3 and the code reported in NICE Decision Support Unit (DSU) Technical Support Document Series [ 29–33 ]. Convergence was confirmed through inspection of the ratios of Monte-Carlo error to the standard deviations of the posteriors; values >5% are strong signs of convergence issues [ 31 ]. In some cases, trials reported outcome results of zero (ACR70, PASI100, SAE) in one or more arms for which a continuity correction was applied to mitigate the issue, as without the correction most models were not convergent or provided a large posterior distribution making little clinical sense [ 31 ].

Four NMA models [fixed effects (FE) unadjusted, FE baseline risk-adjusted, random effects (RE) unadjusted and RE baseline risk-adjusted] were assessed and the best-fit models were chosen using methods described in NICE DSU Technical Support Document 2 [ 31 ]. Odds ratios (ORs) and differences of mean change (MC) with the associated 95% credible intervals (CrIs) were calculated for each treatment comparison in the evidence network for the best fitting models and presented in league tables and forest plots. In addition, the probability of bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W being better than other treatments was calculated using surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) to determine relative rank. Conclusions (i.e. better/worse or comparable) for bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W vs comparators were based on whether the pairwise 95% CrIs of the ORs/difference of MC include 1 (dichotomous outcomes), 0 (continuous outcomes) or not. In the case where the 95% CrI included 1 or 0, then bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W and the comparator were considered comparable. If the 95% CrI did not include 1 or 0, then bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W was considered either better or worse depending on the direction of the effect.

Compliance with ethics guidelines

This article is based on previously conducted studies and does not contain any new studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Study and patient characteristics

The SLR identified 4576 records through databases and 214 records through grey literature, of which 3143 were included for abstract review. Following the exclusion of a further 1609 records, a total of 1534 records were selected for full-text review. A total of 66 primary studies from 246 records were selected for data extraction. No trial was identified as having a moderate or high risk of bias ( Supplementary Table S3 , available at Rheumatology online).

Of the 66 studies identified in the SLR, 41 studies reported outcomes at weeks 12, 16 or 24 and met the criteria for inclusion in the NMA in either a b/tsDMARD-naïve population ( n = 20), a TNFi-experienced population ( n = 5), a mixed population with subgroups ( n = 13) or a mixed PsA population without subgroups reported ( n = 3). The PRISMA diagram is presented in Fig. 1 . Included and excluded studies are presented in Supplementary Tables S4 and S5 , respectively (available at Rheumatology online).

PRISMA flow diagram. The PRISMA flow diagram for the SLR conducted to identify published studies assessing approved treatments for the treatment of PsA. cDMARD: conventional DMARD; NMA: network meta-analysis; NR: not reported; PD: pharmacodynamic; PK: pharmacokinetic; PRISMA: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses; RCT: randomized controlled trial; SLR: systematic literature review

The baseline study and patient characteristics (where reported) are presented in Supplementary Table S6 (available at Rheumatology online). There were 20–483 patients included in treatment arms. The median age of patients was 48.9 years, the median percentage of males was 50.3% and a median of 92.3% of patients were Caucasian. Patients had a mean time since diagnosis of 7.6 years and a mean PASI score of 8.7. The mean (range) use of concomitant MTX, NSAIDs and steroids were 53.9% (29.1% to 84.0%), 72.4% (33.3% to 100.0%) and 16.8% (9.2% to 30.0%), respectively. Heterogeneity was generally low across studies except for the concomitant use of MTX, NSAIDs and steroids. Using an approach consistent with established NMA methods in PsA [ 34–36 ], a meta-regression model using JAGS code reported in NICE DSU Technical Support Document 3 [ 33 ] was used to account for variation in placebo responses when model-fit statistics suggested that baseline risk-adjusted models provided a better fit to the data.

NMA results

The network diagrams for ACR50 in b/tsDMARD-naïve and TNFi-experienced patients are presented in Fig. 2A and B with network diagrams for other outcomes presented in Supplementary Fig. S1 (available at Rheumatology online). The networks for ACR response were larger, in terms of both number of studies and patients included, than the networks for PASI. Similarly, the networks for b/tsDMARD-naïve patients were larger than TNFi-experienced patients across all outcomes analysed. Placebo was used as a common comparator in all networks and there were a few studies that included more than two arms (OPAL-Broaden, Select-PsA-1, SPIRIT-P1 and BE OPTIMAL) that included adalimumab as the reference arm in b/tsDMARD-naïve patients. Lastly, networks included studies where the primary outcome was evaluated at time points longer than 16 weeks (e.g. EXCEED study at 52 weeks) but as per the methods, 16-week data formed the network.

Network of evidence for ACR50. ( A ) b/tsDMARD-naïve patients. ( B ) TNFi-experienced patients. The size of the circle representing each intervention is proportional to the number of patients included in the analysis. The line width is proportional to the number of studies connecting the interventions. ABA: abatacept; ADA: adalimumab; APR: apremilast; b/tsDMARD-naïve: biologic and targeted synthetic DMARD-naïve; BKZ: bimekizumab; CZP: certolizumab pegol; ETA: etanercept; GOL: golimumab; GUS: guselkumab; IFX: infliximab; IV: intravenous; IXE: ixekizumab; PBO: placebo; Q4W: every 4 weeks; Q8W: every 8 weeks; RIS: risankizumab; SEC: secukinumab; TNFi-experienced: TNF inhibitor–experienced; TOF: tofacitinib; UPA: upadacitinib; UST: ustekinumab; w/o LD: without loading dose

The best-fit model is noted for each outcome with full model fit statistics for all outcomes presented in Supplementary Table S7 (available at Rheumatology online). Forest plots for ACR50 and PASI100 are presented in Figs 3 and 4 , with forest plots for other outcomes, along with the league tables in Supplementary Fig. S2 and Table S8 , respectively (available at Rheumatology online).

ACR50. The results for the NMA on ACR50 at week 16. ( A ) b/tsDMARD-naïve patients including forest plot and SUCRA values. FE baseline–adjusted model DIC = 469.59. ( B ) TNFi-experienced patients including forest plot and SUCRA values. RE-unadjusted model DIC = 205.33. a Week 24 data were used as week 16 data was not available. * The 95% CrI does not include 1; bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W is considered either better or worse depending on the direction of the effect. ABA: abatacept; ADA: adalimumab; APR: apremilast; b/tsDMARD-naïve: biologic and targeted synthetic DMARD-naïve; BKZ: bimekizumab; CrI: credible interval; CZP: certolizumab pegol; DIC: deviance information criterion; ETA: etanercept; FE: fixed effects; GOL: golimumab; GUS: guselkumab; IFX: infliximab; IV: intravenous; IXE: ixekizumab; NMA: network meta-analysis; PBO: placebo; Q4W: every 4 weeks; Q8W: every 8 weeks; RE: random effects; RIS: risankizumab; SEC: secukinumab; SUCRA: surface under the cumulative ranking curve; TNFi-experienced: TNF inhibitor–experienced; TOF: tofacitinib; UPA: upadacitinib; UST: ustekinumab; w/o LD: without loading dose

PASI100. The results for the NMA on PASI100 at week 16: ( A ) b/tsDMARD-naïve patients including forest plot and SUCRA values. FE baseline–adjusted model DIC = 150.27. ( B ) TNFi-experienced patients including forest plot and SUCRA values. RE-unadjusted model DIC = 81.76. a Week 24 data were used as week 16 data was not available. * The 95% CrI does not include 1; bimekizumab 160 mg 4W is considered better. ADA: adalimumab; b/tsDMARD-naïve: biologic and targeted synthetic DMARD-naïve; BKZ, bimekizumab; CrI, credible interval; CZP, certolizumab pegol; DIC, deviance information criterion; FE, fixed effects; GOL, golimumab; GUS, guselkumab; IXE, ixekizumab; NMA, network meta-analysis; PASI, Psoriasis Area and Severity Index; PBO, placebo; Q4W, every 4 weeks; Q8W, every 8 weeks; RE, random effects; SEC, secukinumab; SUCRA, surface under the cumulative ranking curve; TNFi-experienced, TNF inhibitor–experienced; UPA, upadacitinib

Joint outcomes

For ACR50 outcomes, the best-fit models for b/tsDMARD-naïve and TNFi-experienced were the FE baseline–adjusted model and RE-unadjusted model, respectively.

b/tsDMARD-naïve patients

Bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W ranked 6th for ACR20 (SUCRA = 0.75), 5th for ACR50 (SUCRA = 0.74) ( Fig. 3A ) and 3rd for ACR70 (SUCRA = 0.80) among 21 treatments. For ACR50, bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W was better than placebo, abatacept 125 mg, guselkumab 100 mg Q4W, ustekinumab 45 mg, risankizumab 150 mg, guselkumab 100 mg Q8W and ustekinumab 90 mg; worse than golimumab 2 mg i.v.; and comparable to the remaining treatments in the network ( Fig. 3A ).

TNFi-experienced patients

Bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W ranked 1st among 16 treatments for ACR20 (SUCRA = 0.96), 2nd among 15 treatments for ACR50 (SUCRA = 0.84) ( Fig. 3B ) and 1st among 16 treatments for ACR70 (SUCRA = 0.83). Bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W was better than placebo, abatacept 125 mg, secukinumab 150 mg without loading dose, tofacitinib 5 mg and secukinumab 150 mg; and comparable to the remaining treatments in the network on ACR50 ( Fig. 3B ).

Skin outcomes

For PASI100 outcomes, the best-fit models for b/tsDMARD-naïve and TNFi-experienced were the FE baseline–adjusted model and RE-unadjusted model, respectively.

Bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W ranked 2nd among 15 treatments (SUCRA = 0.89) for PASI90 and 1st among 11 treatments (SUCRA = 0.95) for PASI100 ( Fig. 4A ). Bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W was better than placebo, certolizumab pegol pooled, golimumab 2 mg i.v., secukinumab 150 mg, adalimumab 40 mg, upadacitinib 15 mg, secukinumab 300 mg and ixekizumab 80 mg Q4W; and comparable to the remaining treatments in the network on PASI100 ( Fig. 4A ).

Bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W ranked 1st among 10 treatments (SUCRA = 0.85) for PASI90 and 2nd among 7 treatments (SUCRA = 0.79) for PASI100 ( Fig. 4B ). Bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W was better than placebo, ixekizumab 80 mg Q4W and upadacitinib 15 mg; and comparable to the remaining treatments in the network on PASI100 ( Fig. 4B ).

For MDA, the best-fit models for b/tsDMARD-naïve and TNFi-experienced were the FE baseline–adjusted model and RE-unadjusted model, respectively.

Bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W ranked 1st among 13 treatments (SUCRA = 0.91) and was better than placebo [OR (95% CrI) 6.31 (4.61–8.20)], guselkumab 100 mg Q4W [2.06 (1.29–3.10)], guselkumab 100 mg Q8W [1.76 (1.09–2.69)], risankizumab 150 mg [1.99 (1.40–2.76)] and adalimumab 40 mg [1.41 (1.01–1.93)]; and comparable to the remaining treatments in the network ( Supplementary Fig. S2G , available at Rheumatology online).

Bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W ranked 1st among 11 treatments (SUCRA = 0.83) and was better than placebo [12.10 (5.31–28.19)] and tofacitinib 5 mg [6.81 (2.14–21.35)]; and comparable to the remaining treatments in the network ( Supplementary Fig. S2H , available at Rheumatology online).

The network for SAEs for a mixed population included 23 treatments and the best-fit model was an RE-unadjusted model (due to study populations and time point reporting heterogeneity). Bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W showed comparable safety to all treatments in the network ( Supplementary Fig. S2I , available at Rheumatology online).

The treatment landscape for PsA is complex, with numerous treatment options and limited direct comparative evidence. Bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W has recently been approved for the treatment of active PsA by the European Medicines Agency and recommended by NICE in the UK, and the published phase 3 results warrant comparison with existing therapies by NMA.

This NMA included 41 studies evaluating 22 b/tsDMARDs including the novel IL-17F and IL-17A inhibitor, bimekizumab. Overall, bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W ranked favourably among b/tsDMARDS for efficacy in joint, skin and disease activity outcomes in PsA across both b/tsDMARD-naïve and TNFi-experienced populations. The safety of bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W was similar to the other b/tsDMARDs.

The Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA) and EULAR provide evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of PsA [ 1 , 2 ]. To treat peripheral arthritis symptoms in PsA, efficacy across the classes of current b/tsDMARDs are considered similar by both GRAPPA and EULAR, in part due to a lack of data comparing licensed therapies in a head-to-head trial setting [ 1 , 2 ]. EULAR recommends the use of JAK inhibitors in the case of inadequate response, intolerance or when a bDMARD is not appropriate [ 1 ]. This recommendation was made when tofacitinib was the only available JAK inhibitor, but reflects current marketing authorizations for tofacitinib and upadacitinib which indicate use in patients with an inadequate response or prior intolerance to TNFis (USA) or bDMARDs (Europe) [ 37–40 ]. This NMA suggests that bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W may have an advantage over current treatments, including IL-23 inhibitors in b/tsDMARD naïve patients, and secukinumab 150 mg and tofacitinib in TNFi-experienced patients, as evidenced by our analysis of ACR50 for which the pairwise comparisons were significantly in favour of bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W.

For the treatment of skin symptoms in PsA, IL-23, IL-12/23 and IL-17A inhibitors are currently recommended due to their greater efficacy compared with TNFis [ 1 , 4 ]. GRAPPA also suggests considering efficacy demonstrated in direct comparative studies in PSO when selecting a treatment for PsA skin symptoms [ 2 ]. In our analysis of complete skin clearance as measured by PASI100, bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W demonstrated the likelihood of significantly greater efficacy than IL-17A, JAK inhibitors and TNFis in b/tsDMARD-naïve patients and IL-17A and JAK inhibitors in TNFi-experienced patients. Furthermore, the NMA results for skin clearance in PsA are in alignment with previous studies in PSO that demonstrated superiority of bimekizumab 320 mg Q4W or Q8W vs secukinumab, ustekinumab and adalimumab ( P < 0.001) (note that the dosing of bimekizumab in PSO differs from that in PsA) [ 12 , 18 , 41 , 42 ].

There are similarities between our results and other recently published NMAs of b/tsDMARDs in PsA, although methodological heterogeneity across all NMAs makes comparisons challenging [ 34–36 , 43–45 ]. Among recent NMAs, the largest evaluated 21 treatments [ 34 ] and only four considered subgroups of b/tsDMARD-naïve and TNFi-experienced patients or those with inadequate response [ 35 , 36 , 43 , 45 ]. Furthermore, different or pooled levels of response were evaluated for ACR and PASI outcomes.

Previous NMAs also support IL-17, IL-12/23 and IL-23 inhibitors having greater efficacy for skin symptoms than TNFis [ 35 , 36 ]. In an overall PsA population, McInnes et al. demonstrated that secukinumab 300 mg, ixekizumab 80 mg Q4W, and ustekinumab 45 mg and 90 mg were likely more efficacious than TNFis for PASI90 [ 35 ]. In another NMA by Ruyssen-Witrand et al. , results suggested that ixekizumab 80 mg Q4W had significantly greater efficacy than adalimumab, certolizumab pegol pooled, and etanercept 25 mg twice weekly/50 mg once weekly for any PASI score (50%, 75%, 90% and 100% reduction) in bDMARD-naïve patients [ 36 ].

For joint outcomes, Mease et al. compared guselkumab Q4W and Q8W with other b/tsDMARDs in a network of 21 treatments in an overall PsA population for ACR50 [ 34 ]. Both guselkumab dosing schedules were better than abatacept and apremilast, but golimumab 2 mg i.v. had a higher likelihood of ACR50 response than guselkumab Q8W [ 34 ]. Despite MDA being assessed in clinical trials for bDMARD therapies and a treatment target in PsA [ 46 ], evidence for comparative efficacy for this outcome is limited. None of the most recent NMAs before this one included an analysis of MDA [ 34–36 ]. With regard to safety outcomes, previous NMAs evaluating SAEs also resulted in either no difference between b/tsDMARDs vs placebo or other b/tsDMARDs [ 34 , 36 , 44 , 45 ].

This study has a number of strengths. To our knowledge this NMA represents the most comprehensive and in-depth comparative efficacy analysis of approved treatments in PsA to date. The evidence was derived from a recent SLR, ensuring that new RCTs and updated results from previously published RCTs were included. It is also the first NMA to include the phase 3 BE COMPLETE and BE OPTIMAL trials of bimekizumab [ 19 , 20 ]. Our NMA used robust methods and accounted for variation in placebo response through network meta-regression in accordance with NICE DSU Technical Support Documents [ 31–33 ]. As an acknowledgement of the evolution of treatment advances, separate analyses of b/tsDMARD-naïve and TNFi-experienced subgroups were conducted with the intent to assist healthcare decision-making in different clinical settings. In addition, a panel of clinical experts were consulted from project inception and are authors of this paper, ensuring inclusion of a comprehensive set of clinically meaningful outcomes, including the composite, treat-to-target outcome of MDA.

Despite the robust evidence base and methodology, this NMA has limitations. Indirect treatment comparisons such as this NMA are not a substitute for head-to-head trials. There was heterogeneity in the endpoints and reporting in the included studies. Fewer studies reporting PASI outcomes resulted in smaller networks compared with the network of studies evaluating ACR response criteria. Not all trials reported outcomes at the same timepoint, thereby reducing the comparability of trial results, which has been transparently addressed by noting where week 24 data were used vs week 12, 14 or 16 data. The analyses for the TNFi-experienced population were limited by potential heterogeneity, especially in the analyses where fewer studies were included in the networks, as this group could include patients who had an inadequate response to TNFi or discontinued TNFi treatment due to other reasons (e.g. lost access). Also, in the analyses for the TNFi-experienced population, very low patient numbers for some treatments resulted in less statistical power. Additionally, the data included in the analysis were derived exclusively from RCTs, for which the study populations may not reflect a typical patient population seen in real-world practice. For example, trial results may be different in patients with oligoarthritis who are not well-represented in clinical trials.

Over the years covering our SLR, we acknowledge that patient populations and the PsA treatment landscape have evolved. After a thorough review of baseline patient characteristics, no significant differences were observed across the studies included in the NMA. To further mitigate uncertainty, baseline regression was used to actively correct for changes in the placebo rate over time ensuring a consistent and fair comparison across all included treatments. In addition, our analyses were conducted in separate b/tsDMARD-naïve and TNFi-experienced populations that reflect the evolving PsA patient population over time. Radiographic progression was not within the purview of this NMA because the NMA focused on a shorter timeframe than the 52-week duration typically recommended by the literature for investigating radiographic progression. Furthermore, there is existing literature on this topic, as exemplified by the work of Wang et al. in 2022 [ 47 ]. Nevertheless, the comprehensive and current evidence base, examination of multiple endpoints, and consistency with previous reported NMAs lend credence to our results.

Overall, the results of this NMA demonstrated the favourable relative efficacy and safety of bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W vs all approved treatments for PsA. Bimekizumab ranked high in terms of efficacy on joint, skin and MDA outcomes in both b/tsDMARD-naïve and TNFi-experienced patient populations, and showed comparable safety to other treatments. In the evolving PsA treatment landscape, bimekizumab 160 mg Q4W is a potentially beneficial treatment option for patients with PsA.

Supplementary material is available at Rheumatology online.

The datasets generated during and/or analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

This study was funded in full by UCB Pharma.

Disclosure statement : P.J.M.: has received research grants from AbbVie, Amgen, BMS, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma and UCB Pharma; consultancy fees from AbbVie, Acelyrin, Aclaris, Amgen, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Moonlake Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Sun Pharma and UCB Pharma; and speakers’ bureau for AbbVie, Amgen, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB Pharma. L.C.C.: received grants/research support from AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB; worked as a paid consultant for AbbVie, Amgen, Bristol Myers Squibb, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Gilead, Galapagos, Janssen, Moonlake, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB; and has been paid as a speaker for AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Medac, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB. D.D.G.: consultant and/or received grant support from Abbvie, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Eli Lilly, Galapagos, Gilead, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer and UCB. J.F.M.: consultant and/or investigator for AbbVie, Amgen, Biogen, BMS, Dermavant, Eli Lilly, Janssen, LEO Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron, Sanofi, Sun Pharma and UCB Pharma. P.N.: research grants, clinical trials and honoraria for advice and lectures on behalf of AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, BMS, Eli Lilly, Galapagos/Gilead, GSK, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Samsung, Sanofi and UCB Pharma. S.G. and V.L.-K.: employees of Cytel, Inc. which served as a consultant on the project. A.R.P., D.W. and V.T.: employees and stockholders of UCB Pharma.

The authors acknowledge Leah Wiltshire of Cytel for medical writing and editorial assistance based on the authors’ input and direction, Heather Edens (UCB Pharma, Smyrna, GA, USA) for publication coordination and Costello Medical for review management, which were funded by UCB Pharma. This analysis was funded by UCB Pharma in accordance with Good Publication Practice (GPP 2022) guidelines ( http://www.ismpp.org/gpp-2022 ). Data were previously presented at ISPOR-US 2023 (Boston, MA, USA, 7–10 May 2023).

Gossec L , Baraliakos X , Kerschbaumer A et al. EULAR recommendations for the management of psoriatic arthritis with pharmacological therapies: 2019 update . Ann Rheum Dis 2020 ; 79 : 700 – 12 .

Google Scholar

Coates LC , Soriano ER , Corp N et al. ; GRAPPA Treatment Recommendations domain subcommittees . Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA): updated treatment recommendations for psoriatic arthritis 2021 . Nat Rev Rheumatol 2022 ; 18 : 465 – 79 .

Fitzgerald O , Ogdie A , Chandran V et al. Psoriatic arthritis . Nat Rev Dis Primers 2021 ; 7 : 59 .

Coates LC , Soriano ER , Corp N et al. Treatment recommendations domain subcommittees. Group for Research and Assessment of Psoriasis and Psoriatic Arthritis (GRAPPA): updated treatment recommendations for psoriatic arthritis 2021 . Nat Rev Rheumatol 2022 ; 27 : 1 – 15 .

Najm A , Goodyear CS , McInnes IB , Siebert S. Phenotypic heterogeneity in psoriatic arthritis: towards tissue pathology-based therapy . Nat Rev Rheumatol 2023 ; 19 : 153 – 65 .

Ogdie A , Weiss P. The epidemiology of psoriatic arthritis . Rheum Dis Clin North Am 2015 ; 41 : 545 – 68 .

Alinaghi F , Calov M , Kristensen LE et al. Prevalence of psoriatic arthritis in patients with psoriasis: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational and clinical studies . J Am Acad Dermatol 2019 ; 80 : 251 – 65.e19 .

Singh JA , Guyatt G , Ogdie A et al. Special Article: 2018 American college of rheumatology/national psoriasis foundation guideline for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis . Arthritis Rheumatol 2019 ; 71 : 5 – 32 .

Coates LC , Robinson DE , Orbai AM et al. What influences patients' opinion of remission and low disease activity in psoriatic arthritis? Principal component analysis of an international study . Rheumatology (Oxford) 2021 ; 60 : 5292 – 9 .

Gondo G , Mosca M , Hong J et al. Demographic and clinical factors associated with patient-reported remission in psoriatic arthritis . Dermatol Ther (Heidelb) 2022 ; 12 : 1885 – 95 .

Glatt S , Baeten D , Baker T et al. Dual IL-17A and IL-17F neutralisation by bimekizumab in psoriatic arthritis: evidence from preclinical experiments and a randomised placebo-controlled clinical trial that IL-17F contributes to human chronic tissue inflammation . Ann Rheum Dis 2018 ; 77 : 523 – 32 .

UCB Pharma S.A . Bimzelx ® (bimekizumab): Summary of Product Characteristics. 2023 . https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/bimzelx (26 June 2023, date last accessed).

Adams R , Maroof A , Baker T et al. Bimekizumab, a novel humanized IgG1 antibody that neutralizes both IL-17A and IL-17F . Front Immunol 2020 ; 11 : 1894 .

Burns LA , Maroof A , Marshall D et al. Presence, function, and regulation of IL-17F-expressing human CD4(+) T cells . Eur J Immunol 2020 ; 50 : 568 – 80 .

Kuestner R , Taft D , Haran A et al. Identification of the IL-17 receptor related molecule IL-17RC as the receptor for IL-17F . J Immunol 2007 ; 179 : 5462 – 73 .

Johansen C , Usher PA , Kjellerup RB et al. Characterization of the interleukin-17 isoforms and receptors in lesional psoriatic skin . Br J Dermatol 2009 ; 160 : 319 – 24 .

Shah M , Maroof A , Gikas P et al. Dual neutralisation of IL-17F and IL-17A with bimekizumab blocks inflammation-driven osteogenic differentiation of human periosteal cells . RMD Open 2020 ; 6 : e001306 .

Reich K , Warren RB , Lebwohl M et al. Bimekizumab versus Secukinumab in Plaque Psoriasis . New Engl J Med 2021 ; 385 : 142 – 52 .

McInnes IB , Asahina A , Coates LC et al. Bimekizumab in patients with psoriatic arthritis, naive to biologic treatment: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (BE OPTIMAL) . Lancet 2023 ; 401 : 25 – 37 .

Merola JF , Landewe R , McInnes IB et al. Bimekizumab in patients with active psoriatic arthritis and previous inadequate response or intolerance to tumour necrosis factor-alpha inhibitors: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (BE COMPLETE) . Lancet 2023 ; 401 : 38 – 48 .

Page MJ , McKenzie JE , Bossuyt PM et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews . BMJ 2021 ; 372 : n71 .

Higgins JP. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Vol. 2. 2nd edn. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons, 2019 .

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence . The guidelines manual: Process and methods [PMG6]. 2012 . https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg6/chapter/introduction (3 March 2023, date last accessed).

Booth AM , Wright KE , Outhwaite H. Centre for Reviews and Dissemination databases: value, content, and developments . Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2010 ; 26 : 470 – 2 .

Sterne JAC , Savovic J , Page MJ et al. RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials . BMJ 2019 ; 366 : l4898 .

Daly C , Dias S , Welton N , Anwer S , Ades A. NICE Guidelines Technical Support Unit. Meta-Analysis: Guideline Methodology Document 1 (Version 1). 2021 . http://www.bristol.ac.uk/population-health-sciences/centres/cresyda/mpes/nice/guideline-methodology-documents-gmds/ (1 March 2023, date last accessed).

Dias S , Caldwell DM. Network meta-analysis explained . Archi Dis Childhood Fetal Neonatal Ed 2019 ; 104 : F8 – F12 .

Merola JF , Lockshin B , Mody EA. Switching biologics in the treatment of psoriatic arthritis . Semin Arthritis Rheum 2017 ; 47 : 29 – 37 .

Openbugs (website) 2014 . http://www.openbugs.net/w/FrontPage (6 April 2023, date last accessed).

Lunn D , Spiegelhalter D , Thomas A , Best N. The BUGS project: evolution, critique and future directions . Stat Med 2009 ; 28 : 3049 – 67 .

Dias S , Welton NJ , Sutton AJ , Ades AE. NICE DSU technical support document 2: a generalised linear modelling framework for pairwise and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. London. 2016 . https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/nice-dsu/tsds/full-list (25 January 2023, date last accessed).

Dias S , Welton N , Sutton AJ , Caldwell DM , Lu G , Ades AE. NICE DSU technical support document 4: inconsistency in networks of evidence based on randomised controlled trials. 2011 . https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/nice-dsu/tsds/full-list (25 January 2023, date last accessed).

Dias S , Sutton AJ , Welton N , Ades AE. NICE DSU Technical support document 3: heterogeneity: subgroups, meta-regression, bias and bias-adjustment. 2011 . https://www.sheffield.ac.uk/nice-dsu/tsds/full-list (25 January 2023, date last accessed).

Mease PJ , McInnes IB , Tam LS et al. Comparative effectiveness of guselkumab in psoriatic arthritis: results from systematic literature review and network meta-analysis . Rheumatology (Oxford) 2021 ; 60 : 2109 – 21 .

McInnes IB , Sawyer LM , Markus K et al. Targeted systemic therapies for psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review and comparative synthesis of short-term articular, dermatological, enthesitis and dactylitis outcomes . RMD Open 2022 ; 8 : e002074 .

Ruyssen-Witrand A , Perry R , Watkins C et al. Efficacy and safety of biologics in psoriatic arthritis: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis . RMD Open 2020 ; 6 : e001117 .

Pfizer Inc . XELJANZ ® (tofacitinib): Summary of Product Characteristics. 2022 . https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/xeljanz (4 May 2023, date last accessed).

Pfizer Inc . XELJANZ ® (tofacitinib): US Prescribing Information. 2022 . https://labeling.pfizer.com/ShowLabeling.aspx?id=959 (4 May 2023, date last accessed).

Abbvie Inc . RINVOQ ® (upadacitinib) extended-release tablets, for oral use: US Prescribing Information. 2023 . https://www.rxabbvie.com/pdf/rinvoq_pi.pdf (4 May 2023, date last accessed).

AbbVie Deutschland GmbH & Co . KG. RINVOQ ® (upadacitinib): Summary of Product Characteristics. 2023 . https://www.ema.europa.eu/en/medicines/human/EPAR/rinvoq (4 May 2023, date last accessed).

Warren RB , Blauvelt A , Bagel J et al. Bimekizumab versus Adalimumab in Plaque Psoriasis . N Engl J Med 2021 ; 385 : 130 – 41 .

Reich K , Papp KA , Blauvelt A et al. Bimekizumab versus ustekinumab for the treatment of moderate to severe plaque psoriasis (BE VIVID): efficacy and safety from a 52-week, multicentre, double-blind, active comparator and placebo controlled phase 3 trial . Lancet 2021 ; 397 : 487 – 98 .

Gladman DD , Orbai AM , Gomez-Reino J et al. Network meta-analysis of tofacitinib, biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs, and apremilast for the treatment of psoriatic arthritis . Curr Ther Res Clin Exp 2020 ; 93 : 100601 .

Qiu M , Xu Z , Gao W et al. Fourteen small molecule and biological agents for psoriatic arthritis: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials . Medicine (Baltimore) 2020 ; 99 : e21447 .

Kawalec P , Holko P , Mocko P , Pilc A. Comparative effectiveness of abatacept, apremilast, secukinumab and ustekinumab treatment of psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis . Rheumatol Int 2018 ; 38 : 189 – 201 .

Gossec L , McGonagle D , Korotaeva T et al. Minimal disease activity as a treatment target in psoriatic arthritis: a review of the literature . J Rheumatol 2018 ; 45 : 6 – 13 .

Wang SH , Yu CL , Wang TY , Yang CH , Chi CC. Biologic disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs for preventing radiographic progression in psoriatic arthritis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis . Pharmaceutics 2022 ; 14 .

Supplementary data

Month:	Total Views:
January 2024	715
February 2024	637
March 2024	596
April 2024	535
May 2024	462
June 2024	350
July 2024	217

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

Rheumatology X/Twitter
BSR Instagram
BSR Facebook
Recommend to Your Librarian

Affiliations

Online ISSN 1462-0332
Print ISSN 1462-0324
About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Institutional account management
Rights and permissions
Get help with access
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Ritual and the poetics of closure in Flavian literature

Gerjanne h. van den berg , university of amsterdam. [email protected].

[Authors and titles are listed at the end of the review.]

This edited volume ‘explores the role and significance of ancient religious practices … both in closing sections of literary texts … as well as in the overall closure of the text itself’ (p. 1). The themes of ritual and closure have gained traction in Flavian literature in recent decades. This is the second edited volume on ritual in Flavian literature in recent years, and to some extent the current volume builds on and fills in the gaps of the volume Ritual and Religion in Flavian Epic (Oxford 2013), edited by Antony Augoustakis. While the previous volume heavily leaned on Statius and exclusively focused on epic, Roumpou’s work provides a balanced approach, encompassing all Flavian epicists and incorporating non-epic Flavian authors like Martial. [1] The volume’s second main focus, closure, owes much to Fowler’s seminal work and has similarly garnered significant attention. [2] Reminiscent of Virgil’s Aeneid , the potentially unsatisfying closure of Statius’ Thebaid has been discussed in detail. [3] Again, the current volume does well filling in gaps: several contributions do not single out the closure of the epic text or collection as a whole, but instead focus on closural aspects found at other points in the text. The convergence of these two topics is the central theme of this volume, using ‘ritual as a way to reflect on closure’ (p.1). In the introduction, Roumpou argues that in Flavian literature ‘ritual opens up further questions instead of giving a sense of finality’ (p. 7). The volume consists of an introduction, followed by ten chapters, and ends with an epilogue.

One of the strengths of this collection is the inclusion of a theoretical chapter by Jörg Rüpke on ritual closure, which forms the first chapter in the volume. Rüpke conceptualises ritual as a dynamic communication between human actors and (divine) addressees, emphasising its interactive and communicative nature. After defining ritual, the chapter ends with a short application of the theory to Statius’ Thebaid , which takes the form of bullet points with minimal references to scholarship. While the chapter provides a solid theoretical framework, this section could benefit from more extensive exploration. For instance, a lot more could be (and has been) said about burial as a ritual. [4] This section of the chapter could have been stronger if, for instance, one bullet point had been singled out and treated more elaborately. We find some cross-referencing to Rüpke’s theoretical foundation of the volume in other chapters. Even stronger connections between Rüpke’s theory and its application in other chapters could have enhanced the coherence of the volume and could have prevented interpretations of ritual from becoming overly subjective.

The next chapters by Margot Neger and Alison Keith both discuss Martial. In her chapter, Neger connects the epigrammatic genre to ritual. In Martial, ritual practices are often used in satirical contexts, but can also be covered in a more serious tone (e.g. Mart. Ep. 1.114 and 116). Neger’s chapter presents itself in the conclusion as ‘a short survey’ (p. 41), and the brief treatment of some of the examples leaves the reader wanting a more in-depth discussion of the interesting topic. This is partly provided by the next chapter written by Keith, which focuses on Epigrams 10 as a closure to the collection as a whole and on how the presentation of ancient religious practices creates an ‘open’ closure to the collection.

The volume intriguingly transitions to Statius’ Siluae , perhaps an unconventional choice for a discussion centred on closure. Nonetheless, Laila Dell’Anno presents a compelling argument advocating for an interpretation of Siluae 5 as ‘complete and authentic, rather than a posthumous and fragmentary edition’ (p. 59). Since the chapter’s argument largely rests on this statement, one probably has to read Dell’Anno’s PhD thesis to be fully convinced by this argument, as there is not enough space in this chapter to set out all the evidence. [5] Nevertheless, what follows is a reappraisal of Siluae 5, drawing parallels with Ovid’s Ex Ponto 4, which has recently also been argued as intentionally designed by Ovid himself. [6] In this chapter, ritual takes the form of a ‘rite of passage’, and Dell’Anno even goes so far as to state that ‘ritual is the poetic matter of the Siluae ’ (p. 70). Noteworthy insights into the analysis of ritual in Siluae 5 can be found in the discussion of Silu. 5.3 (full of poetic funerary rites), where Dell’Anno sees the poet as ‘Statius- sacerdos ’ (p. 71).

The subsequent sections of the volume focus on Flavian epic, starting with Sophia Papaioannou’s analysis of Valerius Flaccus. Closure of the Argonautica is complicated by the epic’s incompleteness and has very recently been discussed in detail by Zissos. [7] Papaioannou sees potential in the lack of completion, which provides ‘richly diverse interpretative potential for the whole work’ (p. 79). Papaioannou identifies a ring composition between intertextual and closural elements in Argonautica 1 and 8. The focus is here on the much-discussed conclusion of Book 1 featuring the suicides of Aeson and Alcimede and the subsequent katabasis, both connected to ritual. Papaioannou argues that the ending of Book 1 contains similarities with Book 8, which also explores themes such as civil war, death and fratricide. Papaioannou sees closure in the ‘premature ending’ (p. 93) of the epic, slightly downplaying the effect of its incompleteness. Nonetheless, even though the Argonautica may be incomplete, closural motifs earlier in Book 8 can be meaningful.

A set of complementary chapters on Silius’ Punica follows. First, Clayton Schroer discusses reditus as a ritual in Punica 17. This chapter argues that Silius uses the reditus to create a distinction between the exiles of Hannibal and Scipio Africanus. Schroer shows closure operating on multiple levels: whereas on the one hand, the reditus seems to provide satisfying closure, the fact that Scipio will be exiled puts into question the effectiveness of such a closural strategy. Theodoros Antoniadis continues the Silian diptych with a focus on (mock) funerals and triumphs as closural markers, which starts already in Punica 2 in Saguntum. Many of Silius’ rituals can be characterised by their failed or false nature, setting up ‘a closure that is partially ambiguous or unsettling’ (p. 119). Ending with Scipio’s triumph, Antoniadis draws a connection with Nero and the Flavians: emperors start to play the role of religious actors and devalue certain rituals, and this is reflected in Silius’ Punica .

Statius’ Thebaid is covered by Helen Lovatt, who looks at fire imagery. This imagery frequently intersects with ritual, especially in the context of the funeral (notably the funeral of Opheltes). Lovatt shows that fire in the Thebaid is not a purifying or cleansing force, but rather perpetuates further destruction, both within ritual practice and narrative structures (endings become beginnings). Lovatt depicts the image of ‘setting epic teleology on fire’, which conjures a dark political vision of Statius.

Michael Knierim returns to Valerius Flaccus with a discussion of Valerius Flaccus’ Cyzicus episode using modern literature on trauma. Knierim analyses the processing of the events that happened at Cyzicus using the ‘moral injury’ paradigm. Closure is here presented as closure of psychological tension. The purification ritual and the departure without looking back provide ‘emphatic closure to the psychological wounds of the Argonauts’ (p. 168). Knierim draws comparisons to Apollonius’ treatment of the Cyzicus episode. The chapter’s skilful utilisation of theory contributes to the expanding scholarship on the portrayal of trauma in classical literature.

The final chapter by Marco Fucecchi expands its scope beyond the Flavians to encompass Lucan, who bears notable similarities to the Flavian authors, and Claudian’s De raptu Proserpinae . Instead of focusing on a specific ritualistic event, it discusses the Latin phrase compage soluta , which contains Stoic connotations. The phrase ‘graphically illustrates the loosening of the very structure of the cosmos’ (p. 182) and presents a tension between openness (dissolution) and closure ((re-)construction between chaos and cosmos). While Statius uses the phrase to signal that in Thebaid 8, the epic is entering its pivotal phase, Silius’ Hannibal (like Lucan’s Caesar) is ‘undaunted by cosmic dissolution’ (p. 200).

Although in some chapters, either ritual or closure is slightly relegated to the background, the varied perspectives and methodologies used in this volume will provide food for thought. The volume ends with a reflective epilogue by Damien Nelis, which can be read as an alternative introduction to the volume, but also forms a fitting close to the volume. The epilogue returns to scholarship on ritual and closure and its importance for our field. The current volume is partly a direct result of Fowler’s work on closure but with a narrower focus. The second part of the epilogue opens future possibilities for research on ritual closure in Virgil and other Augustan literature.

In conclusion, Ritual and the Poetics of Closure in Flavian Literature stands out as a valuable addition to the expanding collection of edited volumes on Flavian literature. Like many of the other volumes, it features a mixture of more established Flavian scholars and junior colleagues, providing a dynamic volume with fresh perspectives and incorporating modern theory. While not every chapter may sway all readers, each offers compelling analyses of the texts that not only contribute to Flavian studies, but also, as Nelis points out in the epilogue, prompt discussions in adjacent fields of (Latin) literature, such as Augustan literature, regarding the impact of ritual on closure.

Authors and Titles

Introduction: Ritual and the Poetics of Closure in Flavian Literature (Angeliki-Nektaria Roumpou)
Ritual Closure and Transcendence: Mobilising Ritual Theory for Flavian Epic (Jörg Rüpke)
Religious and Social Rituals as Motifs of Closure in Martial’s Epigrams (Margot Neger)
Closural Poetics in Martial, Epigrams 10 (Alison Keith)
Ritual and the Impossibility of Song in Statius’ Siluae 5 (Laila Dell’Anno)
Sacrifice, Death, and Closure in Valerius’ Argonautica Book 1 (Sophia Papaioannou)
Mansuri Compos Decoris ? Scipio’s Reditus and Exile in Punica 17 (Clayton Schroer)
Silius Italicus’ False Rituals, Politics and Poetics: Mock Funerals and Triumphs as Closural Markers in the Punica (Theodoros Antoniadis)
Burning up, Melting down, Collapsing in: Fire Imagery, Narrative Articulation, Funerals, and the Incestuous Poetics of Statius’ Thebaid (Helen Lovatt)
Narrative and Psychological Closure through Ritual at Cyzicus and Circe’s Island (Michael Knierim)
Compage soluta : Collapsing Universe and the Boundaries of Epic Poetry (Lucan, Silius, Statius and Claudian’s De raptu ) (Marco Fucecchi)
Epilogue (Damien Nelis)

[1] The only epic text (unfortunately) not receiving its own chapter is Statius’ Achilleid .

[2] E.g. D. P. Fowler (1989), ‘First Thoughts on Closure: Problems and Prospects’, MD 22: 75–122 and Fowler (1997), ‘Second Thoughts on Closure: Problems and Prospects’, in D. H. Roberts, F. M. Dunn, and D. P. Fowler (eds.), Classical Closure: Reading the End in Greek and Latin Literature (Princeton), 3–22, both engaged with frequently in the volume itself.

[3] Notably, S. Braund (1996), ‘Ending Epic: Statius, Theseus and a Merciful Release’, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philological Society 42: 1–23.

[4] E.g. A. Augoustakis, S. Froedge, A. Kozak and C. Schroer (2019), ‘Death, Ritual, and Burial from Homer to the Flavians’, in C. Reitz and S. Finkmann (eds.), Structures of Epic Poetry , Vol. II.2: Configuration (Leiden, 483–522) regarding Opheltes’ burial, cited by Roumpou in the introduction of this volume.

[5] L. Dell’Anno (2023), ‘Statius’ Silvan Poetics: A Synoptic Reading of the Silvae’, PhD Thesis (Cambridge).

[6] E.g. T. Franklinos (2018), ‘Ovid, Ex Ponto 4: an intratextually cohesive book’, in S. Harrison / S. Frangoulidis / T.D. Papanghelis (eds.), Intratextuality and Latin Literature , Berlin/ Boston, 289–306.

[7] Zissos, A. (2024), ‘The Missing Conclusion to Valerius Flaccus’ Argonautica ’, in J. Fabre-Serris, M. Formisano, and S. Frangoulidis (eds.), Labor Imperfectus: Unfinished, Incomplete, Partial Texts in Classical Antiquity (Berlin and Boston), 353–382.

IMAGES

(PDF) Approximating the Practice of Writing the Dissertation Literature
14+ Literature Review Examples
Dissertation Literature Review from Professional Writers!
Thesis Literature Review Example
50 Smart Literature Review Templates (APA) ᐅ TemplateLab
50 Smart Literature Review Templates (APA) ᐅ TemplateLab

VIDEO

Lesson 2:Research- Phrases to use in the Literature Review (Part 1) #english #researchtips
Writing A Literature Review In Six Simple Steps
Ph.D. Chapter two Literature Review for a Thesis| HOW TO WRITE CHAPTE TWO for Ph.D
Lesson 3: Research- Phrases to use in the Literature Review (Part 2) #researchtips
Mastering Your Literature Review
How to Do a Good Literature Review for Research Paper and Thesis

COMMENTS

How to Write a Literature Review
Examples of literature reviews. Step 1 - Search for relevant literature. Step 2 - Evaluate and select sources. Step 3 - Identify themes, debates, and gaps. Step 4 - Outline your literature review's structure. Step 5 - Write your literature review.
What is a Literature Review?
A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research. There are five key steps to writing a literature review: Search for relevant literature. Evaluate sources. Identify themes, debates and gaps.
What Is A Literature Review (In A Dissertation Or Thesis)
The word "literature review" can refer to two related things that are part of the broader literature review process. The first is the task of reviewing the literature - i.e. sourcing and reading through the existing research relating to your research topic. The second is the actual chapter that you write up in your dissertation, thesis or ...
What is a Literature Review? How to Write It (with Examples)
A literature review is a critical analysis and synthesis of existing research on a particular topic. It provides an overview of the current state of knowledge, identifies gaps, and highlights key findings in the literature. 1 The purpose of a literature review is to situate your own research within the context of existing scholarship ...
Writing a Literature Review
A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels and plays).
How to write a literature review in 6 steps
In a thesis, a literature review is part of the introduction, but it can also be a separate section. In research papers, a literature review may have its own section or it may be integrated into the introduction, depending on the field.
A Guide to Writing a PhD Literature Review
The process of writing a literature review is different to that of writing the bulk of the dissertation itself. The aim at this point isn't necessarily to illustrate your own original ideas and research - that's what the dissertation is for - but rather to show the depth of your knowledge of the field and your ability to assess the work of other scholars.
Steps in Conducting a Literature Review
A literature review is an integrated analysis-- not just a summary-- of scholarly writings and other relevant evidence related directly to your research question.That is, it represents a synthesis of the evidence that provides background information on your topic and shows a association between the evidence and your research question.
The Literature Review
The literature review of a dissertation gives a clear, critical overview of a specific area of research. Our main Writing the Dissertation - Overview and Planning guide explains how you can refine your dissertation topic and begin your initial research; the next tab of this guide, 'Process', expands on those ideas. In summary, the process of ...
PDF The Thesis Writing Process and Literature Review
The key here is to focus first on the literature relevant to the puzzle. In this example, the tokenism literature sets up a puzzle derived from a theory and contradictory empirical evidence. Let's consider what each of these means... The literature(s) from which you develop the theoretical/empirical puzzle that drives your research question.
Writing a literature review
A formal literature review is an evidence-based, in-depth analysis of a subject. There are many reasons for writing one and these will influence the length and style of your review, but in essence a literature review is a critical appraisal of the current collective knowledge on a subject. Rather than just being an exhaustive list of all that ...
How To Structure A Literature Review (Free Template)
How To Structure Your Literature Review. Like any other chapter in your thesis or dissertation, your literature review needs to have a clear, logical structure. At a minimum, it should have three essential components - an introduction, a body and a conclusion. Let's take a closer look at each of these. 1: The Introduction Section
How to Write the Dissertation Literature Review
Steps of Writing a Literature Review. 1. Gather, Assess, and Choose Relevant Literature. The first seed to take when writing your dissertation or thesis is to choose a fascinating and manageable research topic. Once a topic has been selected, you can begin searching for relevant academic sources. If you are writing a literature review for your ...
Literature review
What is a literature review? ... In a larger piece of written work, such as a dissertation or project, a literature review is usually one of the first tasks carried out after deciding on a topic. Reading combined with critical analysis can help to refine a topic and frame research questions. Conducting a literature review establishes your ...
How to write a dissertation literature review
4. Consider the organisation of your work. In a dissertation literature review, organising your work goes beyond having an introduction, body and conclusion. You'll be reviewing a number of texts, so you'll also have to think clearly about how to organise themes, topics and your argument in general.
Writing a Literature Review
A literature review is simply a summary of what existing scholarship knows about a particular topic. Commonly, as a prelude to further research, it appears near the beginning of a thesis or dissertation, directly after the introduction. ... In a PhD thesis, the literature review typically comprises one chapter (perhaps 8-10,000 words), for a ...
PDF LITERATURE REVIEWS
2. MOTIVATE YOUR RESEARCH in addition to providing useful information about your topic, your literature review must tell a story about how your project relates to existing literature. popular literature review narratives include: ¡ plugging a gap / filling a hole within an incomplete literature ¡ building a bridge between two "siloed" literatures, putting literatures "in conversation"
Dissertation Literature Review: Key Steps and Best Practices
A literature review is a comprehensive and critically assessed summary of existing research focused on a specific topic or question.Unlike other types of literature reviews, the dissertation literature review requires depth and context, serving as an extensive examination of scholarly works, including articles, books, theses, and other authoritative sources.
Engineering: The Literature Review Process
Literature reviews are also part of dissertations, theses, research reports and scholarly journal articles; these types of documents include the review in a section or chapter that discusses what has gone before, how the research being presented in this document fills a gap in the field's knowledge and why that is important.
What is a Literature Review?
A literature review is a review and synthesis of existing research on a topic or research question. A literature review is meant to analyze the scholarly literature, make connections across writings and identify strengths, weaknesses, trends, and missing conversations. A literature review should address different aspects of a topic as it ...
What is a Literature Review?
This excellent overview of the literature review explains what a literature review and outlines processes and best practices for doing one. It includes input from an NCSU professor on what a literature review is and what it should do. (Shared under a CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 US license, attributed to North Carolina State University Libraries). <<
What is a Literature Review?
A literature review is a comprehensive summary of previous research on a topic. The literature review surveys scholarly articles, books, and other sources relevant to a particular area of research. The review should enumerate, describe, summarize, objectively evaluate and clarify this previous research.
Dissertations
The literature review should justify the need for your research and highlight areas for further investigation. Avoid introducing your own ideas at this point; instead, compare and comment on existing ideas. Many (although not all) theoretical dissertations will include a separate literature review. You may decide to include this as a separate ...
Writing a Literature Review
A literature review is not a list describing or summarizing one piece of literature after another. It's usually a bad sign to see every paragraph beginning with the name of a researcher. Instead, organize the literature review into sections that present themes or identify trends, including relevant theory.
How to Write a Literature Review in 6 Steps
A "literature review" is a summary of what previous studies have demonstrated or argued about a topic. It may stand on its own as the focus of a paper, with just an introduction and conclusion summarizing the relevant literature, or it may be part of a more extensive research paper , such as a journal article, research proposal , thesis, or ...
Student Blog: How to Select Your Research Topic, Set Research Questions
This is the first part for researchers to gain insights from data analysis and literature review. Ensure that the research questions align with the subsequent parts. Conducting a Literature Review. Generally, the literature review is vital to understanding the current level of knowledge and understanding on your topic.
Full article: A systematic literature review on green human resource
The purpose of this systematic literature review is to identify trends in Green HRM research related to sustainability over the past decade and to determine how green human research management (GHRM) research is related to sustainability, its antecedents, and the level of implementation. After analyzing keywords through the VOSviewer ...
100 Best Books of the 21st Century
As voted on by 503 novelists, nonfiction writers, poets, critics and other book lovers — with a little help from the staff of The New York Times Book Review. Many of us find joy in looking back ...
Comparative efficacy and safety of bimekizumab in psoriatic arthritis
The SLR identified 4576 records through databases and 214 records through grey literature, of which 3143 were included for abstract review. Following the exclusion of a further 1609 records, a total of 1534 records were selected for full-text review. A total of 66 primary studies from 246 records were selected for data extraction.
Ritual and the poetics of closure in Flavian literature
Preview [Authors and titles are listed at the end of the review.] This edited volume 'explores the role and significance of ancient religious practices … both in closing sections of literary texts … as well as in the overall closure of the text itself' (p. 1).

Have a language expert improve your writing

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Table of contents

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Make a list of keywords

Search for relevant sources

Take notes and cite your sources

Chronological

Methodological

Theoretical

Cite this Scribbr article

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Have a language expert improve your writing

What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Table of contents

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

Make a list of keywords

Search for relevant sources

Take notes and cite your sources

Chronological

Methodological

Theoretical

Cite this Scribbr article

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

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

Table of Contents

How to write a good literature review

What is a literature review?

What is the purpose of literature review?

Literature review example

Literature Review on Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity:

a. Habitat Loss and Species Extinction:

b. Range Shifts and Phenological Changes:

c. Ocean Acidification and Coral Reefs:

d. Adaptive Strategies and Conservation Efforts:

Conducting a literature review

Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question:

Decide on the Scope of Your Review:

Select Databases for Searches:

Conduct Searches and Keep Track:

Review the Literature:

Organize and Write Your Literature Review:

How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal?

Frequently asked questions

Related Reads:

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

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

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

What are the parts of a lit review?

How should I organize my lit review?

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

How to write a literature review in 6 steps

What is a literature review?

What is a PhD literature review?

Planning your PhD literature review

How long should a literature review be?

Structuring a PhD literature review

Writing up a PhD literature review

Finishing a PhD literature review

Literature reviews and PhD upgrade exams

Doing a PhD

Our postgrad newsletter shares courses, funding news, stories and advice

Select your nearest city

Do you want hassle-free information and advice?

Create your account

Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library

YSN Doctoral Programs: Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

What is a literature review?

APA7 Style resources

1. Choose a topic. Define your research question.

2. Decide on the scope of your review

3. Select the databases you will use to conduct your searches.

4. Conduct your searches to find the evidence. Keep track of your searches.

Review the literature

Writing the Dissertation - Guides for Success: The Literature Review