guidelines for a literature review

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 This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission.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.

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

Table of contents

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.

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students. Free citation check included.

Try for free

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.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

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 August 29, 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, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

How To Write A Literature Review - A Complete Guide

Table of Contents

A literature review is much more than just another section in your research paper. It forms the very foundation of your research. It is a formal piece of writing where you analyze the existing theoretical framework, principles, and assumptions and use that as a base to shape your approach to the research question.

Curating and drafting a solid literature review section not only lends more credibility to your research paper but also makes your research tighter and better focused. But, writing literature reviews is a difficult task. It requires extensive reading, plus you have to consider market trends and technological and political changes, which tend to change in the blink of an eye.

Now streamline your literature review process with the help of SciSpace Copilot. With this AI research assistant, you can efficiently synthesize and analyze a vast amount of information, identify key themes and trends, and uncover gaps in the existing research. Get real-time explanations, summaries, and answers to your questions for the paper you're reviewing, making navigating and understanding the complex literature landscape easier.

In this comprehensive guide, we will explore everything from the definition of a literature review, its appropriate length, various types of literature reviews, and how to write one.

What is a literature review?

A literature review is a collation of survey, research, critical evaluation, and assessment of the existing literature in a preferred domain.

Eminent researcher and academic Arlene Fink, in her book Conducting Research Literature Reviews , defines it as the following:

“A literature review surveys books, scholarly articles, and any other sources relevant to a particular issue, area of research, or theory, and by so doing, provides a description, summary, and critical evaluation of these works in relation to the research problem being investigated.

Literature reviews are designed to provide an overview of sources you have explored while researching a particular topic, and to demonstrate to your readers how your research fits within a larger field of study.”

Simply put, a literature review can be defined as a critical discussion of relevant pre-existing research around your research question and carving out a definitive place for your study in the existing body of knowledge. Literature reviews can be presented in multiple ways: a section of an article, the whole research paper itself, or a chapter of your thesis.

A literature review does function as a summary of sources, but it also allows you to analyze further, interpret, and examine the stated theories, methods, viewpoints, and, of course, the gaps in the existing content.

As an author, you can discuss and interpret the research question and its various aspects and debate your adopted methods to support the claim.

What is the purpose of a literature review?

A literature review is meant to help your readers understand the relevance of your research question and where it fits within the existing body of knowledge. As a researcher, you should use it to set the context, build your argument, and establish the need for your study.

What is the importance of a literature review?

The literature review is a critical part of research papers because it helps you:

• Gain an in-depth understanding of your research question and the surrounding area
• Convey that you have a thorough understanding of your research area and are up-to-date with the latest changes and advancements
• Establish how your research is connected or builds on the existing body of knowledge and how it could contribute to further research
• Elaborate on the validity and suitability of your theoretical framework and research methodology
• Identify and highlight gaps and shortcomings in the existing body of knowledge and how things need to change
• Convey to readers how your study is different or how it contributes to the research area

How long should a literature review be?

Ideally, the literature review should take up 15%-40% of the total length of your manuscript. So, if you have a 10,000-word research paper, the minimum word count could be 1500.

Your literature review format depends heavily on the kind of manuscript you are writing — an entire chapter in case of doctoral theses, a part of the introductory section in a research article, to a full-fledged review article that examines the previously published research on a topic.

Another determining factor is the type of research you are doing. The literature review section tends to be longer for secondary research projects than primary research projects.

What are the different types of literature reviews?

All literature reviews are not the same. There are a variety of possible approaches that you can take. It all depends on the type of research you are pursuing.

Here are the different types of literature reviews:

Argumentative review

It is called an argumentative review when you carefully present literature that only supports or counters a specific argument or premise to establish a viewpoint.

Integrative review

It is a type of literature review focused on building a comprehensive understanding of a topic by combining available theoretical frameworks and empirical evidence.

Methodological review

This approach delves into the ''how'' and the ''what" of the research question —  you cannot look at the outcome in isolation; you should also review the methodology used.

Systematic review

This form consists of an overview of existing evidence pertinent to a clearly formulated research question, which uses pre-specified and standardized methods to identify and critically appraise relevant research and collect, report, and analyze data from the studies included in the review.

Meta-analysis review

Meta-analysis uses statistical methods to summarize the results of independent studies. By combining information from all relevant studies, meta-analysis can provide more precise estimates of the effects than those derived from the individual studies included within a review.

Historical review

Historical literature reviews focus on examining research throughout a period, often starting with the first time an issue, concept, theory, or phenomenon emerged in the literature, then tracing its evolution within the scholarship of a discipline. The purpose is to place research in a historical context to show familiarity with state-of-the-art developments and identify future research's likely directions.

Theoretical Review

This form aims to examine the corpus of theory accumulated regarding an issue, concept, theory, and phenomenon. The theoretical literature review helps to establish what theories exist, the relationships between them, the degree the existing approaches have been investigated, and to develop new hypotheses to be tested.

Scoping Review

The Scoping Review is often used at the beginning of an article, dissertation, or research proposal. It is conducted before the research to highlight gaps in the existing body of knowledge and explains why the project should be greenlit.

State-of-the-Art Review

The State-of-the-Art review is conducted periodically, focusing on the most recent research. It describes what is currently known, understood, or agreed upon regarding the research topic and highlights where there are still disagreements.

Can you use the first person in a literature review?

When writing literature reviews, you should avoid the usage of first-person pronouns. It means that instead of "I argue that" or "we argue that," the appropriate expression would be "this research paper argues that."

Do you need an abstract for a literature review?

Ideally, yes. It is always good to have a condensed summary that is self-contained and independent of the rest of your review. As for how to draft one, you can follow the same fundamental idea when preparing an abstract for a literature review. It should also include:

• The research topic and your motivation behind selecting it
• A one-sentence thesis statement
• An explanation of the kinds of literature featured in the review
• Summary of what you've learned
• Conclusions you drew from the literature you reviewed
• Potential implications and future scope for research

Here's an example of the abstract of a literature review

Is a literature review written in the past tense?

Yes, the literature review should ideally be written in the past tense. You should not use the present or future tense when writing one. The exceptions are when you have statements describing events that happened earlier than the literature you are reviewing or events that are currently occurring; then, you can use the past perfect or present perfect tenses.

How many sources for a literature review?

There are multiple approaches to deciding how many sources to include in a literature review section. The first approach would be to look level you are at as a researcher. For instance, a doctoral thesis might need 60+ sources. In contrast, you might only need to refer to 5-15 sources at the undergraduate level.

The second approach is based on the kind of literature review you are doing — whether it is merely a chapter of your paper or if it is a self-contained paper in itself. When it is just a chapter, sources should equal the total number of pages in your article's body. In the second scenario, you need at least three times as many sources as there are pages in your work.

Quick tips on how to write a literature review

To know how to write a literature review, you must clearly understand its impact and role in establishing your work as substantive research material.

You need to follow the below-mentioned steps, to write a literature review:

• Outline the purpose behind the literature review
• Search relevant literature
• Examine and assess the relevant resources
• Discover connections by drawing deep insights from the resources
• Structure planning to write a good literature review

1. Outline and identify the purpose of  a literature review

As a first step on how to write a literature review, you must know what the research question or topic is and what shape you want your literature review to take. Ensure you understand the research topic inside out, or else seek clarifications. You must be able to the answer below questions before you start:

• How many sources do I need to include?
• What kind of sources should I analyze?
• How much should I critically evaluate each source?
• Should I summarize, synthesize or offer a critique of the sources?
• Do I need to include any background information or definitions?

Additionally, you should know that the narrower your research topic is, the swifter it will be for you to restrict the number of sources to be analyzed.

2. Search relevant literature

Dig deeper into search engines to discover what has already been published around your chosen topic. Make sure you thoroughly go through appropriate reference sources like books, reports, journal articles, government docs, and web-based resources.

You must prepare a list of keywords and their different variations. You can start your search from any library’s catalog, provided you are an active member of that institution. The exact keywords can be extended to widen your research over other databases and academic search engines like:

• Google Scholar
• Microsoft Academic
• Science.gov

Besides, it is not advisable to go through every resource word by word. Alternatively, what you can do is you can start by reading the abstract and then decide whether that source is relevant to your research or not.

Additionally, you must spend surplus time assessing the quality and relevance of resources. It would help if you tried preparing a list of citations to ensure that there lies no repetition of authors, publications, or articles in the literature review.

3. Examine and assess the sources

It is nearly impossible for you to go through every detail in the research article. So rather than trying to fetch every detail, you have to analyze and decide which research sources resemble closest and appear relevant to your chosen domain.

While analyzing the sources, you should look to find out answers to questions like:

• What question or problem has the author been describing and debating?
• What is the definition of critical aspects?
• How well the theories, approach, and methodology have been explained?
• Whether the research theory used some conventional or new innovative approach?
• How relevant are the key findings of the work?
• In what ways does it relate to other sources on the same topic?
• What challenges does this research paper pose to the existing theory
• What are the possible contributions or benefits it adds to the subject domain?

Be always mindful that you refer only to credible and authentic resources. It would be best if you always take references from different publications to validate your theory.

Always keep track of important information or data you can present in your literature review right from the beginning. It will help steer your path from any threats of plagiarism and also make it easier to curate an annotated bibliography or reference section.

4. Discover connections

At this stage, you must start deciding on the argument and structure of your literature review. To accomplish this, you must discover and identify the relations and connections between various resources while drafting your abstract.

A few aspects that you should be aware of while writing a literature review include:

• Rise to prominence: Theories and methods that have gained reputation and supporters over time.
• Constant scrutiny: Concepts or theories that repeatedly went under examination.
• Contradictions and conflicts: Theories, both the supporting and the contradictory ones, for the research topic.
• Knowledge gaps: What exactly does it fail to address, and how to bridge them with further research?
• Influential resources: Significant research projects available that have been upheld as milestones or perhaps, something that can modify the current trends

Once you join the dots between various past research works, it will be easier for you to draw a conclusion and identify your contribution to the existing knowledge base.

5. Structure planning to write a good literature review

There exist different ways towards planning and executing the structure of a literature review. The format of a literature review varies and depends upon the length of the research.

Like any other research paper, the literature review format must contain three sections: introduction, body, and conclusion. The goals and objectives of the research question determine what goes inside these three sections.

Nevertheless, a good literature review can be structured according to the chronological, thematic, methodological, or theoretical framework approach.

Literature review samples

1. Standalone

2. As a section of a research paper

How SciSpace Discover makes literature review a breeze?

SciSpace Discover is a one-stop solution to do an effective literature search and get barrier-free access to scientific knowledge. It is an excellent repository where you can find millions of only peer-reviewed articles and full-text PDF files. Here’s more on how you can use it:

Find the right information

Find what you want quickly and easily with comprehensive search filters that let you narrow down papers according to PDF availability, year of publishing, document type, and affiliated institution. Moreover, you can sort the results based on the publishing date, citation count, and relevance.

Assess credibility of papers quickly

When doing the literature review, it is critical to establish the quality of your sources. They form the foundation of your research. SciSpace Discover helps you assess the quality of a source by providing an overview of its references, citations, and performance metrics.

Get the complete picture in no time

SciSpace Discover’s personalized suggestion engine helps you stay on course and get the complete picture of the topic from one place. Every time you visit an article page, it provides you links to related papers. Besides that, it helps you understand what’s trending, who are the top authors, and who are the leading publishers on a topic.

Make referring sources super easy

To ensure you don't lose track of your sources, you must start noting down your references when doing the literature review. SciSpace Discover makes this step effortless. Click the 'cite' button on an article page, and you will receive preloaded citation text in multiple styles — all you've to do is copy-paste it into your manuscript.

Final tips on how to write a literature review

A massive chunk of time and effort is required to write a good literature review. But, if you go about it systematically, you'll be able to save a ton of time and build a solid foundation for your research.

We hope this guide has helped you answer several key questions you have about writing literature reviews.

Would you like to explore SciSpace Discover and kick off your literature search right away? You can get started here .

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

1. how to start a literature review.

• What questions do you want to answer?

• What sources do you need to answer these questions?

• What information do these sources contain?

• How can you use this information to answer your questions?

2. What to include in a literature review?

• A brief background of the problem or issue

• What has previously been done to address the problem or issue

• A description of what you will do in your project

• How this study will contribute to research on the subject

3. Why literature review is important?

The literature review is an important part of any research project because it allows the writer to look at previous studies on a topic and determine existing gaps in the literature, as well as what has already been done. It will also help them to choose the most appropriate method for their own study.

4. How to cite a literature review in APA format?

To cite a literature review in APA style, you need to provide the author's name, the title of the article, and the year of publication. For example: Patel, A. B., & Stokes, G. S. (2012). The relationship between personality and intelligence: A meta-analysis of longitudinal research. Personality and Individual Differences, 53(1), 16-21

5. What are the components of a literature review?

• A brief introduction to the topic, including its background and context. The introduction should also include a rationale for why the study is being conducted and what it will accomplish.

• A description of the methodologies used in the study. This can include information about data collection methods, sample size, and statistical analyses.

• A presentation of the findings in an organized format that helps readers follow along with the author's conclusions.

6. What are common errors in writing literature review?

• Not spending enough time to critically evaluate the relevance of resources, observations and conclusions.

• Totally relying on secondary data while ignoring primary data.

• Letting your personal bias seep into your interpretation of existing literature.

• No detailed explanation of the procedure to discover and identify an appropriate literature review.

7. What are the 5 C's of writing literature review?

• Cite - the sources you utilized and referenced in your research.

• Compare - existing arguments, hypotheses, methodologies, and conclusions found in the knowledge base.

• Contrast - the arguments, topics, methodologies, approaches, and disputes that may be found in the literature.

• Critique - the literature and describe the ideas and opinions you find more convincing and why.

• Connect - the various studies you reviewed in your research.

8. How many sources should a literature review have?

When it is just a chapter, sources should equal the total number of pages in your article's body. if it is a self-contained paper in itself, you need at least three times as many sources as there are pages in your work.

9. Can literature review have diagrams?

• To represent an abstract idea or concept

• To explain the steps of a process or procedure

• To help readers understand the relationships between different concepts

10. How old should sources be in a literature review?

Sources for a literature review should be as current as possible or not older than ten years. The only exception to this rule is if you are reviewing a historical topic and need to use older sources.

11. What are the types of literature review?

• Argumentative review

• Integrative review

• Methodological review

• Systematic review

• Meta-analysis review

• Historical review

• Theoretical review

• Scoping review

• State-of-the-Art review

12. Is a literature review mandatory?

Yes. Literature review is a mandatory part of any research project. It is a critical step in the process that allows you to establish the scope of your research, and provide a background for the rest of your work.

But before you go,

• Six Online Tools for Easy Literature Review
• Evaluating literature review: systematic vs. scoping reviews
• Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review
• Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Guidelines and Examples

You might also like

Consensus GPT vs. SciSpace GPT: Choose the Best GPT for Research

Literature Review and Theoretical Framework: Understanding the Differences

Types of Essays in Academic Writing - Quick Guide (2024)

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• CAREER FEATURE
• 04 December 2020
• Correction 09 December 2020

How to write a superb literature review

Andy Tay is a freelance writer based in Singapore.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Credit: Getty

Literature reviews are important resources for scientists. They provide historical context for a field while offering opinions on its future trajectory. Creating them can provide inspiration for one’s own research, as well as some practice in writing. But few scientists are trained in how to write a review — or in what constitutes an excellent one. Even picking the appropriate software to use can be an involved decision (see ‘Tools and techniques’). So Nature asked editors and working scientists with well-cited reviews for their tips.

WENTING ZHAO: Be focused and avoid jargon

Assistant professor of chemical and biomedical engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

When I was a research student, review writing improved my understanding of the history of my field. I also learnt about unmet challenges in the field that triggered ideas.

For example, while writing my first review 1 as a PhD student, I was frustrated by how poorly we understood how cells actively sense, interact with and adapt to nanoparticles used in drug delivery. This experience motivated me to study how the surface properties of nanoparticles can be modified to enhance biological sensing. When I transitioned to my postdoctoral research, this question led me to discover the role of cell-membrane curvature, which led to publications and my current research focus. I wouldn’t have started in this area without writing that review.

Collection: Careers toolkit

A common problem for students writing their first reviews is being overly ambitious. When I wrote mine, I imagined producing a comprehensive summary of every single type of nanomaterial used in biological applications. It ended up becoming a colossal piece of work, with too many papers discussed and without a clear way to categorize them. We published the work in the end, but decided to limit the discussion strictly to nanoparticles for biological sensing, rather than covering how different nanomaterials are used in biology.

My advice to students is to accept that a review is unlike a textbook: it should offer a more focused discussion, and it’s OK to skip some topics so that you do not distract your readers. Students should also consider editorial deadlines, especially for invited reviews: make sure that the review’s scope is not so extensive that it delays the writing.

A good review should also avoid jargon and explain the basic concepts for someone who is new to the field. Although I trained as an engineer, I’m interested in biology, and my research is about developing nanomaterials to manipulate proteins at the cell membrane and how this can affect ageing and cancer. As an ‘outsider’, the reviews that I find most useful for these biological topics are those that speak to me in accessible scientific language.

Bozhi Tian likes to get a variety of perspectives into a review. Credit: Aleksander Prominski

BOZHI TIAN: Have a process and develop your style

Associate professor of chemistry, University of Chicago, Illinois.

In my lab, we start by asking: what is the purpose of this review? My reasons for writing one can include the chance to contribute insights to the scientific community and identify opportunities for my research. I also see review writing as a way to train early-career researchers in soft skills such as project management and leadership. This is especially true for lead authors, because they will learn to work with their co-authors to integrate the various sections into a piece with smooth transitions and no overlaps.

After we have identified the need and purpose of a review article, I will form a team from the researchers in my lab. I try to include students with different areas of expertise, because it is useful to get a variety of perspectives. For example, in the review ‘An atlas of nano-enabled neural interfaces’ 2 , we had authors with backgrounds in biophysics, neuroengineering, neurobiology and materials sciences focusing on different sections of the review.

After this, I will discuss an outline with my team. We go through multiple iterations to make sure that we have scanned the literature sufficiently and do not repeat discussions that have appeared in other reviews. It is also important that the outline is not decided by me alone: students often have fresh ideas that they can bring to the table. Once this is done, we proceed with the writing.

I often remind my students to imagine themselves as ‘artists of science’ and encourage them to develop how they write and present information. Adding more words isn’t always the best way: for example, I enjoy using tables to summarize research progress and suggest future research trajectories. I’ve also considered including short videos in our review papers to highlight key aspects of the work. I think this can increase readership and accessibility because these videos can be easily shared on social-media platforms.

ANKITA ANIRBAN: Timeliness and figures make a huge difference

Editor, Nature Reviews Physics .

One of my roles as a journal editor is to evaluate proposals for reviews. The best proposals are timely and clearly explain why readers should pay attention to the proposed topic.

It is not enough for a review to be a summary of the latest growth in the literature: the most interesting reviews instead provide a discussion about disagreements in the field.

Careers Collection: Publishing

Scientists often centre the story of their primary research papers around their figures — but when it comes to reviews, figures often take a secondary role. In my opinion, review figures are more important than most people think. One of my favourite review-style articles 3 presents a plot bringing together data from multiple research papers (many of which directly contradict each other). This is then used to identify broad trends and suggest underlying mechanisms that could explain all of the different conclusions.

An important role of a review article is to introduce researchers to a field. For this, schematic figures can be useful to illustrate the science being discussed, in much the same way as the first slide of a talk should. That is why, at Nature Reviews, we have in-house illustrators to assist authors. However, simplicity is key, and even without support from professional illustrators, researchers can still make use of many free drawing tools to enhance the value of their review figures.

Yoojin Choi recommends that researchers be open to critiques when writing reviews. Credit: Yoojin Choi

YOOJIN CHOI: Stay updated and be open to suggestions

Research assistant professor, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology, Daejeon.

I started writing the review ‘Biosynthesis of inorganic nanomaterials using microbial cells and bacteriophages’ 4 as a PhD student in 2018. It took me one year to write the first draft because I was working on the review alongside my PhD research and mostly on my own, with support from my adviser. It took a further year to complete the processes of peer review, revision and publication. During this time, many new papers and even competing reviews were published. To provide the most up-to-date and original review, I had to stay abreast of the literature. In my case, I made use of Google Scholar, which I set to send me daily updates of relevant literature based on key words.

Through my review-writing process, I also learnt to be more open to critiques to enhance the value and increase the readership of my work. Initially, my review was focused only on using microbial cells such as bacteria to produce nanomaterials, which was the subject of my PhD research. Bacteria such as these are known as biofactories: that is, organisms that produce biological material which can be modified to produce useful materials, such as magnetic nanoparticles for drug-delivery purposes.

Synchronized editing: the future of collaborative writing

However, when the first peer-review report came back, all three reviewers suggested expanding the review to cover another type of biofactory: bacteriophages. These are essentially viruses that infect bacteria, and they can also produce nanomaterials.

The feedback eventually led me to include a discussion of the differences between the various biofactories (bacteriophages, bacteria, fungi and microalgae) and their advantages and disadvantages. This turned out to be a great addition because it made the review more comprehensive.

Writing the review also led me to an idea about using nanomaterial-modified microorganisms to produce chemicals, which I’m still researching now.

PAULA MARTIN-GONZALEZ: Make good use of technology

PhD student, University of Cambridge, UK.

Just before the coronavirus lockdown, my PhD adviser and I decided to write a literature review discussing the integration of medical imaging with genomics to improve ovarian cancer management.

As I was researching the review, I noticed a trend in which some papers were consistently being cited by many other papers in the field. It was clear to me that those papers must be important, but as a new member of the field of integrated cancer biology, it was difficult to immediately find and read all of these ‘seminal papers’.

That was when I decided to code a small application to make my literature research more efficient. Using my code, users can enter a query, such as ‘ovarian cancer, computer tomography, radiomics’, and the application searches for all relevant literature archived in databases such as PubMed that feature these key words.

The code then identifies the relevant papers and creates a citation graph of all the references cited in the results of the search. The software highlights papers that have many citation relationships with other papers in the search, and could therefore be called seminal papers.

My code has substantially improved how I organize papers and has informed me of key publications and discoveries in my research field: something that would have taken more time and experience in the field otherwise. After I shared my code on GitHub, I received feedback that it can be daunting for researchers who are not used to coding. Consequently, I am hoping to build a more user-friendly interface in a form of a web page, akin to PubMed or Google Scholar, where users can simply input their queries to generate citation graphs.

Tools and techniques

Most reference managers on the market offer similar capabilities when it comes to providing a Microsoft Word plug-in and producing different citation styles. But depending on your working preferences, some might be more suitable than others.

Reference managers

Here is a comparison of the more popular collaborative writing tools, but there are other options, including Fidus Writer, Manuscript.io, Authorea and Stencila.

Collaborative writing tools

*Markdown and LaTex are code-based formatting languages favoured by physicists, mathematicians and computer scientists who code on a regular basis, and less popular in other disciplines such as biology and chemistry.

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03422-x

Interviews have been edited for length and clarity.

Updates & Corrections

Correction 09 December 2020 : An earlier version of the tables in this article included some incorrect details about the programs Zotero, Endnote and Manubot. These have now been corrected.

Hsing, I.-M., Xu, Y. & Zhao, W. Electroanalysis 19 , 755–768 (2007).

Article   Google Scholar  

Ledesma, H. A. et al. Nature Nanotechnol. 14 , 645–657 (2019).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Brahlek, M., Koirala, N., Bansal, N. & Oh, S. Solid State Commun. 215–216 , 54–62 (2015).

Choi, Y. & Lee, S. Y. Nature Rev. Chem . https://doi.org/10.1038/s41570-020-00221-w (2020).

Download references

Related Articles

• Research management

Tales of a migratory marine biologist

Career Feature 28 AUG 24

Nail your tech-industry interviews with these six techniques

Career Column 28 AUG 24

How to harness AI’s potential in research — responsibly and ethically

Career Feature 23 AUG 24

Binning out-of-date chemicals? Somebody think about the carbon!

Correspondence 27 AUG 24

No more hunting for replication studies: crowdsourced database makes them easy to find

Nature Index 27 AUG 24

Partners in drug discovery: how to collaborate with non-governmental organizations

Exclusive: the papers that most heavily cite retracted studies

News 28 AUG 24

Chain retraction: how to stop bad science propagating through the literature

Comment 28 AUG 24

Global Faculty Recruitment of School of Life Sciences, Tsinghua University

The School of Life Sciences at Tsinghua University invites applications for tenure-track or tenured faculty positions at all ranks (Assistant/Ass...

Beijing, China

Tsinghua University (The School of Life Sciences)

Tenure-Track/Tenured Faculty Positions

Tenure-Track/Tenured Faculty Positions in the fields of energy and resources.

Suzhou, Jiangsu, China

School of Sustainable Energy and Resources at Nanjing University

ATLAS - Joint PhD Program from BioNTech and TRON with a focus on translational medicine

5 PhD positions for ATLAS, the joint PhD Program from BioNTech and TRON with a focus on translational medicine.

Mainz, Rheinland-Pfalz (DE)

Translational Oncology (TRON) Mainz

Alzheimer's Disease (AD) Researcher/Associate Researcher

Xiaoliang Sunney XIE’s Group is recruiting researchers specializing in Alzheimer's disease (AD).

Changping Laboratory

Supervisory Bioinformatics Specialist CTG Program Head

The National Library of Medicine (NLM) is a global leader in biomedical informatics and computational health data science and the world’s largest b...

Bethesda, Maryland (US)

National Library of Medicine, National Center for Biotechnology Information

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List

How-to conduct a systematic literature review: A quick guide for computer science research

Angela carrera-rivera.

a Faculty of Engineering, Mondragon University

William Ochoa

Felix larrinaga.

b Design Innovation Center(DBZ), Mondragon University

Associated Data

• No data was used for the research described in the article.

Performing a literature review is a critical first step in research to understanding the state-of-the-art and identifying gaps and challenges in the field. A systematic literature review is a method which sets out a series of steps to methodically organize the review. In this paper, we present a guide designed for researchers and in particular early-stage researchers in the computer-science field. The contribution of the article is the following:

• • Clearly defined strategies to follow for a systematic literature review in computer science research, and
• • Algorithmic method to tackle a systematic literature review.

Graphical abstract

Specifications table

Method details

A Systematic Literature Review (SLR) is a research methodology to collect, identify, and critically analyze the available research studies (e.g., articles, conference proceedings, books, dissertations) through a systematic procedure [12] . An SLR updates the reader with current literature about a subject [6] . The goal is to review critical points of current knowledge on a topic about research questions to suggest areas for further examination [5] . Defining an “Initial Idea” or interest in a subject to be studied is the first step before starting the SLR. An early search of the relevant literature can help determine whether the topic is too broad to adequately cover in the time frame and whether it is necessary to narrow the focus. Reading some articles can assist in setting the direction for a formal review., and formulating a potential research question (e.g., how is semantics involved in Industry 4.0?) can further facilitate this process. Once the focus has been established, an SLR can be undertaken to find more specific studies related to the variables in this question. Although there are multiple approaches for performing an SLR ( [5] , [26] , [27] ), this work aims to provide a step-by-step and practical guide while citing useful examples for computer-science research. The methodology presented in this paper comprises two main phases: “Planning” described in section 2, and “Conducting” described in section 3, following the depiction of the graphical abstract.

Defining the protocol is the first step of an SLR since it describes the procedures involved in the review and acts as a log of the activities to be performed. Obtaining opinions from peers while developing the protocol, is encouraged to ensure the review's consistency and validity, and helps identify when modifications are necessary [20] . One final goal of the protocol is to ensure the replicability of the review.

Define PICOC and synonyms

The PICOC (Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Context) criteria break down the SLR's objectives into searchable keywords and help formulate research questions [ 27 ]. PICOC is widely used in the medical and social sciences fields to encourage researchers to consider the components of the research questions [14] . Kitchenham & Charters [6] compiled the list of PICOC elements and their corresponding terms in computer science, as presented in Table 1 , which includes keywords derived from the PICOC elements. From that point on, it is essential to think of synonyms or “alike” terms that later can be used for building queries in the selected digital libraries. For instance, the keyword “context awareness” can also be linked to “context-aware”.

Planning Step 1 “Defining PICOC keywords and synonyms”.

Formulate research questions

Clearly defined research question(s) are the key elements which set the focus for study identification and data extraction [21] . These questions are formulated based on the PICOC criteria as presented in the example in Table 2 (PICOC keywords are underlined).

Research questions examples.

Select digital library sources

The validity of a study will depend on the proper selection of a database since it must adequately cover the area under investigation [19] . The Web of Science (WoS) is an international and multidisciplinary tool for accessing literature in science, technology, biomedicine, and other disciplines. Scopus is a database that today indexes 40,562 peer-reviewed journals, compared to 24,831 for WoS. Thus, Scopus is currently the largest existing multidisciplinary database. However, it may also be necessary to include sources relevant to computer science, such as EI Compendex, IEEE Xplore, and ACM. Table 3 compares the area of expertise of a selection of databases.

Planning Step 3 “Select digital libraries”. Description of digital libraries in computer science and software engineering.

Define inclusion and exclusion criteria

Authors should define the inclusion and exclusion criteria before conducting the review to prevent bias, although these can be adjusted later, if necessary. The selection of primary studies will depend on these criteria. Articles are included or excluded in this first selection based on abstract and primary bibliographic data. When unsure, the article is skimmed to further decide the relevance for the review. Table 4 sets out some criteria types with descriptions and examples.

Planning Step 4 “Define inclusion and exclusion criteria”. Examples of criteria type.

Define the Quality Assessment (QA) checklist

Assessing the quality of an article requires an artifact which describes how to perform a detailed assessment. A typical quality assessment is a checklist that contains multiple factors to evaluate. A numerical scale is used to assess the criteria and quantify the QA [22] . Zhou et al. [25] presented a detailed description of assessment criteria in software engineering, classified into four main aspects of study quality: Reporting, Rigor, Credibility, and Relevance. Each of these criteria can be evaluated using, for instance, a Likert-type scale [17] , as shown in Table 5 . It is essential to select the same scale for all criteria established on the quality assessment.

Planning Step 5 “Define QA assessment checklist”. Examples of QA scales and questions.

Define the “Data Extraction” form

The data extraction form represents the information necessary to answer the research questions established for the review. Synthesizing the articles is a crucial step when conducting research. Ramesh et al. [15] presented a classification scheme for computer science research, based on topics, research methods, and levels of analysis that can be used to categorize the articles selected. Classification methods and fields to consider when conducting a review are presented in Table 6 .

Planning Step 6 “Define data extraction form”. Examples of fields.

The data extraction must be relevant to the research questions, and the relationship to each of the questions should be included in the form. Kitchenham & Charters [6] presented more pertinent data that can be captured, such as conclusions, recommendations, strengths, and weaknesses. Although the data extraction form can be updated if more information is needed, this should be treated with caution since it can be time-consuming. It can therefore be helpful to first have a general background in the research topic to determine better data extraction criteria.

After defining the protocol, conducting the review requires following each of the steps previously described. Using tools can help simplify the performance of this task. Standard tools such as Excel or Google sheets allow multiple researchers to work collaboratively. Another online tool specifically designed for performing SLRs is Parsif.al 1 . This tool allows researchers, especially in the context of software engineering, to define goals and objectives, import articles using BibTeX files, eliminate duplicates, define selection criteria, and generate reports.

Build digital library search strings

Search strings are built considering the PICOC elements and synonyms to execute the search in each database library. A search string should separate the synonyms with the boolean operator OR. In comparison, the PICOC elements are separated with parentheses and the boolean operator AND. An example is presented next:

(“Smart Manufacturing” OR “Digital Manufacturing” OR “Smart Factory”) AND (“Business Process Management” OR “BPEL” OR “BPM” OR “BPMN”) AND (“Semantic Web” OR “Ontology” OR “Semantic” OR “Semantic Web Service”) AND (“Framework” OR “Extension” OR “Plugin” OR “Tool”

Gather studies

Databases that feature advanced searches enable researchers to perform search queries based on titles, abstracts, and keywords, as well as for years or areas of research. Fig. 1 presents the example of an advanced search in Scopus, using titles, abstracts, and keywords (TITLE-ABS-KEY). Most of the databases allow the use of logical operators (i.e., AND, OR). In the example, the search is for “BIG DATA” and “USER EXPERIENCE” or “UX” as a synonym.

Example of Advanced search on Scopus.

In general, bibliometric data of articles can be exported from the databases as a comma-separated-value file (CSV) or BibTeX file, which is helpful for data extraction and quantitative and qualitative analysis. In addition, researchers should take advantage of reference-management software such as Zotero, Mendeley, Endnote, or Jabref, which import bibliographic information onto the software easily.

Study Selection and Refinement

The first step in this stage is to identify any duplicates that appear in the different searches in the selected databases. Some automatic procedures, tools like Excel formulas, or programming languages (i.e., Python) can be convenient here.

In the second step, articles are included or excluded according to the selection criteria, mainly by reading titles and abstracts. Finally, the quality is assessed using the predefined scale. Fig. 2 shows an example of an article QA evaluation in Parsif.al, using a simple scale. In this scenario, the scoring procedure is the following YES= 1, PARTIALLY= 0.5, and NO or UNKNOWN = 0 . A cut-off score should be defined to filter those articles that do not pass the QA. The QA will require a light review of the full text of the article.

Performing quality assessment (QA) in Parsif.al.

Data extraction

Those articles that pass the study selection are then thoroughly and critically read. Next, the researcher completes the information required using the “data extraction” form, as illustrated in Fig. 3 , in this scenario using Parsif.al tool.

Example of data extraction form using Parsif.al.

The information required (study characteristics and findings) from each included study must be acquired and documented through careful reading. Data extraction is valuable, especially if the data requires manipulation or assumptions and inferences. Thus, information can be synthesized from the extracted data for qualitative or quantitative analysis [16] . This documentation supports clarity, precise reporting, and the ability to scrutinize and replicate the examination.

Analysis and Report

The analysis phase examines the synthesized data and extracts meaningful information from the selected articles [10] . There are two main goals in this phase.

The first goal is to analyze the literature in terms of leading authors, journals, countries, and organizations. Furthermore, it helps identify correlations among topic s . Even when not mandatory, this activity can be constructive for researchers to position their work, find trends, and find collaboration opportunities. Next, data from the selected articles can be analyzed using bibliometric analysis (BA). BA summarizes large amounts of bibliometric data to present the state of intellectual structure and emerging trends in a topic or field of research [4] . Table 7 sets out some of the most common bibliometric analysis representations.

Techniques for bibliometric analysis and examples.

Several tools can perform this type of analysis, such as Excel and Google Sheets for statistical graphs or using programming languages such as Python that has available multiple  data visualization libraries (i.e. Matplotlib, Seaborn). Cluster maps based on bibliographic data(i.e keywords, authors) can be developed in VosViewer which makes it easy to identify clusters of related items [18] . In Fig. 4 , node size is representative of the number of papers related to the keyword, and lines represent the links among keyword terms.

[1] Keyword co-relationship analysis using clusterization in vos viewer.

This second and most important goal is to answer the formulated research questions, which should include a quantitative and qualitative analysis. The quantitative analysis can make use of data categorized, labelled, or coded in the extraction form (see Section 1.6). This data can be transformed into numerical values to perform statistical analysis. One of the most widely employed method is frequency analysis, which shows the recurrence of an event, and can also represent the percental distribution of the population (i.e., percentage by technology type, frequency of use of different frameworks, etc.). Q ualitative analysis includes the narration of the results, the discussion indicating the way forward in future research work, and inferring a conclusion.

Finally, the literature review report should state the protocol to ensure others researchers can replicate the process and understand how the analysis was performed. In the protocol, it is essential to present the inclusion and exclusion criteria, quality assessment, and rationality beyond these aspects.

The presentation and reporting of results will depend on the structure of the review given by the researchers conducting the SLR, there is no one answer. This structure should tie the studies together into key themes, characteristics, or subgroups [ 28 ].

SLR can be an extensive and demanding task, however the results are beneficial in providing a comprehensive overview of the available evidence on a given topic. For this reason, researchers should keep in mind that the entire process of the SLR is tailored to answer the research question(s). This article has detailed a practical guide with the essential steps to conducting an SLR in the context of computer science and software engineering while citing multiple helpful examples and tools. It is envisaged that this method will assist researchers, and particularly early-stage researchers, in following an algorithmic approach to fulfill this task. Finally, a quick checklist is presented in Appendix A as a companion of this article.

CRediT author statement

Angela Carrera-Rivera: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing-Original. William Ochoa-Agurto : Methodology, Writing-Original. Felix Larrinaga : Reviewing and Supervision Ganix Lasa: Reviewing and Supervision.

Declaration of Competing Interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgments

Funding : This project has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie Grant No. 814078.

Carrera-Rivera, A., Larrinaga, F., & Lasa, G. (2022). Context-awareness for the design of Smart-product service systems: Literature review. Computers in Industry, 142, 103730.

1 https://parsif.al/

Data Availability

• UConn Library
• Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide
• Introduction

Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide — Introduction

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

What are Literature Reviews?

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

Goals of Literature Reviews

What are the goals of creating a Literature Review?  A literature could be written to accomplish different aims:

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

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

What kinds of sources require a Literature Review?

• A research paper assigned in a course
• A thesis or dissertation
• A grant proposal
• An article intended for publication in a journal

All these instances require you to collect what has been written about your research topic so that you can demonstrate how your own research sheds new light on the topic.

Types of Literature Reviews

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

Narrative review: The purpose of this type of review is to describe the current state of the research on a specific topic/research and to offer a critical analysis of the literature reviewed. Studies are grouped by research/theoretical categories, and themes and trends, strengths and weakness, and gaps are identified. The review ends with a conclusion section which summarizes the findings regarding the state of the research of the specific study, the gaps identify and if applicable, explains how the author's research will address gaps identify in the review and expand the knowledge on the topic reviewed.

• Example : Predictors and Outcomes of U.S. Quality Maternity Leave: A Review and Conceptual Framework:  10.1177/08948453211037398  

Systematic review : "The authors of a systematic review use a specific procedure to search the research literature, select the studies to include in their review, and critically evaluate the studies they find." (p. 139). Nelson, L. K. (2013). Research in Communication Sciences and Disorders . Plural Publishing.

• Example : The effect of leave policies on increasing fertility: a systematic review:  10.1057/s41599-022-01270-w

Meta-analysis : "Meta-analysis is a method of reviewing research findings in a quantitative fashion by transforming the data from individual studies into what is called an effect size and then pooling and analyzing this information. The basic goal in meta-analysis is to explain why different outcomes have occurred in different studies." (p. 197). Roberts, M. C., & Ilardi, S. S. (2003). Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology . Blackwell Publishing.

• Example : Employment Instability and Fertility in Europe: A Meta-Analysis:  10.1215/00703370-9164737

Meta-synthesis : "Qualitative meta-synthesis is a type of qualitative study that uses as data the findings from other qualitative studies linked by the same or related topic." (p.312). Zimmer, L. (2006). Qualitative meta-synthesis: A question of dialoguing with texts .  Journal of Advanced Nursing , 53 (3), 311-318.

• Example : Women’s perspectives on career successes and barriers: A qualitative meta-synthesis:  10.1177/05390184221113735

Literature Reviews in the Health Sciences

• UConn Health subject guide on systematic reviews Explanation of the different review types used in health sciences literature as well as tools to help you find the right review type
• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: How to Pick a Topic >>
• Last Updated: Sep 21, 2022 2:16 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uconn.edu/literaturereview

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

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Request Info
• Search Search Site Faculty/Staff
• Open Navigation Menu Menu Close Navigation Menu
• Literature Review Guidelines

Making sense of what has been written on your topic.

Goals of a literature review:.

Before doing work in primary sources, historians must know what has been written on their topic.  They must be familiar with theories and arguments–as well as facts–that appear in secondary sources.

Before you proceed with your research project, you too must be familiar with the literature: you do not want to waste time on theories that others have disproved and you want to take full advantage of what others have argued.  You want to be able to discuss and analyze your topic.

Your literature review will demonstrate your familiarity with your topic’s secondary literature.

GUIDELINES FOR A LITERATURE REVIEW:

1) LENGTH:  8-10 pages of text for Senior Theses (485) (consult with your professor for other classes), with either footnotes or endnotes and with a works-consulted bibliography. [See also the  citation guide  on this site.]

2) NUMBER OF WORKS REVIEWED: Depends on the assignment, but for Senior Theses (485), at least ten is typical.

3) CHOOSING WORKS:

Your literature review must include enough works to provide evidence of both the breadth and the depth of the research on your topic or, at least, one important angle of it.  The number of works necessary to do this will depend on your topic. For most topics, AT LEAST TEN works (mostly books but also significant scholarly articles) are necessary, although you will not necessarily give all of them equal treatment in your paper (e.g., some might appear in notes rather than the essay). 4) ORGANIZING/ARRANGING THE LITERATURE:

As you uncover the literature (i.e., secondary writing) on your topic, you should determine how the various pieces relate to each other.  Your ability to do so will demonstrate your understanding of the evolution of literature.

You might determine that the literature makes sense when divided by time period, by methodology, by sources, by discipline, by thematic focus, by race, ethnicity, and/or gender of author, or by political ideology.  This list is not exhaustive.  You might also decide to subdivide categories based on other criteria.  There is no “rule” on divisions—historians wrote the literature without consulting each other and without regard to the goal of fitting into a neat, obvious organization useful to students.

The key step is to FIGURE OUT the most logical, clarifying angle.  Do not arbitrarily choose a categorization; use the one that the literature seems to fall into.  How do you do that?  For every source, you should note its thesis, date, author background, methodology, and sources.  Does a pattern appear when you consider such information from each of your sources?  If so, you have a possible thesis about the literature.  If not, you might still have a thesis.

Consider: Are there missing elements in the literature?  For example, no works published during a particular (usually fairly lengthy) time period?  Or do studies appear after long neglect of a topic?  Do interpretations change at some point?  Does the major methodology being used change?  Do interpretations vary based on sources used?

Follow these links for more help on analyzing  historiography  and  historical perspective .

5) CONTENTS OF LITERATURE REVIEW:

The literature review is a research paper with three ingredients:

a) A brief discussion of the issue (the person, event, idea). [While this section should be brief, it needs to set up the thesis and literature that follow.] b) Your thesis about the literature c) A clear argument, using the works on topic as evidence, i.e., you discuss the sources in relation to your thesis, not as a separate topic.

These ingredients must be presented in an essay with an introduction, body, and conclusion.

6) ARGUING YOUR THESIS:

The thesis of a literature review should not only describe how the literature has evolved, but also provide a clear evaluation of that literature.  You should assess the literature in terms of the quality of either individual works or categories of works.  For instance, you might argue that a certain approach (e.g. social history, cultural history, or another) is better because it deals with a more complex view of the issue or because they use a wider array of source materials more effectively. You should also ensure that you integrate that evaluation throughout your argument.  Doing so might include negative assessments of some works in order to reinforce your argument regarding the positive qualities of other works and approaches to the topic.

Within each group, you should provide essential information about each work: the author’s thesis, the work’s title and date, the author’s supporting arguments and major evidence.

In most cases, arranging the sources chronologically by publication date within each section makes the most sense because earlier works influenced later ones in one way or another.  Reference to publication date also indicates that you are aware of this significant historiographical element.

As you discuss each work, DO NOT FORGET WHY YOU ARE DISCUSSING IT.  YOU ARE PRESENTING AND SUPPORTING A THESIS ABOUT THE LITERATURE.

When discussing a particular work for the first time, you should refer to it by the author’s full name, the work’s title, and year of publication (either in parentheses after the title or worked into the sentence).

For example, “The field of slavery studies has recently been transformed by Ben Johnson’s The New Slave (2001)” and “Joe Doe argues in his 1997 study, Slavery in America, that . . . .”

Your paper should always note secondary sources’ relationship to each other, particularly in terms of your thesis about the literature (e.g., “Unlike Smith’s work, Mary Brown’s analysis reaches the conclusion that . . . .” and “Because of Anderson’s reliance on the president’s personal papers, his interpretation differs from Barry’s”). The various pieces of the literature are “related” to each other, so you need to indicate to the reader some of that relationship.  (It helps the reader follow your thesis, and it convinces the reader that you know what you are talking about.)

7) DOCUMENTATION:

Each source you discuss in your paper must be documented using footnotes/endnotes and a bibliography.  Providing author and title and date in the paper is not sufficient.  Use correct Turabian/Chicago Manual of Style form.  [See  Bibliography  and  Footnotes/Endnotes  pages.]

In addition, further supporting, but less significant, sources should be included in  content foot or endnotes .  (e.g., “For a similar argument to Ben Johnson’s, see John Terry, The Slave Who Was New (New York: W. W. Norton, 1985), 3-45.”)

8 ) CONCLUSION OF LITERATURE REVIEW:

Your conclusion should not only reiterate your argument (thesis), but also discuss questions that remain unanswered by the literature.  What has the literature accomplished?  What has not been studied?  What debates need to be settled?

Additional writing guidelines

History and American Studies

• About the Department
• Major Requirements & Courses
• What courses will I take as an History major?
• What can I do with my History degree?
• History 485
• Methodology
• Choosing a Topic
• Book Reviews
• Historiographic Clues
• Understanding Historical Perspective
• Sample Literature Review
• Using Quotations
• Ellipses and Brackets
• Footnotes and Endnotes
• Content Notes
• Citation Guide
• Citing Non-Print Resources
• How to Annotate
• Annotated Examples
• Journals vs. Magazines
• Understanding Plagiarism
• Historians Define Plagiarism
• Plagiarism Tutorial
• UMW Honor System
• Presentation Guidelines
• Tips for Leading Seminars
• Hints for Class Discussion
• Speaking Center
• Guidelines for a Research Paper
• Library Research Plan
• How to Use ILL
• Database Guide
• Guide to Online Research
• Writing Guidelines
• Recognizing Passive Voice
• Introduction and Conclusion
• MS Word’s Grammar and Spellcheck
• Writing Center
• What You Need to Know
• Links to Online Primary Sources by Region
• What will I learn from my American Studies major?
• What courses will I take as an American Studies major?
• What can I do with my American Studies degree?
• American Studies 485
• For Prospective Students
• Honors and Award Recipients
• Internships

Alumni Intros

How have History & American Studies majors built careers after earning their degrees? Learn more by clicking the image above.  

Recent Posts

• History and American Studies Symposium–April 26, 2024
• Fall 2024 Courses
• Fall 2023 Symposium – 12/8 – All Welcome!
• Spring ’24 Course Flyers
• Internship Opportunity – Chesapeake Gateways Ambassador
• Congratulations to our Graduates!
• History and American Studies Symposium–April 21, 2023
• View umwhistory’s profile on Facebook
• View umwhistory’s profile on Twitter

PSYC 210: Foundations of Psychology

• Tips for Searching for Articles

What is a literature review?

Conducting a literature review, organizing a literature review, writing a literature review, helpful book.

• Avoiding Plagiarism
• Google Scholar

A  literature review  is a compilation of the works published in a particular field of study or line of research, usually over a specific period of time, in the form of an in-depth, critical bibliographic essay or annotated list in which attention is drawn to the most significant works.

• Summarizes and analyzes previous research relevant to a topic
• Includes scholarly books and articles published in academic journals
• Can be an specific scholarly paper or a section in a research paper

The objective of a Literature Review is to find previous published scholarly works relevant to an specific topic

• Help gather ideas or information
• Keep up to date in current trends and findings
• Help develop new questions

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
• Helps focus your own research questions or problems
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas
• Suggests unexplored ideas or populations
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic
• Tests assumptions; may help counter preconceived ideas and remove unconscious bias
• Identifies critical gaps, points of disagreement, or potentially flawed methodology or theoretical approaches

Source: "What is a Literature Review?", Old Dominion University,  https://guides.lib.odu.edu/c.php?g=966167&p=6980532

1. Choose a topic. Define your research question. 

Your literature review should be guided by a central research question. It 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.
• Write down terms that are related to your question for they will be useful for searches later. 

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.
• Consider these things when planning your time for research. 

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

• By Research Guide 

4. Conduct your searches and find the literature. 

• Review the abstracts carefully - this will save you time!
• Many databases will have a search history tab for you to return to for later.
• Use bibliographies and references of research studies to locate others.
• Use citation management software such as Zotero to keep track of your research citations. 

5. Review the literature. 

Some questions to help you analyze the research: 

• What was the research question you are reviewing? What are the authors trying to discover? 
• Was the research funded by a source that could influence the findings? 
• What were the research methodologies? Analyze the literature review, samples and variables used, results, and conclusions. Does the research seem complete? Could it have been conducted more soundly? What further questions does it raise? 
• If there are conflicted studies, why do you think that is? 
• How are the authors viewed in the field? Are they experts or novices? Has the study been cited? 

Source: "Literature Review", University of West Florida,  https://libguides.uwf.edu/c.php?g=215113&p=5139469

A literature review is not a summary of the sources but a synthesis of the sources. It is made up of the topics the sources are discussing. Each section of the review is focused on a topic, and the relevant sources are discussed within the context of that topic. 

1. Select the most relevant material from the sources

• Could be material that answers the question directly
• Extract as a direct quote or paraphrase 

2. Arrange that material so you can focus on it apart from the source text itself

• You are now working with fewer words/passages
• Material is all in one place

3. Group similar points, themes, or topics together and label them 

• The labels describe the points, themes, or topics that are the backbone of your paper’s structure

4. Order those points, themes, or topics as you will discuss them in the paper, and turn the labels into actual assertions

• A sentence that makes a point that is directly related to your research question or thesis 

This is now the outline for your literature review. 

Source: "Organizing a Review of the Literature – The Basics", George Mason University Writing Center,  https://writingcenter.gmu.edu/writing-resources/research-based-writing/organizing-literature-reviews-the-basics

• Literature Review Matrix Here is a template on how people tend to organize their thoughts. The matrix template is a good way to write out the key parts of each article and take notes. Downloads as an XLSX file.

The most common way that literature reviews are organized is by theme or author. Find a general pattern of structure for the review. When organizing the review, consider the following: 

• the methodology 
• the quality of the findings or conclusions
• major strengths and weaknesses
• any other important information

Writing Tips: 

• Be selective - Select only the most important points in each source to highlight in the review. It should directly relate to the review's focus.
• Use quotes sparingly.
• Keep your own voice - Your voice (the writer's) should remain front and center. .   
• Aim for one key figure/table per section to illustrate complex content, summarize a large body of relevant data, or describe the order of a process
• Legend below image/figure and above table and always refer to them in text 

Source: "Composing your Literature Review", Florida A&M University,  https://library.famu.edu/c.php?g=577356&p=3982811

• << Previous: Tips for Searching for Articles
• Next: Citing Your Sources >>
• Last Updated: Aug 21, 2024 3:43 PM
• URL: https://infoguides.pepperdine.edu/PSYC210

Explore. Discover. Create.

Copyright ©  2022  Pepperdine University

Loading metrics

Open Access

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review

* E-mail: [email protected]

Affiliations Centre for Functional and Evolutionary Ecology (CEFE), CNRS, Montpellier, France, Centre for Biodiversity Synthesis and Analysis (CESAB), FRB, Aix-en-Provence, France

• Marco Pautasso

Published: July 18, 2013

• https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149
• Reader Comments

Citation: Pautasso M (2013) Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review. PLoS Comput Biol 9(7): e1003149. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149

Editor: Philip E. Bourne, University of California San Diego, United States of America

Copyright: © 2013 Marco Pautasso. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

Funding: This work was funded by the French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB) through its Centre for Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity data (CESAB), as part of the NETSEED research project. The funders had no role in the preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests: The author has declared that no competing interests exist.

Literature reviews are in great demand in most scientific fields. Their need stems from the ever-increasing output of scientific publications [1] . For example, compared to 1991, in 2008 three, eight, and forty times more papers were indexed in Web of Science on malaria, obesity, and biodiversity, respectively [2] . Given such mountains of papers, scientists cannot be expected to examine in detail every single new paper relevant to their interests [3] . Thus, it is both advantageous and necessary to rely on regular summaries of the recent literature. Although recognition for scientists mainly comes from primary research, timely literature reviews can lead to new synthetic insights and are often widely read [4] . For such summaries to be useful, however, they need to be compiled in a professional way [5] .

When starting from scratch, reviewing the literature can require a titanic amount of work. That is why researchers who have spent their career working on a certain research issue are in a perfect position to review that literature. Some graduate schools are now offering courses in reviewing the literature, given that most research students start their project by producing an overview of what has already been done on their research issue [6] . However, it is likely that most scientists have not thought in detail about how to approach and carry out a literature review.

Reviewing the literature requires the ability to juggle multiple tasks, from finding and evaluating relevant material to synthesising information from various sources, from critical thinking to paraphrasing, evaluating, and citation skills [7] . In this contribution, I share ten simple rules I learned working on about 25 literature reviews as a PhD and postdoctoral student. Ideas and insights also come from discussions with coauthors and colleagues, as well as feedback from reviewers and editors.

Rule 1: Define a Topic and Audience

How to choose which topic to review? There are so many issues in contemporary science that you could spend a lifetime of attending conferences and reading the literature just pondering what to review. On the one hand, if you take several years to choose, several other people may have had the same idea in the meantime. On the other hand, only a well-considered topic is likely to lead to a brilliant literature review [8] . The topic must at least be:

• interesting to you (ideally, you should have come across a series of recent papers related to your line of work that call for a critical summary),
• an important aspect of the field (so that many readers will be interested in the review and there will be enough material to write it), and
• a well-defined issue (otherwise you could potentially include thousands of publications, which would make the review unhelpful).

Ideas for potential reviews may come from papers providing lists of key research questions to be answered [9] , but also from serendipitous moments during desultory reading and discussions. In addition to choosing your topic, you should also select a target audience. In many cases, the topic (e.g., web services in computational biology) will automatically define an audience (e.g., computational biologists), but that same topic may also be of interest to neighbouring fields (e.g., computer science, biology, etc.).

Rule 2: Search and Re-search the Literature

After having chosen your topic and audience, start by checking the literature and downloading relevant papers. Five pieces of advice here:

• keep track of the search items you use (so that your search can be replicated [10] ),
• keep a list of papers whose pdfs you cannot access immediately (so as to retrieve them later with alternative strategies),
• use a paper management system (e.g., Mendeley, Papers, Qiqqa, Sente),
• define early in the process some criteria for exclusion of irrelevant papers (these criteria can then be described in the review to help define its scope), and
• do not just look for research papers in the area you wish to review, but also seek previous reviews.

The chances are high that someone will already have published a literature review ( Figure 1 ), if not exactly on the issue you are planning to tackle, at least on a related topic. If there are already a few or several reviews of the literature on your issue, my advice is not to give up, but to carry on with your own literature review,

• PPT PowerPoint slide
• PNG larger image
• TIFF original image

The bottom-right situation (many literature reviews but few research papers) is not just a theoretical situation; it applies, for example, to the study of the impacts of climate change on plant diseases, where there appear to be more literature reviews than research studies [33] .

https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149.g001

• discussing in your review the approaches, limitations, and conclusions of past reviews,
• trying to find a new angle that has not been covered adequately in the previous reviews, and
• incorporating new material that has inevitably accumulated since their appearance.

When searching the literature for pertinent papers and reviews, the usual rules apply:

• be thorough,
• use different keywords and database sources (e.g., DBLP, Google Scholar, ISI Proceedings, JSTOR Search, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science), and
• look at who has cited past relevant papers and book chapters.

Rule 3: Take Notes While Reading

If you read the papers first, and only afterwards start writing the review, you will need a very good memory to remember who wrote what, and what your impressions and associations were while reading each single paper. My advice is, while reading, to start writing down interesting pieces of information, insights about how to organize the review, and thoughts on what to write. This way, by the time you have read the literature you selected, you will already have a rough draft of the review.

Of course, this draft will still need much rewriting, restructuring, and rethinking to obtain a text with a coherent argument [11] , but you will have avoided the danger posed by staring at a blank document. Be careful when taking notes to use quotation marks if you are provisionally copying verbatim from the literature. It is advisable then to reformulate such quotes with your own words in the final draft. It is important to be careful in noting the references already at this stage, so as to avoid misattributions. Using referencing software from the very beginning of your endeavour will save you time.

Rule 4: Choose the Type of Review You Wish to Write

After having taken notes while reading the literature, you will have a rough idea of the amount of material available for the review. This is probably a good time to decide whether to go for a mini- or a full review. Some journals are now favouring the publication of rather short reviews focusing on the last few years, with a limit on the number of words and citations. A mini-review is not necessarily a minor review: it may well attract more attention from busy readers, although it will inevitably simplify some issues and leave out some relevant material due to space limitations. A full review will have the advantage of more freedom to cover in detail the complexities of a particular scientific development, but may then be left in the pile of the very important papers “to be read” by readers with little time to spare for major monographs.

There is probably a continuum between mini- and full reviews. The same point applies to the dichotomy of descriptive vs. integrative reviews. While descriptive reviews focus on the methodology, findings, and interpretation of each reviewed study, integrative reviews attempt to find common ideas and concepts from the reviewed material [12] . A similar distinction exists between narrative and systematic reviews: while narrative reviews are qualitative, systematic reviews attempt to test a hypothesis based on the published evidence, which is gathered using a predefined protocol to reduce bias [13] , [14] . When systematic reviews analyse quantitative results in a quantitative way, they become meta-analyses. The choice between different review types will have to be made on a case-by-case basis, depending not just on the nature of the material found and the preferences of the target journal(s), but also on the time available to write the review and the number of coauthors [15] .

Rule 5: Keep the Review Focused, but Make It of Broad Interest

Whether your plan is to write a mini- or a full review, it is good advice to keep it focused 16 , 17 . Including material just for the sake of it can easily lead to reviews that are trying to do too many things at once. The need to keep a review focused can be problematic for interdisciplinary reviews, where the aim is to bridge the gap between fields [18] . If you are writing a review on, for example, how epidemiological approaches are used in modelling the spread of ideas, you may be inclined to include material from both parent fields, epidemiology and the study of cultural diffusion. This may be necessary to some extent, but in this case a focused review would only deal in detail with those studies at the interface between epidemiology and the spread of ideas.

While focus is an important feature of a successful review, this requirement has to be balanced with the need to make the review relevant to a broad audience. This square may be circled by discussing the wider implications of the reviewed topic for other disciplines.

Rule 6: Be Critical and Consistent

Reviewing the literature is not stamp collecting. A good review does not just summarize the literature, but discusses it critically, identifies methodological problems, and points out research gaps [19] . After having read a review of the literature, a reader should have a rough idea of:

• the major achievements in the reviewed field,
• the main areas of debate, and
• the outstanding research questions.

It is challenging to achieve a successful review on all these fronts. A solution can be to involve a set of complementary coauthors: some people are excellent at mapping what has been achieved, some others are very good at identifying dark clouds on the horizon, and some have instead a knack at predicting where solutions are going to come from. If your journal club has exactly this sort of team, then you should definitely write a review of the literature! In addition to critical thinking, a literature review needs consistency, for example in the choice of passive vs. active voice and present vs. past tense.

Rule 7: Find a Logical Structure

Like a well-baked cake, a good review has a number of telling features: it is worth the reader's time, timely, systematic, well written, focused, and critical. It also needs a good structure. With reviews, the usual subdivision of research papers into introduction, methods, results, and discussion does not work or is rarely used. However, a general introduction of the context and, toward the end, a recapitulation of the main points covered and take-home messages make sense also in the case of reviews. For systematic reviews, there is a trend towards including information about how the literature was searched (database, keywords, time limits) [20] .

How can you organize the flow of the main body of the review so that the reader will be drawn into and guided through it? It is generally helpful to draw a conceptual scheme of the review, e.g., with mind-mapping techniques. Such diagrams can help recognize a logical way to order and link the various sections of a review [21] . This is the case not just at the writing stage, but also for readers if the diagram is included in the review as a figure. A careful selection of diagrams and figures relevant to the reviewed topic can be very helpful to structure the text too [22] .

Rule 8: Make Use of Feedback

Reviews of the literature are normally peer-reviewed in the same way as research papers, and rightly so [23] . As a rule, incorporating feedback from reviewers greatly helps improve a review draft. Having read the review with a fresh mind, reviewers may spot inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and ambiguities that had not been noticed by the writers due to rereading the typescript too many times. It is however advisable to reread the draft one more time before submission, as a last-minute correction of typos, leaps, and muddled sentences may enable the reviewers to focus on providing advice on the content rather than the form.

Feedback is vital to writing a good review, and should be sought from a variety of colleagues, so as to obtain a diversity of views on the draft. This may lead in some cases to conflicting views on the merits of the paper, and on how to improve it, but such a situation is better than the absence of feedback. A diversity of feedback perspectives on a literature review can help identify where the consensus view stands in the landscape of the current scientific understanding of an issue [24] .

Rule 9: Include Your Own Relevant Research, but Be Objective

In many cases, reviewers of the literature will have published studies relevant to the review they are writing. This could create a conflict of interest: how can reviewers report objectively on their own work [25] ? Some scientists may be overly enthusiastic about what they have published, and thus risk giving too much importance to their own findings in the review. However, bias could also occur in the other direction: some scientists may be unduly dismissive of their own achievements, so that they will tend to downplay their contribution (if any) to a field when reviewing it.

In general, a review of the literature should neither be a public relations brochure nor an exercise in competitive self-denial. If a reviewer is up to the job of producing a well-organized and methodical review, which flows well and provides a service to the readership, then it should be possible to be objective in reviewing one's own relevant findings. In reviews written by multiple authors, this may be achieved by assigning the review of the results of a coauthor to different coauthors.

Rule 10: Be Up-to-Date, but Do Not Forget Older Studies

Given the progressive acceleration in the publication of scientific papers, today's reviews of the literature need awareness not just of the overall direction and achievements of a field of inquiry, but also of the latest studies, so as not to become out-of-date before they have been published. Ideally, a literature review should not identify as a major research gap an issue that has just been addressed in a series of papers in press (the same applies, of course, to older, overlooked studies (“sleeping beauties” [26] )). This implies that literature reviewers would do well to keep an eye on electronic lists of papers in press, given that it can take months before these appear in scientific databases. Some reviews declare that they have scanned the literature up to a certain point in time, but given that peer review can be a rather lengthy process, a full search for newly appeared literature at the revision stage may be worthwhile. Assessing the contribution of papers that have just appeared is particularly challenging, because there is little perspective with which to gauge their significance and impact on further research and society.

Inevitably, new papers on the reviewed topic (including independently written literature reviews) will appear from all quarters after the review has been published, so that there may soon be the need for an updated review. But this is the nature of science [27] – [32] . I wish everybody good luck with writing a review of the literature.

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to M. Barbosa, K. Dehnen-Schmutz, T. Döring, D. Fontaneto, M. Garbelotto, O. Holdenrieder, M. Jeger, D. Lonsdale, A. MacLeod, P. Mills, M. Moslonka-Lefebvre, G. Stancanelli, P. Weisberg, and X. Xu for insights and discussions, and to P. Bourne, T. Matoni, and D. Smith for helpful comments on a previous draft.

• 1. Rapple C (2011) The role of the critical review article in alleviating information overload. Annual Reviews White Paper. Available: http://www.annualreviews.org/userimages/ContentEditor/1300384004941/Annual_Reviews_WhitePaper_Web_2011.pdf . Accessed May 2013.
• View Article
• Google Scholar
• 7. Budgen D, Brereton P (2006) Performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Proc 28th Int Conf Software Engineering, ACM New York, NY, USA, pp. 1051–1052. doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/1134285.1134500 .
• 16. Eco U (1977) Come si fa una tesi di laurea. Milan: Bompiani.
• 17. Hart C (1998) Doing a literature review: releasing the social science research imagination. London: SAGE.
• 21. Ridley D (2008) The literature review: a step-by-step guide for students. London: SAGE.

• Boston University Libraries

Literature Reviews in Social Work

• Guidelines for Writing a Literature Review
• Types of Reviews

Literature Review Checklist

• Starting Your Search and Search Strategies
• Associations and Research Institutes
• Citing Your Sources

Some initial first steps towards a strong literature review are:

• This could be by chronology, theme, method, or theory. 
• This could be the time frame, type of source, or other defining criteria for inclusion or exclusion.
• Evaluating and synthesizing the material you have found, pointing out common themes, gaps in the literature, contradictory research findings, and suggest areas for further research when possible
• Clearly relating the synthesis and evaluation of material to the topic or issue outlined as  the purpose of the review
• Carefully citing all the research studies, quotations, and other material used in the review in the format designated for the assignment. If you are using the exact text from an author’s work, be sure to use quotation marks around the text.  If paraphrasing points made in an article in your own words, be sure to provide a citation

We want our literature reviews to be focused, critical, and engaging. Sometimes, it is helpful to review the following questions as a checklist to yourself. If you answer no, you might want to return to your literature review with this in mind.

Organization and Structure

• Have you organized your literature review? This could be by chronological order, theme, method, or theory.
• Does your literature review have organization and structure?
• Does it have focus, unity, and coherence?
• Is there a clear focus for your literature review?
• Are you citing key researchers, scholars, or thinkers related to this subject?
• Have you eliminated discussing sources that do not related to our research topic at all?
• Have you eliminated repetitive words and phrases?
• Have you changed verbose words when they are not needed?
• Have you critically summarized and evaluated sources in your subject matter? 
• Have you addressed the quality of the research of each resource (book, article, etc.)?
• Have you summarized the argument, conclusions, and research design of the resource?
• Have you critically evaluated the research? This can include engagement with population(s), research design, scope of research, successful argumentation, contributions to the field, authoritative evidence, and ethics of the research. 
• Have you addressed the contributions of the resource to the field?
• Have you cited all your sources both within the literature review and at the end of the document?

• << Previous: Types of Reviews
• Next: Starting Your Search and Search Strategies >>
• Last Updated: Aug 28, 2024 3:02 PM
• URL: https://library.bu.edu/literaturereviews

Literature review guidelines

Developed by James O'Neill with assistance from Ronald Levant, Rod Watts, Andrew Smiler, Michael Addis, and Stephen Wester.

General considerations

• A good review should summarize the state of knowledge on a well-defined topic in the psychology of men and masculinity in concise and clear ways. This means that the review is written with exceptional clarity, cohesiveness, conciseness, and comprehensiveness.
• A good review should describe in detail the systematic process or method that was used in doing the literature review. There are articulated ways to do "narrative reviews" just as there are ways of doing experiments or meta-analyses (Baumeister & Leary, 1997; Bem, 1995).

Essential elements for a review

• Focus on an important, relevant, and operationally defined topic in the psychology of men and masculinity, and make a strong case for why a literature review of this topic is important.
• Include a critical and inclusive review of previous theory related to the relevant topic. "Critical" means that the literature review reveals problems, contradictions, controversies, strengths, next steps, and potentials in the theories. "Inclusive" means that there is an active evaluation of all of the theory relevant to the topic.
• Include a critical and inclusive review of previous empirical research related to the relevant topic.
• Critically analyze the distinction between authors' interpretation of their data and the actual empirical evidence presented. A good review critically analyses how accurately previous authors have reported their findings and whether they have refrained from asserting conclusions not supported by data.
• Discuss the methodological diversity of studies reported in the literature review and the implications of this diversity for new knowledge or future research.
• Raise provocative and innovative questions on the topic not discussed before in the literature.
• Write the review so that theoretical knowledge and empirical research is significantly advanced in the psychology of men and masculinity, and that there is an overall contribution to the field's theory, research, and clinical practice.
• Include many "take home messages" (Sternberg, 1991) that generate new theories and empirical research.

Sections that might be included in a review

• Provide a historical account or background of the development of the theory or research program reviewed.
• Include persuasive arguments and articulated points of view on the topic from both theoretical and empirical perspectives.
• Propose novel conceptualizations or theories based on reviews of previous theories and empirical research.
• Propose new research paradigms or testable hypotheses that advance future research.
• Propose new therapeutic paradigms or testable hypotheses that advance clinical practice/psychoeducational programming with men.
• Address the frequent gap between reporting theory/research and interpreting the meaning of the theory and research.

It is not expected that reviews will be able to meet all of the above-listed criteria, but authors should meet many of them.

• Bem, D. J. (1995). Writing a review article for Psychological Bulletin. Psychological Bulletin, 118 , 172–177.
• Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1997). Writing narrative literature reviews. Review of General Psychology, 1 , 311–320.
• Sternberg, R. J. (1991). Editorial. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 3–4.

More about this journal

• Psychology of Men & Masculinities
• Pricing and subscription info
• Read sample articles
• General call for papers
• Call for papers: Advancements in research methods in the psychology of men and masculinities

Contact Journals

How educational chatbots support self-regulated learning? A systematic review of the literature

• Open access
• Published: 30 August 2024

Cite this article

You have full access to this open access article

• Rui Guan   ORCID: orcid.org/0009-0006-4789-3741 1 ,
• Mladen Raković   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1413-1103 1 ,
• Guanliang Chen   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-8236-3133 1 &
• Dragan Gašević   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-9265-1908 1 , 2  

Engagement in self-regulated learning (SRL) may improve academic achievements and support development of lifelong learning skills. Despite its educational potential, many students find SRL challenging. Educational chatbots have a potential to scaffold or externally regulate SRL processes by interacting with students in an adaptive way. However, to our knowledge, researchers have yet to learn whether and how educational chatbots developed so far have (1) promoted learning processes pertaining to SRL and (2) improved student learning performance in different tasks. To contribute this new knowledge to the field, we conducted a systematic literature review of the studies on educational chatbots that can be linked to processes of SRL. In doing so, we followed the PRISMA guidelines. We collected and reviewed publications published between 2012 and 2023, and identified 27 publications for analysis. We found that educational chatbots so far have mainly supported learners to identify learning resources, enact appropriate learning strategies, and metacognitively monitor their studying. Limited guidance has been provided to students to set learning goals, create learning plans, reflect on their prior studying, and adapt to their future studying. Most of the chatbots in the reviewed corpus of studies appeared to promote productive SRL processes and boost learning performance of students across different domains, confirming the potential of this technology to support SRL. However, in some studies the chatbot interventions showed non-significant and mixed effects. In this paper, we also discuss the findings and provide recommendations for future research.

Explore related subjects

• Artificial Intelligence
• Digital Education and Educational Technology

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

1 Introduction

Self-regulated learning (SRL) is considered a complex set of recursive and goal-oriented learning processes (Panadero, 2017 ). Self-regulated learners set their learning goals and actively select, monitor and modify their learning strategies to accomplish these goals and succeed in different learning tasks (Zimmerman, 2013 ; Winne & Hadwin, 1998 ; Winne, 2022 ; Cleary et al., 2022 ). Self-regulated learners are thus in control over their learning processes and learning goals (Winne, 2018 ). As engagement in SRL processes has a potential to improve academic achievements and, more broadly, to support lifelong learning (Cleary & Chen, 2009 ; Klug et al., 2011 ; Recommendation, 2018 ; Theobald, 2021 ), it is critical for students to master their command of SRL and become productive learners in different domains of knowledge.

To advance understanding of SRL and identify the relationships among different learning processes involved, researchers have proposed several SRL theoretical frameworks, such as Winne and Hadwin ( 1998 ); Winne ( 2018 ); Zimmerman ( 2000 ); Pintrich ( 2000 ). Although differences among these theoretical models are noticeable, these models broadly agree that SRL is a cyclic process that involves a repertoire of learning goals and learning strategies (Panadero, 2017 ). For example, according to Zimmerman ( 2000 ), self-regulated learners selectively use specific processes to work on learning tasks, over three cyclical phases: forethought, performance and self-refection. Winne and Hadwin ( 1998 )’s theoretical model describes SRL as a dynamic set of skills where learning unfolds over five facets (conditions, operations, products, evaluations, and standards - COPES) and four phases (defining task requirements, setting goals and devising plans, enacting study tactics, and adapting future studying).

Even though researchers have made a substantial progress over the past several decades towards deeper understanding and more effective support for learning processes involved in SRL, development of SRL skills is still considered challenging for many students (Bjork et al., 2013 ). For example, students struggle to gather appropriate resources for a learning task (List & Du, 2021 ); set relevant, specific and attainable goals to guide their engagement with the task(McCardle et al., 2017 ); select appropriate learning strategies and effectively use them (Azevedo, 2018 ; List & Lin, 2023 ); and accurately monitor and evaluate their own progress (Zimmerman, 2002 ; Gutierrez de Blume, 2022 ; Lim et al., 2023 ). Students often need guidance to successfully enact these learning processes. Educational researchers and practitioners proposed different types of external support to students as they are developing SRL skills (Jivet et al., 2020 , 2021 ; Perez-Alvarez et al., 2022 ). Broadly, the SRL support has so far been provided in a more traditional way, e.g., via a classroom-style coaching on goal setting (McCardle et al., 2017 ; Morisano et al., 2010 ; Alessandri et al., 2020 ) and metacognitive strategies (Cleary et al., 2022 ; Dignath & Veenman, 2021 ), and, more recently, using technology-enhanced learning platforms, e.g., computer-based scaffolding environments that support task orientation, strategy use and metacognitive monitoring (Baker et al., 2020 ; Azevedo et al., 2017 ; Azevedo & Aleven, 2013 ; Pérez et al., 2020 ; Jivet et al., 2020 , 2021 ; Dever et al., 2023 ; Srivastava et al., 2022 ; Lim et al., 2023 ).

In recent years, researchers have become increasingly interested in using chatbots to address educational problems (Wollny et al., 2021 ; Li et al., 2023 ; Dai et al., 2023 ). One of the main reasons for such increased interest is that chatbots have a potential to scaffold or externally regulate learning processes in dynamically changing learning contexts like SRL (Azevedo & Hadwin, 2005 ), because chatbots use artificial intelligence and natural language processing to simulate and adapt to conversation with humans. Following the growing interest in educational chatbots, researchers have recently published several literature reviews on the topic (Winkler & Söllner, 2018 ; Pérez et al., 2020 ; Smutny & Schreiberova, 2020 ). All these reviews have contributed a significant knowledge to this field, providing valuable findings about the currently available educational chatbots across disciplines and the benefits of using chatbot technologies in education to, e.g., supplement teaching or recommend learning content to students. However, to our knowledge, researchers have yet to learn how educational chatbots developed so far have supported processes theorised in SRL. These new findings may add to the current educational research and practice given the documented benefits of SRL skills for academic performance and life-long learning. To contribute new research knowledge to the fields of educational technology and learning sciences, we conducted the present systematic review of the literature explicitly focusing on how educational chatbots have been used to support SRL processes and learning achievements. Our analysis was based on Winne and Hadwin ( 1998 )’s theoretical framework that defined facets and phases of SRL. Our findings may inform future research related to development and implementation of educational chatbots that provide a more comprehensive SRL support to learners.

2 Background

2.1 srl theoretical framework to guide this systematic review.

Different theoretical frameworks have been proposed to date to define SRL processes and to understand the relationships among them, and, in this way, help researchers to measure and support learners’ engagement in SRL. For an overview of major SRL theoretical frameworks, see Panadero ( 2017 ). To theoretically ground our systematic literature review, we utilized the SRL theoretical model proposed by Winne and Hadwin ( 1998 ). According to this framework, students’ SRL processes unfold over four general phases: task definition, goal setting and planning, enacting study tactics, and adaptation to future studying, and five facets: conditions, operations, products, evaluations and standards. We opted to use this framework because (1) it is one of the six most cited frameworks in the literature, signifying its robustness and widespread acceptance among researchers, and it is particularly welcomed in research involving computer assisted learning (Panadero et al., 2016 ; 2) it provides a comprehensive account of cognitive, metacognitive and motivational processes that interweave in SRL offering a holistic view of the learning process; and (3) the model is distinguished by its detailed depiction of how different phases interact with each other over time as learning unfolds, affording researchers and educators ways to design specific and time-sensitive SRL support to learners (Greene & Azevedo, 2007 ).

The first phase in Winne and Hadwin’s model of SRL is task definition where learners make inferences and develop perceptions about the features of the task, and survey available resources for studying. The next phase is goal setting and planning where learners set their learning goals, devise plans and determine learning strategies which will be used to accomplish goals for learning. In the following phase, students enact their learning strategies and oversee (i.e., metacognitively monitor) the effectiveness of those strategies in addressing the task. For example, learners might highlight key concepts and construct a vocabulary list during a reading task, and, if they deem this strategy to be ineffective, they may decide to modify (i.e., metacognitively control) it, e.g., engage in note-taking instead of highlighting. In the adaptation phase, learners reflect on their studying during the previous stages and make forward-reaching adaptations for similar tasks in the future, e.g., a learner may decide to include note-taking in a repository of preferable learning strategies for the upcoming reading comprehension tasks, as note-taking worked well for the learner in the present task. In this way, learners reach beyond the present task and change their cognitive conditions for future learning (Greene & Azevedo, 2007 ).

Learning activities that unfold over the four general phases of SRL can be characterised relative to five common dimensions, i.e., facets: conditions, operations, products, evaluations and standards (COPES). Conditions encompass different internal and external factors that affect how a learner will engage with a task. For example, internal conditions include the learner’s prior knowledge of a domain, knowledge of learning strategies, experience with a task, and motivation and interest in a task; whereas external conditions include available learning resources, task instructions, scoring rubrics and time constraints. Operations are the processes by which learners manipulate information at hand and, in that way, induce actual learning (Winne, 2022 ). Winne ( 2018 ) defined five fundamental operations including searching, monitoring, assembling, rehearsing and translating (SMART). As learners engage in operations, they create products of learning, e.g., a note, essay draft or program code. Self-regulated learners actively evaluate their learning products against standards , e.g., a scoring rubric or instructional objectives. Upon evaluating their learning products, self-regulated learners may engage in metacognitive control, i.e., they may decide to modify their learning goals and strategies, and revise the products (Greene & Azevedo, 2007 ; Raković et al., 2022a ).

2.2 Educational chatbots

A chatbot is an interactive computer program enhanced by artificial intelligence (AI) and natural language processing (NLP) to simulate conversation with humans through text and voice. Since the development of the earliest chatbot Eliza (Weizenbaum, 1966 ) in 1966, various chatbots have evolved providing interactive interface for users to engage with different services, resources, and data in a natural conversational style (McTear, 2020 ). As well, chatbots have been used as tools to understand and model human behavior (McTear, 2020 ). The use of chatbots has seen a significant increase over the past several years (Zawacki-Richter et al., 2019 ), offering support to users in different contexts, e.g., customer services, online shopping and banking (Illescas-Manzano et al., 2021 ).

Due to its characteristics to dynamically and adaptively interact with users, educational chatbots have been considered a viable option to support learning in different settings (Smutny & Schreiberova, 2020 ), including SRL. For example, as metacognitive processes of monitoring and control are considered central in SRL (Winne, 2022 ), learners need to continuously engage those processes to succeed in a learning task. Many learners, however, struggle to sustain these metacognitive processes throughout a learning session (Azevedo & Aleven, 2013 ), which further prevents them from productively engaging in SRL and performing well in a task. Educational chatbot may provide external regulation to learners by performing a part of metacognitive monitoring instead of students having to conduct these processes by themselves (Molenaar, 2022 ), e.g, a bot may identify two learning strategies that a learner had used previously in the task and ask a learner to compare the effectiveness of these two strategies relative to task requirements. In this way, a chatbot may help the learner preserve cognitive resources for other aspects of the task, e.g., constructing deeper understanding of concepts studied. As well, by providing SRL guidance to students, chatbot may help learners increase their engagement across phases and facets of SRL, which may further benefit their development of SRL skills and boost their academic achievements.

Recent literature reviews (Winkler & Söllner, 2018 ; Pérez et al., 2020 ; Smutny & Schreiberova, 2020 ; Wollny et al., 2021 ) have reported that chatbots have been used for the two main purposes in educational settings, including (1) service support and (2) teaching support. Building on the success of chatbots in the area of customer service, chatbots have been used at many educational institutions to provide service support to students, e.g., support with enrolment, library and campus resources (Sweidan et al., 2021 ; Allison, 2012 ). For example, an interactive bot SIAAA-C (Sweidan et al., 2021 ) is designed to provide students with important campus resources, e.g., campus map and notifications during COVID-19. On the other hand, teaching-oriented chatbots have been commonly used in formal education to supplement traditional teaching in different domains, e.g., languages, math and science. Harnessing their conversational features, those chatbots typically play the role of human tutor and provide learners with content knowledge and practice questions. For instance, Wu et al. ( 2020 ) developed a multi-module chatbot that supported students studying mathematics and Chinese history, whereas Mageira et al. ( 2022 ) and Vázquez-Cano et al. ( 2021 ) created the chatbots to help students learn English and Spanish, respectively, e.g., through prompting and recommending additional learning resources. The literature reviews published so far (Winkler & Söllner, 2018 ; Pérez et al., 2020 ; Smutny & Schreiberova, 2020 ; Wollny et al., 2021 ) identifed different types of educational chatbots and technologies used to implement those bots. These reviews have also revealed the potential of using chatbots to facilitate teaching and learning processes, to recommend learning content and to provide service support to students. While there have been several studies investigating the use of chatbots for SRL, there has been insufficient understanding about the extent to which different aspects of SRL have been supported by chatbots. To address this gap, we conducted a systematic literature review to learn (1) how educational chatbots have provided support for learners’ SRL and (2) how that support has affected learners’ SRL skills and performance. This inquiry is critical because by identifying and synthesizing the ways in which educational chatbots contribute to or hinder SRL, our study could potentially offer valuable insights into the design of more effective educational technologies that are aligned with pedagogical goals. Second, understanding the impact of chatbots on learners’ SRL skills and performance can inform educators and policymakers about the potential benefits and limitations of integrating these technologies into the learning environments. More formally, the following Research Questions guided our systematic review:

RQ1: How have educational chatbots been used to support students’ SRL processes relative to (i) phases and (ii) facets theorised in Winne and Hadwin ( 1998 ) and Winne ( 2018 )?

RQ2: To what extent has the use of educational chatbots improved learners’ SRL processing and learning performance?

3 Methodology

We conducted a systematic review of the literature to answer our research questions. To ensure a thorough and transparent systematic literature review process, we carried this review using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) framework as a guideline (Page et al., 2021 ; Moher et al., 2009 ). The systematic literature review involved three major phases (1) search for relevant publications in multiple bibliographical databases, (2) select relevant publications following the PRISMA framework, (3) extract and analyse relevant information in selected publications to answer research questions.

3.1 Literature search

We utilized the SPIDER framework (Cooke et al., 2012 ) to define parameters for the literature search. The SPIDER framework proposes five general groups of search criteria, including sample, phenomenon of interest, design, evaluation and research type. As per our inclusion criteria (detailed in the next section) our Sample (S) involved students studying in formal educational settings at primary, secondary and tertiary levels. The Phenomena of our Interest (PI) were self-regulated learning and educational chatbots. We searched for research studies that have been Designed to empirically evaluate the effects of chatbots on SRL (D) and that have reported outcome measures based on these Evaluations (E). We included qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies (R) in our search.

We used the following search query: (“chatbot” OR “educational chatbot” OR “conversational agent”) AND “self-regulated learning” AND “formal education” AND (“student” OR “learner”) AND “research article” to search for titles, abstracts and keywords of publications in bibliographical databases. We included studies published between 2012 and 2023, inclusively, as we deemed this time range to be sufficient to capture the state-of-the-art in the emerging field of educational chatbots. We searched the following bibliographical databases: Scopus, Elsevier, ACM, IEEE Xplore, Web of Science, ERIC, PsychInfo, Wiley library, Google Scholar, ResearchGate and the library database at our university. The search was conducted in October 2023. At this stage, we retrieved 598 publications. After removing 72 duplicates, 526 publications remained in our dataset for further analysis.

3.2 Abstract screening and full paper review

To identify relevant publications for our review we performed two reviewing steps, following the PRISMA guidelines (1) abstract screening and (2) full paper review. In other words, publications selected in the abstract screening step were reviewed in full for their relevance at the full paper review step. For these two reviewing steps, we followed our inclusion and exclusion criteria. Specifically, we included research studies that:

Reported on the use of chatbots in formal educational settings

Reported on the use of chatbots to support students to engage in SRL processing (e.g., goal setting, strategy use, and monitoring)

Described characteristics of educational chatbots (e.g., chatbot architecture and types of utterances exchanged between student and bot)

Reported on the effectiveness of educational chatbots in supporting SRL skills and/or learning outcomes

Were published in peer-reviewed journals and conference proceedings in English between Jan 2012 and Oct 2023

We excluded:

Publications that reported on using chatbots outside of formal educational settings (e.g., school administration and customer service)

Publications from which it could not be clearly inferred what SRL processes have been supported by the chatbot (e.g., studies applying a third-party chatbot as a black box intervention or using a chatbot to conduct a quiz)

Publications that did not provide a clear description of chatbot characteristics

Publications that did not provide the evaluation of chatbot effectiveness

Technical reports, conceptual and design papers

Non-peer reviewed publications and publications without available full-text

At the screening step, two reviewers screened the titles and abstracts of 526 publications, i.e., those publications that remained from the previous phase in this review. Each reviewer had an opportunity to vote “Yes”, “Maybe” or “No” for the study, relative to whether the study should be included in the next stage of the review. The reviewers had the agreement on 456 papers ( 86.7%, Fleiss kappa = 0.734, p <0.001). The remaining 70 conflicts were resolved through discussion between the reviewers. The main reasons for conflicts came from abstracts that did not explicitly state whether the chatbot evaluation was performed in the study. The reviewers agreed to keep such articles in the dataset and fully assess those in the next stage. A total of 101 publications remained in the dataset after this stage.

At the full paper review step, the reviewers randomly selected 15 out of 101 publications (nearly 15%), separately reviewed those and voted whether the paper should be included in the study or not, following the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The reviewers agreed on 12 out of 15 publications (80%, Fleiss kappa = 0.52, p =0.04). The common disagreement between the reviewers at this stage was about whether the study provided a sufficiently clear description of the bot characteristics. This disagreement was resolved through discussion between the reviewers and the decision was made to include in the final review only those publications that described types of utterances exchanged between a student and a bot. The reviewers evenly split the remaining publications in the dataset (i.e., 86 publications were randomly assigned to each reviewer) and reviewed those separately. A total of 27 papers were extracted for the review. We summarized our review process in Fig. 1 (Page et al., 2021 ).

PRISMA flow diagram

Number of publications by year color-coded with chatbot architectures

3.3 Analysis of extracted publications

The first author of this review extracted data from each publication as per following categories: general information (publication title, authors, year, sample size, level of education, domain of education and learning task), chatbot type, SRL facet (conditions, operations, products, evaluations, and standards), SRL phase (task understanding, goal setting and planning, enactment, and adaptation), and reported effects (on SRL processes and learning achievements). To categorise publications into suitable SRL facets and phases, the first author closely followed definitions of constructs provided in Winne and Hadwin ( 1998 ). See the section SRL Theoretical Framework to Guide This Review for details. The analysis of SRL facets and phases in selected publications was used to address RQ1, while the analysis of the reported effects of chatbots on SRL processes and learning achievements was used to address RQ2.

4.1 General information

We summarised the studies included in our systematic literature review in Fig. 2 . Out of the 526 studies that we assessed in this review, 27 studies fit the inclusion criteria for full review. Over 92% of these studies were published in 2020 onward, i.e, six in 2020, 11 in 2021, two studies in 2022 and six studies in 2023, whereas only two studies were published before 2020. We observed that 13 studies utilized a natural language processing (NLP)-driven approach in their chatbot design to interpret and respond to user inputs in a conversational manner. On the other hand, 13 studies employed rule-based architectures in their chatbot design, i.e., following predefined pathways or rules to respond to specific commands or keywords, offering predictable and consistent interactions within a structured framework (Fig. 2 ). Additional architectures in the reviewed studies include an NLP-driven architecture with contextual bandit algorithm (Cai et al., 2021 ) and knowledge-based system accessing a vast domain-specific database to deliver accurate information (Chang et al., 2022b ).

Further, the chatbots we reviewed provided SRL support to students in different domains of education, including language learning, math, science, computer programming, accounting and educational psychology, with language learning being slightly more prominent than the other domains (Fig. 3 ). Moreover, the chatbots included in this review have been mainly utilised in higher education, i.e., researchers provided chatbots to university students in 21 studies. Two studies were conducted in primary schools, three studies were conducted in secondary school and one study involved a diverse student population recruited from Amazon Mechanical Turk (Fig. 3 ).

Domain of education supported by chatbot color-coded with participants’ level of education

4.2 RQ1: How have educational chatbots been used to support students’ SRL processes relative to (1) phases and (2) facets theorised in Winne and Hadwin ( 1998 ) and Winne ( 2018 )?

Of 27 articles included in this review, 15 reported on using chatbots to support student SRL processing in a single SRL phase, 11 articles reported on support across two and 1 article reported on support across three SRL phases. None of the reviewed studies appeared to utilise educational chatbots to provide comprehensive SRL support across all four phases of SRL defined in Winne and Hadwin ( 1998 ). More specifically, in 25 articles researchers used chatbots to facilitate SRL during the strategy enactment phase, i.e., the phase in which students are to select and use learning tactics and strategies. In these studies, chatbots were mainly utilised to guide students to enact learning tactics/strategies to accomplish a particular learning task, such as writing a thesis statement (Lin & Chang, 2020 ) or an essay (Neumann et al., 2021 ), learning a programming language (Ait et al., 2023 ; Tian et al., 2021 ) and developing a project report (Kumar, 2021 ). Six chatbots supported students at the task definition stage, e.g., “Make sure to re-read the question!” (Cai et al., 2021 ). Five chatbots supported students to set goals and devise plans for learning, e.g., by scaffolding students to specify their achievement goals (Hew et al., 2021 , 2023 ) and by guiding goal setting with questions (Du et al., 2021 ; Al-Abdullatif et al., 2023 ). Four chatbots supported students to adapt to their future studying, e.g., by providing students with the opportunity to monitor their learning progress (Harati et al., 2021 ; Oliveira et al., 2021 ) (Fig. 4 ).

Venn diagram showing the number of studies over SRL phases

In all the studies we reviewed authors have reported on using chatbots to promote SRL processes at conditions, operations, and products, the three cognitive facets of SRL. For instance, researchers have used chatbots to promote students’ internal conditions for a task that include activation of domain knowledge (Cai et al., 2021 ; Neumann et al., 2021 ), task interest and motivation (Fryer et al., 2017 , 2020 ; Yin et al., 2021 ), self-efficacy (Chang et al., 2022a ), and outcome expectation (Hew et al., 2021 )). Researchers have also utilised chatbots to support students to leverage external conditions for a task. For example, chatbots recommended learning resources to students (Bailey et al., 2021 ; Chang et al., 2022b ), and guided students to manage their studying time (Harati et al., 2021 ) and to understand task requirements Du et al. ( 2021 ); Mellado-Silva et al. ( 2020 ); Chen et al. ( 2020 )). We also found that in 17 studies chatbots supported students to engage in cognitive operations of assembling. These include integrating and consolidating conceptual knowledge in math (Cai et al., 2021 ), English language learning (Fryer et al., 2017 ; Xia et al., 2023 ), physical sciences (Deveci Topal et al., 2021 ) and accounting (Mellado-Silva et al., 2020 ). Nine chatbots provided support for cognitive operations of translating. These include guiding students to transform knowledge from readings into a written narrative (Bailey et al., 2021 ) and to apply knowledge in a practical project (Kumar, 2021 ). 13 chatbots provided support for metacognitive operations of monitoring. These include guiding students to monitor for domain knowledge acquisition (Harati et al., 2021 ), for learning goals and responses to questions (Hew et al., 2021 ), for learning strategy employment (Song & Kim, 2021 ) and for progress and performance (Cai et al., 2021 ; Neumann et al., 2021 ; Oliveira et al., 2021 ; Zhang et al., 2023a , b ). Five chatbots provided support for searching operations. These include guiding students to search for course materials and learning content (Chang et al., 2022a , b ; Oliveira et al., 2021 ), for specific learning strategies (Du et al., 2021 ) and for learning tools (Jones & Castellano, 2018 ). And one chatbot included support for a cognitive operation of rehearsing by guiding students to formulate acquired knowledge in their own words (Jeon, 2021 ). Next, we found that the most common learning products that students created while studying with chatbots were answers to questions on tests/quizzes (Cai et al., 2021 ; Chang et al., 2022b ; Jeon, 2021 ), and only a few chatbots have supported students to produce essays (Neumann et al., 2021 ), thesis statements (Lin & Chang, 2020 ), project reports (Kumar, 2021 ) and learning goals (Du et al., 2021 ).

Further, 16 chatbots in the corpus we reviewed have appeared to provide support for learning processes theorised to occur at the evaluations facet of SRL. For instance, chatbots utilised in Cai et al. ( 2021 ), Oliveira et al. ( 2021 ), Zhang et al. ( 2023a ) and Lin and Chang ( 2020 ) assisted students to engage in judgment of learning, whereas chatbots in Jones and Castellano ( 2018 ), Hew et al. ( 2021 ), Song and Kim ( 2021 ) and Yin et al. ( 2021 ) promoted student engagement in self-reflection. Last, 14 chatbots provided a guidance to students to better comprehend task standards. Specifically, these chatbots provided students with initial explanations of task requirements and other task features (Bailey et al., 2021 ; Lin & Chang, 2020 ; Jones & Castellano, 2018 ; Chen et al., 2020 ), task-related tips (Tian et al., 2021 ), opportunities for progress check relative to task topics (Harati et al., 2021 ), and questions for goal setting (Du et al., 2021 ; Hew et al., 2023 ). We provide the summary table of the SRL phases and facets supported by the educational chatbots included in this review in the appendix (Figs. 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , and 9 ).

4.3 RQ2: To what extent the use of educational chatbots improved students’ SRL processing and learning performance?

Among the publications reviewed, we found mixed effects of educational chatbots on students’ SRL processes and learning performance. In terms of promoting SRL processing, researchers have reported that students who studied with chatbots tended to: use more effective learning strategies (Bailey et al., 2021 ; Chang et al., 2022b ; Mellado-Silva et al., 2020 ), increase their awareness of the importance of setting learning goals (Du et al., 2021 ; Hew et al., 2023 ), control the learning process over their study pace (Yin et al., 2021 ; Tian et al., 2021 ), enhance their learning engagement and self-efficacy (Chang et al., 2022a ; Hew et al., 2021 ; Oliveira et al., 2021 ), and transfer some of their SRL skills to a new learning activity (Jones & Castellano, 2018 ). Researchers have also found that students who studied with a chatbot did not sustain well their interest in task, attributed to the novelty effect (Fryer et al., 2017 ), and did not increase their SRL processing (Harati et al., 2021 ). Moreover, the use of chatbot in one of the studies did not appear to statistically significantly boost student internal conditions, i.e., need for cognition, perception of learning, creativity, self-efficacy and motivational beliefs – conditions critical for productive SRL (Kumar, 2021 ). The systematic review also shows that chatbots were used to improve students’ learning performance in tasks spanning different subjects, including English as a second language (Bailey et al., 2021 ), obstetrics (Chang et al., 2022a ), physical education (Chang et al., 2022b ), science (Deveci Topal et al., 2021 ), accounting (Mellado-Silva et al., 2020 ), geography (Jones & Castellano, 2018 ) and educational psychology (Lin & Chang, 2020 ; Kumar, 2021 ). We also note that the use of chatbot had limited effects on learning performance of students working on a chemistry task (Harati et al., 2021 ), and statistically non-significant effects on performance of students working on tasks in math (Cai et al., 2021 ), computer science (Oliveira et al., 2021 ) and geography (Jones & Castellano, 2018 ). We summarised descriptive and inferential statistics on SRL processes and learning performance across the reviewed studies in the appendix (Figs. 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , and 9 ).

5 Discussion

Even though chatbot is not a new technology, our results indicate that the application of chatbots for promoting SRL has only recently attracted attention from educational researchers and practitioners, i.e., over 90% of the papers in the reviewed corpus were published after 2020. Unlike some other educational technologies that have been widely researched as support for student SRL over the past decade – e.g., intelligent tutoring systems (Duffy & Azevedo, 2015 ; Dever et al., 2023 ; Taub et al., 2021 ) and computer-based scaffolding environments (Molenaar et al., 2012 ; Srivastava et al., 2022 ; Lim et al., 2023 ) – the use of chatbots to this purpose appears yet to be more deeply explored.

The two most prominent chatbot architectures in the reviewed corpus were NLP-driven and rule-based chatbots. NLP-driven chatbots utilize NLP and machine learning methods to derive the meaning from user input and understand user intents. Even though the NLP-driven models often require extensive training before they can be applied, chatbots based on this architecture typically offer more robustness in interpreting insufficiently clear and grammatically incorrect student inputs. We found DialogFlow to be a commonly used NLP platform powering NLP-driven chatbots for SRL (Deveci Topal et al., 2021 ; Bailey et al., 2021 ). On the other hand, rule-based chatbots use a set of predefined rules, e.g., a tree-like decision flow, to map student input to appropriate chatbot response. These rules are created after anticipating users’ input and pre-scripted during the bot design. Rule-based chatbot provides better behavior control and may be a particularly applicable architecture for researchers aiming to explicitly map user inputs to SRL processes, e.g., “What should I do first?” can be mapped to goal setting, and, based on that, chatbot may provide a series of prompts to guide a learner to set their goals. In this review, researchers utilised chatbots to support learning in a very diverse set of educational domains (i.e., 15 different domains identified in our corpus) and this finding aligns with findings from the previously conducted literature reviews (Winkler & Söllner, 2018 ; Pérez et al., 2020 ; Smutny & Schreiberova, 2020 ) that also reported that researchers tended to apply educational chatbots in diverse domains. The main reason for this cross-domain popularity of chatbots may be because this technology was designed to adapt to conversation with different users and on different topics.

Educational chatbots for self-regulated learning have mainly supported learners’ processes at one or two phases of the Winne and Hadwin model of SRL. Our findings suggest that the current design and implementation of educational chatbots lack the ability to aid the whole SRL cycle and thus provide students with comprehensive SRL support addressing all the four phases of SRL defined in Winne and Hadwin ( 1998 ) and Winne ( 2018 ). Commonly, almost all of the reviewed chatbots were designed to promote the enactment of learning tactics and strategies that educators deemed to be important for success in different learning tasks. For example, in the writing thesis statement task (Lin & Chang, 2020 ), educators may guide students to strategically engage the following learning activities “identify relevant passage” \(\rightarrow \) “identify claims” \(\rightarrow \) “compose thesis statement” \(\rightarrow \) “evaluate your conceptual understanding” \(\rightarrow \) “revise thesis statement”. The bot was designed to provide guidance to students on these activities, in any order they prefer. For this reason, utterances between learners and chatbots have been often mapped to specific learning tactics to reinforce the learning of students, taking into account required learning activities. In this way, chatbots have served as a potentially effective supplement to traditional classroom teaching, the trend also identified in the previous literature (Pérez et al., 2020 ). This finding ties with another finding from our review showing that chatbots mainly supported operations of rehearsing, assembling and translating, i.e., cognitive operations that are typically contingent upon task conditions (Winne, 1995 ), such as integrate information from several readings in an essay or recap a math formula in a quiz. Together, these findings may suggest that design of SRL chatbots was primarily informed by the nature of specific learning tasks, e.g., persuasive writing, numerical conversion and software programming, and, as such, dependent upon expected sequences of actions that learners should take to address those tasks.

To a lesser extent, chatbots supported students to metacognitively evaluate their immediate and past studying, and to adapt their studying accordingly. For instance, by using interactive and personalised feedback from chatbots the students were afforded the opportunity to engage in judgement of learning (Cai et al., 2021 ; Chang et al., 2022b ; Lin & Chang, 2020 ; Oliveira et al., 2021 ), and evaluate and adapt learning strategies they used during the task. In two of the studies, engagement in metacognitive judgement of learning was reported to be associated with increased student engagement in critical thinking (Chang et al., 2022b ) and writing performance (Lin & Chang, 2020 ), further confirming the potential of educational chatbots to support student metacognition, which is considered to be one of the central processes for productive SRL (Winne, 2018 ). Students’ internal conditions such as motivation, self-efficacy, and interest in a task, are often measured using self-report questionnaires, interviews and self-reflection prompts administered before or after the learning session. Data that dynamically capture student internal conditions as they evolve during the session is rarely collected, making it hard for educational technologies to provide immediate support adaptive to learning conditions. Even though some chatbots we reviewed have demonstrated ability to promote internal conditions, e.g., learning motivation (Yin et al., 2021 ), perception of learning (Neumann et al., 2021 ) and self-efficacy (Chang et al., 2022a ), the capability of educational chatbots to provide responses sensitive to evolving internal conditions remains limited. We also note that many chatbots in the reviewed corpus supported students to search for, gather and access learning resources for their tasks. As chatbots have been traditionally used in dialogue systems for customer service and information acquisition (Serban et al., 2017 ; Winkler & Söllner, 2018 ), we speculate the popularity of this feature in educational chatbots may have been naturally inherited from the field of customer service and adapted to support students as they gather learning content. Moreover, the recent explosion of advanced generative language models that generate sophisticated human-like responses and engage in natural language conversations, such as ChatGPT, has opened up new possibilities to improve educational chatbots from being tools mainly used for information acquisition to a powerful pedagogical tools that can revolutionize how students learn by offering personalized learning experiences and real-time guidance adapted to the student’s learning skills and knowledge of content.

We found that chatbots in the reviewed studies generally promoted increase in productive SRL processes and learning performance of students across different domains, confirming the potential of this technology to support SRL. Non-significant effects were identified in a group of studies and we attribute this finding to several possible reasons. Student motivation and engagement in learning sessions facilitated with chatbot may have dropped as many students may feel isolated in such learning context and may prefer direct support from teachers instead (Zhang et al., 2020 ). This may further lead to challenges in sustaining students’ learning interest in a task, as indicated in one of the reviewed studies (Fryer et al., 2017 ). As the reviewed chatbots have mainly supported university students, it may be expected that many students in this population already possessed a preferred catalogue of learning strategies and that one-time session with chatbot may not be sufficient to help those students alter their approaches to learning. Another reason for non-significant effects may be related to chatbot’s challenges to always provide satisfactory and accurate responses, that clearly target particular learning processes (Deveci Topal et al., 2021 ).

6 Conclusion and implications for further studies

The findings of this systematic literature review indicate the increasing interest of researchers in using educational chatbots to support self-regulated learning. The reviewed studies predominantly employed NLP-driven and rule-based chatbot architectures. Both architectures have shown potential in promoting various processes in SRL, particularly in the enactment of learning strategies and cognitive operations such as assembling, translating, and monitoring. Despite these advancements, the review identifies significant gaps in the comprehensive support of SRL. None of the chatbots have provided SRL support across all the four phases of SRL, as proposed by Winne and Hadwin Winne and Hadwin ( 1998 ). The support often involved guiding students through the steps within specific learning tasks rather than offering a holistic support to student SRL processing. The effects of chatbots on students’ SRL processes and learning performance appeared to be mixed. While many studies reported improvements in the use of learning strategies, student engagement, and self-efficacy, others found limited or non-significant effects on learning performance.

Based on the findings from this systematic literature review, we propose the following areas of investigation towards advancing research on chatbots and SRL.

1. Create chatbots that provide a comprehensive SRL support across all the phases

Our results suggest that, to date, there has been no chatbot designed to provide a comprehensive support across all the four phases of SRL defined in the Winne and Hadwin model. For instance, even though student engagement in goal settings, planning, and adaptation has been widely documented to benefit student learning experiences and performance (Alessandri et al., 2020 ; Raković et al., 2022a ; Rakovic et al., 2022b ), SRL processes at these stages have been rarely supported in the reviewed corpus, which may partially explain small, insignificant and limited effects of several chatbots on student achievements in this review. Within the SRL framework, each phase builds upon the previous one creating a cyclical process that allows students to continuously improve their learning strategies and accomplish their learning goals. Supporting studying in each phase of SRL may provide students with better control over their learning and may lead to greater academic success, increased confidence and motivation in one’s ability to learn.

2. Identify specific learning tasks in which chatbots can provide most effective support

While it is important to apply chatbots in different subject domains, it is equally important to identify specific tasks within those domains where chatbots can be most effective. By doing so, researchers and educators can ensure that chatbots are used in a targeted and effective manner, maximizing the impact of this technology on students’ learning experience. In this way, chatbots may help learners develop a catalogue of task-specific learning skills and transfer these skills to similar tasks in the future.

3. Evaluate the effectiveness of SRL chatbots in longitudinal studies

Most of the educational chatbots in this review have been evaluated in small scale studies, e.g., a one-time intervention administered in one class. Such a lack of longitudinal data might impede researchers from gaining a deeper understanding of the long term benefits of SRL chatbots. Therefore, it may benefit future research in educational technology and learning sciences if researchers conduct a longitudinal study, e.g., a study spanning over one or several semesters, to examine the effects of chatbot on the development of students’ SRL skills over time.

4. Use chatbot to elicit students’ internal conditions

Student internal conditions including prior knowledge, motivation, interest, self-efficacy, achievement goals, utility value and outcome expectations can have a significant impact on how learners approach and engage with the learning process (Meece, 2023 ). However, there are very limited existing efforts in learning analytics focusing on understanding and eliciting internal conditions (Matcha et al., 2019 ). These constructs have been typically measured at the beginning of a learning task. Since SRL is a dynamic and cyclic process (Panadero, 2017 ), student internal conditions may often change during the learning session, also affecting other processes that learners enact. For example, use of effective learning strategies and accomplishment of some learning goals early in a learning session may increase students’ self-efficacy and motivation later in the session, compared to what learners reported at the outset of the session. Given the conversational and interactive nature of chatbots, researchers may consider using this technology as an instrument that dynamically captures changes in internal conditions and helps learners to reflect on their own learning process, e.g., by engaging in dialogues with learners, asking questions that gauge students’ understanding, their learning goals and confidence levels, analyzing the content and frequency of student interactions, providing feedback on their progress, and offering suggestions for improvement.

5. Record and analyse what students did, not only what they say they did

Digital trace-data, e.g., navigation logs, text annotations and keystrokes, that students generate in digital learning environments have been increasingly harnessed to unobtrusively measure SRL (Fan et al., 2022 ; Rakovic et al., 2022b ; Lim et al., 2023 ). For instance, trace-data are often mapped to theorised SRL processes and dynamically analysed (e.g., by using process mining and natural language processing approaches) to obtain a more complete picture of student learning behaviors. To our knowledge, educational chatbots developed to date have mainly gathered information about student learning in two ways (1) via self-reports, e.g., based on what students said to the bot they did, and (2) via student performance data, e.g., correct/incorrect answers on a test. Researchers, however, have identified several challenges related to those methods. For example, students self-reports may often be insufficiently accurate and biased towards student beliefs or social desirability (Winne, 2022 ), whereas performance data often cannot directly inform the intervention (Arizmendi et al., 2022 ). Researchers may consider introducing trace-data as an additional input to SRL chatbots to ensure bots more accurately monitor student SRL processes as they dynamically unfold and, based on that, provide students with a more accurate and timely SRL support.

6. Support students at all educational levels

The chatbots in the reviewed corpus have mainly supported university students. More research is needed to adapt chatbots to cater to the needs of students at other levels of education, e.g., primary and secondary. Students at different levels of education may have different learning needs and preferences (Ambrose et al., 2010 ). By conducting research and adapting chatbots to cater these specific needs from different levels of students, we can ensure that the benefits of educational chatbots are accessible to students of all developmental stages, potentially creating more effective, engaging and inclusive learning environment for them. Also, university students have become more experienced learners and have often formed certain learning habits. This may make it challenging for the educational chatbot to induce some changes to learning. An early intervention at a primary or secondary education level could help in preparing students to better self-regulate their learning at a tertiary education level and throughout life.

7. Improve the effectiveness and accuracy of chatbot responses by harnessing the potential of large language models and generative AI

In our review, a notable limitation of current educational chatbots is their often unsatisfactory responses (Deveci Topal et al., 2021 ), highlighting a gap in understanding users’ intentions and providing relevant support. This indicates that the current chatbots may have limited ability to interpret users’ intentions and provide adequate support, which further may hamper student engagement and motivation. Researchers may utilise the rapidly emerging technologies of generative AI specifically large language models like ChatGPT, that can handle complex language problems, e.g., large language models such as ChatGPT, to enhance the chatbots’ ability to understand learners’ intentions and provide appropriate responses in the context of SRL. In this way, the volume of productive interactions between students and SRL chatbots may improve student learning experiences and interest in studying with a bot, marking a step forward in AI-driven education.

Data availability statement

Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study. This systematic literature review is based entirely on data from publicly available sources. The analysis synthesizes findings from a wide range of publications, including journal articles and conference papers, all of which are cited in the references section of this paper. These sources can be accessed through academic libraries and online databases. Supplementary materials created during this review, including summary tables (Figs. 5 - 9 ) and figures (Figs. 1 - 4 ), are available upon request.

Ait Baha, T., El Hajji, M., Es-Saady, Y., & Fadili, H. (2023). The impact of educational chatbot on student learning experience. Education and InformationTechnologies , 1–24.

Al-Abdullatif, A. M., Al-Dokhny, A. A., & Drwish, A. M. (2023). Implementing the bashayer chatbot in saudi higher education: Measuring the inuence on students’ motivation and learning strategies. Frontiers in Psychology, 14 , 1129070–1129070.

Article   Google Scholar  

Alessandri, G., Borgogni, L., Latham, G. P., Cepale, G., Theodorou, A., & De Longis, E. (2020). Self-set goals improve academic performance through nonlinear effects on daily study performance. Learning and Individual Differences, 77 , 101784.

Allison, D. (2012). Chatbots in the library: Is it time? Library Hi tech, 30 (1), 95–107.

Arizmendi, C. J., Bernacki, M. L., Raković, M., Plumley, R. D., Urban, C. J., Panter, A., Greene, J. A., & Gates, K. M. (2022). Predicting student outcomes using digital logs of learning behaviors: Review, current standards, and suggestions for future work. Behavior Research Methods , 1–29.

Ambrose, S. A., Bridges, M. W., DiPietro, M., Lovett, M. C., & Norman, M. K. (2010). How learning works: Seven research-based principles for smart teaching. John Wiley & Sons.

Azevedo, R. (2018). Using hypermedia as a metacognitive tool for enhancing student learning? the role of self-regulated learning. In: Educational psychologist (pp. 199–209). Routledge.

Azevedo, R., & Aleven, V. (2013). Metacognition and learning technologies: An overview of current interdisciplinary research. International Handbook of Metacognition and Learning Technologies , 1–16.

Azevedo, R., & Hadwin, A. F. (2005). Scaffolding self-regulated learning and metacognition - implications for the design of computer-based sca olds. Instructional Science, 33 (5/6), 367–379.

Azevedo, R., Taub, M., Mudrick, N. V., Millar, G. C., Bradbury, A. E., & Price, M. J. (2017). Using Data Visualizations to Foster Emotion Regulation During Self- Regulated Learning with Advanced Learning Technologies. In J. Buder & F. W. Hesse (Eds.), Informational environments : Effects of use, effective designs (pp. 225–247). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64274-110

Bailey, D., Southam, A., & Costley, J. (2021). Digital storytelling with chatbots: Mapping l2 participation and perception patterns. Interactive Technology and Smart Education, 18 (1), 85–103.

Baker, R., Xu, D., Park, J., Yu, R., Li, Q., Cung, B., & Smyth, P. (2020). The benefits and caveats of using clickstream data to understand student self-regulatory behaviors: Opening the black box of learning processes. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 17 , 1–24.

Bjork, R. A., Dunlosky, J., & Kornell, N. (2013). Self-regulated learning: Beliefs, techniques, and illusions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64 , 417–444.

Cai, W., Grossman, J., Lin, Z. J., Sheng, H., Wei, J.T.-Z., Williams, J. J., & Goel, S. (2021). Bandit algorithms to personalize educational chatbots. Machine Learning, 110 (9), 2389–2418.

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Chang, C.-Y., Hwang, G.-J., & Gau, M.-L. (2022). Promoting students’ learning achievement and self-efficacy: A mobile chatbot approach for nursing training. British Journal of Educational Technology, 53 (1), 171–188.

Chang, C.-Y., Kuo, S.-Y., & Hwang, G.-H. (2022). Chatbot-facilitated nursing education. Educational Technology & Society, 25 (1), 15–27.

Google Scholar  

Chen, H.-L., Vicki Widarso, G., & Sutrisno, H. (2020). A chatbot for learning chinese: Learning achievement and technology acceptance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 58 (6), 1161–1189.

Cleary, T. J., & Chen, P. P. (2009). Self-regulation, motivation, and math achievement in middle school: Variations across grade level and math context. Journal of School Psychology, 47 (5), 291–314.

Cleary, T. J., Kitsantas, A., Peters-Burton, E., Lui, A., McLeod, K., Slemp, J., & Zhang, X. (2022). Professional development in self-regulated learning: Shifts and variations in teacher outcomes and approaches to implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 111 , 103619.

Cooke, A., Smith, D., & Booth, A. (2012). Beyond pico: The spider tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. Qualitative Health Research, 22 (10), 1435–1443.

Dai, W., Lin, J., Jin, H., Li, T., Tsai, Y. S., Gašević, D., & Chen, G. (2023). Can large language models provide feedback to students? A case study on ChatGPT. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT) (pp. 323-325). IEEE.

Deveci Topal, A., Dilek Eren, C., & Kolburan Geçer, A. (2021). Chatbot application in a 5th grade science course. Education and Information Technologies, 26 (5), 6241–6265.

Dever, D. A., Sonnenfeld, N. A., Wiedbusch, M. D., Schmorrow, S. G., Amon, M. J., & Azevedo, R. (2023). A complex systems approach to analyzing pedagogical agents’ scaffolding of self-regulated learning within an intelligent tutoring system. Metacognition and Learning , 1–33.

Dignath, C., & Veenman, M. V. (2021). The role of direct strategy instruction and indirect activation of self-regulated learning|evidence from classroom observation studies. Educational Psychology Review, 33 (2), 489–533.

Du, J., Huang, W., & Hew, K. F. (2021). Supporting students goal setting process using chatbot: Implementation in a fully online course. 2021 IEEE International Conference on Engineering, Technology & Education (TALE) , 35–41.

Duffy, M. C., & Azevedo, R. (2015). Motivation matters: Interactions between achievement goals and agent scaffolding for self-regulated learning within an intelligent tutoring system. Computers in Human Behavior, 52 , 338–348.

Fan, Y., Lim, L., van der Graaf, J., Kilgour, J., Raković, M., Moore, J., Molenaar, I., Bannert, M., & Gašević, D. (2022). Improving the measurement of self-regulated learning using multi-channel data. Metacognition and Learning , 1–31.

Fryer, L. K., Ainley, M., Thompson, A., Gibson, A., & Sherlock, Z. (2017). Stimulating and sustaining interest in a language course: An experimental comparison of chatbot and human task partners. Computers in Human Behavior, 75 , 461–468.

Fryer, L. K., Thompson, A., Nakao, K., Howarth, M., & Gallacher, A. (2020). Supporting self-efficacy beliefs and interest as educational inputs and outcomes: Framing ai and human partnered task experiences. Learning and Individual Differences, 80 , 101850.

Greene, J. A., & Azevedo, R. (2007). A theoretical review of winne and hadwin’s model of self-regulated learning: New perspectives and directions. Review of Educational Research, 77 (3), 334–372.

Gutierrez de Blume, A. P. (2022). Calibrating calibration: A meta-analysis of learning strategy instruction interventions to improve metacognitive monitoring accuracy. Journal of Educational Psychology, 114 (4), 681.

Harati, H., Sujo-Montes, L., Tu, C.-H., Armfield, S. J., & Yen, C.-J. (2021). Assessment and learning in knowledge spaces (aleks) adaptive system impact on students’ perception and self-regulated learning skills. Education Sciences, 11 (10), 603.

Hew, K. F., Huang, W., Du, J., & Jia, C. (2021). Using chatbots in ipped learning online sessions: Perceived usefulness and ease of use. International Conference on Blended Learning , 164–175.

Hew, K. F., Huang, W., Du, J., & Jia, C. (2023). Using chatbots to support student goal setting and social presence in fully online activities: Learner engagement and perceptions. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 35 (1), 40–68.

Illescas-Manzano, M. D., Vicente López, N., Afonso González, N., & Cristofol Rodríguez, C. (2021). Implementation of chatbot in online commerce, and open innovation. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 7 (2), 125.

Jeon, J. (2021). Chatbot-assisted dynamic assessment (ca-da) for l2 vocabulary learning and diagnosis. Computer Assisted Language Learning , 1–27.

Jivet, I., Scheffel, M., Schmitz, M., Robbers, S., Specht, M., & Drachsler, H. (2020). From students with love: An empirical study on learner goals, self-regulated learning and sense-making of learning analytics in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 47 , 100758.

Jivet, I., Wong, J., Scheffel, M., Valle Torre, M., Specht, M., & Drachsler, H. (2021). Quantum of choice: How learners’ feedback monitoring decisions, goals and self-regulated learning skills are related. LAK21: 11th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference , 416–427.

Jones, A., & Castellano, G. (2018). Adaptive robotic tutors that support self-regulated learning: A longer-term investigation with primary school children. International Journal of Social Robotics, 10 (3), 357–370.

Klug, J., Ogrin, S., Keller, S., Ihringer, A., & Schmitz, B. (2011). A plea for selfregulated learning as a process: Modelling, measuring and intervening.

Kumar, J. A. (2021). Educational chatbots for project-based learning: Investigating learning outcomes for a team-based design course. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18 (1), 1–28.

Li, Y., Sha, L., Yan, L., Lin, J., Raković, M., Galbraith, K., Lyons, K., Gašević, D., & Chen, G. (2023). Can large language models write reflectively. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 4 , 100140. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.caeai.2023.100140 .

Lim, L., Bannert, M., van der Graaf, J., Singh, S., Fan, Y., Surendrannair, S., Rakovic, M., Molenaar, I., Moore, J., & Gašević, D. (2023). Effects of real-time analytics-based personalized scaffolds on students’ self-regulated learning. Computers in Human Behavior , 107547.

Lin, M.P.-C., & Chang, D. (2020). Enhancing post-secondary writers’ writing skills with a chatbot. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 23 (1), 78–92.

List, A., & Du, H. (2021). Reasoning beyond history: Examining students’ strategy use when completing a multiple text task addressing a controversial topic in education. Reading and Writing, 34 (4), 1003–1048.

List, A., & Lin, C.-J. (2023). Content and quantity of highlights and annotations predict learning from multiple digital texts. Computers & Education, 199 , 104791.

Mageira, K., Pittou, D., Papasalouros, A., Kotis, K., Zangogianni, P., & Daradoumis, A. (2022). Educational ai chatbots for content and language integrated learning. Applied Sciences, 12 (7), 3239.

Matcha, W., Gašević, D., Pardo, A., et al. (2019). A systematic review of empirical studies on learning analytics dashboards: A self-regulated learning perspective. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies, 13 (2), 226–245.

McCardle, L., Webster, E. A., Haffey, A., & Hadwin, A. F. (2017). Examining students’ self-set goals for self-regulated learning: Goal properties and patterns. Studies in Higher Education, 42 (11), 2153–2169.

McTear, M. (2020). Conversational ai: Dialogue systems, conversational agents, and chatbots. Synthesis Lectures on Human Language Technologies, 13 (3), 1–251.

Meece, J. L. (2023). The role of motivation in self-regulated learning. In Self-regulation of learning and performance (pp. 25–44). Routledge.

Mellado-Silva, R., Faúndez-Ugalde, A., & Blanco-Lobos, M. (2020). Effective learning of tax regulations using different chatbot techniques. Advances in Science, Technology and Engineering Systems, 5 (6), 439–446.

Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., Altman, D., Antes, G., . . . Berlin, J. A., et al. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and metaanalyses: The prisma statement (chinese edition). Journal of Chinese Integrative Medicine , 7 (9), 889–896.

Molenaar, I. (2022). The concept of hybrid human-ai regulation: Exemplifying how to support young learners’ self-regulated learning. Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence, 3 , 100070.

Molenaar, I., Roda, C., van Boxtel, C., & Sleegers, P. (2012). Dynamic scaffolding of socially regulated learning in a computer-based learning environment. Computers & Education, 59 (2), 515–523.

Morisano, D., Hirsh, J. B., Peterson, J. B., Pihl, R. O., & Shore, B. M. (2010). Setting, elaborating, and reecting on personal goals improves academic performance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 95 (2), 255.

Neumann, A. T., Arndt, T., Köbis, L., Meissner, R., Martin, A., de Lange, P., & Wollersheim, H.-W. (2021). Chatbots as a tool to scale mentoring processes: Individually supporting self-study in higher education. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 4 , 668220.

Oliveira, E., de Barba, P. G., & Corrin, L. (2021). Enabling adaptive, personalised and context-aware interaction in a smart learning environment: Piloting the icollab system. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 37 (2), 1–23.

Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Brennan, S. E., et al. (2021). The prisma 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews, 10 (1), 1–11.

Panadero, E. (2017). A review of self-regulated learning: Six models and four directions for research. Frontiers in Psychology , 422.

Panadero, E., Klug, J., & Järvelä, S. (2016). Third wave of measurement in the self-regulated learning field: When measurement and intervention come hand in hand. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 60 (6), 723–735.

Pérez, J. Q., Daradoumis, T., & Puig, J. M. M. (2020). Rediscovering the use of chatbots in education: A systematic literature review. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 28 (6), 1549–1565.

Perez-Alvarez, R., Jivet, I., Pérez-Sanagustin, M., Scheffel, M., & Verbert, K. (2022). Tools designed to support self-regulated learning in online learning environments: A systematic review. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies .

Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In: Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451–502). Elsevier.

Raković, M., Bernacki, M. L., Greene, J. A., Plumley, R. D., Hogan, K. A., Gates, K. M., & Panter, A. T. (2022a). Examining the critical role of evaluation and adaptation in self-regulated learning. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 68 , 102027.

Rakovic, M., Fan, Y., Van Der Graaf, J., Singh, S., Kilgour, J., Lim, L., Moore, J., Bannert, M., Molenaar, I., & Gasevic, D. (2022b). Using learner trace data to understand metacognitive processes in writing from multiple sources. LAK22: 12th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference , 130–141.

Recommendation, E. C. (2018). Key competences for lifelong learning. [SPACE] https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12173

Serban, I. V., Sankar, C., Germain, M., Zhang, S., Lin, Z., Subramanian, S., . . . Ke, N. R., et al. (2017). A deep reinforcement learning chatbot. arXiv:1709.02349 .

Smutny, P., & Schreiberova, P. (2020). Chatbots for learning: A review of educational chatbots for the facebook messenger. Computers & Education, 151 , 103862.

Song, D., & Kim, D. (2021). Effects of self-regulation scaffolding on online participation and learning outcomes. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 53 (3), 249–263.

Srivastava, N., Fan, Y., Rakovic, M., Singh, S., Jovanovic, J., Van Der Graaf, J., Lim, L., Surendrannair, S., Kilgour, J., Molenaar, I., et al. (2022). Effects of internal and external conditions on strategies of self-regulated learning: A learning analytics study. LAK22: 12th International Learning Analytics and Knowledge Conference , 392–403.

Sweidan, S. Z., Abu Laban, S. S., Alnaimat, N. A., & Darabkh, K. A. (2021). Siaaa-c: A student interactive assistant android application with chatbot during covid-19 pandemic. Computer Applications in Engineering Education, 29 (6), 1718–1742.

Taub, M., Azevedo, R., Rajendran, R., Cloude, E. B., Biswas, G., & Price, M. J. (2021). How are students’ emotions related to the accuracy of cognitive and metacognitive processes during learning with an intelligent tutoring system? Learning and Instruction, 72 , 101200.

Theobald, M. (2021). Self-regulated learning training programs enhance university students’ academic performance, self-regulated learning strategies, and motivation: A meta-analysis. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 66 , 101976.

Tian, X., Risha, Z., Ahmed, I., Lekshmi Narayanan, A. B., & Biehl, J. (2021). Let’s talk it out: A chatbot for effective study habit behavioral change. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-computer Interaction, 5 (CSCW1), 1–32.

Vázquez-Cano, E., Mengual-Andrés, S., & López-Meneses, E. (2021). Chatbot to improve learning punctuation in spanish and to enhance open and exible learning environments. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18 (1), 1–20.

Weizenbaum, J. (1966). Eliza|a computer program for the study of natural language communication between man and machine. Communications of the ACM, 9 (1), 36–45.

Winkler, R., & Söllner, M. (2018). Unleashing the potential of chatbots in education: A state-of-the-art analysis. Academy of Management Annual Meeting (AOM) .

Winne, P. H. (1995). Inherent details in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 30 (4), 173–187.

Winne, P. H. (2018). Theorizing and researching levels of processing in self-regulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 88 (1), 9–20.

Winne, P. H. (2022). Modeling self-regulated learning as learners doing learning science: How trace data and learning analytics help develop skills for self-regulated learning. Metacognition and Learning , 1–19.

Winne, P. H., & Hadwin, A. F. (1998). Studying as self-regulated engagement in learning. in metacognition in educational theory and practice. Metacognition in Educational Theory and Practice , 277–304.

Wollny, S., Schneider, J., Di Mitri, D., Weidlich, J., Rittberger, M., & Drachsler, H. (2021). Are we there yet?-a systematic literature review on chatbots in education. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence, 4 , 654924.

Wu, E.H.-K., Lin, C.-H., Ou, Y.-Y., Liu, C.-Z., Wang, W.-K., & Chao, C.-Y. (2020). Advantages and constraints of a hybrid model k-12 e-learning assistant chatbot. Ieee Access, 8 , 77788–77801.

Xia, Q., Chiu, T. K. F., Chai, C. S., & Xie, K. (2023). The mediating effects of needs satisfaction on the relationships between prior knowledge and self-regulated learning through artificial intelligence chatbot. British Journal of Educational Technology, 54 (4), 967–986.

Yin, J., Goh, T.-T., Yang, B., & Xiaobin, Y. (2021). Conversation technology with micro-learning: The impact of chatbot-based learning on students’ learning motivation and performance. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 59 (1), 154–177.

Zawacki-Richter, O., Marín, V. I., Bond, M., & Gouverneur, F. (2019). Systematic review of research on artificial intelligence applications in higher education- where are the educators? International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16 (1), 1–27.

Zhang, J.-H., Zou, L.-C., Miao, J.-J., Zhang, Y.-X., Hwang, G.-J., & Zhu, Y. (2020). An individualized intervention approach to improving university students’ learning performance and interactive behaviors in a blended learning environment. Interactive Learning Environments, 28 (2), 231–245.

Zhang, R., Zou, D., & Cheng, G. (2023a). Chatbot-based learning of logical fallacies in e writing: Perceived effectiveness in improving target knowledge and learner motivation (pp. 1–18). Ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print): Interactive Learning Environments.

Zhang, R., Zou, D., & Cheng, G. (2023b). Chatbot-based training on logical fallacy in efl argumentative writing. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 17 (5), 932–945.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Elsevier.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41 (2), 64–70.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2013). Theories of self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview and analysis. Self-regulated Learning and Academic Achievement , 1–36.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was in part supported by funding from the Australian Research Council (DP220101209, DP240100069) and Jacobs Foundation.

Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and its Member Institutions.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Centre for Learning Analytics at Monash, Faculty of Information Technology, Monash University, 25 Exhibition walk, Clayton, VIC, 3800, Australia

Rui Guan, Mladen Raković, Guanliang Chen & Dragan Gašević

School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK

Dragan Gašević

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Rui Guan: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing - Original Draft, Data Curation.Mladen Raković: Conceptualization, Methodology, Formal analysis, Writing - Original Draft, Data Curation, Supervision.Guanliang Chen: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing - Original Draft, Supervision.Dragan Gašević: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing - Original Draft, Supervision

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mladen Raković .

Ethics declarations

Competing interest.

The authors have no competing interests to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Financial Interest

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest or non-financial interest in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Ethical Standard

This systematic review has been conducted in accordance with the principles of academic integrity and honesty. All sources have been properly cited, and no copyrighted material has been used without permission. The review does not involve any original data collection from human or animal subjects, and therefore, ethical approval was not sought.

Appendix A: Summary of the reviewed studies

Summary table of reviewed chatbot articles including supported SRL stages and facets

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Guan, R., Raković, M., Chen, G. et al. How educational chatbots support self-regulated learning? A systematic review of the literature. Educ Inf Technol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12881-y

Download citation

Received : 18 March 2024

Accepted : 21 June 2024

Published : 30 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-024-12881-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Educational chatbot
• Self-regulated learning
• Scaffolding
• Artificial intelligence
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

• Systematic Review
• Open access
• Published: 30 August 2024

A scoping review of stroke services within the Philippines

• Angela Logan 1 , 2 ,
• Lorraine Faeldon 3 ,
• Bridie Kent 1 , 4 ,
• Aira Ong 1 &
• Jonathan Marsden 1  

BMC Health Services Research volume  24 , Article number:  1006 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

1 Altmetric

Metrics details

Stroke is a leading cause of mortality and disability. In higher-income countries, mortality and disability have been reduced with advances in stroke care and early access to rehabilitation services. However, access to such services and the subsequent impact on stroke outcomes in the Philippines, which is a lower- and middle-income countries (LMIC), is unclear. Understanding gaps in service delivery and underpinning research from acute to chronic stages post-stroke will allow future targeting of resources.

This scoping review aimed to map available literature on stroke services in the Philippines, based on Arksey and O’Malley’s five-stage-process.

Summary of review

A targeted strategy was used to search relevant databases (Focused: MEDLINE (ovid), EMBASE (ovid), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO (ebsco); broad-based: Scopus; review-based: Cochrane Library, International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), JBI (formerly Joanna Briggs Institute) as well as grey literature (Open Grey, Google scholar). The searches were conducted between 12/2022-01/2023 and repeated 12/2023. Literature describing adults with stroke in the Philippines and stroke services that aimed to maximize well-being, participation and function were searched. Studies were selected if they included one or more of: (a) patient numbers and stroke characteristics (b) staff numbers, qualifications and role (c) service resources (e.g., access to a rehabilitation unit) (d) cost of services and methods of payment) (e) content of stroke care (f) duration of stroke care/rehabilitation and interventions undertaken (g) outcome measures used in clinical practice.

A total of 70 papers were included. Articles were assessed, data extracted and classified according to structure, process, or outcome related information. Advances in stroke services, including stroke ready hospitals providing early access to acute care such as thrombectomy and thrombolysis and early referral to rehabilitation coupled with rehabilitation guidelines have been developed. Gaps exist in stroke services structure (e.g., low number of neurologists and neuroimaging, lack of stroke protocols and pathways, inequity of stroke care across urban and rural locations), processes (e.g., delayed arrival to hospital, lack of stroke training among health workers, low awareness of stroke among public and non-stroke care workers, inequitable access to rehabilitation both hospital and community) and outcomes (e.g., low government insurance coverage resulting in high out-of-pocket expenses, limited data on caregiver burden, absence of unified national stroke registry to determine prevalence, incidence and burden of stroke). Potential solutions such as increasing stroke knowledge and awareness, use of mobile stroke units, TeleMedicine, TeleRehab, improving access to rehabilitation, upgrading PhilHealth and a unified national long-term stroke registry representing the real situation across urban and rural were identified.

This scoping review describes the existing evidence-base relating to structure, processes and outcomes of stroke services for adults within the Philippines. Developments in stroke services have been identified however, a wide gap exists between the availability of stroke services and the high burden of stroke in the Philippines. Strategies are critical to address the identified gaps as a precursor to improving stroke outcomes and reducing burden. Potential solutions identified within the review will require healthcare government and policymakers to focus on stroke awareness programs, primary and secondary stroke prevention, establishing and monitoring of stroke protocols and pathways, sustainable national stroke registry, and improve access to and availability of rehabilitation both hospital and community.

What is already known?

Stroke services in the Philippines are inequitable, for example, urban versus rural due to the geography of the Philippines, location of acute stroke ready hospitals and stroke rehabilitation units, limited transport options, and low government healthcare insurance coverage resulting in high out-of-pocket costs for stroke survivors and their families.

What are the new findings?

The Philippines have a higher incidence of stroke in younger adults than other LMICs, which impacts the available workforce and the country’s economy. There is a lack of data on community stroke rehabilitation provision, the content and intensity of stroke rehabilitation being delivered and the role and knowledge/skills of those delivering stroke rehabilitation, unmet needs of stroke survivors and caregiver burden and strain,

What do the new findings imply?

A wide gap exists between the availability of stroke services and the high burden of stroke. The impact of this is unclear due to the lack of a compulsory national stroke registry as well as published data on community or home-based stroke services that are not captured/published.

What does this review offer?

This review provides a broad overview of existing evidence-base of stroke services in the Philippines. It provides a catalyst for a) healthcare government to address stroke inequities and burden; b) development of future evidence-based interventions such as community-based rehabilitation; c) task-shifting e.g., training non-neurologists, barangay workers and caregivers; d) use of digital technologies and innovations e.g., stroke TeleRehab, TeleMedicine, mobile stroke units.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

In the Philippines, stroke is the second leading cause of death, with a prevalence of 0·9% equating to 87,402 deaths per annum [ 1 , 2 ]. Approximately 500,000 Filipinos will be affected by stroke, with an estimated US$350 million to $1·2 billion needed to meet the cost of medical care [ 1 ]. As healthcare is largely private, the cost is borne out-of-pocket by patients and their families. This provides a major obstacle for the lower socio-demographic groups in the country.

Research on implementation of locally and regionally adapted stroke-services and cost-effective secondary prevention programs in the Philippines have been cited as priorities [ 3 , 4 ]. Prior to developing, implementing, and evaluating future context-specific acute stroke management services and community-based models of rehabilitation, it was important to map out the available literature on stroke services and characteristics of stroke in the Philippines.

The scoping review followed a predefined protocol, established methodology [ 5 ] and is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews Guidelines (PRISMA-ScR) [ 6 , 7 ]. Healthcare quality will be described according to the following three aspects: structures, processes, and outcomes following the Donabedian model [ 8 , 9 ].The review is based on Arksey and O'Malley’s five stages framework [ 5 ].

Stage 1: The research question:

What stroke services are available for adults within the Philippines? The objective was to systematically scope the literature to describe the availability, structure, processes, and outcome of stroke services for adults within the Philippines.

Stage 2: Identifying relevant studies:

The following databases were searched. Focused: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), PsycINFO; broad-based: Scopus; review-based: Cochrane Library, Prospero, JBI (formerly Joanna Briggs Institute); Grey literature: Herdin, North Grey, Grey matters, MedRxiv, NIHR health technology assessment, Department of Health Philippines, The Kings Fund, Ethos, Carrot2. Additionally, reference lists of full text included studies were searched.

The targeted search strategy, developed in consultation with an information scientist, was adapted for each database (see supplemental data). Search terms were peer reviewed using the PRESS (Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies) checklist [ 10 ].

The key search concepts from the Population, Concept and Context (PCC) framework were ≥ 18 years with a stroke living in the Philippines ( population ), stroke services aiming to maximize well-being, participation and function following a stroke ( concept ) and stroke services from acute to chronic including those involving healthcare professionals, non-healthcare related personnel or family or friends ( context ). Search tools such as medical subject headings (MESH) and truncation to narrow or expand searches were used. Single and combined search terms were included (see supplemental data). The search was initially conducted over two weeks in December 2022 and re-run in December 2023.

Studies were selected if they described stroke care in the Philippines in terms of one or more of the following: (a) patient numbers and stroke characteristics (b) staff numbers, qualifications and role (c) service resources (e.g., number of beds/access to a rehabilitation unit, equipment used) (d) cost of services and methods of payment (UHC, Insurance, private) (e) content of stroke care (f) duration of stroke care (hours of personnel contact e.g., Therapy hours per day); interventions undertaken (g) outcome measures used in clinical practice.

Additional criteria:

Context: all environments (home, hospital, outpatients, clinic, academic institute).

Date limits: published between 2002 onwards. This is based on the Philippines Community Rehabilitation Guidelines published in 2009 that would suggest that papers earlier than 2002 may not reflect current practice [ 11 ].

Qualitative and quantitative studies including grey literature.

Language: reported in English or Filipino only.

Publication status: no limit because the level of rigor was not assessed.

Type of study: no limit which included conference abstracts, as the level of rigor was not assessed.

Studies were excluded if they were in non-stroke populations or the full text article could not be obtained. Conference abstracts were excluded if there were insufficient data about methods and results.

Searches of databases were performed by one researcher (JM) and searches of grey literature were performed by one researcher (AO). All retrieved articles were uploaded into Endnote X9 software™, and duplicates identified and removed before transferring them to Rayyan [ 12 ] for screening.

Stage 3: study selection

The title and abstract were selected using eligibility criteria. Two pairs of researchers independently screened abstracts and titles;(Databases: JM and AL and grey literature by AO and LF). Where a discrepancy existed for title and abstract screening, the study was automatically included for full text review and discussed among reviewers.

Two reviewers (JM and AL) undertook full-text screening of the selected studies. Discrepancies were resolved through consensus discussions without the need for a third reviewer. There were no discrepancies that required a third reviewer. Reason for exclusion were documented according to pre-determined eligibility criteria. References of included full text articles were screened by each reviewer independently and identified articles were subjected to the same screening process as per the PRISMA-ScR checklist (Fig.  1 ).

PRISMA-ScR flow diagram

Stage 4: Charting the data

Two reviewers independently extracted the data using a piloted customized and standardized data extraction form including (1) Structure: financial (e.g., costs, insurance, government funding), resources (structure and number of stroke facilities, staff (number, profession/specialism, qualifications etc.), stroke characteristics (2) Process: duration of care, content of stroke care within acute, secondary care, community, outcome measures used; (3) Outcome: survival, function, patient satisfaction, cost (admission and interventions), and (4) year of publication, geographical location (including if Philippines only or multiple international locations) and type of evidence (e.g., policy, review, observational, experimental, clinical guidelines). Critical appraisal of included studies was not undertaken because the purpose of the review was to map available evidence on stroke services available within the Philippines.

Stage 5: Collating, summarising and reporting the results

The search identified 351 records from databases and registers. A total of 70 records are included and reasons for non-inclusion are summarized in Fig.  1 .

Study descriptors

The characteristics of included studies are shown in Supplementary Material Table 1. Of the 70 included studies, 36 were observational with most being based on a retrospective review of case notes ( n  = 31), two were audits, eight were surveys or questionnaires, four were consensus opinion and/or guideline development, three were randomized controlled trial (RCT) or feasibility RCT, 1 was a systematic review, two were policy and guidelines, 11 were narrative reviews or opinion pieces, two were case series or reports and one was an experimental study.

Of the 70 studies, 32 (45.7%) were based in a single tertiary hospital site. There were only three papers based in the community (4.3%). Papers that were opinion pieces or reviews were classified as having a national focus. Of the 22 papers classified as having a national focus, 10 (45.5%) were narrative reviews/ opinion pieces (Table 1 ).

The primary focus of the research studies (excluding the 11 narrative reviews and 2 policy documents) were classified as describing structure ( n  = 8, 14%); process ( n  = 21,36.8%) or outcomes ( n  = 29, 49.2%). The structure of acute care was described in seven studies out of eight studies ( n  = 7/8 87.5%) whilst neurosurgery structures were described in one out of eight studies (12.5%). Acute care processes were described in 11 out of 21 studies ( n  = 11/21 52.3%) whilst rehabilitation processes were described in six out of 21 studies (28.6%), with three out of 21 studies primarily describing outcome measurement (14.3%). The primary focus of the outcomes were stroke characteristics (25 out of 28 papers, 89.2%) in terms of number of stroke (prevalence), mortality or severity of stroke. Measures of stroke quality of life were not reported. Healthcare professional knowledge was described in two studies ( n  = 2/28 7.1%) whilst risk factors for stroke were described in one study ( n  = 1/28, 3.6%). Carer burden was described in one study ( n  = 1/28, 3.6%).

A summary of the findings is presented in Table 2 .

This scoping review describes the available literature on stroke services within the Philippines across the lifespan of an adult (> 18 years) with a stroke. The review has identified gaps in information about structures, processes and outcomes as well as deficits in provision of stroke services and processes as recommended by WHO. These included a low number of specialist clinicians including neurologists, neuro-radiographers and neurosurgeons. The high prevalence of stroke suggests attention and resources need to focus on primary and secondary prevention. Awareness of stroke is low, especially in terms of what a stroke is, the signs/symptoms and how to minimize risk of stroke [ 25 ]. Barriers exist, such as lack of healthcare resources, maldistribution of health facilities, inadequate training on stroke treatment among health care workers, poor stroke awareness, insufficient government support and limited health insurance coverage [ 22 ].

The scoping review also highlighted areas where further work is needed, for example, descriptions and research into the frequency, intensity, and content of rehabilitation services especially in the community setting and the outcome measures used to monitor recovery and impairment. PARM published stroke rehabilitation clinical practice guidelines in 2012, which incorporated an innovative approach to contextualize Western clinical practice guidelines for stroke care to the Philippines [ 42 ]. Unfortunately, availability and equitable access to evidence-based rehabilitation for people with stroke in the Philippines pose significant challenges because of multiple factors impacting the country (e.g., geographical, social, personal, environmental, educational, economic, workforce) [ 25 , 40 , 43 ].

The number of stroke survivors with disability has not been reported previously, thus, the extent and burden of stroke from acute to chronic is unknown. The recent introduction of a national stroke registry across public and private facilities may provide some of this data [ 82 ]. The project started in 2021 and captures data on people hospitalized for transient ischemic attack or stroke in the Philippines. National stroke registries have been identified as a pragmatic solution to reduce the global burden of stroke [ 83 ] through surveillance of incidence, prevalence, and outcomes (e.g., death, disability) of, and quality of care for, stroke, and prevalence of risk factors. For the Philippine government to know the full impact and burden of stroke nationally, identify areas for improvement and make meaningful changes for the benefit of Filipinos, the registry would need to be compulsory for all public and private facilities and include out of hospital data. This will require information technology, trained workforces for data capture, monitoring and sharing, as well as governance and funding [ 83 ].

This scoping review has generated a better understanding of the published evidence focusing on availability of stroke services in the Philippines, as well as the existing gaps through the lens of Donabedian’s Structure , Process and Outcome framework. The findings have helped to inform a wider investigation of current stroke service utilization conducted using survey and interview methods with stroke survivors, carers and key stakeholders in the Philippines, and drive forward local, regional and national policy and service changes.

Conclusions

This scoping review describes the existing evidence-based relating to structure, processes and outcomes of stroke services for adults within the Philippines. The review revealed limited information in certain areas, such as the impact of stroke on functional ability, participation in everyday life, and quality of life; the content and intensity of rehabilitation both in the hospital or community setting; and the outcome measures used to evaluate clinical practice. Developments in stroke services have been identified however, a wide gap exists between the availability of stroke services and the high burden of stroke in the Philippines. Strategies are critical to address the identified gaps as a precursor to improving stroke outcomes and reducing burden. Potential solutions identified within the review will require a comprehensive approach from healthcare policymakers to focus on stroke awareness programs, primary and secondary prevention, establishing and monitoring of stroke protocols and pathways, implementation of a compulsory national stroke registry, use of TeleRehab, TeleMedicine and mobile stroke units and improve access to and availability of both hospital- and community-based stroke rehabilitation. Furthermore, changes in PhilHealth coverage and universal credit to minimize catastrophic out-of-pocket costs.

Limitations

Although a comprehensive search was undertaken, data were taken from a limited number of located published studies on stroke in the Philippines. This, together with data from databases and grey literature, may not reflect the current state of stroke services in the country.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Data availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Navarro JC, Baroque AC, Lokin JK, Venketasubramanian N. The real stroke burden in the Philippines. Int J Stroke. 2014;9(5):640–1.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Philippines TSSot. Phillipines: stroke 2024. Available from: https://www.strokesocietyphilippines.org/philippines-stroke/#:~:text=Stroke%20is%20the%20Philippines'%20second,or%2014.12%25%20of%20total%20deaths .

Banaag MS, Dayrit MM, Mendoza RU. Health Inequity in the Philippines. In: Batabyal A, Higano Y, Nijkamp P (eds). Disease, Human Health, and Regional Growth and Development in Asia. New Frontiers in Regional Science: Asian Perspectives, vol 38. Singapore: Springer; 2019.

Hodge A, Firth S, Bermejo R, Zeck W, Jimenez-Soto E. Utilisation of health services and the poor: deconstructing wealth-based differences in facility-based delivering in teh Philippines. BMC Public Health. 2016;16:1–12.

Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8:19–32.

Article   Google Scholar  

Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, et al. PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73.

Levac D, Colquhoun H, O’Brien KK. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implement Sci. 2010;5:69.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Donabedian A. The quality of care. How can it be assessed? JAMA. 1988;260(12):1743–8.

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

McDonald KM, Sundaram V, Bravata DM, Lewis R, Lin N, Kraft SA, et al. Closing the quality gap: a critical analysis of quality improvement strategies. Tech Rev. 2007;7(9).

McGowan J, Sampson M, Salzwedel DM, Cogo E, Foerster V, Lefebvre C. PRESS peer review of electronic search strategies: 2015 guideline statement. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;75:40–6.

McGlade B, Mendoza VE. Philippines CBR manual: an inclusive development strategy. Philippines: CBM-CBR Coordinating office; 2009.

Ouzzani M, Hammady H, Fedorowicz Z, et al. Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2016;5(210). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0384-4 .

Baliguas B. Adherence to the clinical practice guidelines of the stroke society of the Philippines in the management of ischemic stroke in young adults admitted in 3 tertiary hospitals in Bacolod City, Philippines from May to October 2010. Neurology. 2018;90(15).

Barcelon EA, Moll MAKDN, Serondo DJ, Collantes MEV. Validation of the Filipino version of national institute of health stroke scale. Clinical Neurology. 2016;56:S379.

Google Scholar  

Baticulon RE, Lucena LLN, Gimenez MLA, Sabalza MN, Soriano JA. The Neurosurgical Workforce of the Philippines. Neurosurgery. 2024;94(1):202–11. https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000002630 .

Berroya RM. Incidence of symptomatic intracerebral hemorrhage after thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke at St. Luke’s Medical Center-Global City from January 2010 to February 2017. J Neurol Sci. 2010;2017(381):398–9.

Carcel C, Espiritu-Picar R. Circadian variation of ischemic and hemorrhagic strokes in adults at a tertiary hospital: a retrospective study. J Neurol Sci. 2009;285:S174.

Cayco CS, Gorgon EJR, Lazaro RT. Proprioceptive neuromuscular facilitation to improve motor outcomes in older adults with chronic stroke. Neurosciences (Riyadh). 2019;24(1):53–60.

Co COC, Yu JRT, Macrohon-Valdez MC, Laxamana LC, De Guzman VPE, Berroya-Moreno RMM, et al. Acute stroke care algorithm in a private tertiary hospital in the Philippines during the COVID-19 pandemic: a third world country experience. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2020;29(9):105059.

Co COC, Yu JRT, Laxamana LC, David-Ona DIA. Intravenous thrombolysis for stroke in a COVID-19 positive Filipino patient, a case report. J Clin Neurosci. 2020;77:234–6.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Collantes ME. Evaluation of change in stroke care in the Philippines using RES-Q data. Eur Stroke J. 2019;4:318.

Collantes ME. Improving stroke systems of care in lmic: Philippines. Int J Stroke. 2021;16(2):4.

Collantes ME, Navarro J, Belen A, Gan R. Stroke systems of care in the Philippines: addressing gaps and developing strategies. Front Neurol. 2022;13:1046351.

Collantes MEV, Yves Miel H, Zuñiga Uezono DR. Incidence and prevalence of stroke and its risk factors in the Philippines: a systematic review. Acta Medica Philippina. 2022;56:26–34.

Collantes MV, Zuniga YH, Granada CN, Uezono DR, De Castillo LC, Enriquez CG, et al. Current state of stroke care in the Philippines. Front Neurol. 2021;12:665086.

Constantino GA, Soliven JA. Points of in-hospital delays in thrombolytic therapy among patients with acute ischemic stroke: a single center 5-year retrospective study. Neurology. 2020;94(15).  https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.94.15_supplement.2901 .

Constantino GAA, Señga MMA, Soliven JAR, Jocson VED. Emerging Utility of Endovascular Thrombectomy in the Philippines: A Single-center Clinical Experience. Acta Med Philipp [Internet]. 2023;57(5). Available from: https://actamedicaphilippina.upm.edu.ph/index.php/acta/article/view/5113 . [cited 2024 Aug 21].

Dans AL, Punzalan FE, Villaruz MV. National Nutrition and Health Survey (NNHeS): atherosclerosis-related diseases and risk factors. Philipp J Intern Med. 2005;43:103–15.

De Castillo LL, Collantes ME. Thrombolysis for stroke at the Philippine general hospital: a descriptive analysis. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2019;48:54.

de Castillo LLC, Diestro JDB, Tuazon CAM, Sy MCC, Añonuevo JC, San Jose MCZ. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2021;30(7):105831.

Delfino JPM, Carandang-Chacon CA. Comparison of acute ischemic stroke care quality before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in a private tertiary hospital in metro Manila, Philippines. Neurol Asia. 2023;28(1):13–7.

Department of Health. Department of Health Administrative Order 2011-0003. 2011. [Accessed online: 12/2022], from the Philippine Department of Health].

Department of Health. The national policy framework on the prevention, control and management of acute stroke in the Philippines. 2020.

Diestro JDB, Omar AT, Sarmiento RJC, Enriquez CAG, Castillo LLC, Ho BL, et al. Cost of hospitalization for stroke in a low-middle-income country: Findings from a public tertiary hospital in the Philippines. Int J Stroke. 2021;16(1):39–42.

Duenas M, Ranoa G, Benjamin VS. Assessment of post-stroke caregivers’ burden through the modified caregivers strain index (MCSI) in a tertiary center in the Philippines: a cross-sectional study. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2019;48:56–7.

Duya JE, Hernandez K, San Jose MC. The evolving clinical and echocardiographic profile of patients admitted for acute cardioembolic stroke at a Tertiary Hospital in the Philippines. J Hong Kong Coll Cardiol. 2019;27(1):58.

Espiritu AI, San Jose MCZ. A call for a stroke referral network between primary care and stroke-ready hospitals in the philippines: a narrative review. Neurologist. 2021;26(6):253–60.

Gambito ED, Gonzalez-Suarez CB, Grimmer KA, Valdecañas CM, Dizon JM, Beredo ME, et al. Updating contextualized clinical practice guidelines on stroke rehabilitation and low back pain management using a novel assessment framework that standardizes decisions. BMC Res Notes. 2015;8:643.

Gelisanga MA, Gorgon EJ. Upright motor control test: interrater reliability, retest reliability, and concurrent validity in adults with subacute stroke. Eur Stroke J. 2017;2(1):357–8.

Gonzalez-Suarez C, Grimmer K, Alipio I, Anota-Canencia EG, Santos-Carpio ML, Dizon JM, et al. Stroke rehabilitation in the Philippines: an audit study. Disabil CBR Inclusive Develop. 2015;26(3):44–67.

Gonzalez-Suarez CB, Grimmer K, Cabrera JTC, Alipio IP, Anota-Canencia EGG, Santos-Carpio MLP, et al. Predictors of medical complications in stroke patients confined in hospitals with rehabilitation facilities: a Filipino audit of practice. Neurology Asia. 2018;23(3):199–208.

Gonzalez-Suarez CB, Grimmer-Somers K, Margarita Dizon J, King E, Lorenzo S, Valdecanas C, et al. Contextualizing Western guidelines for stroke and low back pain to a developing country (Philippines): an innovative approach to putting evidence into practice efficiently. J Healthc Leadersh. 2012;4:141–56.

Gonzalez-Suarez CB, Margarita J, Dizon R, Grimmer K, Estrada MS, Uyehara ED, et al. Implementation of recommendations from the Philippine Academy of Rehabilitation Medicine's Stroke Rehabilitation Guideline: a plan of action. Clin Audit. 2013;5:77–89.

Ignacio KHD, Diestro JDB, Medrano JMM, Salabi SKU, Logronio AJ, Factor SJV, et al. Depression and anxiety after stroke in young adult Filipinos. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2022;31(2):106232.

Inting K, Canete MT. Ischemic stroke subtypes: a comparison between causative and phenotypic classifications in a tertiary hospital in the Philippines. Int J Stroke. 2021;16(2):28.

Jaca PKM, Chacon CAC, Alvarez RM. Clinical characteristics of cerebrovascular disease with COVID-19: a single-center study in Manila. Philippines Neurology Asia. 2021;26(1):15–25.

Jamora RDG, Corral EV, Ang MA, Epifania M, Collantes V, Gan R. Stroke recurrence among Filipino patients taking aspirin for first-ever non-cardioembolic ischemic stroke. Neurol Clin Neurosci. 2017;5:1–5.

Jamora RDG, Prado MB Jr, Anlacan VMM, Sy MCC, Espiritu AI. Incidence and risk factors for stroke in patients with COVID-19 in the Philippines: an analysis of 10,881 cases. J Stroke Cerebrovasc Dis. 2022;31(11).

Juangco DN, Mariano GS. Endovascular therapy for acute ischemic stroke: a review of cases and outcomes from a primary stroke center (a 5-year retrospective study). Cerebrovasc Dis. 2016;41:54.

Leochico CFD, Austria EMV, Gelisanga MAP, Ignacio SD, Mojica JAP. Home-based telerehabilitation for community-dwelling persons with stroke during the COVID-19 pandemic: a pilot study. J Rehabil Med. 2023;55:jrm4405.

Loo KW, Gan SH. Burden of stroke in the Philippines. Int J Stroke. 2013;8(2):131–4.

Mansouri A, Ku JC, Khu KJ, Mahmud MR, Sedney C, Ammar A, et al. Exploratory analysis into reasonable timeframes for the provision of neurosurgical care in low- and middle-income countries. World Neurosurg. 2018;117:e679–91.

Mendoza RA. The clinical profile and treatment outcome of acute ischemic stroke patients who underwent thrombolysis with recombinant tissue plasminogen activator therapy, Philippine experience: a retrospective study. J Neurol Sci. 2009;285:S85–6.

Navarro J. Prevalence of stroke: a community survey. Philipp J Neurol. 2005;9(2):11–5.

Navarro JC, Venketasubramanian N. Stroke burden and services in the Philippines. Cerebrovasc Dis Extra. 2021;11(2):52–4.

Navarro JC, Baroque AC 2nd, Lokin JK. Stroke education in the Philippines. Int J Stroke. 2013;8 Suppl A100:114–5.

Navarro JC, Chen CL, Lee CF, Gan HH, Lao AY, Baroque AC, et al. Durability of the beneficial effect of MLC601 (NeuroAiD™) on functional recovery among stroke patients from the Philippines in the CHIMES and CHIMES-E studies. Int J Stroke. 2017;12(3):285–91.

Navarro JC, Escabillas C, Aquino A, Macrohon C, Belen A, Abbariao M, et al. Stroke units in the Philippines: an observational study. Int J Stroke. 2021;16(7):849–54.

Navarro JC, San Jose MC, Collantes E, Macrohon-Valdez MC, Roxas A, Hivadan J, et al. Stroke thrombolysis in the Philippines. Neurol Asia. 2018;23(2):115.

Ng JC, Churojana A, Pongpech S, Vu LD, Sadikin C, Mahadevan J, et al. Current state of acute stroke care in Southeast Asian countries. Interv Neuroradiol. 2019;25(3):291–6.

Ocampo FF, De Leon-Gacrama FRG, Cuanang JR, Navarro JC. Profile of stroke mimics in a tertiary medical center in the Philippines. Neurol Asia. 2021;26(1):35–9.

Pascua R, Hiyadan JH. Outcome of decompressive hemicraniectomy without evacuation of hematoma in supratentorial intracerebral hemorrhage in a tertiary government hospital in the Philippines: a retrospective study. Eur Stroke J. 2023;8(2):586.

Prado M, Jamora RD, Charmaine Sy M, Anlacan M, Espiritu A. Determinants and Outcomes of Cerebrovascular Disease in Patients with COVID19 in the Philippines: An Analysis of 10881 Cases. Neurology. 2022;98(18). https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.98.18_supplement.2076 .

Qua CV, Tiqui V, Villatima NE, Perales DJ, Rubio SM, Santos ER, et al. A predictive assessment of early neurological deterioration among Filipino acute ischemic stroke patients utilizing hematological, lipid profile, and metabolic parameters in a tertiary hospital in Pampanga. Philippines Cerebrovasc Dis. 2022;51:101.

Que DL, Cuanang J, San Jose MC. Clinical profile, management and outcomes of patients with cerebralvenous thrombosis in atertiary hospital in the Philippines. Int J Stroke. 2020;15(1):511.

Quiles LEP, Diamante PAB, Pascual JLV. Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic in the acute stroke admissions and outcomes in a Philippine Tertiary Hospital. Cerebrovasc Dis Extra. 2022;12(2):76–84.

Roxas AA. The RIFASAF project: a case-control study on risk factors for stroke among Filipinos. Philippine J Neurol. 2002;6(1):1–7.

Roxas AAC, Carabal-Handumon J. Knowledge and perceptions among the barangay health workers in Plaridel, Misamis Occidental. Philipp J Neurol. 2002;6(1):44.

Sasikumar S, Bengzon Diestro JD. Global & community health: acute ischemic stroke in Toronto and Manila: bridging the gap. Neurology. 2020;95(13):604–6.

Senga MM, Reyes JPB. Cerebral venous thrombosis in a single center tertiary hospital of a South East Asian country (CVSTS study)-a retrospective study on the clinical profiles of patients with cerebral venous thrombosis. Neurology. 2019;92(15). https://doi.org/10.1212/WNL.92.15_supplement.P5.3-011 .

Sese LVC, Guillermo MCL. Strengthening stroke prevention and awareness in the Philippines: a conceptual framework. Front Neurol. 2023;14:1258821.

Suwanwela NC, Chen CLH, Lee CF, Young SH, Tay SS, Umapathi T, et al. Effect of combined treatment with MLC601 (NeuroAiDTM) and rehabilitation on post-stroke recovery: the CHIMES and CHIMES-E studies. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2018;46(1–2):82–8.

Talamera AF, Franco DS. Validation study of Siriraj stroke score in Southern Philippines. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2011;32:9.

Tan A, Navarro J. Outcomes and quality of care outcome of patients with primary intracerebral hemorrhage in a single center in the philippines. Int J Stroke. 2014;9:269.

Tangcuangco NC, Bitanga ES, Roxas AA, Pascual JL, Saniel E, Reyes JP, et al. Intravenous recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (IV-rtPA) use in acute ischemic stroke in a private tertiary hospital: a Philippine setting. Int J Stroke. 2010;5:107.

Tsang ACO, Yang IH, Orru E, Nguyen QA, Pamatmat RV, Medhi G, et al. Overview of endovascular thrombectomy accessibility gap for acute ischemic stroke in Asia: a multi-national survey. Int J Stroke. 2020;15(5):516–20.

Vatanagul J, Cantero-Auguis C. Awareness on acute stroke management among family medicine and internal medicine residents in Metro Cebu. Philippines J Neurol Sci. 2015;357:e418–9.

Vatanagul J, Rulona IA. The incidence of post-stroke depression in a tertiary hospital in Cebu City, Philippines. J Neurol Sci. 2015;357:e419.

Vatanagul JAS, Rulona IA, Belonguel NJ. Cerebral venous thrombosis (CVST): study of four Filipino patients and literature review. Cerebrovasc Dis. 2013;36:81.

Venketasubramanian N, Yoon BW, Pandian J, Navarro JC. Stroke epidemiology in south, east, and south-east Asia: a review. J Stroke. 2017;19(3):286–94.

Yu RF, San Jose MC, Manzanilla BM, Oris MY, Gan R. Sources and reasons for delays in the care of acute stroke patients. J Neurol Sci. 2002;199(1–2):49–54.

Philippine Neurological Association One Database - Stroke DsSMG. Multicentre collection of uniform data on patients hospitalised for transient ischaemic attack or stroke in the Philippines: the Philippine Neurological Association One Database-Stroke (PNA1DB-Stroke) protocol. BMJ Open. 2022;12(5):54.

Feigin VL, Owolabi MO, Group WSOLNCSC. Pragmatic solutions to reduce the global burden of stroke: a world stroke organization-lancet neurology commission. Lancet Neurol. 2023;22(12):1160–206.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge the TULAY collaborators: Dr Roy Francis Navea, Dr Myrna Estrada, Dr Elda Grace Anota, Dr Maria Mercedes Barba, Dr June Ann De Vera, Dr Maria Elena Tan, Dr Sarah Buckingham and Professor Fiona Jones. We are grateful to Lance de Jesus and Dr Annah Teves, Research Assistants on the TULAY project, for their contribution to some of the data extraction.

This research was funded by the NIHR Global Health Policy and Systems Research Programme (Award ID: NIHR150244) in association with UK aid from the UK Government to support global health research. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the UK’s Department of Health and Social Care.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Faculty of Health, Intercity Place, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, Devon, PL4 6AB, UK

Angela Logan, Bridie Kent, Aira Ong & Jonathan Marsden

Royal Devon University Healthcare NHS Foundation Trust, William Wright House, Barrack Road, Exeter, Devon, EX2 5DW, UK

Angela Logan

De La Salle University-Evelyn D. Ang Institute of Biomedical Engineering and Health Technologies, 2401 Taft Avenue, Malate, Manila, 1004, Philippines

Lorraine Faeldon

The University of Plymouth Centre for Innovations in Health and Social Care: A JBI Centre of Excellence, Faculty of Health, Intercity Place, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, Devon, PL4 6AB, UK

Bridie Kent

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualisation, methodology and setting search terms, AL, LF, AO, JM, BK. Searches and screening, AL, JM, LF, AO. Data extraction, AL, LF, AO, JM, LdJ, AT. Original draft preparation, AL, JM. All authors provided substantive intellectual and editorial revisions and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Angela Logan .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate, consent for publication, competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary material 1., rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Logan, A., Faeldon, L., Kent, B. et al. A scoping review of stroke services within the Philippines. BMC Health Serv Res 24 , 1006 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11334-z

Download citation

Received : 20 March 2024

Accepted : 22 July 2024

Published : 30 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11334-z

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Stroke care
• Low- middle-income countries
• Developing countries
• Philippines

BMC Health Services Research

ISSN: 1472-6963

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Here’s how you know

• U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
• National Institutes of Health

Meditation and Mindfulness: Effectiveness and Safety

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} What are meditation and mindfulness?

Meditation has a history that goes back thousands of years, and many meditative techniques began in Eastern traditions. The term “meditation” refers to a variety of practices that focus on mind and body integration and are used to calm the mind and enhance overall well-being. Some types of meditation involve maintaining mental focus on a particular sensation, such as breathing, a sound, a visual image, or a mantra, which is a repeated word or phrase. Other forms of meditation include the practice of mindfulness, which involves maintaining attention or awareness on the present moment without making judgments.

Programs that teach meditation or mindfulness may combine the practices with other activities. For example, mindfulness-based stress reduction is a program that teaches mindful meditation, but it also includes discussion sessions and other strategies to help people apply what they have learned to stressful experiences. Mindfulness-based cognitive therapy integrates mindfulness practices with aspects of cognitive behavioral therapy.

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} Are meditation and mindfulness practices safe?

Meditation and mindfulness practices usually are considered to have few risks. However, few studies have examined these practices for potentially harmful effects, so it isn’t possible to make definite statements about safety. 

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} More

A 2020 review examined 83 studies (a total of 6,703 participants) and found that 55 of those studies reported negative experiences related to meditation practices. The researchers concluded that about 8 percent of participants had a negative effect from practicing meditation, which is similar to the percentage reported for psychological therapies. The most commonly reported negative effects were anxiety and depression. In an analysis limited to 3 studies (521 participants) of mindfulness-based stress reduction programs, investigators found that the mindfulness practices were not more harmful than receiving no treatment.

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} How popular are meditation and mindfulness?

According to the National Health Interview Survey, an annual nationally representative survey, the percentage of U.S. adults who practiced meditation more than doubled between 2002 and 2022, from 7.5 to 17.3 percent. Of seven complementary health approaches for which data were collected in the 2022 survey, meditation was the most popular, beating out yoga (used by 15.8 percent of adults), chiropractic care (11.0 percent), massage therapy (10.9 percent), guided imagery/progressive muscle relaxation (6.4 percent), acupuncture (2.2 percent), and naturopathy (1.3 percent).

For children aged 4 to 17 years, data are available for 2017; in that year, 5.4 percent of U.S. children used meditation. 

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} Why do people practice mindfulness meditation?

In a 2012 U.S. survey, 1.9 percent of 34,525 adults reported that they had practiced mindfulness meditation in the past 12 months. Among those responders who practiced mindfulness meditation exclusively, 73 percent reported that they meditated for their general wellness and to prevent diseases, and most of them (approximately 92 percent) reported that they meditated to relax or reduce stress. In more than half of the responses, a desire for better sleep was a reason for practicing mindfulness meditation.

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} What are the health benefits of meditation and mindfulness?

Meditation and mindfulness practices may have a variety of health benefits and may help people improve the quality of their lives. Recent studies have investigated if meditation or mindfulness helps people manage anxiety, stress, depression, pain, or symptoms related to withdrawal from nicotine, alcohol, or opioids. 

Other studies have looked at the effects of meditation or mindfulness on weight control or sleep quality. 

However, much of the research on these topics has been preliminary or not scientifically rigorous. Because the studies examined many different types of meditation and mindfulness practices, and the effects of those practices are hard to measure, results from the studies have been difficult to analyze and may have been interpreted too optimistically.

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} Stress, Anxiety, and Depression

• A 2018 NCCIH-supported analysis of 142 groups of participants with diagnosed psychiatric disorders such as anxiety or depression examined mindfulness meditation approaches compared with no treatment and with established evidence-based treatments such as cognitive behavioral therapy and antidepressant medications. The analysis included more than 12,000 participants, and the researchers found that for treating anxiety and depression, mindfulness-based approaches were better than no treatment at all, and they worked as well as the evidence-based therapies.
• A 2021 analysis of 23 studies (1,815 participants) examined mindfulness-based practices used as treatment for adults with diagnosed anxiety disorders. The studies included in the analysis compared the mindfulness-based interventions (alone or in combination with usual treatments) with other treatments such cognitive behavioral therapy, psychoeducation, and relaxation. The analysis showed mixed results for the short-term effectiveness of the different mindfulness-based approaches. Overall, they were more effective than the usual treatments at reducing the severity of anxiety and depression symptoms, but only some types of mindfulness approaches were as effective as cognitive behavioral therapy. However, these results should be interpreted with caution because the risk of bias for all of the studies was unclear. Also, the few studies that followed up with participants for periods longer than 2 months found no long-term effects of the mindfulness-based practices.
• A 2019 analysis of 23 studies that included a total of 1,373 college and university students looked at the effects of yoga, mindfulness, and meditation practices on symptoms of stress, anxiety, and depression. Although the results showed that all the practices had some effect, most of the studies included in the review were of poor quality and had a high risk of bias.

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} High Blood Pressure

Few high-quality studies have examined the effects of meditation and mindfulness on blood pressure. According to a 2017 statement from the American Heart Association, the practice of meditation may have a possible benefit, but its specific effects on blood pressure have not been determined.

• A 2020 review of 14 studies (including more than 1,100 participants) examined the effects of mindfulness practices on the blood pressure of people who had health conditions such as hypertension, diabetes, or cancer. The analysis showed that for people with these health conditions, practicing mindfulness-based stress reduction was associated with a significant reduction in blood pressure.

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} Pain

Studies examining the effects of mindfulness or meditation on acute and chronic pain have produced mixed results.

• A 2020 report by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality concluded that mindfulness-based stress reduction was associated with short-term (less than 6 months) improvement in low-back pain but not fibromyalgia pain.
• A 2020 NCCIH-supported analysis of five studies of adults using opioids for acute or chronic pain (with a total of 514 participants) found that meditation practices were strongly associated with pain reduction.
• Acute pain, such as pain from surgery, traumatic injuries, or childbirth, occurs suddenly and lasts only a short time. A 2020 analysis of 19 studies examined the effects of mindfulness-based therapies for acute pain and found no evidence of reduced pain severity. However, the same analysis found some evidence that the therapies could improve a person’s tolerance for pain.
• A 2017 analysis of 30 studies (2,561 participants) found that mindfulness meditation was more effective at decreasing chronic pain than several other forms of treatment. However, the studies examined were of low quality.
• A 2019 comparison of treatments for chronic pain did an overall analysis of 11 studies (697 participants) that evaluated cognitive behavioral therapy, which is the usual psychological intervention for chronic pain; 4 studies (280 participants) that evaluated mindfulness-based stress reduction; and 1 study (341 participants) of both therapies. The comparison found that both approaches were more effective at reducing pain intensity than no treatment, but there was no evidence of any important difference between the two approaches.
• A 2019 review found that mindfulness-based approaches did not reduce the frequency, length, or pain intensity of headaches. However, the authors of this review noted that their results are likely imprecise because only five studies (a total of 185 participants) were included in the analysis, and any conclusions made from the analysis should be considered preliminary.

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} Insomnia and Sleep Quality

Mindfulness meditation practices may help reduce insomnia and improve sleep quality.

• A 2019 analysis of 18 studies (1,654 total participants) found that mindfulness meditation practices improved sleep quality more than education-based treatments. However, the effects of mindfulness meditation approaches on sleep quality were no different than those of evidence-based treatments such as cognitive behavioral therapy and exercise.

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} Substance Use Disorder

Several clinical trials have investigated if mindfulness-based approaches such as mindfulness-based relapse prevention (MBRP) might help people recover from substance use disorders. These approaches have been used to help people increase their awareness of the thoughts and feelings that trigger cravings and learn ways to reduce their automatic reactions to those cravings.

• A 2018 review of 37 studies (3,531 total participants) evaluated the effectiveness of several mindfulness-based approaches to substance use disorder treatment and found that they significantly decreased participants’ craving levels. The mindfulness-based practices were slightly better than other therapies at promoting abstinence from substance use.
• A 2017 analysis specifically focused on MBRP examined 9 studies (901 total participants) of this approach. The analysis concluded that MBRP was not more effective at preventing substance use relapses than other treatments such as health education and cognitive behavioral therapy. However, MBRP did slightly reduce cravings and symptoms of withdrawal associated with alcohol use disorders.

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder

Studies have suggested that meditation and mindfulness may help reduce symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

• A 2018 review supported by NCCIH examined the effects of meditation (in 2 studies, 179 total participants) and other mindfulness-based practices (in 6 studies, 332 total participants) on symptoms of PTSD. Study participants included veterans, nurses, and people who experienced interpersonal violence. Six of the eight studies reported that participants had a reduction of PTSD symptoms after receiving some form of mindfulness-based treatment.
• A 2018 clinical trial funded by the U.S. Department of Defense compared the effectiveness of meditation, health education, and prolonged exposure therapy, a widely accepted treatment for PTSD recommended by the American Psychological Association. Prolonged exposure therapy helps people reduce their PTSD symptoms by teaching them to gradually remember traumatic memories, feelings, and situations. The study included 203 veterans with PTSD as a result of their active military service. The results of the study showed that meditation was as effective as prolonged exposure therapy at reducing PTSD symptoms and depression, and it was more effective than PTSD health education. The veterans who used meditation also showed improvement in mood and overall quality of life.

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} Cancer

Mindfulness-based approaches may improve the mental health of people with cancer.

• A 2019 analysis of 29 studies (3,274 total participants) of mindfulness-based practices showed that use of mindfulness practices among people with cancer significantly reduced psychological distress, fatigue, sleep disturbance, pain, and symptoms of anxiety and depression. However, most of the participants were women with breast cancer, so the effects may not be similar for other populations or other types of cancer.

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} Weight Control and Eating Behavior

Studies have suggested possible benefits of meditation and mindfulness programs for losing weight and managing eating behaviors.

• A 2017 review of 15 studies (560 total participants) looked at the effects of mindfulness-based practices on the mental and physical health of adults with obesity or who were overweight. The review found that these practices were very effective methods for managing eating behaviors but less effective at helping people lose weight. Mindfulness-based approaches also helped participants manage symptoms of anxiety and depression.
• A 2018 analysis of 19 studies (1,160 total participants) found that mindfulness programs helped people lose weight and manage eating-related behaviors such as binge, emotional, and restrained eating. The results of the analysis showed that treatment programs, such as mindfulness-based stress reduction and mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, that combine formal meditation and mindfulness practices with informal mindfulness exercises were especially effective methods for losing weight and managing eating.

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

Several studies have been done on using meditation and mindfulness practices to improve symptoms of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). However, the studies have not been of high quality and the results have been mixed, so evidence that meditation or mindfulness approaches will help people manage symptoms of ADHD is not conclusive.

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} How do meditation and mindfulness work?

Some research suggests that meditation and mindfulness practices may affect the functioning or structure of the brain. Studies have used various methods of measuring brain activity to look for measurable differences in the brains of people engaged in mindfulness-based practices. Other studies have theorized that training in meditation and mindfulness practices can change brain activity. However, the results of these studies are difficult to interpret, and the practical implications are not clear.

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} NCCIH-Funded Research

NCCIH supports a variety of meditation and mindfulness studies, including:

• An evaluation of how the brain responds to the use of mindfulness meditation as part of a combined treatment for migraine pain.
• A study of the effectiveness of mindfulness therapy and medication (buprenorphine) as a treatment for opioid use disorder.
• A study of a mindfulness training program designed to help law enforcement officers improve their mental health by managing stress and increasing resilience.

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} Tips To Consider

• Don’t use meditation or mindfulness to replace conventional care or as a reason to postpone seeing a health care provider about a medical problem.
• Ask about the training and experience of the instructor of the meditation or mindfulness practice you are considering.
• Take charge of your health—talk with your health care providers about any complementary health approaches you use. Together, you can make shared, well-informed decisions

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} For More Information

Nccih clearinghouse.

The NCCIH Clearinghouse provides information on NCCIH and complementary and integrative health approaches, including publications and searches of Federal databases of scientific and medical literature. The Clearinghouse does not provide medical advice, treatment recommendations, or referrals to practitioners.

Toll-free in the U.S.: 1-888-644-6226

Telecommunications relay service (TRS): 7-1-1

Website: https://www.nccih.nih.gov

Email: [email protected] (link sends email)

Know the Science

NCCIH and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) provide tools to help you understand the basics and terminology of scientific research so you can make well-informed decisions about your health. Know the Science features a variety of materials, including interactive modules, quizzes, and videos, as well as links to informative content from Federal resources designed to help consumers make sense of health information.

Explaining How Research Works (NIH)

Know the Science: How To Make Sense of a Scientific Journal Article

Understanding Clinical Studies (NIH)

A service of the National Library of Medicine, PubMed® contains publication information and (in most cases) brief summaries of articles from scientific and medical journals. For guidance from NCCIH on using PubMed, see How To Find Information About Complementary Health Approaches on PubMed .

Website: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/

NIH Clinical Research Trials and You

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) has created a website, NIH Clinical Research Trials and You, to help people learn about clinical trials, why they matter, and how to participate. The site includes questions and answers about clinical trials, guidance on how to find clinical trials through ClinicalTrials.gov and other resources, and stories about the personal experiences of clinical trial participants. Clinical trials are necessary to find better ways to prevent, diagnose, and treat diseases.

Website: https://www.nih.gov/health-information/nih-clinical-research-trials-you

Research Portfolio Online Reporting Tools Expenditures & Results (RePORTER)

RePORTER is a database of information on federally funded scientific and medical research projects being conducted at research institutions.

Website: https://reporter.nih.gov

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} Key References

• Anheyer D, Leach MJ, Klose P, et al.  Mindfulness-based stress reduction for treating chronic headache: a systematic review and meta-analysis . Cephalalgia . 2019;39(4):544-555.
• Black LI, Barnes PM, Clarke TC, Stussman BA, Nahin RL.  Use of yoga, meditation, and chiropractors among U.S. children aged 4–17 years . NCHS Data Brief, no 324. Hyattsville, MD: National Center for Health Statistics. 2018.
• Breedvelt JJF, Amanvermez Y, Harrer M, et al.  The effects of meditation, yoga, and mindfulness on depression, anxiety, and stress in tertiary education students: a meta-analysis . Frontiers in Psychiatry . 2019;10:193. 
• Burke A, Lam CN, Stussman B, et al.  Prevalence and patterns of use of mantra, mindfulness and spiritual meditation among adults in the United States . BMC Complementary and Alternative Medicine. 2017;17(1):316.
• Carrière K, Khoury B, Günak MM, et al.  Mindfulness‐based interventions for weight loss: a systematic review and meta‐analysis . Obesity Reviews . 2018;19(2):164-177. 
• Cavicchioli M, Movalli M, Maffei C.  The clinical efficacy of mindfulness-based treatments for alcohol and drugs use disorders: a meta-analytic review of randomized and nonrandomized controlled trials . European Addiction Research . 2018;24(3):137-162.
• Cillessen L, Johannsen M, Speckens AEM, et al.  Mindfulness‐based interventions for psychological and physical health outcomes in cancer patients and survivors: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials . Psychooncology . 2019;28(12):2257-2269.
• Creswell JD.  Mindfulness interventions . Annual Review of Psychology. 2017;68:491-516.
• Davidson RJ, Kaszniak AW.  Conceptual and methodological issues in research on mindfulness and meditation . American Psychologist. 2015;70(7):581-592.
• Farias M, Maraldi E, Wallenkampf KC, et al.  Adverse events in meditation practices and meditation-based therapies: a systematic review . Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica. 2020;142(5):374-393. 
• Garland EL, Brintz CE, Hanley AW, et al.  Mind-body therapies for opioid-treated pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis . JAMA Internal Medicine . 2020;180(1):91-105.
• Goldberg SB, Tucker RP, Greene PA, et al. Mindfulness-based interventions for psychiatric disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis . Clinical Psychology Review . 2018;59:52-60.
• Grant S, Colaiaco B, Motala A, et al.  Mindfulness-based relapse prevention for substance use disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis . Journal of Addiction Medicine . 2017;11(5):386-396. 
• Haller H, Breilmann P, Schröter M et al.  A systematic review and meta‑analysis of acceptance and mindfulness‑based interventions for DSM‑5 anxiety disorders . Scientific Reports . 2021;11(1):20385.
• Hilton L, Hempel S, Ewing BA, et al.  Mindfulness meditation for chronic pain: systematic review and meta-analysis . Annals of Behavioral Medicine. 2017;51(2):199-213.
• Hirshberg MJ, Goldberg SB, Rosenkranz M, et al.  Prevalence of harm in mindfulness-based stress reduction . Psychological Medicine. August 18, 2020. [Epub ahead of print]. 
• Intarakamhang U, Macaskill A, Prasittichok P.  Mindfulness interventions reduce blood pressure in patients with non-communicable diseases: a systematic review and meta-analysis . Heliyon. 2020;6(4):e03834.
• Khoo E-L, Small R, Cheng W, et al.  Comparative evaluation of group-based mindfulness-based stress reduction and cognitive behavioural therapy for the treatment and management of chronic pain: a systematic review and network meta-analysis . Evidence-Based Mental Health.  2019;22(1):26-35.
• Levine GN, Lange RA, Bairey-Merz CN, et al.  Meditation and cardiovascular risk reduction: a scientific statement from the American Heart Association . Journal of the American Heart Association. 2017;6(10):e002218.
• Nidich S, Mills PJ, Rainforth M, et al.  Non-trauma-focused meditation versus exposure therapy in veterans with post-traumatic stress disorder: a randomised controlled trial . Lancet Psychiatry . 2018;5(12):975-986.
• Niles BL, Mori DL, Polizzi C, et al.  A systematic review of randomized trials of mind-body interventions for PTSD . Journal of Clinical Psychology . 2018;74(9):1485-1508.
• Rogers JM, Ferrari M, Mosely K, et al.  Mindfulness-based interventions for adults who are overweight or obese: a meta-analysis of physical and psychological health outcomes . Obesity Reviews . 2017;18(1):51-67. 
• Rosenkranz MA, Dunne JD, Davidson RJ.  The next generation of mindfulness-based intervention research: what have we learned and where are we headed? Current Opinion in Psychology. 2019;28:179-183.
• Rusch HL, Rosario M, Levison LM, et al.  The effect of mindfulness meditation on sleep quality: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials . Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences . 2019;1445(1):5-16. 
• Schell LK, Monsef I, Wöckel A, et al. Mindfulness-based stress reduction for women diagnosed with breast cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2019;3(3):CD011518. Accessed at cochranelibrary.com on June 3, 2022.
• Semple RJ, Droutman V, Reid BA.  Mindfulness goes to school: things learned (so far) from research and real-world experiences . Psychology in the Schools. 2017;54(1):29-52.
• Shires A, Sharpe L, Davies JN, et al.  The efficacy of mindfulness-based interventions in acute pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis . Pain . 2020;161(8):1698-1707. 
• Van Dam NT, van Vugt MK, Vago DR, et al.  Mind the hype: a critical evaluation and prescriptive agenda for research on mindfulness and meditation . Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2018;13(1):36-61. 

.header_greentext{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_bluetext{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_redtext{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_purpletext{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_yellowtext{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_blacktext{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_whitetext{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.header_darkred{color:#803d2f!important;}.Green_Header{color:green!important;font-size:24px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Blue_Header{color:blue!important;font-size:18px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Red_Header{color:red!important;font-size:28px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Purple_Header{color:purple!important;font-size:31px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Yellow_Header{color:yellow!important;font-size:20px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.Black_Header{color:black!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;}.White_Header{color:white!important;font-size:22px!important;font-weight:500!important;} Other References

• American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Integrative Medicine. Mind-body therapies in children and youth. Pediatrics . 2016;138(3):e20161896.
• Coronado-Montoya S, Levis AW, Kwakkenbos L, et al. Reporting of positive results in randomized controlled trials of mindfulness-based mental health interventions. PLoS One . 2016;11(4):e0153220.
• Dakwar E, Levin FR. The emerging role of meditation in addressing psychiatric illness, with a focus on substance use disorders. Harvard Review of Psychiatry . 2009;17(4):254-267.
• Goyal M, Singh S, Sibinga EMS, et al. Meditation programs for psychological stress and well-being: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Internal Medicine. 2014;174(3):357-368.
• Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Advancing Pain Research, Care, and Education. Relieving Pain in America: A Blueprint for Transforming Prevention, Care, Education, and Research . Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2011. 
• Kabat-Zinn J, Massion AO, Kristeller J, et al. Effectiveness of a meditation-based stress reduction program in the treatment of anxiety disorders. American Journal of Psychiatry. 1992;149(7):936-943.
• Ludwig DS, Kabat-Zinn J. Mindfulness in medicine. JAMA. 2008;300(11):1350-1352.
• McKeering P, Hwang Y-S. A systematic review of mindfulness-based school interventions with early adolescents. Mindfulness . 2019;10:593-610.
• Muratori P, Conversano C, Levantini V, et al. Exploring the efficacy of a mindfulness program for boys with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder and oppositional defiant disorder. Journal of Attention Disorders . 2021;25(11):1544-1553.
• Nahin RL, Rhee A, Stussman B. Use of complementary health approaches overall and for pain management by US adults. JAMA. 2024;331(7):613-615.
• Poissant H, Mendrek A, Talbot N, et al. Behavioral and cognitive impacts of mindfulness-based interventions on adults with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: a systematic review. Behavioural Neurology . 2019;2019:5682050.
• Skelly AC, Chou R, Dettori JR, et al. Noninvasive Nonpharmacological Treatment for Chronic Pain: A Systematic Review Update. Comparative Effectiveness Review no. 227. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2020. AHRQ publication no. 20-EHC009.
• Stieger JR, Engel S, Jiang H, et al. Mindfulness improves brain–computer interface performance by increasing control over neural activity in the alpha band. Cerebral Cortex . 2021;31(1):426-438.
• Teasdale JD, Segal ZV, Williams JMG, et al. Prevention of relapse/recurrence in major depression by mindfulness-based cognitive therapy. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology . 2000;68(4):615-623.
• Weng HY, Lewis-Peacock JA, Hecht FM, et al. Focus on the breath: brain decoding reveals internal states of attention during meditation. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience . 2020;14:336.
• Yoshida K, Takeda K, Kasai T, et al. Focused attention meditation training modifies neural activity and attention: longitudinal EEG data in non-meditators. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience . 2020;15(2):215-223.
• Yuan JP, Connolly CG, Henje E, et al. Gray matter changes in adolescents participating in a meditation training. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience . 2020;14:319.
• Zhang J, Díaz-Román A, Cortese S. Meditation-based therapies for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children, adolescents and adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.  Evidence-Based Mental Health . 2018;21(3):87-94.

Acknowledgments

Thanks to Elizabeth Ginexi, Ph.D., Erin Burke Quinlan, Ph.D., and David Shurtleff, Ph.D., NCCIH, for their review of this 2022 publication.

This publication is not copyrighted and is in the public domain. Duplication is encouraged.

NCCIH has provided this material for your information. It is not intended to substitute for the medical expertise and advice of your health care provider(s). We encourage you to discuss any decisions about treatment or care with your health care provider. The mention of any product, service, or therapy is not an endorsement by NCCIH.

Related Topics

Pain: Considering Complementary Approaches (eBook)

For Consumers

8 Things to Know About Meditation and Mindfulness

For Health Care Providers

Use of Yoga, Meditation, and Chiropractic by Adults and Children

Mind and Body Approaches for Chronic Pain

Meditation - Systematic Reviews/Reviews/Meta-analyses (PubMed®)

Meditation - Randomized Controlled Trials (PubMed®)

Research Results

National Survey Reveals Increased Use of Yoga, Meditation, and Chiropractic Care Among U.S. Adults

National Survey Reveals Increased Use of Yoga and Meditation Among U.S. Children

Mindfulness-Based Stress Reduction, Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy Shown To Be Cost Effective for Chronic Low-Back Pain

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

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

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

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

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

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

Original Submission Date Received: .

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

Article Menu

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

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

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

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Drivers and consequences of land degradation on livestock productivity in sub-saharan africa: a systematic literature review.

1. Introduction

2. materials and methods, 2.1. study design, 2.2. pertinence and state of the matter studied, 2.3. literature search, 2.4. inclusion and exclusion criteria.

2.5. Data Extraction and Synthesis

2.6. data analysis, 3. results and discussion, 3.1. primary drivers of land degradation in sub-saharan rangelands.

3.2. Impact of Land Degradation on Livestock Health, Productivity, and Mortality

3.3. Socio-Economic Consequences of Reduced Livestock Productivity

3.4. Effectiveness of Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies

3.5. Key Themes and Insights from the Word Cloud on Land Degradation, Rangelands, and Livestock in Sub-Saharan Africa

3.6. insights from the co-occurrence network diagram on land degradation, rangelands, and livestock in sub-saharan africa, 4. recommendations for policy makers in charge of these problems and future research directions, 5. potential limitations, 6. conclusions, author contributions, data availability statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.

• Szangolies, L.; Lohmann, D.; Hauptfleisch, M.; Jeltsch, F. Balanced Functional Herbivore Composition Stabilizes Tree-Grass Coexistence and Productivity in a Simulated Savanna Rangeland Ecosystem. Rangel. Ecol. Manag. 2023 , 90 , 208–220. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sibanda, A.; Tui, S.H.K.; Van Rooyen, A.; Dimes, J.; Nkomboni, D.; Sisito, G. Understanding community perceptions of land use changes in the rangelands, Zimbabwe. Exp. Agric. 2011 , 47 , 153–168. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tesfaye, K.; Jaleta, M.; Jena, P.; Mutenje, M. Identifying potential recommendation domains for conservation agriculture in Ethiopia, Kenya, and Malawi. Environ. Manag. 2015 , 55 , 330–346. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Hoffman, M.; Skowno, A.; Bell, W.; Mashele, S. Long-term changes in land use, land cover and vegetation in the Karoo drylands of South Africa: Implications for degradation monitoring. Afr. J. Range Forage Sci. 2018 , 35 , 209–221. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gxasheka, M.; Beyene, S.T.; Mlisa, N.L.; Lesoli, M. Farmers’ perceptions of vegetation change, rangeland condition and degradation in three communal grasslands of South Africa. Trop. Ecol. 2017 , 58 , 217–228. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kahumba, A.; Tefera, S. Pastoralists’ indigenous knowledge and perceptions of rangeland degradation in three communal rangelands of central northern Namibia. J. Arid. Environ. 2023 , 216 , 105009. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bourne, A.; Muller, H.; de Villiers, A.; Alam, M.; Hole, D. Assessing the efficiency and effectiveness of rangeland restoration in Namaqualand, South Africa. Plant Ecol. 2017 , 218 , 7–22. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Worqlul, A.W.; Dile, Y.T.; Schmitter, P.; Jeong, J.; Meki, M.N.; Gerik, T.J.; Srinivasan, R.; Lefore, N.; Clarke, N. Water resource assessment, gaps, and constraints of vegetable production in Robit and Dangishta watersheds, Upper Blue Nile Basin, Ethiopia. Agric. Water Manag. 2019 , 226 , 105767. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vetter, S. Development and sustainable management of rangeland commons–aligning policy with the realities of South Africa’s rural landscape. Afr. J. Range Forage Sci. 2013 , 30 , 1–9. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ringrose, S.; Vanderpost, C.; Matheson, W. The use of integrated remotely sensed and GIS data to determine causes of vegetation cover change in southern Botswana. Appl. Geogr. 1996 , 16 , 225–242. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wessels, K.J.; Prince, S.D.; Carroll, M.; Malherbe, J. Relevance of rangeland degradation in semiarid northeastern South Africa to the nonequilibrium theory. Ecol. Appl. 2007 , 17 , 815–827. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Onduru, D.D.; Du Preez, C.C. Ecological and agro-economic study of small farms in sub-Saharan Africa. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2007 , 27 , 197–208. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Munthali, M.G.; Davis, N.; Adeola, A.M.; Botai, J.O.; Kamwi, J.M.; Chisale, H.L.; Orimoogunje, O.O. Local perception of drivers of land-use and land-cover change dynamics across Dedza District, Central Malawi Region. Sustainability 2019 , 11 , 832. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bennett, J.E.; Palmer, A.R.; Blackett, M.A. Range degradation and land tenure change: Insights from a ‘released’ communal area of Eastern Cape Province, South Africa. Land Degrad. Dev. 2012 , 23 , 557–568. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mureithi, S.M.; Verdoodt, A.; Njoka, J.T.; Gachene, C.K.; Van Ranst, E. Benefits derived from rehabilitating a degraded semi-arid rangeland in communal enclosures, Kenya. Land Degrad. Dev. 2016 , 27 , 1853–1862. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Inman, E.N.; Hobbs, R.J.; Tsvuura, Z.; Valentine, L. Current vegetation structure and composition of woody species in community-derived categories of land degradation in a semiarid rangeland in Kunene region, Namibia. Land Degrad. Dev. 2020 , 31 , 2996–3013. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ward, D.; Ngairorue, B.T.; Apollus, A.; Tjiveze, H. Perceptions and realities of land degradation in arid Otjimbingwe, Namibia. J. Arid. Environ. 2000 , 45 , 337–356. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bekele, N.; Kebede, G. Rangeland degradation and restoration in semi-arid areas of southern Ethiopia: The case of Borana rangeland. Int. J. Environ. Sci. 2014 , 3 , 94–103. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bekele, A.E.; Drabik, D.; Dries, L.; Heijman, W. Large-scale land investments, household displacement, and the effect on land degradation in semiarid agro-pastoral areas of Ethiopia. Land Degrad. Dev. 2021 , 32 , 777–791. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Matarira, D.; Mutanga, O.; Dube, T. Landscape scale land degradation mapping in the semi-arid areas of the save catchment, Zimbabwe. S. Afr. Geogr. J. 2021 , 103 , 183–203. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Moyo, B.; Dube, S.; Moyo, P. Rangeland management and drought coping strategies for livestock farmers in the semi-arid savanna communal areas of Zimbabwe. J. Hum. Ecol. 2013 , 44 , 9–21. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Taiye, O.A.; Dauda, M.M.; Emmanuel, A.O. Assessment of the effects of emerging grazing policies on land degradation in Nigeria. J. Appl. Sci. Environ. Manag. 2017 , 21 , 1183–1187. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mganga, K.Z.; Kinyamario, J.I.; Ekaya, W.N. Effect of grazing pressure on plant species composition and rangeland condition in the southern Kenya rangelands. Afr. J. Range Forage Sci. 2010 , 27 , 129–136. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cobo, M.J.; López-Herrera, A.G.; Herrera-Viedma, E.; Herrera, F. An approach for detecting, quantifying, and visualizing the evolution of a research feld: A practical application to the Fuzzy Sets Theory feld. J. Informetr. 2011 , 5 , 146–166. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Monroe, M.C.; Plate, R.R.; Oxarart, A.; Bowers, A.; Chaves, W.A. Identifying Effective Climate Change Education Strategies: A Systematic Review of the Research. Environ. Edu. Res. 2017 , 25 , 791–812. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bettany-Saltikov, J. Learning how to undertake a systematic review: Part 2. Nurs. Stand. (Through 2013) 2010 , 24 , 47. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing ; R Foundation for Statistical Computing: Vienna, Austria, 2021; Available online: https://www.R-project.org/ (accessed on 3 March 2024).
• Royle, P.; Kandala, N.B.; Barnard, K.; Waugh, N. Bibliometrics of systematic reviews: Analysis of citation rates and journal impact factors. Syst. Rev. 2013 , 2 , 74. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Linnenluecke, M.K.; Marrone, M.; Singh, A.K. Conducting systematic literature reviews and bibliometric analyses. Aust. J. Manag. 2020 , 45 , 175–194. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. CitNetExplorer: A new software tool for analyzing and visualizing citation networks. J. Informetr. 2014 , 8 , 802–823. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Spear, D.; Chappel, A. Livelihoods on the edge without a safety net: The case of smallholder crop farming in north-central Namibia. Land Use Policy 2018 , 77 , 494–506. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hurni, H. Land degradation, famine, and land resource scenarios in Ethiopia. In World Soil Erosion and Conservation ; Pimentel, D., Ed.; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1993; pp. 27–62. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dougill, A.J.; Fraser, E.D.; Reed, M.S. Anticipating vulnerability to climate change in dryland pastoral systems: Using dynamic systems models for the Kalahari. Ecol. Soc. 2010 , 15 , 17. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Adedoyin, A. Deforestation and land degradation in the Nigerian savanna: Implications for sustainable rural livelihoods. Int. J. Sustain. Dev. World Ecol. 2001 , 8 , 255–266. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mwangi, E.; Dohrn, S. Securing access to drylands resources for multiple users in Africa: A review of recent research. Land Use Policy 2008 , 25 , 240–248. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Murwira, A.; Murwira, K.S. Degradation of rangelands in Zimbabwe: Are smallholder farmers responsible? Afr. J. Ecol. 2005 , 43 , 251–258. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nyahunda, L.; Tirivangasi, H.M. Harnessing of social capital as a determinant for climate change adaptation in Mazungunye communal lands in Bikita, Zimbabwe. Scientifica 2021 , 2021 , 8416410. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Solomon, T.B.; Snyman, H.A.; Smit, G.N. Cattle-rangeland management practices and perceptions of pastoralists towards rangeland degradation in the Borana zone of southern Ethiopia. J. Environ. Manag. 2007 , 82 , 481–494. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Abel, N. Mis-measurement of the productivity and sustainability of African communal rangelands: A case study and some principles from Botswana. Ecol. Econ. 1997 , 23 , 113–133. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mganga, K.Z.; Musimba, N.K.; Nyariki, D.M. Combining sustainable land management technologies to combat land degradation and improve rural livelihoods in semi-arid lands in Kenya. Environ. Manag. 2015 , 56 , 1538–1548. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Oba, G.; Kaitira, L.M. Herder knowledge of landscape assessments in arid rangelands in northern Tanzania. J. Arid. Environ. 2006 , 66 , 168–186. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dregne, H.E. Land degradation in the drylands. Arid. Land Res. Manag. 2002 , 16 , 99–132. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mugerwa, S.; Emmanuel, Z. Drivers of grassland ecosystems’ deterioration in Uganda. Appl. Sci. Rep. 2014 , 2 , 103–111. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sebego, R.J.; Atlhopheng, J.R.; Chanda, R.; Mulale, K.; Mphinyane, W. Land use intensification and implications on land degradation in the Boteti area: Botswana. Afr. Geogr. Rev. 2019 , 38 , 32–47. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kideghesho, J.; Rija, A.; Mwamende, K.; Selemani, I. Emerging issues and challenges in conservation of biodiversity in the rangelands of Tanzania. Nat. Conserv. 2013 , 6 , 1–29. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ngwenya, B.N.; Thakadu, O.T.; Magole, L.; Chimbari, M.J. Memories of environmental change and local adaptations among molapo farming communities in the Okavango Delta, Botswana—A gender perspective. Acta Trop. 2017 , 175 , 31–41. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Perkins, J.S.; Thomas, D.S.G. Spreading deserts or spatially confined environmental impacts? Land degradation and cattle ranching in the Kalahari desert of Botswana. Land Degrad. Dev. 1993 , 4 , 179–194. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mwalyosi, R.B. Land-use changes and resource degradation in south–west Masailand, Tanzania. Environ. Conserv. 1992 , 19 , 145–152. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Beyene, S.T. Rangeland Degradation in a Semi-Arid Communal Savannah of Swaziland: Long–Term DIP-Tank Use Effects on Woody Plant Structure, Cover and their Indigenous Use in Three Soil Types. Land Degrad. Dev. 2015 , 26 , 311–323. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Scoones, I. Land degradation and livestock production in Zimbabwe’s communal areas. Land Degrad. Dev. 1992 , 3 , 99–113. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Reed, M.S.; Dougill, A.J. Linking degradation assessment to sustainable land management: A decision support system for Kalahari pastoralists. J. Arid. Environ. 2010 , 74 , 149–155. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chakoma, I.; Chummun, B.Z. Forage seed value chain analysis in a subhumid region of Zimbabwe: Perspectives of smallholder producers. Afr. J. Range Forage Sci. 2019 , 36 , 95–104. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nkonya, E.; Mirzabaev, A.; von Braun, J. (Eds.) Economics of Land Degradation and Improvement—A Global Assessment for Sustainable Development ; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2016; pp. 431–469. [ Google Scholar ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Slayi, M.; Zhou, L.; Dzvene, A.R.; Mpanyaro, Z. Drivers and Consequences of Land Degradation on Livestock Productivity in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Literature Review. Land 2024 , 13 , 1402. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13091402

Slayi M, Zhou L, Dzvene AR, Mpanyaro Z. Drivers and Consequences of Land Degradation on Livestock Productivity in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Literature Review. Land . 2024; 13(9):1402. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13091402

Slayi, Mhlangabezi, Leocadia Zhou, Admire Rukudzo Dzvene, and Zolisanani Mpanyaro. 2024. "Drivers and Consequences of Land Degradation on Livestock Productivity in Sub-Saharan Africa: A Systematic Literature Review" Land 13, no. 9: 1402. https://doi.org/10.3390/land13091402

Article Metrics

Further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals