the main purpose of literature review is to

by Diana Ridley

by Dave Harris

Conducting your literature review 

by Susanne Hempel

The purpose of a literature review

Conducting a literature review is a means of demonstrating the  author’s knowledge  about a particular field of study, including vocabulary, theories, key variables and phenomena, and its methods and history. Conducting a literature review also informs the student of the  influential researchers and research groups  in the field (Randolph, 2009).

Literature reviews:

• report on  knowledge and ideas  that have been established on a particular topic, including their  strengths and weaknesses  while they allow you to discover the agreed academic opinion on the topic while at the same time letting you find out the disagreements on the same subject.
• position your research project within the body of literature and thereby  provide perspective  for the reader.
• demonstrate  your knowledge  of the subject area.
• determine what each source contributes to the topic.
• understand the  relationship between the various contributions , identify and (if possible) resolve contradictions, and determine gaps or unanswered questions.
• justify your  choice of research design ; for instance, your choice of qualitative over quantitative approaches, or your method of data analysis.
• clarify how your work fills a  gap  in the scholarly literature.

Writing a literature review also allows you to:

• gain expertise in the ability to scan the literature on a particular topic efficiently, and
• hone your skills in identifying and analysing unbiased and valid data on various topics or fields of study.

Source: Randolph, J.J. 2009.  A guide to writing the dissertation literature review .  Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation . 14 (13): 1-13.

A literature review is meant to help you to ...

Source: Hart, C. 1998. Doing a literature review: releasing the social science research imagination.  London: Sage, p 27.

S helf No: 300.72 HART

Video clips from the Internet

Click on the  links  below for video clips on how to write literature reviews:

• Honours & Postgraduate Diplomas workshop - Writing the Literature Review - Dr Thuli Shandu Phetla (Unisa)
• Literature Review: step by step guide to writing an effective literature review
• How to write a Literature Review in 30 minutes or less 
• How to Write a Literature Review in 3 Simple Steps
• Literature Review in 5 mins
• Literature Review & Theoretical Framework - Dr KS Malatji

Books on writing a liteature review

Doing a systematic literature review in legal scholarship 

by Marnix Snel and Janaína de Moraes

340.072 SNEL

Doing a literature review in nursing, health and social care 

by  Michael Coughlan & Patricia Cronin

610.73072 COUG

7 steps to a comprehensive literature review : a multimodal & cultural approach

by Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie & Rebecca Frels

001.42 ONWU

Writing the literature review : a practical guide 

by Sara Efrat Efron & Ruth Ravid

808.02 EFRO

• << Previous: Literature review process
• Next: Evaluating sources >>
• Last Updated: Apr 30, 2024 1:19 PM
• URL: https://libguides.unisa.ac.za/literature_review

Libraries | Research Guides

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

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

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

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

• Next: Planning the Review >>
• Last Updated: Jul 8, 2024 11:22 AM
• URL: https://libguides.northwestern.edu/literaturereviews

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

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

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

Help is Just a Click Away

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

Go to LibAnswers

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

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

What are the goals of creating a Literature Review?

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

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

When do you need to write a Literature Review?

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

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

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

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

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

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

• Next: Strategies to Find Sources >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 10:56 AM
• URL: https://lit.libguides.com/Literature-Review

The Library, Technological University of the Shannon: Midwest

Literature Review: Purpose of a Literature Review

• Literature Review
• Purpose of a Literature Review
• Work in Progress
• Compiling & Writing
• Books, Articles, & Web Pages
• Types of Literature Reviews
• Departmental Differences
• Citation Styles & Plagiarism
• Know the Difference! Systematic Review vs. Literature Review

The purpose of a literature review is to:

• Provide a foundation of knowledge on a topic
• Identify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication and give credit to other researchers
• Identify inconstancies: gaps in research, conflicts in previous studies, open questions left from other research
• Identify the need for additional research (justifying your research)
• Identify the relationship of works in the context of their contribution to the topic and other works
• Place your own research within the context of existing literature, making a case for why further study is needed.

Videos & Tutorials

VIDEO: What is the role of a literature review in research? What's it mean to "review" the literature? Get the big picture of what to expect as part of the process. This video is published under a Creative Commons 3.0 BY-NC-SA US license. License, credits, and contact information can be found here: https://www.lib.ncsu.edu/tutorials/litreview/

Elements in a Literature Review

• Elements in a Literature Review txt of infographic
• << Previous: Literature Review
• Next: Searching >>
• Last Updated: Oct 19, 2023 12:07 PM
• URL: https://uscupstate.libguides.com/Literature_Review

• Maps & Floorplans
• Libraries A-Z

• Ellis Library (main)
• Engineering Library
• Geological Sciences
• Journalism Library
• Law Library
• Mathematical Sciences
• MU Digital Collections
• Veterinary Medical
• More Libraries...
• Instructional Services
• Course Reserves
• Course Guides
• Schedule a Library Class
• Class Assessment Forms
• Recordings & Tutorials
• Research & Writing Help
• More class resources
• Places to Study
• Borrow, Request & Renew
• Call Numbers
• Computers, Printers, Scanners & Software
• Digital Media Lab
• Equipment Lending: Laptops, cameras, etc.
• Subject Librarians
• Writing Tutors
• More In the Library...
• Undergraduate Students
• Graduate Students
• Faculty & Staff
• Researcher Support
• Distance Learners
• International Students
• More Services for...
• View my MU Libraries Account (login & click on My Library Account)
• View my MOBIUS Checkouts
• Renew my Books (login & click on My Loans)
• Place a Hold on a Book
• Request Books from Depository
• View my ILL@MU Account
• Set Up Alerts in Databases
• More Account Information...

Introduction to Literature Reviews

Introduction.

• Step One: Define
• Step Two: Research
• Step Three: Write
• Suggested Readings

A literature review is a written work that :

• Compiles significant research published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers;
• —Surveys scholarly articles, books, dissertations, conference proceedings, and other sources;
• —Examines contrasting perspectives, theoretical approaches, methodologies, findings, results, conclusions.
• —Reviews critically, analyzes, and synthesizes existing research on a topic; and,
• Performs a thorough “re” view, “overview”, or “look again” of past and current works on a subject, issue, or theory.

From these analyses, the writer then offers an overview of the current status of a particular area of knowledge from both a practical and theoretical perspective.

Literature reviews are important because they are usually a  required  step in a thesis proposal (Master's or PhD). The proposal will not be well-supported without a literature review. Also, literature reviews are important because they help you learn important authors and ideas in your field. This is useful for your coursework and your writing. Knowing key authors also helps you become acquainted with other researchers in your field.

Look at this diagram and imagine that your research is the "something new." This shows how your research should relate to major works and other sources.

Olivia Whitfield | Graduate Reference Assistant | 2012-2015

• Next: Step One: Define >>
• Last Updated: Jul 9, 2024 9:53 AM
• URL: https://libraryguides.missouri.edu/literaturereview

What Is A Literature Review?

A plain-language explainer (with examples).

By:  Derek Jansen (MBA) & Kerryn Warren (PhD) | June 2020 (Updated May 2023)

If you’re faced with writing a dissertation or thesis, chances are you’ve encountered the term “literature review” . If you’re on this page, you’re probably not 100% what the literature review is all about. The good news is that you’ve come to the right place.

Literature Review 101

• What (exactly) is a literature review
• What’s the purpose of the literature review chapter
• How to find high-quality resources
• How to structure your literature review chapter
• Example of an actual literature review

What is a literature review?

The word “literature review” can refer to two related things that are part of the broader literature review process. The first is the task of  reviewing the literature  – i.e. sourcing and reading through the existing research relating to your research topic. The second is the  actual chapter  that you write up in your dissertation, thesis or research project. Let’s look at each of them:

Reviewing the literature

The first step of any literature review is to hunt down and  read through the existing research  that’s relevant to your research topic. To do this, you’ll use a combination of tools (we’ll discuss some of these later) to find journal articles, books, ebooks, research reports, dissertations, theses and any other credible sources of information that relate to your topic. You’ll then  summarise and catalogue these  for easy reference when you write up your literature review chapter. 

The literature review chapter

The second step of the literature review is to write the actual literature review chapter (this is usually the second chapter in a typical dissertation or thesis structure ). At the simplest level, the literature review chapter is an  overview of the key literature  that’s relevant to your research topic. This chapter should provide a smooth-flowing discussion of what research has already been done, what is known, what is unknown and what is contested in relation to your research topic. So, you can think of it as an  integrated review of the state of knowledge  around your research topic. 

What’s the purpose of a literature review?

The literature review chapter has a few important functions within your dissertation, thesis or research project. Let’s take a look at these:

Purpose #1 – Demonstrate your topic knowledge

The first function of the literature review chapter is, quite simply, to show the reader (or marker) that you  know what you’re talking about . In other words, a good literature review chapter demonstrates that you’ve read the relevant existing research and understand what’s going on – who’s said what, what’s agreed upon, disagreed upon and so on. This needs to be  more than just a summary  of who said what – it needs to integrate the existing research to  show how it all fits together  and what’s missing (which leads us to purpose #2, next). 

Purpose #2 – Reveal the research gap that you’ll fill

The second function of the literature review chapter is to  show what’s currently missing  from the existing research, to lay the foundation for your own research topic. In other words, your literature review chapter needs to show that there are currently “missing pieces” in terms of the bigger puzzle, and that  your study will fill one of those research gaps . By doing this, you are showing that your research topic is original and will help contribute to the body of knowledge. In other words, the literature review helps justify your research topic.  

Purpose #3 – Lay the foundation for your conceptual framework

The third function of the literature review is to form the  basis for a conceptual framework . Not every research topic will necessarily have a conceptual framework, but if your topic does require one, it needs to be rooted in your literature review. 

For example, let’s say your research aims to identify the drivers of a certain outcome – the factors which contribute to burnout in office workers. In this case, you’d likely develop a conceptual framework which details the potential factors (e.g. long hours, excessive stress, etc), as well as the outcome (burnout). Those factors would need to emerge from the literature review chapter – they can’t just come from your gut! 

So, in this case, the literature review chapter would uncover each of the potential factors (based on previous studies about burnout), which would then be modelled into a framework. 

Purpose #4 – To inform your methodology

The fourth function of the literature review is to  inform the choice of methodology  for your own research. As we’ve  discussed on the Grad Coach blog , your choice of methodology will be heavily influenced by your research aims, objectives and questions . Given that you’ll be reviewing studies covering a topic close to yours, it makes sense that you could learn a lot from their (well-considered) methodologies.

So, when you’re reviewing the literature, you’ll need to  pay close attention to the research design , methodology and methods used in similar studies, and use these to inform your methodology. Quite often, you’ll be able to  “borrow” from previous studies . This is especially true for quantitative studies , as you can use previously tried and tested measures and scales. 

How do I find articles for my literature review?

Finding quality journal articles is essential to crafting a rock-solid literature review. As you probably already know, not all research is created equally, and so you need to make sure that your literature review is  built on credible research . 

We could write an entire post on how to find quality literature (actually, we have ), but a good starting point is Google Scholar . Google Scholar is essentially the academic equivalent of Google, using Google’s powerful search capabilities to find relevant journal articles and reports. It certainly doesn’t cover every possible resource, but it’s a very useful way to get started on your literature review journey, as it will very quickly give you a good indication of what the  most popular pieces of research  are in your field.

One downside of Google Scholar is that it’s merely a search engine – that is, it lists the articles, but oftentimes  it doesn’t host the articles . So you’ll often hit a paywall when clicking through to journal websites. 

Thankfully, your university should provide you with access to their library, so you can find the article titles using Google Scholar and then search for them by name in your university’s online library. Your university may also provide you with access to  ResearchGate , which is another great source for existing research. 

Remember, the correct search keywords will be super important to get the right information from the start. So, pay close attention to the keywords used in the journal articles you read and use those keywords to search for more articles. If you can’t find a spoon in the kitchen, you haven’t looked in the right drawer. 

Need a helping hand?

How should I structure my literature review?

Unfortunately, there’s no generic universal answer for this one. The structure of your literature review will depend largely on your topic area and your research aims and objectives.

You could potentially structure your literature review chapter according to theme, group, variables , chronologically or per concepts in your field of research. We explain the main approaches to structuring your literature review here . You can also download a copy of our free literature review template to help you establish an initial structure.

In general, it’s also a good idea to start wide (i.e. the big-picture-level) and then narrow down, ending your literature review close to your research questions . However, there’s no universal one “right way” to structure your literature review. The most important thing is not to discuss your sources one after the other like a list – as we touched on earlier, your literature review needs to synthesise the research , not summarise it .

Ultimately, you need to craft your literature review so that it conveys the most important information effectively – it needs to tell a logical story in a digestible way. It’s no use starting off with highly technical terms and then only explaining what these terms mean later. Always assume your reader is not a subject matter expert and hold their hand through a journe y of the literature while keeping the functions of the literature review chapter (which we discussed earlier) front of mind.

Example of a literature review

In the video below, we walk you through a high-quality literature review from a dissertation that earned full distinction. This will give you a clearer view of what a strong literature review looks like in practice and hopefully provide some inspiration for your own. 

Wrapping Up

In this post, we’ve (hopefully) answered the question, “ what is a literature review? “. We’ve also considered the purpose and functions of the literature review, as well as how to find literature and how to structure the literature review chapter. If you’re keen to learn more, check out the literature review section of the Grad Coach blog , as well as our detailed video post covering how to write a literature review . 

Psst… there’s more!

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

16 Comments

Thanks for this review. It narrates what’s not been taught as tutors are always in a early to finish their classes.

Thanks for the kind words, Becky. Good luck with your literature review 🙂

This website is amazing, it really helps break everything down. Thank you, I would have been lost without it.

This is review is amazing. I benefited from it a lot and hope others visiting this website will benefit too.

Timothy T. Chol [email protected]

Thank you very much for the guiding in literature review I learn and benefited a lot this make my journey smooth I’ll recommend this site to my friends

This was so useful. Thank you so much.

Hi, Concept was explained nicely by both of you. Thanks a lot for sharing it. It will surely help research scholars to start their Research Journey.

The review is really helpful to me especially during this period of covid-19 pandemic when most universities in my country only offer online classes. Great stuff

Great Brief Explanation, thanks

So helpful to me as a student

GradCoach is a fantastic site with brilliant and modern minds behind it.. I spent weeks decoding the substantial academic Jargon and grounding my initial steps on the research process, which could be shortened to a couple of days through the Gradcoach. Thanks again!

This is an amazing talk. I paved way for myself as a researcher. Thank you GradCoach!

Well-presented overview of the literature!

This was brilliant. So clear. Thank you

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

• Print Friendly

• Library Homepage

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

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

What is a Literature Review?

So, what is a literature review .

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

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

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

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

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

What are the Goals of Creating a Literature Review?

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

When do you need to write a Literature Review?

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

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

Where I can find examples of Literature Reviews?

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

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

Where to Find Standalone Literature Reviews

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

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

Social Sciences

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

Hard science and health sciences:

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

A Guide to Literature Reviews

Importance of a good literature review.

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

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

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

The purpose of a literature review is to:

• Place each work in the context of its contribution to understanding the research problem being studied.
• Describe the relationship of each work to the others under consideration.
• Identify new ways to interpret prior research.
• Reveal any gaps that exist in the literature.
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies.
• Identify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication of effort.
• Point the way in fulfilling a need for additional research.
• Locate your own research within the context of existing literature [very important].
• << Previous: Definition
• Next: Conducting the Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 3:13 PM
• URL: https://libguides.mcmaster.ca/litreview

Conducting a Literature Review

What is a literature review.

• Types of Literature Reviews
• Tutorials This link opens in a new window
• Research Iteration
• Guides & Handbooks

The literature of a literature review is not made up of novels and short stories and poetry—but is the collection of writing and research that has been produced on a particular topic.

The purpose of the literature review is to give you an overview of a particular topic. Your job is to discover the research that has been done, the major perspectives, and the significant thinkers and writers (experts) who have published on the topic you’re interested in. In other words, it’s a survey of what has been written and argued about your topic.

By the time you complete your literature review you should have written an essay that demonstrates that you:

• Understand the history of what’s been written and researched on your topic.
• Know the significance of the current academic thinking on your topic, including what the controversies are.
• Have a perspective about what work remains to be done on your topic.

Thus, a literature review synthesizes your research into an explanation of what is known and what is not known on your topic. If the topic is one from which you want to embark on a major research project, doing a literature review will save you time and help you figure out where you might focus your attention so you don’t duplicate research that has already been done.

Just to be clear: a literature review differs from a research paper in that a  literature review  is a summary and synthesis of the major arguments and thinking of experts on the topic you’re investigating, whereas a  research paper  supports a position or an opinion you have developed yourself as a result of your own analysis of a topic.

Another advantage of doing a literature review is that it summarizes the intellectual discussion that has been going on over the decades—or centuries—on a specific topic and allows you to join in that conversation (what academics call academic discourse) from a knowledgeable position.

The following presentation will provide you with the basic steps to follow as you work to complete a literature review.

" Literature Reviews " by  Excelsior Online Writing Lab  is licensed under  CC BY 4.0 International

• Next: Types of Literature Reviews >>
• Last Updated: Mar 4, 2024 10:44 AM
• URL: https://library.ric.edu/conducting-a-literature-review

600 Mt. Pleasant Ave

Providence, RI 02908

Social Media Links

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License unless otherwise noted.

©2024 Rhode Island College. All rights reserved.

Privacy Policy

• 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

Types of Literature Review — A Guide for Researchers

Table of Contents

Researchers often face challenges when choosing the appropriate type of literature review for their study. Regardless of the type of research design and the topic of a research problem , they encounter numerous queries, including:

What is the right type of literature review my study demands?

• How do we gather the data?
• How to conduct one?
• How reliable are the review findings?
• How do we employ them in our research? And the list goes on.

If you’re also dealing with such a hefty questionnaire, this article is of help. Read through this piece of guide to get an exhaustive understanding of the different types of literature reviews and their step-by-step methodologies along with a dash of pros and cons discussed.

Heading from scratch!

What is a Literature Review?

A literature review provides a comprehensive overview of existing knowledge on a particular topic, which is quintessential to any research project. Researchers employ various literature reviews based on their research goals and methodologies. The review process involves assembling, critically evaluating, and synthesizing existing scientific publications relevant to the research question at hand. It serves multiple purposes, including identifying gaps in existing literature, providing theoretical background, and supporting the rationale for a research study.

What is the importance of a Literature review in research?

Literature review in research serves several key purposes, including:

• Background of the study: Provides proper context for the research. It helps researchers understand the historical development, theoretical perspectives, and key debates related to their research topic.
• Identification of research gaps: By reviewing existing literature, researchers can identify gaps or inconsistencies in knowledge, paving the way for new research questions and hypotheses relevant to their study.
• Theoretical framework development: Facilitates the development of theoretical frameworks by cultivating diverse perspectives and empirical findings. It helps researchers refine their conceptualizations and theoretical models.
• Methodological guidance: Offers methodological guidance by highlighting the documented research methods and techniques used in previous studies. It assists researchers in selecting appropriate research designs, data collection methods, and analytical tools.
• Quality assurance and upholding academic integrity: Conducting a thorough literature review demonstrates the rigor and scholarly integrity of the research. It ensures that researchers are aware of relevant studies and can accurately attribute ideas and findings to their original sources.

Types of Literature Review

Literature review plays a crucial role in guiding the research process , from providing the background of the study to research dissemination and contributing to the synthesis of the latest theoretical literature review findings in academia.

However, not all types of literature reviews are the same; they vary in terms of methodology, approach, and purpose. Let's have a look at the various types of literature reviews to gain a deeper understanding of their applications.

1. Narrative Literature Review

A narrative literature review, also known as a traditional literature review, involves analyzing and summarizing existing literature without adhering to a structured methodology. It typically provides a descriptive overview of key concepts, theories, and relevant findings of the research topic.

Unlike other types of literature reviews, narrative reviews reinforce a more traditional approach, emphasizing the interpretation and discussion of the research findings rather than strict adherence to methodological review criteria. It helps researchers explore diverse perspectives and insights based on the research topic and acts as preliminary work for further investigation.

Steps to Conduct a Narrative Literature Review

Source:- https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Steps-of-writing-a-narrative-review_fig1_354466408

Define the research question or topic:

The first step in conducting a narrative literature review is to clearly define the research question or topic of interest. Defining the scope and purpose of the review includes — What specific aspect of the topic do you want to explore? What are the main objectives of the research? Refine your research question based on the specific area you want to explore.

Conduct a thorough literature search

Once the research question is defined, you can conduct a comprehensive literature search. Explore and use relevant databases and search engines like SciSpace Discover to identify credible and pertinent, scholarly articles and publications.

Select relevant studies

Before choosing the right set of studies, it’s vital to determine inclusion (studies that should possess the required factors) and exclusion criteria for the literature and then carefully select papers. For example — Which studies or sources will be included based on relevance, quality, and publication date?

*Important (applies to all the reviews): Inclusion criteria are the factors a study must include (For example: Include only peer-reviewed articles published between 2022-2023, etc.). Exclusion criteria are the factors that wouldn’t be required for your search strategy (Example: exclude irrelevant papers, preprints, written in non-English, etc.)

Critically analyze the literature

Once the relevant studies are shortlisted, evaluate the methodology, findings, and limitations of each source and jot down key themes, patterns, and contradictions. You can use efficient AI tools to conduct a thorough literature review and analyze all the required information.

Synthesize and integrate the findings

Now, you can weave together the reviewed studies, underscoring significant findings such that new frameworks, contrasting viewpoints, and identifying knowledge gaps.

Discussion and conclusion

This is an important step before crafting a narrative review — summarize the main findings of the review and discuss their implications in the relevant field. For example — What are the practical implications for practitioners? What are the directions for future research for them?

Write a cohesive narrative review

Organize the review into coherent sections and structure your review logically, guiding the reader through the research landscape and offering valuable insights. Use clear and concise language to convey key points effectively.

Structure of Narrative Literature Review

A well-structured, narrative analysis or literature review typically includes the following components:

• Introduction: Provides an overview of the topic, objectives of the study, and rationale for the review.
• Background: Highlights relevant background information and establish the context for the review.
• Main Body: Indexes the literature into thematic sections or categories, discussing key findings, methodologies, and theoretical frameworks.
• Discussion: Analyze and synthesize the findings of the reviewed studies, stressing similarities, differences, and any gaps in the literature.
• Conclusion: Summarizes the main findings of the review, identifies implications for future research, and offers concluding remarks.

Pros and Cons of Narrative Literature Review

• Flexibility in methodology and doesn’t necessarily rely on structured methodologies
• Follows traditional approach and provides valuable and contextualized insights
• Suitable for exploring complex or interdisciplinary topics. For example — Climate change and human health, Cybersecurity and privacy in the digital age, and more
• Subjectivity in data selection and interpretation
• Potential for bias in the review process
• Lack of rigor compared to systematic reviews

Example of Well-Executed Narrative Literature Reviews

Paper title:  Examining Moral Injury in Clinical Practice: A Narrative Literature Review

Source: SciSpace

While narrative reviews offer flexibility, academic integrity remains paramount. So, ensure proper citation of all sources and maintain a transparent and factual approach throughout your critical narrative review, itself.

2. Systematic Review

A systematic literature review is one of the comprehensive types of literature review that follows a structured approach to assembling, analyzing, and synthesizing existing research relevant to a particular topic or question. It involves clearly defined criteria for exploring and choosing studies, as well as rigorous methods for evaluating the quality of relevant studies.

It plays a prominent role in evidence-based practice and decision-making across various domains, including healthcare, social sciences, education, health sciences, and more. By systematically investigating available literature, researchers can identify gaps in knowledge, evaluate the strength of evidence, and report future research directions.

Steps to Conduct Systematic Reviews

Source:- https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Steps-of-Systematic-Literature-Review_fig1_321422320

Here are the key steps involved in conducting a systematic literature review

Formulate a clear and focused research question

Clearly define the research question or objective of the review. It helps to centralize the literature search strategy and determine inclusion criteria for relevant studies.

Develop a thorough literature search strategy

Design a comprehensive search strategy to identify relevant studies. It involves scrutinizing scientific databases and all relevant articles in journals. Plus, seek suggestions from domain experts and review reference lists of relevant review articles.

Screening and selecting studies

Employ predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria to systematically screen the identified studies. This screening process also typically involves multiple reviewers independently assessing the eligibility of each study.

Data extraction

Extract key information from selected studies using standardized forms or protocols. It includes study characteristics, methods, results, and conclusions.

Critical appraisal

Evaluate the methodological quality and potential biases of included studies. Various tools (BMC medical research methodology) and criteria can be implemented for critical evaluation depending on the study design and research quetions .

Data synthesis

Analyze and synthesize review findings from individual studies to draw encompassing conclusions or identify overarching patterns and explore heterogeneity among studies.

Interpretation and conclusion

Interpret the findings about the research question, considering the strengths and limitations of the research evidence. Draw conclusions and implications for further research.

The final step — Report writing

Craft a detailed report of the systematic literature review adhering to the established guidelines of PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). This ensures transparency and reproducibility of the review process.

By following these steps, a systematic literature review aims to provide a comprehensive and unbiased summary of existing evidence, help make informed decisions, and advance knowledge in the respective domain or field.

Structure of a systematic literature review

A well-structured systematic literature review typically consists of the following sections:

• Introduction: Provides background information on the research topic, outlines the review objectives, and enunciates the scope of the study.
• Methodology: Describes the literature search strategy, selection criteria, data extraction process, and other methods used for data synthesis, extraction, or other data analysis..
• Results: Presents the review findings, including a summary of the incorporated studies and their key findings.
• Discussion: Interprets the findings in light of the review objectives, discusses their implications, and identifies limitations or promising areas for future research.
• Conclusion: Summarizes the main review findings and provides suggestions based on the evidence presented in depth meta analysis.

*Important (applies to all the reviews): Remember, the specific structure of your literature review may vary depending on your topic, research question, and intended audience. However, adhering to a clear and logical hierarchy ensures your review effectively analyses and synthesizes knowledge and contributes valuable insights for readers.

Pros and Cons of Systematic Literature Review

• Adopts rigorous and transparent methodology
• Minimizes bias and enhances the reliability of the study
• Provides evidence-based insights
• Time and resource-intensive
• High dependency on the quality of available literature (literature research strategy should be accurate)
• Potential for publication bias

Example of Well-Executed Systematic Literature Review

Paper title: Systematic Reviews: Understanding the Best Evidence For Clinical Decision-making in Health Care: Pros and Cons.

Read this detailed article on how to use AI tools to conduct a systematic review for your research!

3. Scoping Literature Review

A scoping literature review is a methodological review type of literature review that adopts an iterative approach to systematically map the existing literature on a particular topic or research area. It involves identifying, selecting, and synthesizing relevant papers to provide an overview of the size and scope of available evidence. Scoping reviews are broader in scope and include a diverse range of study designs and methodologies especially focused on health services research.

The main purpose of a scoping literature review is to examine the extent, range, and nature of existing studies on a topic, thereby identifying gaps in research, inconsistencies, and areas for further investigation. Additionally, scoping reviews can help researchers identify suitable methodologies and formulate clinical recommendations. They also act as the frameworks for future systematic reviews or primary research studies.

Scoping reviews are primarily focused on —

• Emerging or evolving topics — where the research landscape is still growing or budding. Example — Whole Systems Approaches to Diet and Healthy Weight: A Scoping Review of Reviews .
• Broad and complex topics : With a vast amount of existing literature.
• Scenarios where a systematic review is not feasible: Due to limited resources or time constraints.

Steps to Conduct a Scoping Literature Review

While Scoping reviews are not as rigorous as systematic reviews, however, they still follow a structured approach. Here are the steps:

Identify the research question: Define the broad topic you want to explore.

Identify Relevant Studies: Conduct a comprehensive search of relevant literature using appropriate databases, keywords, and search strategies.

Select studies to be included in the review: Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, determine the appropriate studies to be included in the review.

Data extraction and charting : Extract relevant information from selected studies, such as year, author, main results, study characteristics, key findings, and methodological approaches.  However, it varies depending on the research question.

Collate, summarize, and report the results: Analyze and summarize the extracted data to identify key themes and trends. Then, present the findings of the scoping review in a clear and structured manner, following established guidelines and frameworks .

Structure of a Scoping Literature Review

A scoping literature review typically follows a structured format similar to a systematic review. It includes the following sections:

• Introduction: Introduce the research topic and objectives of the review, providing the historical context, and rationale for the study.
• Methods : Describe the methods used to conduct the review, including search strategies, study selection criteria, and data extraction procedures.
• Results: Present the findings of the review, including key themes, concepts, and patterns identified in the literature review.
• Discussion: Examine the implications of the findings, including strengths, limitations, and areas for further examination.
• Conclusion: Recapitulate the main findings of the review and their implications for future research, policy, or practice.

Pros and Cons of Scoping Literature Review

• Provides a comprehensive overview of existing literature
• Helps to identify gaps and areas for further research
• Suitable for exploring broad or complex research questions
• Doesn’t provide the depth of analysis offered by systematic reviews
• Subject to researcher bias in study selection and data extraction
• Requires careful consideration of literature search strategies and inclusion criteria to ensure comprehensiveness and validity.

In short, a scoping review helps map the literature on developing or emerging topics and identifying gaps. It might be considered as a step before conducting another type of review, such as a systematic review. Basically, acts as a precursor for other literature reviews.

Example of a Well-Executed Scoping Literature Review

Paper title: Health Chatbots in Africa Literature: A Scoping Review

Check out the key differences between Systematic and Scoping reviews — Evaluating literature review: systematic vs. scoping reviews

4. Integrative Literature Review

Integrative Literature Review (ILR) is a type of literature review that proposes a distinctive way to analyze and synthesize existing literature on a specific topic, providing a thorough understanding of research and identifying potential gaps for future research.

Unlike a systematic review, which emphasizes quantitative studies and follows strict inclusion criteria, an ILR embraces a more pliable approach. It works beyond simply summarizing findings — it critically analyzes, integrates, and interprets research from various methodologies (qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods) to provide a deeper understanding of the research landscape. ILRs provide a holistic and systematic overview of existing research, integrating findings from various methodologies. ILRs are ideal for exploring intricate research issues, examining manifold perspectives, and developing new research questions.

Steps to Conduct an Integrative Literature Review

• Identify the research question: Clearly define the research question or topic of interest as formulating a clear and focused research question is critical to leading the entire review process.
• Literature search strategy: Employ systematic search techniques to locate relevant literature across various databases and sources.
• Evaluate the quality of the included studies : Critically assess the methodology, rigor, and validity of each study by applying inclusion and exclusion criteria to filter and select studies aligned with the research objectives.
• Data Extraction: Extract relevant data from selected studies using a structured approach.
• Synthesize the findings : Thoroughly analyze the selected literature, identify key themes, and synthesize findings to derive noteworthy insights.
• Critical appraisal: Critically evaluate the quality and validity of qualitative research and included studies by using BMC medical research methodology.
• Interpret and present your findings: Discuss the purpose and implications of your analysis, spotlighting key insights and limitations. Organize and present the findings coherently and systematically.

Structure of an Integrative Literature Review

• Introduction : Provide an overview of the research topic and the purpose of the integrative review.
• Methods: Describe the opted literature search strategy, selection criteria, and data extraction process.
• Results: Present the synthesized findings, including key themes, patterns, and contradictions.
• Discussion: Interpret the findings about the research question, emphasizing implications for theory, practice, and prospective research.
• Conclusion: Summarize the main findings, limitations, and contributions of the integrative review.

Pros and Cons of Integrative Literature Review

• Informs evidence-based practice and policy to the relevant stakeholders of the research.
• Contributes to theory development and methodological advancement, especially in the healthcare arena.
• Integrates diverse perspectives and findings
• Time-consuming process due to the extensive literature search and synthesis
• Requires advanced analytical and critical thinking skills
• Potential for bias in study selection and interpretation
• The quality of included studies may vary, affecting the validity of the review

Example of Integrative Literature Reviews

Paper Title: An Integrative Literature Review: The Dual Impact of Technological Tools on Health and Technostress Among Older Workers

5. Rapid Literature Review

A Rapid Literature Review (RLR) is the fastest type of literature review which makes use of a streamlined approach for synthesizing literature summaries, offering a quicker and more focused alternative to traditional systematic reviews. Despite employing identical research methods, it often simplifies or omits specific steps to expedite the process. It allows researchers to gain valuable insights into current research trends and identify key findings within a shorter timeframe, often ranging from a few days to a few weeks — unlike traditional literature reviews, which may take months or even years to complete.

When to Consider a Rapid Literature Review?

• When time impediments demand a swift summary of existing research
• For emerging topics where the latest literature requires quick evaluation
• To report pilot studies or preliminary research before embarking on a comprehensive systematic review

Steps to Conduct a Rapid Literature Review

• Define the research question or topic of interest. A well-defined question guides the search process and helps researchers focus on relevant studies.
• Determine key databases and sources of relevant literature to ensure comprehensive coverage.
• Develop literature search strategies using appropriate keywords and filters to fetch a pool of potential scientific articles.
• Screen search results based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria.
• Extract and summarize relevant information from the above-preferred studies.
• Synthesize findings to identify key themes, patterns, or gaps in the literature.
• Prepare a concise report or a summary of the RLR findings.

Structure of a Rapid Literature Review

An effective structure of an RLR typically includes the following sections:

• Introduction: Briefly introduce the research topic and objectives of the RLR.
• Methodology: Describe the search strategy, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and data extraction process.
• Results: Present a summary of the findings, including key themes or patterns identified.
• Discussion: Interpret the findings, discuss implications, and highlight any limitations or areas for further research
• Conclusion: Summarize the key findings and their implications for practice or future research

Pros and Cons of Rapid Literature Review

• RLRs can be completed quickly, authorizing timely decision-making
• RLRs are a cost-effective approach since they require fewer resources compared to traditional literature reviews
• Offers great accessibility as RLRs provide prompt access to synthesized evidence for stakeholders
• RLRs are flexible as they can be easily adapted for various research contexts and objectives
• RLR reports are limited and restricted, not as in-depth as systematic reviews, and do not provide comprehensive coverage of the literature compared to traditional reviews.
• Susceptible to bias because of the expedited nature of RLRs. It would increase the chance of overlooking relevant studies or biases in the selection process.
• Due to time constraints, RLR findings might not be robust enough as compared to systematic reviews.

Example of a Well-Executed Rapid Literature Review

Paper Title: What Is the Impact of ChatGPT on Education? A Rapid Review of the Literature

A Summary of Literature Review Types

Tools and Resources for Conducting Different Types of Literature Reviews

Online scientific databases.

Platforms such as SciSpace , PubMed , Scopus , Elsevier , and Web of Science provide access to a vast array of scholarly literature, facilitating the search and data retrieval process.

Reference management software

Tools like SciSpace Citation Generator , EndNote, Zotero , and Mendeley assist researchers in organizing, annotating, and citing relevant literature, streamlining the review process altogether.

Automate Literature Review with AI tools

Automate the literature review process by using tools like SciSpace literature review which helps you compare and contrast multiple papers all on one screen in an easy-to-read matrix format. You can effortlessly analyze and interpret the review findings tailored to your study. It also supports the review in 75+ languages, making it more manageable even for non-English speakers.

Goes without saying — literature review plays a pivotal role in academic research to identify the current trends and provide insights to pave the way for future research endeavors. Different types of literature review has their own strengths and limitations, making them suitable for different research designs and contexts. Whether conducting a narrative review, systematic review, scoping review, integrative review, or rapid literature review, researchers must cautiously consider the objectives, resources, and the nature of the research topic.

If you’re currently working on a literature review and still adopting a manual and traditional approach, switch to the automated AI literature review workspace and transform your traditional literature review into a rapid one by extracting all the latest and relevant data for your research!

There you go!

Frequently Asked Questions

Narrative reviews give a general overview of a topic based on the author's knowledge. They may lack clear criteria and can be biased. On the other hand, systematic reviews aim to answer specific research questions by following strict methods. They're thorough but time-consuming.

A systematic review collects and analyzes existing research to provide an overview of a topic, while a meta-analysis statistically combines data from multiple studies to draw conclusions about the overall effect of an intervention or relationship between variables.

A systematic review thoroughly analyzes existing research on a specific topic using strict methods. In contrast, a scoping review offers a broader overview of the literature without evaluating individual studies in depth.

A systematic review thoroughly examines existing research using a rigorous process, while a rapid review provides a quicker summary of evidence, often by simplifying some of the systematic review steps to meet shorter timelines.

A systematic review carefully examines many studies on a single topic using specific guidelines. Conversely, an integrative review blends various types of research to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the topic.

You might also like

Boosting Citations: A Comparative Analysis of Graphical Abstract vs. Video Abstract

The Impact of Visual Abstracts on Boosting Citations

Introducing SciSpace’s Citation Booster To Increase Research Visibility

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

The importance of scientific communication in the healthcare industry

The Importance and Role of Biostatistics in Clinical Research

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

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

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

The common perception of literature review and reality:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Importance of literature review in research:

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

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

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

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

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

References:

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

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

Related Topics:

Meta Analysis

Scientific Research Paper Writing

Medical Research Paper Writing

Scientific Communication in healthcare

pubrica academy

Related posts.

Importance Of Proofreading For Scientific Writing Methods and Significance

Statistical analyses of case-control studies

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

Comments are closed.

How to Write a Literature Review - A Self-Guided Tutorial

• Literature Reviews: A Recap
• Reading Journal Articles
• Does it describe a Literature Review?
• 1. Identify the question
• 2. Review discipline styles
• Searching article databases - video
• Finding the article full-text
• Citation trails
• When to stop searching
• Citation Managers
• 5. Critically analyze and evaluate
• 6. Synthesize
• 7. Write literature review
• Additional Resources

Does it describe a literature review?

Determine whether the statements below describe or do not describe a literature review and drag them to the appropriate box.

• << Previous: Reading Journal Articles
• Next: 1. Identify the question >>
• Last Updated: Aug 16, 2024 10:53 AM
• URL: https://libguides.ucmerced.edu/literature-review

Writing the Literature Review

Barry Mauer and John Venecek

• The Literature Review

What is the Purpose of the Review?

What is the scope of the review, strategies for getting started, types of literature reviews, composition guidelines, how to locate reviews by discipline, key takeaways.

We also provide the following activities:

Types of Literature Reviews [Refresher]

Writing the literature review [refresher], the literature review [1].

Conducting a literary studies research project involves time and effort, with much of it going towards the development of a literature review . A literature review might fill several pages of your research paper and usually appears soon after an introduction but before you present your detailed argument. A literature review provides your audience with an overview of the available research about your area(s) of study, including the literary work, your theory, and methodology. The literature review demonstrates how these scholarly discussions have changed over time, and it allows you to position your research in relation to research that has come before yours. Your aim is to present the discussion up to this point. Depending on the nature of the assignment, you may also include your critical commentary on prior research, noting among this material the weaker and stronger arguments, breakthroughs and dead ends, blind spots and opportunities, the invention of key terms and methods, mistakes as well as misreadings, and so on.

Once you have gathered the research materials you need for your literature review, you have another task: conducting an analysis on the research to see where your original contribution fits into the scholarly conversation. As the saying goes, “we are standing on the shoulders of giants.” Your job is to show a portrait of these giants to your audience, and to show how your work relates to the portrait. On many scholarly topics, literature reviews already exist. You may refer to such existing reviews within your own, indicating any materials might have been overlooked, new developments that have arisen since the publication of the existing literature review, and new perspectives or insights you have about the materials.

Some beginning researchers try to tear down the work of other researchers in an effort to make their own work look good by comparison. It rarely works. First, it tends to make your audience skeptical of your claims. Second, it ignores the fact that even the mistakes, blind spots, and failures of other researchers contribute something to our knowledge. Albert Einstein didn’t disrespect Sir Isaac Newton by saying Newton’s theory of space was wrong and terrible and that Einstein’s own theory was great by comparison. He built upon Newton’s work, showing how it could be improved. If, however, a researcher willfully set out to deceive or distort or to tear down the work of other scholars without good reason, then their work does not deserve such deference.

Most literature reviews appear after the introduction. It presents your reader with relevant information about the scholarly discussion up to now. Later in your paper, you discuss your contribution. Before you begin work on your literature review, let’s discuss what we mean by “literature”; understand the purpose and scope of the review; establish criteria for selecting, organizing, and interpreting your findings; and discuss how to connect your findings to your research question.

Many students seek to “find sources that agree with my claim or idea.” That approach is too narrow, in our view. If we use such an approach, we may get the following results:

• Because we can find sources that agree with almost any claim, readers will wonder whether your claims are weak and the sources are cherry picked.
• While literary scholars sometimes cite authorities to support their claims, they don’t rely only on authority. They respect authority, but not too much. Your own claims need to rely more on evidence (from the literary text, historical and biographical information), and your critical and creative reasoning skills.
• Scholarship is a conversation; thus, the goal is less about finding agreement and more about joining the conversation with the aim of making a valuable contribution to the discussion.

The literature review provides your reader with an overview of the existing research about your topic or problem. It provides the context necessary for your reader to catch up with the scholarly conversation and then to appreciate the value of your contribution to it. The literature review sharpens the focus of your research and demonstrates your knowledge and understanding of the scholarly conversation around your topic, which, in turn, helps establish your credibility as a researcher.

Creating the literature review involves more than gathering citations. It is a qualitative process through which you will discover what is already known about your topic, and identify the key authorities, methods, and theoretical foundations, so you can begin to position your contributions within the scholarly conversation.

Defining the scope of your review will also help you establish criteria to determine the relevance of the sources you are finding. At this stage, you are not reading in-depth; instead, you are skimming through what has already been published and identifying the major concepts, theories, methodologies, and methods present within these published works. You should also be identifying connections, tensions, and contradictions within the already published works of your topic or problem. This involves building on the knowledge of others and understanding what methods, measures, and models we have inherited from previous researchers in our field.

Literature Reviews: Common Errors Made When Conducting a Literature Review [12 min 22 sec]

Video provided courtesy of the Center for Quality Research (CQR)

A literature review helps your reader understand the relationship of your research project to the work of other scholars. It covers the existing knowledge about a problem, and allows you to show the relevance/significance of your contribution to the discussion. Your reader may or may not have read scholarly literature about the theories, methodologies, and literary works you are discussing. But they want to know that you have read it and have thought about it. Your literature review provides not only a summary of the existing scholarship for readers; it also offers your perspective on it.

Begin your work on the literature review by synthesizing the various sources in your annotated bibliography .

For advice on Synthesizing Sources, consider the following from The Purdue Online Writing Lab: [2]

Note that  synthesizing is not the same as summarizing .

• A summary restates the information in one or more sources without providing new insight or reaching new conclusions.
• A synthesis draws on multiple sources to reach a broader conclusion.
• Don’t force a relationship between sources if there isn’t one. Not all of your sources have to complement one another.
• Do your best to highlight the relationships between sources in very clear ways.
• Don’t ignore any outliers in your research. It’s important to take note of every perspective (even those that disagree with your broader conclusions).

Not all humanities research projects contain literature reviews, but many do. Keep in mind that the type of literature review you choose (see list below) pertains to the secondary research – other scholarly sources – and not to the primary literary work. For instance, a literature review about Kate Chopin’s writing will be your thoughts about the scholarship on Chopin and not about Chopin’s text itself. You are summarizing what you see in the scholarly literature about Chopin’s writing. The literature review puts you in the position of authority not just on Chopin’s writing but on the scholarship about her writing. You are seeking to understand what scholars have said about her work. Scholars might belong to different schools of thought (psychoanalytic, feminist, Marxist, etc.). They might make different arguments about Chopin. They might use different methodological approaches. 

If your research involves two or more theories, such as psychology and genre studies, you may need to create multiple literature reviews, one for each theory or methodology. If the theories overlap with each other significantly (i.e., Marxism and Cultural Studies), you may combine them. Your literature review need not include everything about the subject area – you would need to write a book to cover a single theory – but only those concepts and methods that are most relevant to your research problem.

Factors to Consider When Developing Your Literature Review

• Determine the Scope : How broad or narrow should your literature review be? You may want to focus on recent scholarship only, or on a particular school of thought in the literature. Your scope is determined by your purpose; what is it you aim to achieve with your research?
• Establish Criteria : We discussed the importance of defining the purpose and scope of your review on the previous page, but it’s worth reviewing here as well. This step will help you establish important criteria and focus your searching. For example, how many sources will you need? What types of sources (primary, secondary, statistics, media)? Is currency important? Do you know who the prominent authors or theorists are in your subject area? Take some time to map out these or other important factors before you begin searching journals and databases.
• Consider Your Audience : Unlike a work cited page or an annotated bibliography, both of which are lists of sources, a literature review is essayistic and can be considered a precursor to your final paper. Therefore, it should be written in your own voice, and it should be geared toward a specific audience. Considering audience during this early stage will help focus your final paper as well.
• Find Models : We’ll discuss the different types of literature reviews and how to locate examples in the section below. However, even if you’re undecided about what type of review will work best for you, you may want to review some example literature reviews to get a sense of what they look like before you begin your own.

One piece of advice before starting: look for existing literature reviews on your area of scholarship. You can build on the work that other scholars have put into reviewing the scholarly literature. There’s no need to completely “reinvent the wheel” if some of the work is already done.

Scholars sometimes publish “stand-alone” literature reviews that are not part of a larger work; such literature reviews are valuable contributions to the field, as they summarize the state of knowledge for other scholars.

Maria J. Grant and Andrew Booth’s “A Typology of Reviews” identifies 14 distinct types of literature reviews. Further, the UCLA library created a chart to complement the article and for easy comparison of those 14 types of reviews. This section provides a brief summary of the most common literature reviews. For a more complete analysis, please see the full article and the chart .

To choose the most appropriate structure, put yourself in your reader’s shoes and think through their need for information. The literature review is about providing context for your contribution. How much context do people need? Keep it to the minimum necessary; compressing a lot of information into a small amount of text is a must.

These structures are not meant to be straightjackets but tools to help you organize your research. If you find that the tool is working, then keep using it. If not, switch tools or modify the one you are using. Keep in mind that the types of literature reviews are just different ways of organizing information. So, you can discuss literary trends without organizing your review of secondary literature by trend; your discussion can be organized by theory or theme, for examples. In our literature reviews, we are not recounting other scholars’ arguments at length but merely providing key concepts so we can summarize the discussion so far and position our own claims. You don’t have to adhere strictly to one structure or another. They are just organizing tools that help you manage your material (and help your reader make sense of it).

Types of Reviews

• Traditional or narrative reviews : This approach will generate a comprehensive, critical analysis of the published research on your topic. However, rather than merely compiling as many sources as possible, use this approach to establish a theoretical framework for your paper, establish trends, and identify gaps in the research. This process should bring your research question into clearer focus and help define a thesis that you will argue for in your paper. This is perhaps the most common and general type of literature review. The examples listed below are all designed to serve a more specific purpose.
• Argumentative : The purpose of an argumentative literature review is to select sources for the purpose of supporting or refuting a specific claim. While this type of review can help the author make a strong case for or against an issue, they can also be prone to claims of bias. Later in this textbook, we will read about the distinction between warranted and unwarranted bias . One is ok and the other is not.
• Chronological : A chronological review is used when the author wants to demonstrate the progression of how a theory, methodology, or issue has progressed over time. This method is most effective when there is a clear chronological path to the research about a specific historical event or trend as opposed to a more recursive theoretical concept.
• By trend : This is similar to the chronological approach except it focuses on clearly-defined trends rather than date ranges. This would be most appropriate if you want to illustrate changing perspectives or attitudes about a given issue when specific date ranges are less important than the ebb and flow of the trend.
• Thematic : In this type of literature review, the author will select specific themes that he or she feels are important to understanding a larger topic or concept. Then, the author will organize the sources around those themes, which are often based on relevance or importance. The value of this method is that the process of organizing the review by theme is similar to constructing an argument. This can help the author see how resources connect to each other and determine how as well as why specific sources support their thesis.
• Theoretical : The goal of this type of review is to examine how theory has shaped the research on a given topic. It establishes existing theoretical models, their connections, and how extensively they have been developed in the published research. For example, Jada applied critical race theory to her analysis of Sonny’s Blues , but she might also consider conducting a more comprehensive review of other theoretical frameworks such as feminism, Marxism, or postmodernism. Doing so could provide insight into alternate readings, and help her identify theoretical gaps such as unexplored or under-developed approaches to Baldwin’s work.
• Methodological : The approach focuses on the various methodologies used by researchers in a specific area rather than an analysis of their findings. In this case, you would create a framework of approaches to data collection related to your topic or research question. This is perhaps more common in education or the social and hard sciences where published research often includes a methods section, but it is sometimes appropriate for the digital humanities as well.
• Scoping : The aim of a scoping review is to provide a comprehensive overview or map of the published research or evidence related to a research question. This might be considered a prelude to a systematic review that would take the scoping review one step further toward answering a clearly defined research question. See below for more details.
• Systematic : The systematic review is most appropriate when you have a clearly-defined research question and have established criteria for the types of sources you need. In this way, the systematic review is less exploratory than other types of reviews. Rather, it is comprehensive, strategic, and focused on answering a specific research question. For this reason, the systematic review is more common in the health and social sciences, where comprehensiveness is more important. Literature reviews in the Humanities are not usually exhaustive but tend to show only the most representative or salient developments in the scholarship.
• Meta-analysis : Does your research deal with statistics or large amounts of data? If so, then a meta-analysis might be best for you rather than providing a critical review, the meta-analysis will summarize and synthesize the results of numerous studies that involve statistics or data to provide a more comprehensive picture than would be possible from just one study.

An argumentative literature review presents and takes sides in scholarly arguments about the literary work. It makes arguments about other scholars’ work. It does not necessarily involve a claim that the literary work is itself making an argument. Likewise, a chronological literature review presents the scholarly literature in chronological order.

You don’t need to keep strictly to one type. Scholars often combine features from various types of literature reviews. A sample review that combines the follow types –

• Argumentative
• Theoretical
• Methodological

– is the excellent work of Eiranen, Reetta, Mari Hatavara, Ville Kivimäki, Maria Mäkelä & Raisa Maria Toivo (2022) “ Narrative and Experience: Interdisciplinary Methodologies between History and Narratology , ” Scandinavian Journal of History , 47:1, 1-15

When writing your literature review, please follow these pointers:

• Conduct systematic searches
• Use Evidence
• Be Selective
• Use Quotes Sparingly
• Summarize & Synthesize
• Use Caution when Paraphrasing
• Use Your Own Voice

Advice from James Mason University’s “Literature Reviews: An Overview”

A note on synthesizing : Don’t make the common mistake of summarizing individual studies or articles one after the other. The goal is to synthesize — that is, to make observations about groups of studies. Synthesis often uses language like this:

• Much of the literature on [topic x ] focuses on [major themes].
• In recent years, researchers have begun investigating [facets a , b , and c ] of [topic x ].
• The studies in this review of [topic x ] confirm / suggest / call into question / support [idea / practice / finding / method / theory / guideline y ].
• In the reviewed studies [variable x ] was generally associated with higher / lower rates of [outcome y ].
• A limitation of some / most / all of these studies is [ y ].

Please see this sample annotated literature review  from James Mason University.

Structure of a literature review [2]

• Problematization: The 2 to 3 pages of problematization are a distinct, iterative, step. It may take doing such a statement a few times before moving forward to writing the actual paper.
• Search: Write down your keyword sets, your updated keyword sets, and databases. It is perfectly within a reviewer’s rights to ask for these details.
• Summary: Really getting to know major themes requires some annotation of articles. You want to identify core papers and themes and write about them. This helps you really learn the material. [ChatGPT or Wikipedia are no substitute for deep engagement with a paper.]
• Argument: Either outline or create a slide deck that help you express the arguments in your paper. Read them out loud. Have friends look at them. Present them. [Every literature review has an argument. If not, it’s a summary. A summary does not merit publication in a top outlet.]
• Unpacking: Once you’ve nailed the short pitch, unpack the full argument. [ a) Take time in each major section to map out a) the argument, b) the supporting evidence, and the takeaway. b) Take those major sections, reconcile them, make sure they don’t overlap, then move on to writing. c) Sketch out the paper’s sections, tables, figures, and appendices.]
• Writing: Writing is the easy part. You can always put words to the screen. [Revising and improving is hard. Make time to write every day. Improving requires feedback. Find a writing partner to give feedback. Create your tables and figures. Write to them. Make sure the words in the paper align to the visuals.]
• Communicate: When the paper is done, go back and create a paper presentation. [I do this for the papers that I’m most serious about. The act of storyboarding helps me sort out the small pieces of the story that don’t fit together. If I really want it to succeed, I present it. The act of presenting helps me get it right. My best papers sometimes take seven or eight presentations to get it right. Then I return to the paper and fine tune it. Only then, does it have a shot at a top outlet.]

Literature reviews can be published as part of a scholarly article, often after the introduction and sometimes with a header, but they can also be published as a standalone essay. To find examples of what reviews look like in your discipline, choose an appropriate subject database (such as MLA for literary criticism) and conduct a keyword search with the term “Literature Review” added in quotes:

Not only do these examples demonstrate how to structure different types of literature reviews, but some offer insights into trends and directions for future research. In the next section, we’ll take a closer look at some reading strategies to help guide you through this process.

Since scholars already have produced literature reviews on various scholarly conversations, you don’t always need to “reinvent the wheel” (start a literature review from nothing). You can find a published literature review and update it or amend it; scholars do that all the time. However, you must properly cite work you incorporate from others.

• What types of literature review will you be using for your paper? Why did you make this selection over others? If you haven’t made a selection yet, which types are you considering?
• What specific challenges do you face in following a literature review structure?
• If there are any elements of your assignment that need clarification, please list them.
• What was the most important lesson you learned from this page? What point was confusing or difficult to understand?
• In the “Back Matter” of this book, you will find a page titled “Rubrics.” On that page, we provide a rubric for Creating a Literature Review ↵
• Richard West, Brigham Young University, amended by Jason Thatcher, Temple University - https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jason-thatcher-0329764_academicwriting-topten2023-activity-7146507675021766656-BB0O ↵

Writing the Literature Review Copyright © 2021 by Barry Mauer and John Venecek is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Title Page Setup

A title page is required for all APA Style papers. There are both student and professional versions of the title page. Students should use the student version of the title page unless their instructor or institution has requested they use the professional version. APA provides a student title page guide (PDF, 199KB) to assist students in creating their title pages.

Student title page

The student title page includes the paper title, author names (the byline), author affiliation, course number and name for which the paper is being submitted, instructor name, assignment due date, and page number, as shown in this example.

Title page setup is covered in the seventh edition APA Style manuals in the Publication Manual Section 2.3 and the Concise Guide Section 1.6

Related handouts

• Student Title Page Guide (PDF, 263KB)
• Student Paper Setup Guide (PDF, 3MB)

Student papers do not include a running head unless requested by the instructor or institution.

Follow the guidelines described next to format each element of the student title page.

Professional title page

The professional title page includes the paper title, author names (the byline), author affiliation(s), author note, running head, and page number, as shown in the following example.

Follow the guidelines described next to format each element of the professional title page.

Physical therapy students’ experiences of inappropriate patient sexual behavior: a narrative review

Article sidebar, main article content.

Primary objective :  The purpose of this study is to identify the extent to which inappropriate patient sexual behavior (IPSB) is directed toward student physical therapists (PTs) and how this phenomenon is described in the current literature.

Review type :  Narrative review.

Summary of review method :  A search of PubMed, CINAHL Plus, and Academic Search Complete was conducted using the Boolean phrase (‘sexual harassment’ OR ‘sexual assault’ OR ‘inappropriate sexual behavior’ OR ‘sexual behavior’) AND (‘physical therapy’ OR physiotherapy OR ‘physical therapist’ OR physiotherapist). After relevant articles were identified, references were searched for additional relevant material. Data and common themes were identified, extracted, and summarized.

Primary results :  Studies indicate that 84% to 92.9% of PTs have IPSBs directed at them during their careers. There is less information on the rate at which student PTs are targets of IPSB, but the available studies indicate 66.2% to 78% of them experience IPSB during their clinical experiences. In one study, over 22% of PT students experienced severe forms of IPSB during clinical experiences. Other studies show that student PTs and novice PTs respond to IPSB with techniques that are less effective than those used by experienced PTs. Qualitative reports indicate that student PTs feel that they and their clinical instructors are unprepared for IPSB and believe more training on the topic is necessary.

Conclusion :  The available literature indicates that most PT students have IPSB directed at them during their clinical experiences. Students report feeling unprepared and desire more training on this topic. Additional training may reduce IPSB.

Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License .

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

Solar photovoltaics value chain and end-of-life management practices: a systematic literature review.

1. Introduction

• waste management practices [ 4 , 5 ];
• human health [ 6 , 7 ];
• the natural environment [ 4 , 8 , 9 ];
• water sources specifically [ 7 ];
• economic performance [ 2 , 10 ].

2. Generations of Photovoltaic Technology

3. methodology of the study, 4. bibliometric distribution of the selected paper, 5. thematic results and discussion, 5.1. raw materials, 5.2. manufacturing technology, 5.3. supply chain collaboration, 5.4. pv installation, 5.5. job market, 5.6. business models and pv industry.

• Product–service system: Under this model, customers have the advantage of a product–service system (PSS) because they can use products or services without purchasing them directly. The PSS bypasses the upfront costs of installation and maintenance costs, encouraging customer adoption and promoting PV circularity [ 64 ] through the reuse, repair and refurbishment of products. Schmidt-Costa et al. [ 64 ] identified use-oriented and result-oriented PSS alternatives that may overcome obstacles such as initial costs, a lack of financing options and limited access to appropriate installation sites, even in a region with highly favourable conditions for solar PVs, such as California. A use-oriented PSS includes maintenance and repair services in the rental or lease contracts [ 65 ]. In a result-oriented PSS, the consumer pays a predetermined fee for the energy generated, usually measured in kWh. Payment is determined by the results or product performance, such as the amount of energy produced by a PV array. Reim et al. [ 76 ] identified three structures for PSS models. A product-oriented PSS holds the provider responsible for the products and services, which the customer pays for. In a use-oriented PSS, the provider is responsible for the usability, which the customer pays for over time. A result-oriented PSS has the provider responsible for results and the customer pays for units of outcome. The PSS model has the advantages of increased solar technology affordability and availability, customers have less financial risk and resource efficiency is increased [ 64 ]. On the other hand, the PSS model must address key issues such as active stakeholder engagement and communication, clearly defined value propositions and pricing structures, which can be complex.
• Second-life model. Under this model, PV products are repurposed at the end of their original life to reduce waste, save resources and generate economic benefits [ 66 ]. In a second-life cycle, components can be integrated for new use into building materials and furniture, or they can be repaired for reuse in solar panels. Bocken et al. [ 25 ] propose that solar panel collection systems be combined with product design strategies to facilitate the reuse, refurbishment and recycling of materials and components to create new products. However, effective second-life models have supportive legislation that puts the responsibility onto producers to manage waste and feed it back into second-life processes [ 20 ]. Such product stewardship programs also emphasise consumer education about the challenges of waste associated with solar PV panels and encourage demand for second-life products and services [ 20 ].
• EOL management. A recycling system to recover materials and components from EOL products is another CBM that can promote circularity in the solar industry. This CBM promotes the creation of new products, a reduction in raw material consumption, and increased resource efficiency. Recycling systems can be designed to recover silver, copper and aluminium from used solar panels [ 67 ]. Reduced landfill is another advantage of recycling PV waste.

5.8. Government and Other Institutions

• Tax credits, subsidies or feed-in tariffs that encourage the adoption of circular economic practices and ensure the useful recycling of economic resources;
• Extended producer responsibility (EPR) policies that can shift the financial burden of EOL management to manufacturers, encouraging them to use and generate recyclable materials by applying circular economic principles;
• Landfill bans or charges for solar PV waste disposal.

5.9. Health and Environment

5.10. end-of life (eof) closed loop (reuse, recycle), 5.11. ev batteries/lithium-ion batteries (lib), 5.12. pv system benefits, 6. sustainability and pv management.

• RQ1: In the complex value chain of solar PV systems, there are multiple factors that hinder the integration of a circular economy approach. First are conflicting interests, where manufacturers may place cost effectiveness above environmental sustainability and recyclers favour profitability. Second, there is inadequate supportive legal frameworks or enforcement provisions that ensure compliance with proper waste management and recycling practices. Third, there is the absence of an effective communication or education campaign to enhances stakeholder awareness and knowledge on the benefits of implementing circular economy approaches for solar PV systems.
• RQ2: The role of stakeholders in the development of sustainable practices for end-of-life PV panels is essential, and it should be seen in collaboration and partnerships. There are some excellent examples of collaboration from the EU, and such best cases should be seen as models to be adopted across the world given the identified lack of a suitable framework to guide the CBM for the solar PV panel industry. They include extended producer responsibility (EPR) schemes which encourage manufacturers, importers and recyclers to cooperate, such as the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Directive from the European Union [ 23 ] and voluntary take-back and recycling program by the PV CYCLE association in Europe [ 81 ]. In Australia, the Circular PV Alliance developed circular economy solutions for solar PV waste management as a collaborative initiative involving industry, government and research organisations [ 82 ]. Partnerships are a deeper form of collaboration between governments, manufacturers and recyclers to develop recycling infrastructure and promote circular economy practices, which is often also formalised with agreements. They express long-term commitments for finding solutions based on forecasting the scale and persistence of the issue [ 83 ]. Cooperation and partnerships can be adopted for stakeholders at different stages of the supply chain to avoid landfill treatment and to procure a green pathway for waste management [ 32 ].
• RQ3: We could not find an explicit answer to the question about how a country such as Australia should manage future solar PV panel waste, including through existing policies. The practical relevance and impact on current environmental and economic challenges are yet to be fully and properly addressed in the available literature. Only a few studies bridge the gap between research and real-world applications, including policy development, industry best practices and technological innovations for recycling and waste management. The review shows there is need for more interdisciplinary studies that combine technological solutions with the economic, environmental and social dimensions of the problem.

7. Future Research

• What will be the effects of the lack of raw materials for making solar panels or the effect of toxic substances released during the recovery of failed panels? Is the risk of recycling panels superior to the risk of causing negative health impacts?
• What is the estimated recovery rate and cost of reusing or recycling waste?
• If the recovery of solar panels creates jobs, would the increase in jobs created be significant?
• Given the lack of raw materials and the inability of some countries to produce or recover solar cells, when could solar PV technology be considered as a main method of energy production in the majority of countries?
• What are the circular policies, economic programs and circular technologies of advanced countries for solar PV systems?

8. Conclusions

Supplementary materials, author contributions, institutional review board statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

• Oteng, D.; Zuo, J.; Sharifi, E. An expert-based evaluation on end-of-life solar photovoltaic management: An application of Fuzzy Delphi Technique. Sustain. Horiz. 2022 , 4 , 100036. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• AL-Zoubi, O.H.; Shawaqfah, M.; Almomani, F.; Damash, R.A.; Al-Zboon, K. Photovoltaic Solar Cells and Panels Waste in Jordan: Figures, Facts, and Concerns. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 13313. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kiwan, S.; Al-Gharibeh, E. Jordan toward a 100% renewable electricity system. Renew. Energy 2019 , 147 , 423–436. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Herceg, S.; Pinto Bautista, S.; Weiß, K.-A. Influence of Waste Management on the Environmental Footprint of Electricity Produced by Photovoltaic Systems. Energies 2020 , 13 , 2146. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vargas, C.; Chesney, M. End of life decommissioning and recycling of solar panels in the United States. A real options analysis. J. Sustain. Financ. Invest. 2021 , 11 , 82–102. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bang, Y.-Y.; Hong, N.-J.; Lee, D.S.; Lim, S.-R. Comparative assessment of solar photovoltaic panels based on metal-derived hazardous waste, resource depletion, and toxicity potentials. Int. J. Green Energy 2018 , 15 , 550–557. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nain, P.; Kumar, A. Initial metal contents and leaching rate constants of metals leached from end-of-life solar photovoltaic waste: An integrative literature review and analysis. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020 , 119 , 109592. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kwak, J.I.; Nam, S.-H.; Kim, L.; An, Y.-J. Potential environmental risk of solar cells: Current knowledge and future challenges. J. Hazard. Mater. 2020 , 392 , 122297. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Stamford, L.; Azapagic, A. Environmental impacts of photovoltaics: The effects of technological improvements and transfer of manufacturing from Europe to China. Energy Technol. 2018 , 6 , 1148–1160. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• D’Adamo, I.; Miliacca, M.; Rosa, P. Economic Feasibility for Recycling of Waste Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Modules. Int. J. Photoenergy 2017 , 2017 , 4184676. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yu, M.; Halog, A. Solar Photovoltaic Development in Australia—A Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment Study. Sustainability 2015 , 7 , 1213–1247. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Australian Government. Office of Northern Australia. Available online: https://www.infrastructure.gov.au/territories-regions-cities/regional-australia/office-northern-australia (accessed on 8 August 2024).
• Parkinson, G. Households to Be “Driving Force” of Energy Transition with Solar, Batteries and EVs. 2024. Available online: https://reneweconomy.com.au/households-to-be-driving-force-of-energy-transition-with-solar-batteries-and-evs/ (accessed on 8 August 2024).
• Barbosa, R.R.; Schultz, H.S.; Garcia, L.d.C.; Martins, D.D.; Carvalho, M. Economic and greenhouse gas assessments for two hot water industrial systems: Solar vs. natural gas. Clean. Eng. Technol. 2022 , 6 , 100365. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lassio, J.G.; Branco, D.C.; Magrini, A.; Matos, D. Environmental life cycle-based analysis of fixed and single-axis tracking systems for photovoltaic power plants: A case study in Brazil. Clean. Eng. Technol. 2022 , 11 , 100586. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gautam, A.; Shankar, R.; Vrat, P. End-of-life solar photovoltaic e-waste assessment in India: A step towards a circular economy. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2021 , 26 , 65–77. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Irena, I.-p. End-of-Life Management: Solar Photovoltaic Panels ; International Renewable Energy Agency and International Energy Agency Photovoltaic Power Systems: Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• Van Opstal, W.; Smeets, A. Circular economy strategies as enablers for solar PV adoption in organizational market segments. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2023 , 35 , 40–54. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ndzibah, E.; La Cruz, G.A.P.-D.; Shamsuzzoha, A. End of life analysis of solar photovoltaic panel: Roadmap for developing economies. Int. J. Energy Sect. Manag. 2022 , 16 , 112–128. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Majewski, P.; Al-shammari, W.; Dudley, M.; Jit, J.; Lee, S.-H.; Myoung-Kug, K.; Sung-Jim, K. Recycling of solar PV panels-product stewardship and regulatory approaches. Energy Policy 2021 , 149 , 112062. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Baldwin, S.; Bindewald, G.; Brown, A.; Chen, C.; Cheung, K.; Clark, C.; Cresko, J.; Crozat, M.; Daniels, J.; Edmonds, J. Quadrennial Technology Review: An Assessment of Energy Technologies and Research Opportunities ; US Department of Energy: Washington, DC, USA, 2015.
• Muteri, V.; Cellura, M.; Curto, D.; Franzitta, V.; Longo, S.; Mistretta, M.; Parisi, M.L. Review on life cycle assessment of solar photovoltaic panels. Energies 2020 , 13 , 252. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Radavičius, T.; van der Heide, A.; Palitzsch, W.; Rommens, T.; Denafas, J.; Tvaronavičienė, M. Circular solar industry supply chain through product technological design changes. Insights Reg. Dev. 2021 , 3 , 10–30. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Atasu, A.; Duran, S.; Van Wassenhove, L.N. The dark side of solar power. Harv. Bus. Rev. 2021 . Available online: https://hbr.org/2021/06/the-dark-side-of-solar-power (accessed on 8 August 2024).
• Bocken, N.M.; De Pauw, I.; Bakker, C.; Van Der Grinten, B. Product design and business model strategies for a circular economy. J. Ind. Prod. Eng. 2016 , 33 , 308–320. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bocken, N.M.; Antikainen, M. Circular business model experimentation: Concept and approaches. In Proceedings of the Sustainable Design and Manufacturing 2018: Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Sustainable Design and Manufacturing (KES-SDM-18) 5, Gold Coast, Australia, 24–26 June 2018. [ Google Scholar ]
• Moro, S.R.; Cauchick-Miguel, P.A.; Mendes, G.H.d.S. Adding sustainable value in product-service systems business models design: A conceptual review towards a framework proposal. Sustain. Prod. Consum. 2022 , 32 , 492–504. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Geels, F.W.; Sovacool, B.K.; Schwanen, T.; Sorrell, S. The socio-technical dynamics of low-carbon transitions. Joule 2017 , 1 , 463–479. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Oteng, D.; Zuo, J.; Sharifi, E. A scientometric review of trends in solar photovoltaic waste management research. Sol. Energy 2021 , 224 , 545–562. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• ISO 14044 ; Environmental Management—Life Cycle Assessment—Requirements and Guidelines. International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2006.
• Ali, A.; Koch, T.W.; Volk, T.A.; Malmsheimer, R.W.; Eisenbies, M.H.; Kloster, D.; Brown, T.R.; Naim, N.; Therasme, O. The Environmental Life Cycle Assessment of Electricity Production in New York State from Distributed Solar Photovoltaic Systems. Energies 2022 , 15 , 7278. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sheoran, M.; Kumar, P.; Sharma, S.; Bukya, M. Current situation analysis of solar PV waste management in India. Mater. Today Proc. 2022 , 58 , 773–782. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pastuszak, J.; Węgierek, P. Photovoltaic cell generations and current research directions for their development. Materials 2022 , 15 , 5542. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Alami, A.H.; Alasad, S.; Aljaghoub, H.; Ayoub, M.; Alashkar, A.; Mdallal, A.; Hasan, R. First-Generation Photovoltaics: History and Conventional Manufacturing. In PV Technology and Manufacturing ; Alami, A.H., Ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2023; pp. 1–17. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Aamir Iqbal, M.; Malik, M.; Shahid, W.; Zaheer Ud Din, S.; Anwar, N.; Ikram, M.; Idrees, F. Materials for Photovoltaics: Overview, Generations, Recent Advancements and Future Prospects ; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2022. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Conibeer, G. Third-generation photovoltaics. Mater. Today 2007 , 10 , 42–50. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Battaglia, C.; Cuevas, A.; De Wolf, S. High-efficiency crystalline silicon solar cells: Status and perspectives. Energy Environ. Sci. 2016 , 9 , 1552–1576. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gao, J.; Tang, L.; Shen, Z.; Dong, Y.; Wang, Z.; Lyu, J.; Li, J.; Yu, H. Efficient solar-light conversion for optimizing the catalytic ozonation of gaseous toluene with PdOx-LaFeO 3 . Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2021 , 288 , 120004. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Heath, G.A.; Silverman, T.J.; Kempe, M.; Deceglie, M.; Ravikumar, D.; Remo, T.; Cui, H.; Sinha, P.; Libby, C.; Shaw, S.; et al. Research and development priorities for silicon photovoltaic module recycling to support a circular economy. Nat. Energy 2020 , 5 , 502–510. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Huang, B.; Zhao, J.; Chai, J.; Xue, B.; Zhao, F.; Wang, X. Environmental influence assessment of China’s multi-crystalline silicon (multi-Si) photovoltaic modules considering recycling process. Sol. Energy 2017 , 143 , 132–141. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Oteng, D.; Zuo, J.; Sharifi, E. An evaluation of the impact framework for product stewardship on end-of-life solar photovoltaic modules: An environmental lifecycle assessment. J. Clean. Prod. 2023 , 411 , 137357. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tasnim, S.S.; Rahman, M.M.; Hasan, M.M.; Shammi, M.; Tareq, S.M. Current challenges and future perspectives of solar-PV cell waste in Bangladesh. Heliyon 2022 , 8 , e08970. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Ndzibah, E.; Pinilla-De La Cruz, G.A.; Shamsuzzoha, A. Collaboration towards value creation for end-of-life solar photovoltaic panel in Ghana. J. Clean. Prod. 2022 , 333 , 129969. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cherrington, R.; Goodship, V.; Longfield, A.; Kirwan, K. The feed-in tariff in the UK: A case study focus on domestic photovoltaic systems. Renew. Energy 2013 , 50 , 421–426. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Priyadarshini, P.; Abhilash, P.C. Circular economy practices within energy and waste management sectors of India: A meta-analysis. Bioresour. Technol. 2020 , 304 , 123018. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Snyder, H. Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. J. Bus. Res. 2019 , 104 , 333–339. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Minunno, R.; O’Grady, T.; Morrison, G.M.; Gruner, R.L. Investigating the embodied energy and carbon of buildings: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis of life cycle assessments. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021 , 143 , 110935. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, S.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Syst. Rev. 2021 , 10 , 89. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Scimago Journal & Country Rank. Sustainability. Available online: https://www.scimagojr.com/journalsearch.php?q=21100240100&tip=sid&clean=0 (accessed on 8 August 2024).
• Davy, E.; Hansen, U.E.; Nygaard, I. Localizing the solar value chain in Kenya? Innov. Dev. 2024 , 14 , 217–240. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sah, D.; Chitra; Kumar, S. Investigation and recovery of copper from waste silicon solar module. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2023 , 296 , 127205. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kolathur, S.; Khatiwada, D.; Khan, E.U. Life cycle assessment and life cycle costing of a building-scale, solar-driven water purification system. Energy Nexus 2023 , 10 , 100208. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Senthil, R. A technical note on integrating thermal energy systems into solar photovoltaic panels toward a circular economy. Renew. Energy Focus 2022 , 42 , 97–100. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sinha, P. Life cycle materials and water management for CdTe photovoltaics. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2013 , 119 , 271–275. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Venkatachary, S.K.; Samikannu, R.; Murugesan, S.; Dasari, N.R.; Subramaniyam, R.U. Economics and im-pact of recycling solar waste materials on the environment and health care. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2020 , 20 , 101130. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bonilla-Alicea, R.J.; Fu, K. Social life-cycle assessment (S-LCA) of residential rooftop solar panels using challenge-derived framework. Energy Sustain. Soc. 2022 , 12 , 7. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Maani, T.; Celik, I.; Heben, M.J.; Ellingson, R.J.; Apul, D. Environmental impacts of recycling crystalline silicon (c-SI) and cadmium telluride (CDTE) solar panels. Sci. Total Environ. 2020 , 735 , 138827. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Perkins, G. Techno-economic comparison of the levelised cost of electricity generation from solar PV and battery storage with solar PV and combustion of bio-crude using fast pyrolysis of biomass. Energy Convers. Manag. 2018 , 171 , 1573–1588. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tannous, S.; Manneh, R.; Harajli, H.; El Zakhem, H. Comparative cradle-to-grave life cycle assessment of traditional grid connected and solar stand-alone street light systems: A case study for rural areas in Lebanon. J. Clean. Prod. 2018 , 186 , 963–977. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Farrell, C.; Osman, A.; Doherty, R.; Saad, M.; Zhang, X.; Murphy, A.; Harrison, J.; Vennard, A.; Kumaravel, V.; Al-Muhtaseb, A.; et al. Technical challenges and opportunities in realising a circular economy for waste photovoltaic modules. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020 , 128 , 109911. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rao, R.R.; Priyadarshani, S.; Mani, M. Examining the use of End-of-Life (EoL) PV panels in housing and sustainability. Sol. Energy 2023 , 257 , 210–220. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lema, R.; Bhamidipati, P.L.; Gregersen, C.; Hansen, U.E.; Kirchherr, J. China’s investments in renewable energy in Africa: Creating co-benefits or just cashing-in? World Dev. 2021 , 141 , 105365. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mkhwebane, E.; Ntuli, N. Alternatives for small, medium and micro scale enterprises participation in the renewable energy industry-small scale embedded generation review. J. Energy S. Afr. 2019 , 30 , 144–151. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Schmidt-Costa, J.R.; Uriona-Maldonado, M.; Possamai, O. Product-service systems in solar PV deployment programs: What can we learn from the California Solar Initiative? Resour. Conserv. Recy. 2018 , 140 , 145. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Borg, D.; Mont, O.; Schoonover, H. Consumer acceptance and value in use-oriented product-service systems: Lessons from Swedish consumer goods companies. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 8079. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lieder, M.; Rashid, A. Towards circular economy implementation: A comprehensive review in context of manufacturing industry. J. Clean. Prod. 2016 , 115 , 36–51. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chowdhury, M.S.; Rahman, K.S.; Chowdhury, T.; Nuthammachot, N.; Techato, K.; Akhtaruzzaman, M.; Tiong, S.K.; Sopian, K.; Amin, N. An overview of solar photovoltaic panels’ end-of-life material recycling. Energy Strat. Rev. 2020 , 27 , 100431. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Guerin, T.F. Using integrated risk assessment to enable on-site re-purposing of construction wastes from renewable energy projects to confirm highest value re-use. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 2022 , 29 , 8909–8920. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Franco, M.A.; Groesser, S.N. A systematic literature review of the solar photovoltaic value chain for a circular economy. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 9615. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, Q.; Liu, C.; Zheng, S. Investment and pricing in solar photovoltaic waste recycling with government intervention: A supply chain perspective. Comput. Ind. Eng. 2023 , 177 , 109044. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Le LUU, Q.; Binh, V.; Nguyen, N.Q.; Nguyen, N.H. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of an Integrated Solar PV and Wind Power System in Vietnam. J. Asian Energy Stud. 2020 , 4 , 36–47. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Oteng, D.; Zuo, J.; Sharifi, E. Environmental emissions influencing solar photovoltaic waste management in Australia: An optimised system network of waste collection facilities. J. Environ. Manag. 2022 , 314 , 115007. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Volan, T.; Vaz, C.R.; Uriona-Maldonado, M. Scenarios for end-of-life (EOL) electric vehicle batteries in China. Rev. Gestão 2021 , 28 , 335–357. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Amiryar, M.E.; Pullen, K.R. Assessment of the Carbon and Cost Savings of a Combined Diesel Generator, Solar Photovoltaic, and Flywheel Energy Storage Islanded Grid System. Energies 2019 , 12 , 3356. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Maso, M.D.; Olsen, K.H.; Dong, Y.; Pedersen, M.B.; Hauschild, M.Z. Sustainable development impacts of nationally determined contributions: Assessing the case of mini-grids in Kenya. Clim. Policy 2020 , 20 , 815–831. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Reim, W.; Parida, V.; Örtqvist, D. Product–Service Systems (PSS) business models and tactics—A systematic literature review. J. Clean. Prod. 2015 , 97 , 61–75. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Maqbool, R.; Akubo, S.A.; Rashid, Y.; Ashfaq, S.; Saiba, M.R. Solar energy and the circular economy policies for sustainable management. In Solar Energy Harvesting, Conversion, and Storage: Materials, Technologies, and Applications ; Khalid, M., Walvekar, R., Panchal, H., Vaka, M., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2023; pp. 363–376. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gerbinet, S.; Belboom, S.; Léonard, A. Life Cycle Analysis (LCA) of photovoltaic panels: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014 , 38 , 747–753. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kabir, E.; Kumar, P.; Kumar, S.; Adelodun, A.A.; Kim, K.H. Solar energy: Potential and future prospects. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018 , 82 , 894–900. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Klugmann-Radziemska, E.; Ostrowski, P. Chemical treatment of crystalline silicon solar cells as a method of recovering pure silicon from photovoltaic modules. Renew. Energy 2010 , 35 , 1751–1759. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis [IEEFA]. Role of Recycling for Resilient Solar Photovoltaic Supply Chains. (2 April 2024). Available online: https://ieefa.org/resources/role-recycling-resilient-solar-photovoltaic-supply-chains (accessed on 8 August 2024).
• Circular PV Alliance. Research|Circular PV Alliance. Available online: https://www.circularpv.com.au/research (accessed on 8 August 2024).
• Mahmoudi, S.; Huda, N.; Behnia, M. Photovoltaic waste assessment: Forecasting and screening of emerging waste in Australia. Resour. Conserv. Recycl. 2019 , 146 , 192–205. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Amrollahi Biyouki, Z.; Zaman, A.; Marinova, D.; Minunno, R.; Askari Shayegan, M. Solar Photovoltaics Value Chain and End-of-Life Management Practices: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 7038. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167038

Amrollahi Biyouki Z, Zaman A, Marinova D, Minunno R, Askari Shayegan M. Solar Photovoltaics Value Chain and End-of-Life Management Practices: A Systematic Literature Review. Sustainability . 2024; 16(16):7038. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167038

Amrollahi Biyouki, Zahra, Atiq Zaman, Dora Marinova, Roberto Minunno, and Maryam Askari Shayegan. 2024. "Solar Photovoltaics Value Chain and End-of-Life Management Practices: A Systematic Literature Review" Sustainability 16, no. 16: 7038. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167038

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, supplementary material.

ZIP-Document (ZIP, 93 KiB)

Further Information

Mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

• Submit a Manuscript
• Advanced search

American Journal of Neuroradiology

Advanced Search

Diagnostic Performance of ASL-MRI and FDG-PET in Frontotemporal Dementia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

• Find this author on Google Scholar
• Find this author on PubMed
• Search for this author on this site
• Info & Metrics

This article requires a subscription to view the full text. If you have a subscription you may use the login form below to view the article. Access to this article can also be purchased.

BACKGROUND: While the diagnosis of frontotemporal dementia (FTD) is based mostly on clinical features, [18F]-FDG PET has been investigated as a potential imaging golden standard in ambiguous cases, with arterial spin labeling (ASL) MRI gaining recent interest.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis on the diagnostic performance of ASL MRI in FTD patients and compare it to that of [18F]-FDG PET.

DATA SOURCES: A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus and EMBASE was conducted until March 13, 2024.

STUDY SELECTION: Inclusion criteria were: original articles, patients with FTD and/or its variants, use of ASL MR perfusion imaging with or without [18F]-FDG PET, presence of sufficient diagnostic performance data. Exclusion criteria were: meeting abstracts, comments, summaries, protocols, letters and guidelines, longitudinal studies, overlapping cohorts.

DATA ANALYSIS: The quality of eligible studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for [18F]-FDG PET and ASL MRI were calculated, and a summary receiver operating characteristic curve was plotted.

DATA SYNTHESIS: Seven eligible studies were identified, which included a total of 102 FTD patients. Aside from some of the studies showing at worst an unclear risk of bias in patient selection, index test, flow and timing, all studies showed low risk of bias and applicability concerns in all categories. Data from 4 studies was included in our meta-analysis for ASL MRI and 3 studies for [18F]-FDG PET. Pooled sensitivity, specificity and DOR were 0.70 (95% CI: 0.59-0.79), 0.81 (95% CI: 0.71-0.88) and 8.00 (95% CI: 3.74-17.13) for ASL MRI, and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.71-0.96), 0.89 (95% CI: 0.43-0.99) and 47.18 (95% CI: 10.77-206.75) for [18F]-FDG PET.

LIMITATIONS: The number of studies was relatively small, with a small sample size. The studies used different scanning protocols as well as a mix of diagnostic metrics, all of which might have introduced heterogeneity in the data.

CONCLUSIONS: While ASL MRI performed worse than [18F]-FDG PET in the diagnosis of FTD, it exhibited a decent diagnostic performance to justify its further investigation as a quicker and more convenient alternative.

ABBREVIATIONS: 3DPCASL, 3D pseudocontinuous ASL; AD, Alzheimer’s disease; ASL, arterial spin labeling; AUC, area under the curve; CI, confidence interval; DOR, diagnostic odds ratio; FN, false negative; FP, false positive; FTD, frontotemporal dementia; LE, limbic encephalitis; NLR, negative likelihood ratio; PASL, pulsed ASL; PLD, post-label delay; PLR, positive likelihood ratio; PRISMA, PSP, progressive supranuclear palsy; Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis; SROC, summary receiver operative characteristic; TN, true negative; TP, true positive; QUADAS-2, Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2.

The authors declare no conflicts of interest related to the content of this article.

• © 2024 by American Journal of Neuroradiology

Log in using your username and password

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Citation Manager Formats

• EndNote (tagged)
• EndNote 8 (xml)
• RefWorks Tagged
• Ref Manager

• Tweet Widget
• Facebook Like
• Google Plus One

Jump to section

Related articles.

• No related articles found.
• Google Scholar

Cited By...

• No citing articles found.

This article has not yet been cited by articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

More in this TOC Section

• Clinical Outcome of Pipeline Embolization Device with and without Coil to Treat Intracranial Aneurysm: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
• Comparison of arterial spin labeling and dynamic susceptibility contrast perfusion MR imaging in pediatric brain tumors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Similar Articles