university of york literature review

• About PROSPERO |
• How to register |
• Service information
• My PROSPERO |
• Log in | Join Logout:

PROSPERO is fast-tracking registration of protocols related to COVID-19

PROSPERO accepts registrations for systematic reviews, rapid reviews and umbrella reviews. PROSPERO does not accept scoping reviews or literature scans . Sibling PROSPERO sites registers systematic reviews of human studies and systematic reviews of animal studies .

Before registering a new systematic review, check PROSPERO and the resources on COVID-END to see whether a similar review already exists. If so, please do not duplicate without good reason . Your efforts may be much more useful if switched to a different topic. This will avoid research waste and contribute more effectively to tackling the pandemic.

Shortcut for already registered reviews of human studies relevant to Covid-19

Shortcut for already registered reviews of animal studies relevant to Covid-19

Shortcut for already registered reviews of human and animal studies relevant to Covid-19, tagged by research area

If you do not already have a PROSPERO account, you will need to create one to register a review

Register a review

• Accessing and completing the registration form

Search PROSPERO

Important notice.

To allow the PROSPERO team to focus on COVID-19 and to avoid further delay, during the pandemic all submissions that have been waiting for registration for more than 30 days and which pass a basic automated check will be published automatically . The PROSPERO team will not check these submissions; this will be stated clearly on the published record. Records will be published exactly as submitted; therefore extra care should be taken to ensure that submitted information is accurate. Submissions which do not pass the basic automated check will be automatically rejected.

Due to technical issues, you will not receive an email notification if your record is automatically published. Please check your account after 10 days to confirm registration.

For records that are within 10 days of submission, registrations from the UK will continue to be prioritised because PROSPERO is funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR).

We are receiving a large volume of emails enquiring about progress. As answering these takes time away from processing records, please only email should if it is absolutely necessary. If your enquiry is related to a review on COVID-19 registration please add #COVID-19 to your subject line. For other reviews please allow at least 14 days from submission before enquiring about progress.

Students: We do not (have the resources to) register reviews done as part of training courses, modules or other 'mini' reviews. Feel free to use the system in your learning and to help you develop a full protocol, but do not press the button.

What you will find in PROSPERO

PROSPERO includes protocol details for systematic reviews relevant to health and social care, welfare, public health, education, crime, justice, and international development, where there is a health related outcome.

Systematic review protocols on PROSPERO can include any type of any study design. Reviews of reviews and reviews of methodological issues that contain at least one outcome of direct patient or clinical relevance are also accepted.

From October 2019 PROSPERO will require earlier registration.

Previously, we accepted registrations provided the reviewers had not  completed  their data extraction but,  from 1st October 2019, we will only accept reviews provided that data extraction has not yet  started .

We hope that this will reduce the potential for bias by reducing the opportunity for data extraction to lead to conscious or subconscious effects on the review, for instance by influencing decisions to include or exclude certain items in order to shape a review so that it reaches a desired conclusion.

PROSPERO will continue to accept registrations if formal screening of search results against the review’s eligibility criteria is complete, because we understand that the steps of a review up to that point do not always follow a strictly sequential manner. We also recognise that registration before then may be challenging for reviews being done to a short timeline or strict deadline.

We continue to encourage authors to have written a full protocol before they register their review and to provide full and specific details on their methods in the PROSPERO registration record. Generic ‘cut and paste’ statements are discouraged.

Latest new registrations

• Optimal Administration Routes of Tranexamic Acid in Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis
• Implementation of digital health interventions in primary care settings. Systematic review with narrative synthesis.
• Cost-effectiveness analysis of Rapid-AST for the Diagnosis of Blood Stream Infections and Treatment of Bacterial Sepsis: Systematic literature review
• Understanding vaccine decision-making in migrant communities: a systematic review of frameworks and their efficacy
• The impact of changes in state pension age on health and economic outcomes: a rapid review

Accessibility

Cookies and Privacy

Centre for Reviews and Dissemination University of York York, UK YO10 5DD

• Integrity of data and prospective registration

When to register your review

Do not register too early. Your systematic review protocol should be complete before you submit your registration request.

Registering reviews that are never performed is unhelpful to the research community and may discredit the research team. You should therefore have the necessary resource in place to complete the review before you register your protocol (notification of award of research funding or firm commitment that author time is available for unfunded projects).

PROSPERO relies on the integrity of researchers for the accuracy of the data supplied, and the named contacts are accountable for the content of their records. We routinely monitor the time frame given in submissions and seek clarification where this appears overly ambitious prior to confirming registration and providing a PROSPERO registration number. Amendments and updates to the record are made transparent in the audit trail within each record.

On rare occasions, peer reviewers and editors using PROSPERO to compare what was planned with what is reported in the final manuscript, have identified that the initial registration date in PROSPERO post-dates the manuscript submission date to the journal. In these cases the logical explanation is that the stage of review was inaccurately completed in the PROSPERO registration form; otherwise the submission would have been rejected. In such cases, the named contact will be alerted to the issue and given the opportunity to respond within two weeks. If it is confirmed that incorrect information was provided, or no response is received, the content of the PROSPERO record will be removed, leaving the title and the details of the named contact and the following statement:

Since publication of this record it has been established that information provided initially about the stage of the review and anticipated completion date was inaccurate. The review had actually progressed beyond the stage of eligibility for PROSPERO.

Prospective registration aims to facilitate the comparison of reported review findings with what was planned a priori in the protocol. Reviews should ideally be registered before screening against eligibility criteria commences. However, reviews are currently accepted provided they have not progressed beyond the completion of data extraction.

Protocol details for this review should be sought from the named contact.

Please tell us why this record has been updated.

Please provide a brief description of any major changes made to your record e.g. to inclusion criteria or outcomes and why these have been made. This is important information for those reading your record. It helps safeguard against readers assuming that changes have been done to manipulate results and supports the credibility of your review.

PLEASE NOTE: the text you enter here will appear in the published review under the Revision Notes section

• Help with registration
• The registration data set

What happens after submitting a form

Making changes, amendments and updating a published record, what to do after completing a review and after publishing the findings, registering an update of a completed review, inclusion criteria.

• About PROSPERO
• What is registration?
• Cochrane protocols on PROSPERO
• How to cite a PROSPERO record
• Promotion of PROSPERO
• Support for PROSPERO
• References and resources

PROSPERO Covid-19 filters

Click any of the keywords below to search PROSPERO for Covid-19 registrations or click here to see all Covid-19 human studies or here to see all Covid-19 animal studies.

Click to hide the Covid-19 filters and go back to standard PROSPERO searching

Click to hide your search history and show search results show your search history and hide search results . Open the Filters panel to find records with specific characteristics (e.g. all reviews about cancer or all diagnostic reviews etc). See our Guide to Searching for more details.

Click to hide the standard search and use the Covid-19 filters.

Health area of review

Review authors may add as many Health Area tags as they want. These tags are not currently applied by Cochrane authors so Cochrane Protocols will not be retrieved with this filter.

• Any health area
• Alcohol/substance misuse/abuse
• Blood and immune system
• Cardiovascular
• Care of the elderly
• Child health
• Complementary therapies
• Crime and justice
• Digestive system
• Ear, nose and throat
• Endocrine and metabolic disorders
• Eye disorders
• General interest
• Health inequalities/health equity
• Infections and infestations
• International development
• Mental health and behavioural conditions
• Musculoskeletal
• Neurological
• Obstetrics and gynaecology
• Oral health
• Palliative care
• Perioperative care
• Physiotherapy
• Pregnancy and childbirth
• Public health (including social determinants of health)
• Rehabilitation
• Respiratory disorders
• Service delivery
• Skin disorders
• Social care
• Tropical Medicine
• Wounds, injuries and accidents
• Violence and abuse

Type and method of the review

• Any review type or method
• Epidemiologic
• Intervention
• Service Delivery
• Systematic review
• Meta-analysis
• Individual patient data (IPD) meta-analysis
• Prospective meta-analysis (PMA)
• Pre-clinical review
• Methodology
• Network meta-analysis
• Review of reviews
• Qualitative synthesis
• Cost effectiveness

Source of the review

• All protocols
• Exclude Cochrane protocols
• Exclude reviews of animal studies for human health protocols
• Cochrane protocols only
• Reviews of animal studies for human health protocols only

Status of the review

• Any review status
• Ongoing update
• Discontinued

Restrict search to specific fields

• Common choices
• PROSPERO Registration number [AN]
• Intervention [IV]
• Funding sources [FU]
• Other fields
• Assessment of bias [BA]
• Collaborators [CL]
• Comparator [CM]
• Completion date [CD]
• Condition studied [CS]
• Conflict of interest [CF]
• Contact address [AD]
• Context [CT]
• Country [CO]
• Data extraction [DE]
• Data synthesis [DY]
• Dissemination [DS]
• Existing review details [ER]
• Final report [FR]
• Health area [HA]
• Keywords [KW]
• Language [LA]
• Named contact [NC]
• Named contact email [EM]
• Organisational affiliation [OA]
• Original language title [LT]
• Other registrations [RE]
• Participants [PA]
• Primary outcomes [OP]
• Published protocol [PR]
• Review question [RQ]
• Review team [TE]
• Searches [SS]
• Secondary outcomes [OS]
• Start date [SD]
• Status of the review [RS]
• Study type [ST]
• Subgroup analysis [SG]
• Summary [SM]
• Telephone [TL]
• Type of review [RT]
• URL for search [UR]

Date added to PROSPERO

Export the results of your search to a tagged text file. The file will be prepared and downloaded to your device when you click "Export now" below

An Endnote import filter is available for these records here .

Registering a review on PROSPERO

PROSPERO is an international database of prospectively registered systematic reviews in health and social care. Key features from the review protocol are recorded and maintained as a permanent record in PROSPERO. The aim is to provide a comprehensive listing of systematic reviews registered at inception, to help avoid unplanned duplication. By promoting transparency in the process and enabling comparison of reported review findings with what was planned in the protocol PROSPERO also aims to minimise the risk of bias in systematic review.

PROSPERO has been developed and is managed by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) at the University of York and is funded by the UK’s National Institute for Health Research (NIHR).

What does registration on PROSPERO involve?

Registration in PROSPERO involves the prospective submission and publication of key information about the design and conduct of a systematic review.

Registration on PROSPERO is free of charge. In return, registrants are accountable for the accuracy and updating of information submitted.

PROSPERO includes details of any planned or on-going systematic review that has a health related outcome.

PROSPERO accepts:

Systematic review protocols assessing:

• Interventions (Including qualitative and individual participant data reviews )
• Diagnostic accuracy
• Prognostic factors
• Epidemiological reviews relevant to health and social care
• Public health
• Service delivery in health and social care
• Methodological

Further information on protocol development specific to review types is accessible below.

Requirements for registration

• A full protocol should be ready before registering with PROSPERO
• Submissions must be made before data extraction commences (from October 2019)
• Registration forms must be complete.
• Submissions must be in English (search strategies and protocols attached to a record may be in any language).

PROSPERO does not accept:

• Systematic reviews without an outcome of clear relevance to the health of humans
• Scoping reviews
• Literature reviews that use a systematic search
• Systematic reviews assessing sports performance as an outcome
• Methodological reviews that assess ONLY the quality of reporting
• Systematic critical appraisals

Other considerations

• Cochrane protocols are automatically uploaded- To avoid duplication of records, Cochrane protocols  should not  be registered separately with PROSPERO.
• Systematic reviews of animal studies only are not eligible for registration in the section of PROSPERO dedicated to reviews of human studies. These should be registered in the section of PROSPERO for animal studies.
• Systematic reviews of in-vitro studies only are not eligible for registration on PROSPERO. We recommend registering such protocols elsewhere, for instance on Open Science Framework.

If you are in any doubt about the eligibility of your review, including the stage of progress please contact us by email using the details on the contact page for advice.

Do not register too early. Your systematic review protocol should be complete before you submit your registration request  

Registering reviews that are never performed is unhelpful to the research community and may discredit the research team. You should therefore have the necessary resource in place to complete the review before you register your protocol (notification of award of research funding or firm commitment that author time is available for unfunded projects).

Accessing and navigating the registration form

Obtain a username and password by following the ‘Join’ link in the top right hand corner of the PROSPERO website.

Once you have joined, you can ‘Sign in’ and then you will be able to select ‘Register a review’ in the left hand column. This opens a page that encourages you to check that your review will meet the inclusion criteria and that the review is not already registered, if you are happy to continue, click on Open the registration form. The Open the registration form option opens a page where you are asked to confirm your review is eligible for inclusion and sufficiently different from any other review registered. If you are happy to confirm the information you may proceed to the registration form by clicking on the Register a review box. This will take you to the electronic registration form which has 22 required fields and 18 optional fields. ‘Required’ fields, marked with a red asterisk, must be completed before the Submit button can be accessed. You may save and exit the form at any time, and return at a later date changes are also automatically saved when a field is exited. You are able to add or edit information at a later time by signing in at the main page and going to ‘My PROSPERO records’.

Providing access to a protocol is not a substitute for entering data into the required fields.

Most registrants complete the form in 60 minutes or less.

Access to your record to make further changes or updates is suspended during the administrative process. Receipt of submission is acknowledged in an automated email sent to the named contact.

Registration forms are checked against the eligibility criteria for PROSPERO and if they meet the inclusion criteria are checked for clarity of content before being approved and published on the register, returned for clarification or rejected. We endeavor to provide an update within five working days. However if you wish to enquire on the progress of your submission please contact the administration team by email using the details on the contact page .

Once published on the register, the record will again become accessible for future editing. However the original document submitted will remain in the register to provide a permanent record for the audit trail and for reference. The form can also be saved as a pdf or word processing document if you want to share with others working on the review before submitting.

Should your submission be rejected for registration the record will then be locked and no further edits can be made. Further access to the record for editing is not then possible without contacting us by email using the details on the contact page .

Changes, amendments and updates can be made to a published record by signing in, going to My PROSPERO records and opening the saved record. Once the changes have been made you must click the Submit button. You will then be asked to give brief details of the changes made. The information entered here will appear in the public record and should inform users of the database of the nature of the changes made (e.g. removed one of the outcome measures; changed the anticipated completion date).

Full guidance notes are available here .

All submitted edits and changes to a PROSPERO record will be recorded, dated, and made available within the public record audit trail. The most recent version will appear with previous versions accessible from dated links on the right-hand side of the screen, with the revision notes.

Records remain permanently on PROSPERO. Once the review is completed this information should be updated in the record together with the anticipated publication date. The bibliographic reference and electronic links to publications should be added to the record by the authors. In the absence of a publication, details of availability of the review’s unpublished results, or reasons for the discontinuation of the review, should be documented. Reminder emails with detailed instructions on what to do, are sent on the anticipated completion and publication dates.

If you decide to update the registration of a review you have already completed, you can access the record by signing in and going to My PROSPERO records. You can make changes to the protocol and submit it as an update and it will be processed as for a new review. It is important to decide if you are updating a review, or in fact because of changes to the protocol, are doing a new review. The following definitions have been provided to help you decide.

What is an update of a review?

Updating a systematic review is a discrete event during which efforts are made to identify and incorporate new evidence into a previously completed systematic review An ‘update’ may be any modified version of a review that includes the findings of a more recent search than the previously completed version of the review. It can still be considered an update even if the new search reveals no additional studies. Any newly identified studies should be assessed and, if appropriate, incorporated into the updated review. An update might also be an opportunity to conduct new analyses or add additional information to the review.

What constitutes a new review rather than an update?

It can be difficult to decide whether an update to a review is in fact a new review. There is little published guidance on this. PROSPERO adopts a pragmatic approach. If changes to the review questions or methods are so substantial that they require major changes to the original protocol, this should be regarded as a new review rather than an update. Examples that would constitute a new review:

• addition of new treatment comparisons e.g. direct comparison of different drugs, when the old review included only comparisons of drug with placebo;
• substantial changes to the population being studied e.g. adding adults to a review that was previously restricted to children;
• exclusion criteria in the old review become inclusion criteria in the new review;
• introduction of new analysis techniques e.g. a switch from aggregate data meta-analyses to individual participant meta-analyses.

If in doubt, a new record for a new review should be created. This will minimise the complexity of the editing to the original record in PROSPERO and make it easier for users to distinguish between the original review and the later version. Links between the new and original review can be added in field #37 in the registration form.

Guide to completing the registration fields

The following guidance notes follow the format of the registration form. The guidance includes a description and example of what is required for each of the fields within each section.

SPECIAL NOTES: We accept information in good faith and rely upon the integrity of researchers to ensure the validity of all the data presented in PROSPERO records. Action will be taken if inaccuracies in data, particularly stage of review and anticipated completion date , are identified at any time.

PROSPERO records need to be fully searchable so the information requested needs to be in the fields, even if access to a protocol is given in Field 34. The records are permanent but links are not. We therefore do not accept submissions that refer the reader to the protocol without providing the basic information in the fields.

Registering a review of animal studies on PROSPERO

PROSPERO for animal studies is an international database of prospectively registered systematic reviews of animal studies relevant to human health. Key features from the review protocol are recorded and maintained as a permanent record in PROSPERO. The aim is to provide a comprehensive listing of systematic reviews registered at inception, to help avoid unplanned duplication. By promoting transparency in the process and enabling comparison of reported review findings with what was planned in the protocol PROSPERO also aims to minimise the risk of bias in systematic review.

PROSPERO for animal studies has been developed and is managed by the SYRCLE-CAMARADES team and the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD) at the University of York. It is  funded by the UK’s National Institute for Health Research (NIHR).

• Systematic reviews of human studies only are not eligible for registration in the section of PROSPERO dedicated to reviews of animal studies. These should be registered in the section of PROSPERO for human studies.

Registering reviews that are never performed is unhelpful to the research community and may discredit the research team. You should therefore have the necessary resources in place to complete the review before you register your protocol (notification of award of research funding or firm commitment that author time is available for unfunded projects).

Once you have joined, you can ‘Sign in’ and then you will be able to select ‘Register a review’ in the left hand column. This opens a page that encourages you to check that your review will meet the inclusion criteria and that the review is not already registered. If you are happy to continue, open the registration form by clicking on the "Register a systematic review of animal research studies (study subjects are animals) that is of direct relevance to human health" link. This opens a page where you are asked to confirm your review is eligible for inclusion and sufficiently different from any other review registered. If you are happy to confirm the information you may proceed to the registration form by clicking on the "Register a review" link. This will take you to the electronic registration form which has 26 required fields and 14 optional fields. All subfields of required fields, marked with a red asterisk, must be completed before the protocol can be submitted. You may save and exit the form at any time, and return at a later date changes are also automatically saved when a field is exited. You are able to add or edit information at a later time by signing in at the main page and going to ‘My PROSPERO records’.

Registration forms are checked against the eligibility criteria for PROSPERO. If they meet the inclusion criteria, they are checked for clarity of content before either being approved and published on the register, returned for clarification, or rejected. We endeavour to provide an update within five working days. If you wish to enquire on the progress of your submission please contact the administration team by email using the details on the contact page .

Once published on the register, the record will again become accessible for future editing. However, the original document submitted will remain in the register to provide a permanent record for the audit trail and for reference.

Should your submission be rejected for registration, the record will be locked and no further edits can be made. Further access to the record for editing is not possible without contacting us by email using the details on the contact page .

Changes, amendments and updates can be made to a published record by signing in, going to “My PROSPERO records” and opening the saved record. Once the changes have been made,  click the “Submit” button. You will then be asked to give brief details of the changes made. The information entered here will appear in the public record and should inform users of the database of the nature of the changes made (e.g. removed one of the outcome measures; changed the anticipated completion date).

If you decide to update the registration of a review you have already completed, you can access the record by signing in and going to “My PROSPERO records”. You can make changes to the protocol and submit it as an update and it will be processed as for a new review. It is important to decide if you are updating a review, or in fact are doing a new review because of changes to the protocol. The following definitions have been provided to help you decide.

• substantial changes to the population being studied e.g. adding non-rodents to a review that was previously restricted to rodents;

PROSPERO records need to be fully searchable. We can therefore not accept submissions in which only a link to a protocol registered elsewhere is provided, without providing the basic information in the fields.

These screening questions check whether your review is eligible for inclusion in PROSPERO and avoid wasting your time if it is not eligible.

Will your registration record be in English?

Is this a scoping, literature or mapping review.

PROSPERO does not accept scoping reviews, literature reviews or mapping reviews. This should not stop you from submitting your full protocol or completed review for publication in a journal.

To copy this explanation to the clipboard to include with a journal submission click here .

Resources describing scoping/mapping reviews can be found here .

Does your review include a health outcome with direct relevance to human health?

(e.g. reviews of educational interventions to improve maths skills are not eligible, reviews of educational interventions to promote breastfeeding are eligible)

Is your review of methodological studies that have a clear link to human health?

(e.g. relates to systematic review or clinical study methods)

Is this a Cochrane review?

Cochrane reviews are usually uploaded to PROSPERO from the Cochrane Library and do not need to be registered via the PROSPERO website. However, this is temporarily suspended because of technical issues that we are working to resolve.

If you have a special case review please talk to your Cochrane Review Group and/or contact the PROSPERO team.

Is this a mini or partial review done for a training course or classwork or are you using the system to learn how to register?

PROSPERO does not have resources to process applications for reviews done only for training purposes. This includes mini reviews restricted to a subset of eligible studies, demonstrator reviews where a whole class does the same review, or any other projects that are less than full systematic reviews.

For learning purposes you may download and complete the PROSPERO form as a PDF document . If you do complete the form online, please save this in your own space and do not SUBMIT it for publication.

Please check PROSPERO for similar systematic reviews before proceeding

Checking whether a similar review already exists should be one of the first steps taken in a systematic review.

Knowingly repeating an existing systematic review is not necessarily wrong, but to avoid research waste there should be a reason for doing this - for example if the new review will incorporate additional studies, use new or alternative methods of analysis, or have a different focus.

PROSPERO does not prevent registration of similar reviews. However, registrations are dated in PROSPERO and a journal could decide not to publish a review that has repeated an already registered review without justification.

If you find a similar review in PROSPERO, but are unsure if it is the same or if it will be completed and published, we suggest that you contact the author to find out before proceeding. Contact details can be found within the PROSPERO record.

I have searched PROSPERO and...

Have you written a protocol.

PROSPERO registration captures key information about the design and conduct of a planned systematic review. It is not a full protocol. We strongly encourage you to write a full protocol before completing the PROSPERO registration form (although you may proceed without doing this).

Will more than one person be involved in the systematic review?

We strongly recommend that you follow best practice and include more than one person in the review team. PROSPERO will not accept registrations unless there is more than one person conducting the review. You must include details of the other author(s) in the registration form.

Do you intend to publish the results of your systematic review and/or make them publicly available when completed?

PROSPERO aims to increase transparency and help prevent unintended duplication of effort. This requires that the results of systematic reviews should be made publicly available e.g. by publication in an academic journal, posting in a research repository or being made available on a permanent website. We therefore do not accept registrations from systematic reviews that will not be made available to others e.g. projects that are internal to an organization or company, or masters dissertations if it is known that these will not be shared.

Have you started your review?

Stage of review.

What work have you already done on your systematic review?

Reviews that have started data extraction (at the time of initial submission) are not eligible for inclusion in PROSPERO. If we find that incorrect status and/or start or completion dates have been supplied, the published PROSPERO record will be withdrawn.

Preliminary searches

Searches conducted prior to a systematic review to assess the extent of the existing literature.

Piloting the study selection process

A process to determine whether the study selection criteria will identify studies eligible for inclusion in the project.

Full searches

Exhaustive searches to identify all publications eligible for inclusion in the review.

Full screening of search results against eligibility criteria

Data extraction.

Extracting or obtaining data from included studies or other sources.

Risk of bias or quality assessment

Assessment of the risk of bias or quality of included studies.

Data synthesis

The main project analyses to combine data from eligible studies using formal data synthesis methods.

Please now go ahead and register your review .

Please go back and search PROSPERO before continuing

• Subject Guides

Systematic Reviews: a Practical Guide

Do they really expect a systematic review?

Creating your protocol

Developing your protocol

What sources should you search?

Developing the search strategy

Running and recording your search strategies

Managing your search results

What to do next with your search results

Writing and reporting your review

Sources of help

Search more than one source. You should be as exhaustive as you can given the scope, time and resources that you have available.

You're going to need to search specialist databases — Google Scholar just isn't going to be thorough enough. It can work well when finding single relevant papers but it is not ideal for literature searching for a review because:

the search interface is quite limited

it isn't clear what's being indexed which makes it difficult to report your searches

different users may get different search results depending on their historical use of Google

saving or downloading all results in one go is not possible.

Bibliographic databases are the best resources to use as they allow structured searches using both text and subject indexing, and allow you to save your search strategies and search results easily. Your selection of databases and resources will depend on your topic — be sure to refer to your Subject Guide and the eResources Guide .

Medical research example

In general a systematic review in the area of health and medicine should search MEDLINE and EMBASE plus another specific database related to the review subject.

Remember that there is a difference between databases (like MEDLINE and CINAHL Complete) and the search interfaces that host them (such as Ovid and EBSCO). Some databases may be available to search via the same search interface (for instance you can search MEDLINE, EMBASE and PsycINFO databases via Ovid) and then there is no need to search them via other interfaces. 

Ideally your systematic review should cover published and unpublished literature in order to avoid publication bias. The unpublished literature is sometimes referred to as grey literature (see the links below). If time and resources allow, you should include such literature in your search.

Useful links

• Thesis databases on the eResources Guide

The eResources Guide  indexes all the databases to which the University of York subscribes.

The following links offer access to grey literature:

• Grey Literature Skills Guide Our guide to finding and using grey literature
• Grey Matters: a practical tool for searching health-related grey literature
• << Previous: 3
• Next: 5 >>
• Last Updated: Feb 5, 2024 2:07 PM
• URL: https://subjectguides.york.ac.uk/systematic-review

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

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

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

What are Literature Reviews?

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

Goals of Literature Reviews

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

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

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

What kinds of sources require a Literature Review?

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

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

Types of Literature Reviews

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Literature Reviews in the Health Sciences

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

Communicative Sciences and Disorders

• Online Learners: Quick Links
• ASHA Journals
• Research Tip 1: Define the Research Question(s)
• Reference Resources
• Evidence Summaries & Clinical Guidelines
• Drug Information
• Health Data & Statistics
• Patient/Consumer Facing Materials
• Images/Streaming Video
• Database Tutorials
• Crafting a Search
• Cited Reference Searching
• Research Tip 4: Find Grey Literature
• Research Tip 5: Save Your Work
• Cite Your Sources
• Critical Appraisal
• What are Literature Reviews?
• Conducting & Reporting Systematic Reviews
• Finding Systematic Reviews
• Tutorials & Tools for Literature Reviews
• Point of Care Tools (Mobile Apps)

Database Searching & Strategy Development

• YouTube Series: Carrie Price's Searching School This playlist of videos, created by librarian Carrie Price, details the nuances of systematic searching based on guidance documents like the PRISMA-S and the PRESS Checklist.
• Advanced Searching with CINAHL Subject Headings This guide explains what subject headings and subheadings are and demonstrates how to use CINAHL headings in command-line searching to build one-line simple or complex searches.
• PubMed Help This page offers tips, tricks, and tutorials for searching PubMed, which is a free resource developed and maintained by the National Center for Biotechnology Information (NCBI), at the U.S. National Library of Medicine (NLM).
• PubMed: Building a Search [Video] This tutorial from the Welch Medical Library at Johns Hopkins details the steps to building a systematic search strategy in PubMed with the building block method, including the use of Boolean operators, truncation, quotations, and field tags.
• Medline via Ovid Database Guide This guide describes how Medline information is structured in the Ovid interface. Jump down to Advanced Searching for tips on using Ovid syntax and limits to optimize a search strategy.
• PsycINFO via Ovid Database Guide This guide describes how PsycINFO information is structured in the Ovid interface. Jump down to Advanced Searching for tips on using Ovid syntax and limits to optimize a search strategy.

A spreadsheet template designed to help you keep track of your literature search terms during a systematic search.

1. Log in with your NYU credentials

2. Open and "Make a Copy" to create your own tracker for your literature search strategies

Translating Searches Between Databases

Searching in a comprehensive, systematic way requires authors to execute analogous searches in multiple databases, but not all databases accept the same search syntax, and most databases use different vocabulary for subject headings (or don't use subject headings at all).

As such, once a search strategy has been developed in one database, it is necessary to 'translate' it into a form that will work in a different database.

Here is the same search criteria (diabetes + self management), executed with database-specific search queries for three different databases. 

(diabetes OR diabetic* OR (MH "Diabetes Mellitus+")) AND (“self management” OR “self care” OR “self monitoring” OR “self regulation” OR (MH "Self-Management") OR (MH "Self Care+"))

(“diabetes”[tiab] OR “diabetic*”[tiab] OR "Diabetes Mellitus"[Mesh]) AND (“self management”[tiab] OR “self care”[tiab] OR “self monitoring”[tiab] OR “self regulation”[tiab] OR "Self-Management"[Mesh])

• Web of Science

(diabetes OR diabetic*) AND (“self management” OR “self care” OR “self monitoring” OR “self regulation”)

Resources for Translating Search Queries

• Cochrane Database Syntax Guide (PDF) (152KB) A summary of the different syntax used to structure queries in health databases.
• Cornell University Library Guide - Translate Search Strategies This section of Cornell's guide to evidence synthesis covers key syntax differences between databases.
• UniSA Systematic Reviews Guide: Run Your Search on Other Databases This page has links to documents describing how to translate a search from Ovid MEDLINE into other database syntax

Citation Management Tools

For help choosing a citation management tool: .

See comparison list

For help using a citation management tool: 

See schedule of RefWorks, EndNote, and Zotero classes (coded in pink)

• EndNote NYU has a campus-wide license to this software, which you download (at no cost to you) to your laptop or desktop computer. The software includes a less developed web-based component called EndNoteWeb, which can be used to sync across multiple personal computers.
• RefWorks NYU purchases a campus-wide subscription to this web-based service that covers all members of the NYU community. Because RefWorks is web-based, you can use it from any Internet-connected computer/device on campus or off.
• Zotero A free download that works with your web browser. There are two options: Zotero for Firefox is a Firefox-specific extension that offers the full range of functionality. Zotero Standalone -- a separate browser-independent application that can be used with Chrome, Safari, or Opera -- offers slightly less functionality than the Firefox extension.

Backing Up Bibliographic Data

If you are using a citation manager to store bibliographic data related to your evidence synthesis project, it is recommended that you maintain back up copies of your data.  

Recommended steps for backing up bibliographic data will vary depending on your software of choice (Zotero, EndNote or RefWorks) - more information can be found on the guide for Data Management Planning - Storage & Backup . 

Article Screening - Covidence

Covidence works with reference managers (e.g.,EndNote, Zotero, Refworks, Mendeley) to screen results for the purposes of systematic reviews and other research projects.

Link to Covidence to request a Covidence account using your NYU email address. Accept email invitation and Sign In;

(do NOT click the "free trial" account; do NOT "sign in with Cochrane" Select the option for NYU access).

Covidence Trainings & Support

• Covidence Knowledge Base The Covidence Knowledge Base contains a suite of articles offering overviews of the software, help getting started, and information about review settings, importing records, data extraction, exporting data, FAQs and more.
• Getting Started with Covidence - Video Collection This collection of video tutorials covers: -Signing in and out -Creating a new review and inviting co-reviewers -Importing citations -Screening titles & abstracts -How to breeze through screening
• Getting Started with Covidence (Webinar - 1 Hour) The Covidence 101 training webinar includes a live demo providing an overview of the systematic review workflow, and showcasing some of the most popular features.

Tutorials: Exporting Records from Databases into Covidence

Covidence Knowledge Base: Importing references in Covidence

Video Overviews by Database

• Education Source with ERIC is also hosted on EBSCO
• PsycINFO and MEDLINE are also hosted on EMBASE

PRISMA - Checklist & Diagram

PRISMA ( P referred R eporting I tems for S ystematic R eviews and M eta- A nalyses) is an evidence-based set of minimum items for reporting information in systematic reviews and meta-analyses.

Specific PRISMA resources include:

Prisma checklist.

• A 27 item checklist whose items refer to the preferred content of a for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses, including suggested content for the title, abstract, methods, results, discussion and funding.

PRISMA Extensions

• Extensions to the PRISMA Checklist to facilitate the reporting of different types or aspects of systematic reviews/meta-analyses (e.g., checklists for reporting scoping reviews, individual patient data)

PRISMA Diagram Templates

• Word and PDF Templates  - PRISMA Website
• This file is View Only. To create your own diagram in GoogleDrawings using this template: "File> Make a copy"
• Image can be downloaded as PDF, PNG, JPG, or SVG
• PRISMA Diagram Generator - ShinyApp.io

PRISMA Data Table

• This view-only GoogleDoc shows a table you can use to track the basic data that is needed to complete a PRISMA diagram, including an example table.

Example PRISMA Diagram 

Source: 

Stotz, S. A., McNealy, K., Begay, R. L., DeSanto, K., Manson, S. M., & Moore, K. R. (2021). Multi-level diabetes prevention and treatment interventions for Native people in the USA and Canada: A scoping review.  Current Diabetes Reports, 2 (11), 46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11892-021-01414-3

Video Overview: Filling Out a PRISMA Flow Diagram (2020 Version; 8 minutes, 32 seconds)

Still have questions about constructing a PRISMA diagram using the 2020 template? 

This article, published in the Journal of the Medical Library Association, answers some frequently asked questions about using the PRISMA 2020 format. 

Rethlefsen, M. L., & Page, M. J. (2022). PRISMA 2020 and PRISMA-S: common questions on tracking records and the flow diagram.  Journal of the Medical Library Association : JMLA ,  110 (2), 253–257. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2022.1449 

• << Previous: Finding Systematic Reviews
• Next: Point of Care Tools (Mobile Apps) >>
• Last Updated: May 16, 2024 9:53 AM
• URL: https://guides.nyu.edu/speech

Literature Reviews

What is a literature review, why a literature review.

• Step 2: Gathering Information
• Step 3: Organizing your Information (Intellectually and Physically)
• Step 4: Analyzing and Evaluating the Literature
• Step 5: Writing Your Literature Review
• Other Resources

Rate this Guide

A literature review:

• describes, and
• critically evaluates

all scholarship including books, articles, and other sources relevant to a particular topic or area of research with the goal of rigorously contextualizing a particular research problem.

What does that mean? Basically, a literature review asks you to look at your topic of research critically – what other research have people done in this area, and why? To what end? Has the area been exhausted, is there room for you to add to the research or are you simply repeating what has already been done? Is there an angle that hasn’t been explored? A literature review allows you to gain a better understanding of your area of research before you dive into the research itself! This is done through critically evaluating the works gathered in your literature review in the context of its contribution to the field of research and their relation to each other.

Why do we do literature reviews?

The purpose of a literature review is to determine what has already been done in a field, and what remains to be done. This means you can place your very specific topic in a broader field of knowledge and research or situate it within a historical context.

A literature review allows you to acquire and enhance the subject vocabulary necessary to take on the research! Through the literature review, you’ll learn the “language” of the field of research.

By reading as widely as you can about your particular area, you can articulate important variables and phenomena that are relevant specifically to your field, of which you might not have been aware of before but which are critical to your area of research.

Conducting a literature review allows you to synthesize all of this research so that you can approach your own research with a new and holistic perspective; you can consider the WHOLE scope of the field of research before you get started!

• Next: Step 2: Gathering Information >>
• Last Updated: Feb 6, 2024 5:46 PM
• URL: https://yorkvilleu.libguides.com/LiteratureReviews

• University Libraries
• Research Guides
• Subject Guides

What is a literature review?

• Getting Started

Introduction

Definition and use/purpose, four stages, questions to ask.

• Finding the Literature
• Organization
• Connect with Your Librarian
• More Information

Acknowledgements

This page is based on Write a Literature Review from UC Santa Cruz.

Helpful links

• Literature review assignments Helpful breakdown of common elements and their purposes in lit reviews from Auckland University of Technology
• Literature review scoring rubric From, Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 34(6), 3-15. doi:10.3102/0013189x034006003 (p.8)
• Writing a Short Literature Review An example of a literature review in stages, from annotated bibliography to lit review by William Ashton, Ph.D., York College, CUNY.

Not to be confused with a book review, a literature review surveys scholarly articles, books and other sources (e.g. dissertations, conference proceedings) relevant to a particular issue, area of research, or theory, providing a description, summary, and critical evaluation of each work. The purpose is to offer an overview of significant literature published on a topic.

A literature review may constitute an essential chapter of a thesis or dissertation, or may be a self-contained review of writings on a subject. In either case, its purpose is to:

• Place each work in the context of its contribution to the understanding of the subject under review
• Describe the relationship of each work to the others under consideration
• Identify new ways to interpret, and shed light on any gaps in, previous research
• Resolve conflicts amongst seemingly contradictory previous studies
• Identify areas of prior scholarship to prevent duplication of effort
• Point the way forward for further research
• Place one's original work (in the case of theses or dissertations) in the context of existing literature

The literature review itself, however, does not present new  primary  scholarship.

Similar to primary research, development of the literature review often follows four stages:

• Problem formulation—which topic or field is being examined and what are its component issues?
• Literature search—finding materials relevant to the subject being explored
• Data evaluation—determining which literature makes a significant contribution to the understanding of the topic
• Analysis and interpretation—discussing the findings and conclusions of pertinent literature

Literature reviews can comprise the following elements:

• An overview of the subject, issue or theory under consideration, along with the objectives of the literature review
• Division of works under review into categories (e.g. those in support of a particular position, those against, and those offering alternative theses entirely)
• Explanation of how each work is similar to and how it varies from the others
• Conclusions as to which pieces are best considered in their argument, are most convincing of their opinions, and make the greatest contribution to the understanding and development of their area of research

In assessing each resource (e.g., article, book chapter) you collect as part of your research, consider:

• Provenance—What are the author's credentials? Are the author's arguments supported by evidence (e.g. primary historical material, case studies, narratives, statistics, recent scientific findings)?
• Objectivity—Is the author's perspective even-handed or prejudicial? Is contrary data considered or is certain pertinent information ignored to prove the author's point?
• Persuasiveness—Which of the author's theses are most/least convincing?
• Value—Are the author's arguments and conclusions convincing? Does the work ultimately contribute in any significant way to an understanding of the subject?
• What is already known about the area of study? 
• What are the characteristics of the key concepts or the main factors or variables?
• What are the relationships between these key concepts, factors, or variables?
• What are the existing theories?
• What are the inconsistencies or other shortcomings in our knowledge and understanding?
• Why study (further) the research problem?
• What contribution can your study be expected to make? 
• Next: Finding the Literature >>
• Last Updated: Aug 17, 2023 9:45 AM
• URL: https://libguides.unm.edu/litreview

Traduction Française Indisponible

Writing & publishing guides, grants, theses, writing & publishing: selected guides for graduate students, general guides, preparing a literature review, finding theses, thesis proposals/statements, grants available, writing a grant proposal.

• Discipline Specific Guides
• Guide to selecting an open access journal
• Open Access Publishing Discounts (i.e., Article Processing Charge discounts)
• Predatory Publishers
• Increasing visibility of your work through the YorkSpace repository
• Open Access Resources

Conference Proposals/Presentations

• Post Your Research/Publications in YorkSpace

Directories & Blog Aggregators

• Getting Started with Academic Blogging

Preparing the Thesis/Dissertation

York Specific Guidelines:

• Thesis and Dissertation Guidelines . Faculty of Graduate Studies. York University.

The following are selected books from York University Libraries' collection. Use the links below to get details about each one including their call numbers and the library at which they are located:

• Dunleavy, Patrick. Authoring a PhD : how to plan, draft, write, and finish a doctoral thesis or dissertation . New York : Palgrave Macmillan, 2003
• Lunenburg, Frederick C. Writing a successful thesis or dissertation : tips and strategies for students in the social and behavioral sciences . Thousand Oaks, CA : Corwin Press, 2008.
• Mauch, James E. Guide to the successful thesis and dissertation : a handbook for students and faculty . 4th ed. New York : M. Dekker, 1998.
• Paul, Oliver. Writing Your Thesis . 2nd ed. Los Angeles ; London : SAGE, 2008.
• Roberts, Carol M. The dissertation journey : a practical and comprehensive guide to planning, writing, and defending your dissertation. Thousand Oaks, Calif. : Corwin Press, 2010.
• Thomas, R. Murray. Theses and dissertations : a guide to planning, research, and writing. 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA : Corwin Press, 2008.

Note some of the resources below are web guides, while others are books at York University Libraries:

• How to Write a Literature Review . Guide Prepared by The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
• The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting It. University of Toronto.
• Review of Literature. University of Wisconsin-Madison
• Ridley, Diana, Dr. The literature review : a step-by-step guide for students . London : SAGE, c2008.
• Writing the Literature Review . University of South Australia Online Learning Environment.
• Finding Theses and Dissertations A comprehensive guide on how to find York theses as well as these from other universities. Features links to key databases.
• Creating a Thesis Statement . The OWL at Purdue.
• Developing a Working Thesis . SPARK.
• Developing a Thesis Statement . Hunter College Reading/Writing Center.
• Rozakis, L. Schaum's quick guide to writing great research papers [e-book] . 2nd ed. New York : McGraw-Hill, 2007. Has a chapter about how to write a thesis statement.
• Thesis Statement Basics . Writing Center. Sierra College.

Securing Research Funding & Preparing Funding Proposals

• Student Funding Information. Faculty of Graduate Studies. A very useful resource from the Faculty of Graduate Studies outlining research funding opportunities (both internal and external research funding opportunities) for students at York.
• GrantsNet Online Database From Next Wave and Science Magazine . GrantsNet is a searchable, continuously updated, database of funding opportunities in biomedical research and science education. It contains programs that offer training and research funding for graduate and medical students, postdoctoral fellows, and junior faculty, as well as programs in science, math, engineering, and technology for undergraduate faculty and students
• Locke, L.F. Proposals that work : a guide for planning dissertations and grant proposals . 5th ed. Thousand Oaks, Calif. : Sage Publications, 2007.
• Miner, J.T. Proposal planning & writing . 2nd ed. Westport, Conn. : Greenwood Press, 2008.
• New, C.C. How to write a grant proposal . Hoboken, N.J. : John Wiley & Sons, 2003.

Writing at Graduate Level: General Guide

• Casanave, C.P. Learning the literacy practices of graduate school : insiders' reflections on academic enculturation . Ann Arbor : University of Michigan Press, 2008 Has information about writing competencies and tasks associated with graduate level education.
• Craswell, G. Writing for academic success : a postgraduate guide . London ; Thousand Oaks : SAGE Publications, 2005.
• De Gruchy, J.W. The emerging researcher : nurturing passion, developing skills, producing output. Cape Town : UCT Press, 2007. Talks about how graduate students can develop writing skills.
• Silvia, P.J. How to write a lot : a practical guide to productive academic writing . Washington, DC : American Psychological Association, 2007.

Discipline Specific Writing Guides

• Writing Guides by Discipline/Subject Points students to key writing guides, for a wide range of different disciplines/subjects, available at York University Libraries

Disseminating/Publishing Research

• Academic writing and publishing : a practical handbook . London : New York : Routledge, 2008.
• Huff, Anne Sigismund. Writing for scholarly publication . Thousand Oaks : Sage Publications, 1999.
• Moxley, J.M. Writing and publishing for academic authors . 2nd ed. Lanham, MD : Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 1997.
• Becker, H.S. Writing for social scientists : how to start and finish your thesis, book, or article . 2nd ed. Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 2007.
• Kupfersmid, J. An author's guide to publishing better articles in better journals in the behavioral sciences . Brandon, Vt. : Clinical Psychology Pub. Co., 1994.
• Mackenzie Owen, J. S. The scientific article in the age of digitization . Dordrecht, Netherlands : Springer, 2007.
• Volokh, Eugene. Academic legal writing : law review articles, student notes, seminar papers, and getting on law review . 4rd ed. New York, N.Y. : Foundation Press, 2010.
• Wager, E. How to survive peer review . London : BMJ, 2002.
• Writing for social scientists : how to start and finish your thesis, book, or article . 2nd ed. Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 2007.
• Getting it published : a guide for scholars and anyone else serious about serious books .Chicago : University of Chicago Press, 2001.
• Books in the digital age : the transformation of academic and higher education publishing in Britain and the United States. Cambridge : Polity, 2005.
• Becoming Conference Savvy: Preparing to Present a Paper The University Writing Center. University of Central Florida.
• Conference Paper Guide . Writing Center. Claremont Graduate University.

Posting Your Research Publications in YorkSpace

YorkSpace is York University's repository of research. It is a platform that enables York community members to post, organize and preserve their research online in an institutional context. The YorkSpace repository is an ideal dissemination platform as it promotes and facilitates discovery of research online through its standards-based architecture. Learn more, including how to make submissions or contact Andrea Kosavic , Digital Initiatives Librarian at York University.

Academic Blogging: Recommended Resources

• Academic Blog Portal
• Academic Matters: Recommended Blogs
• Inside Higher Ed: Recommended Blogs
• Nature Network
• Planet York: Blogs at York University
• Research Blogging
• ScienceBlogs
• Stanford Blog Directory

Getting Started with Academic Blogging:

Thinking about starting your own academic blog? Here's a tutorial on getting started: Blogging 101

Here are some articles, with some interesting thoughts and pointers:

• The Negative Myths About Academic Blogging , Daniel Lemire
• Why Academics Should Blog , Hugh McGuire.
• Science Blogging: The Future of Science Communication and Why You Should Be Part of It , Daniel D. Brown.

Library Skills

• Library Induction This link opens in a new window
• Inter Library Loans
• Library Guides
• Special Collections This link opens in a new window
• Open Access Content
• Search Strategy
• Subject Heading Searching
• Cited reference searching
• Proximity Searching
• Setting up search alerts
• Database video & help guides
• What is good or bad quality information?
• Beware of pitfalls!
• Tools to help with critical evaluation
• Literature Reviews for Dissertations & Projects
• Systematic Reviews This link opens in a new window
• Referencing Support, Endnote Software & Avoiding Plagiarism This link opens in a new window
• Help And Support
• Book onto a Digital Skills Session

This section covers:

• What a literature review is
• How to structure a literature review
• Where you can go to within the university for further help

What is a Literature Review?

A literature review is an overview of the scholarly literature on a given topic, sometimes to answer defined questions. Within a piece of academic writing, it situates your research or work within the field of research available on the topic.

Literature Review Tutorial

The tutorial below will walk you through:

• Steps to creating one
• Where you can go to within the university for further help.

Please note: We recommend clicking to view full screen using the arrows and box icon in the top right.  The tutorial can be made more accessible by selecting the three dots option in the top right and selecting accessibility view. You can change vertical or horizontal layout using the settings/cog button. There is also a page of contents in the bottom right.  Open the tutorial in a new page by clicking here .

You can also access a PDF version of the tutorial with the file below.  

• Literature Reviews for Dissertations and Research Projects
• << Previous: Tools to help with critical evaluation
• Next: Systematic Reviews >>
• Last Updated: Apr 22, 2024 2:42 PM
• URL: https://plymouth.libguides.com/skills

• Unis compared 0

You have successfully registered

1,917 reviews for University of York

Our collection of real, honest student reviews of unis and courses is the largest in the UK, and helps you make well-informed decisions about your future. Student reviews also form the basis of our annual Whatuni Student Choice Awards (WUSCAs), which highlight great work carried out by institutions for their students.

• Undergraduate
• Postgraduate
• Great job prospects
• Well equipped
• Good support
• + View more
• - View less
• Latest reviews
• Oldest reviews
• Highest rated
• Lowest rated

Find out which unis our student reviewers love!

Economics BSc (Hons)

Nisa is cheaper

Good balance of work and free time. Better lecture halls would be good

Price is too much for what it is but the accommodation is nice and well kept

Decent uni in general.

HARSH MARKING. STAY AWAY IF YOU WANT A CAREER AND A GOOD GRADE.

Normal accomodation.

MSc Nursing (Adult)

There are excellent lecturers and student support services (particularly academic skills). The campus has a good feel and has a lot of outdoor seating which will be nice when the weather is warm. Lecture rooms are good but the seats are very uncomfortable. There is little impact from the students' union, for example there was no 'refreshers fayre' for January intake students, which also impacts the student life score.

A lot of information is provided and a lot of support is on offer from lecturers. There is a lot of variety in where our placements may be. You know that you will be leaving the university at the end of the course with a very good degree.

Historical Archaeology BA (Hons)

The only negative is that the accommodation is really expensive. Otherwise, the course is well structured, interesting and there is lots of support from lecturers and supervisors. The college system and socials gives a strong community feel and makes it easy to make friends. The city is lovely and in walking distance and has a great night life. There is always something going on

The course is really interesting with many field trips, opportunities to work in the Year centre , and to go on excavations. It is well structured with a range of lectures, work shops, seminars and field trips. The lecturers are incredibly friendly and helpful, I couldn’t recommend this course enough

Really expensive for what you get. The showers don’t drain, there is a leak from my roof which was unable to be sorted, the kitchens are really small and basic with only four chairs for 12 people. Other than that the catered meals are really good, all my flatmates are lovely, reception are always lovely and happy to helps and there are always events going on . Derwent is the social college so if that’s what you want then I would highly recommend.

The community feel at the university of York is wonderful. The campus is always buzzing with students and has so many nice areas outside to sit and chat or decompress between lectures. Sitting by the lake and watching the swans and ducks is one of my favourite places to eat lunch with friends. Overall, I've had a great experience with interesting lecturers and supportive supervisors for lab projects, and would recommend York to anyone looking for a welcoming, well-rounded and high quality education experience at University! Improvements could be made in the delivery of information between management and students, especially regarding the future of departments to ensure all students feel represented, respected and informed about the next stages of their teaching.

The facilities in biological sciences are great, and have allowed me to undertake a fulfilling and interesting final year research project. The blend of online and in person lectures has suited me well as it allows some personal flexibility when planning your own weekly schedule, while still maintaining a structure to work around. Having regular workshops with the lecturers helps recap and cement the previous few weeks' content, and is a boost to revision. It also provides an open space to ask questions which you might have not had during the lecture itself but came up a few days later after the content starts to sink in.

I love the setting of Goodricke college - with its colourful buildings and green banks its a lovely haven to live in when starting Uni. The flats are clean and bright and have everything you need as a student. The maintenance team were always quick to respond if problems arose. While the facilities are great, the price is still rather high which can pose a financial burden, however a University bursary towards living costs helped me a lot.

LLM International Human Rights Law and Practice

Connectivity between the campuses is better than most other universities but still a struggle. Expect a 30 minute journey time between campuses often on the same day due to timetabling.

Fast-paced and supportive department, however the content can be very emotionally heavy.

The maintaince team are v responsive and helpful. The staff are also supportive and nice to chat with.

MSc Data Science

There are so many important and helpful facilities and resources are provided by my university. For example, university library is full of resources such as so many high end PCs for working, library writing center for help with academic writing with one-on-one appointment, kind and polite helpful staff, so many different category of books to borrow and read, good amount of sitting spaces to accommodate high volume of students etc. In addition, there is also a free 3D printing machines to explore and so many academic skills sessions are available to learn life changing skills along with Creativity Lab for high computing task and so many VR headsets for the research purpose. University also offers free subscriptions to useful softwares and free to use laptops, DSLR cameras, high-end equipments on certain duration of loan basis which is very helpful for us to learn new things. Talking about the campus look and feel, I have now words to explain how much beautiful our campus is. It covers so many different type of birds such as duck, geese, swans, grebes, moorhens, coots and so many different animals including fox and hedgehogs which creates a beautiful wildlife around the campus. Furthermore, university has a huge peaceful and calm lake in two separated campus , Campus East and Campus West surrounded by accommodation and departmental buildings. About the student support, there are so many helpful people around the campus including campus staff, university security campus safety huge thanks to them, and most importantly our professors. They are always there for us to solve whatever queries we have. Also, my university accommodation helps us to maintain our well-being and metal support. There is also a visa compliance team and career team is there to makes us understand about visa rules and regulations along with career opportunities and job guidance. Talking about a Student's union, we have two separate unions GSA(Graduate Student Association) and YUSU(University of York Student's Union). Those two unions are key important part of our student life because they always organize important university events apart from academics such as cultural events, festivals, and day trips around the various cities of United Kingdom. Personally I have travelled a lot to some beautiful cities in last 5 months since I came here, like Durham city, Newcastle, Leeds, New bay hall, some of the amazing experiences I had. So, overall our student unions put their so much efforts to make our student life more enjoyable and life-time experience.

The course which I'm doing in this university is the first time the University of York has introduced. So basically we are the first students who attempting this course in our university. So, my initial experience till now was good. Our professors are very gentle and helpful throughout the semester. They were giving us a very good and important feedbacks on our work and assessments. They are also listening to our feedbacks about this course so they can improve the course offerings for the next year students. There are little bit ups and downs with the modules of this course which can be happen if the university is introducing a course for the first time. Overall I'm happy with my course and teaching in my university.

I like the college aspect, it helps makes friends and makes things less scary when first joining. There are good facilities and transport links surrounding the campus.

The lecturers sometimes just read off the PowerPoint and are difficult to understand. They sometimes make it more complicated than it needs to be. There is few contact hours, with seminars being run by people who are not overly confident

The maintenance team are really helpful, and are quick to fix any problems. The room is quite spacious, but the en-suites are quite old. It is quite expensive compared to other universities and colleges for what we receive.

History BA (Hons)

Contact hours are minimal, to an extent that it is enough time spent learning and enough time spent to yourself for the course. This allows me to gain other experiences as I have more time throughout the day. It’s a great place to study during exam times as the library remains open 24/7, however the library does not remain open during the rest of the semester which is something I wish they did do as it’d help me get my work done, as someone who struggles to study in the safety of her own room.

The course doesn’t have unnecessary contact with us, although the option is always there to see someone during student hours. However, while this is nice because it means I do not feel like I am wasting my time, it also creates an atmosphere where no one talks to anyone and this means that the history building is usually abandoned. So I have a hard time making friends.

The halls I was given was literally my last choice. It’s one of the cheaper ones so it makes sense that it’s not as good as the others, however it’s still not the best. The kitchen constantly breaks, the WiFi constantly crashes, the hot water constantly breaks, the electricity always goes off, and the heating is either extremely hot or not there at all. My room is decent, but I have had to bring in things like air dehumidifiers so that it’s not overridden with silverfish, and it smells really bad. As someone who was willing to pay for the more expensive accommodation, having this instead and being able to see how nice my first choices in accommodation are has made me severely upset and unhappy.

Politics with International Relations BA (Hons)

The Student support, especially around helping to afford accommodation- most people did not get any of their first choices for colleges and have ended up in more expensive rooms.

There isn’t too much help before the assessments, some of it was just telling us to do them without explanation.

It is overpriced for a shared bathroom with limited kitchen facilities and it is far away from where I chose to be so is far from lectures

1 to 8 of 300 universities

Whatuni Student Choice Awards

The largest university awards in the UK voted for exclusively by students - find out which unis our student reviewers love!

Search for an excellent uni

Please enter university

Please select university from dropdown

Recommended unis

Other students also liked these unis - you might too!

University of Brighton

Course name.

Best aspects: making friends, learning new things and using the photography studios. Worst: staying in halls and getting no support.

University of Northampton

I like the friendly and supportive atmosphere the time I arrived in campus. There are professional measures to ensure student’s safety and the facilities are accessible by students...

Liverpool Hope University

All the teachers here are very helpful and make all the resources that we need available but sometimes in lectures they will speed through the powerpoints and not explain the infor...

YOUR UCAS POINTS 0

• ANNOUNCEMENTS: Looking to start university this September? Fill in our quick survey for your chance to win a £75 Amazon Gift Card!

Literature Reviews

• 1. Define your research question
• Getting started
• Types of reviews

Define topic

Brainstorming, limit scope, how ai can help, helpful resources.

• 2. Plan your search
• 3. Search the literature
• 4. Organize your results
• 5. Synthesize your findings
• 6. Write the review
• Artificial intelligence (AI) tools
• Thompson Writing Studio This link opens in a new window
• Need to write a systematic review? This link opens in a new window

Contact a Librarian

Ask a Librarian

Mission animated icons created by Freepik - Flaticon

For example, the following research question is too broad.

Does social media affect mental health in college students?

A more focused research question could be:

Does social media play a role in the number of eating disorder diagnoses in college-aged women?

Need some guidance? Contact your subject librarian for a research consultation or reach out to [email protected] .

Start the brainstorming process:

• Begin by identifying a broad topic of research interest (the more you're personally interested in it, the better!). Write it down to clarify your focus.
• Narrow down your scope  by considering specific areas within this topic that you want to explore.
• Identify key themes and elements  related to these specific areas. These will be the building blocks of your investigation.
• Finally,  integrate these key areas and elements  into a well-crafted research question.

One way to brainstorm is to use a flowchart.

The scope of a topic  encompasses the boundaries and constraints you set for your research. The more precise your research question, the smoother the research process becomes.

Feeling stuck? Here are some ways you can narrow down your topic:

• geographic location
• time period
• discipline/field of study
• age group, etc.

You:  I need to conduct a literature review about social media, mental health, and college students. What are some example research questions within this topic?

ChatGPT: 

• How does the frequency and nature of social media use impact the mental health of college students?
• What role do specific social media platforms play in influencing the mental well-being of college students?
• How do online social interactions on platforms like Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter relate to the mental health outcomes of college students?
• Are there differences in the association between social media use and mental health outcomes based on demographic factors such as gender, age, or academic major among college students?
• What strategies do college students employ to cope with negative mental health effects associated with social media use?
• How does the perception of social support through online platforms affect the mental health of college students?
• To what extent does the comparison of oneself to others on social media contribute to mental health challenges among college students?
• What interventions or educational programs are effective in promoting positive mental health behaviors in the context of social media use for college students?
• How do social media literacy and awareness programs impact the mental health attitudes and behaviors of college students?
• What is the relationship between the use of social media for academic and social purposes and the mental health outcomes of college students?

Generative AI tools : ChatGPT , Google Gemini (formerly Bard) , Claude , Microsoft Copilot

For more information on how to incorporate AI tools into your research, check out the section on AI Tools .

• Developing Your Research Question
• Developing a Researchable Question
• Brainstorming tips from UNC Writing Center
• << Previous: Types of reviews
• Next: 2. Plan your search >>
• Last Updated: May 17, 2024 8:42 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.duke.edu/litreviews

Services for...

• Faculty & Instructors
• Graduate Students
• Undergraduate Students
• International Students
• Patrons with Disabilities

• Harmful Language Statement
• Re-use & Attribution / Privacy
• Support the Libraries

Library Guides

Drdp: literature review.

• Current Awareness
• Referencing

Literature Review

• Literature Searching
• Working With Data

The Literature Review may be one of the first sections that your supervisor suggests that you do. Often this is to ensure that you understand your topic, the current research, main resources, key authors, debates, concepts, frameworks, models, and theories, and can start to situate yourself within this. It is a great opportunity to start engaging with your research and honing in on what is most relevant and important to your project. 

You do not need to include everything that has ever been written on your topic. Take ownership of the material you include by being selective, and ensuring that everything that is included is relevant and important to YOUR argument. 

Keep in mind that this is a progressive and evolving part of your experience. What starts off as your Literature Review in the first year will often not remain your Literature Review until the very end. As you progress, you will encounter more research, your approaches may shift, or even your argument may go in another direction, and your Literature Review needs to evolve and alter along the way to reflect this process. 

What is a literature review?

The term “literature” in “literature review” comprises scholarly articles, books, and other sources (e.g. reports) relevant to a particular issue, area of research or theory. In a dissertation, the literature review illustrates what the literature already says on your research subject, providing summary, synthesis and critical analysis of such literature. It is generally structured by topic, starting from general background and concepts, and then addressing what can be found - and cannot be found - on the specific focus of your dissertation. Indeed, the literature review should identify gaps in the literature, that your research aims to fill. 

What is the purpose of a literature review in a dissertation?

• To some extent, it provides background information, concepts, theories and analytical models that will be used in the discussion/analysis chapter(s) of the dissertation.
• To some extent, it shows the limitations and gaps in the existing literature. This justifies your research and shows why the literature doesn’t fully answer your research question (or hypothesis).

Sage Research Methods

How to write a literature review.

Whe have a handy step by step guide on  how to write a literature review

This guide covers:

• Framing the research question/hypothesis
• Identifying relevant work
• Assessing the quality of studies
• Structuring your work
• Synthesising information
• Expressing critical analysis 

Literature Review Resources

Booth, W., Colomb, G., and Williams J. (2016).  The Craft of Research . Fourth Edition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Greetham, B. (2020).  How to Write Your Literature Review . London: Macmillan Education UK.

Gruba, P., and Evans, D. (2014).  How to Write a Better Thesis . Third Edition. New York: Springer International Publishing.

Petre, M., and Rugg, G. (2020).  The Unwritten Rules of PhD Research . Third Edition. London: Open University Press.

Ridley, D. (2008).  The literature review: a step-by- step guide for students . London: Sage. 

• Literature review and systematic reviews reading list General guides to writing literature reviews; subject specific guides to writing literature reviews; systematic reviews and developing research questions

Further resources

• How to...carry out a literature review for a research paper or assignment
• How to... design a research study
• How to be critical in your literature review
• << Previous: Referencing
• Next: Literature Searching >>
• Last Updated: Mar 28, 2024 9:21 AM
• URL: https://libguides.westminster.ac.uk/drdp

CONNECT WITH US

COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK

Director of Operations

• Columbia University Medical Center
• Opening on: May 15 2024
• Job Type: Officer of Administration
• Bargaining Unit:
• Regular/Temporary: Regular
• End Date if Temporary:
• Hours Per Week: 35
• Standard Work Schedule:
• Salary Range: $125,000 - $140,000

Position Summary

• The Division of Pediatric Hematology, Oncology and Stem Cell Transplantation at Columbia University Irving Medical Center is recruiting a Director of Operations for the International Initiative for Pediatrics and Nutrition (IIPAN). The individual would support the Program for advancing nutritional health in children located in low and middle-income countries. The candidate would advance IIPAN’s offers of international as well as domestic educational opportunities in academic medical institutions abroad and work closely with IIPAN’s collaborators within the World Health Organization and Ministries of Health. Current active programs are located in Central and South America, Africa, and several countries in South Asia. The director of operations will be responsible for directing the operations of IIPAN, overseeing and expanding site implementation (monitoring and evaluation), develop and oversee expansion of IIPAN’s technological imprint in the professional and lay populations, and work alongside development to grow IIPAN’s programmatic objectives. The candidate may also serve as a mentor to graduate students at CUIMC who may be interested in global health activities. The candidate will direct operations projects with the Columbia Global Centers to advance regional nutrition operations within the region.

At CUIMC, we are leaders in teaching, research, and patient care and are proud of the service and support we provide to our community. We apply the same rigor in our commitment to fostering an inclusive, thriving community and caring for our employees and their loved ones. We offer immediate eligibility and invest in our employees’ families through comprehensive  Health and Welfare ,  Employee Assistance ,  Tuition Programs , and  Retirement Benefits .

“Subject to business needs, we may support flexible and hybrid work arrangements. Options will be discussed during the interview process”

Responsibilities

• Direct all aspects of operations, encompassing development, marketing, events, and public relations, alongside collaboration with respective departments at CUIMC. 
• Assess current operational structures and devise innovative processes for implementation.
• Conceptualize and refine new workflows for implementation, while actively incorporating team member perspectives into the formulation of proposals.
• Develop and direct cross-departmental collaboration to optimize operations and policies.
• Develop and direct online and automated processes and new technology to enhance efficiency of operations.
• Provide strategic direction and informed recommendations on organizational policies, resource allocation, budgetary considerations, and daily decision-making processes.
• Spearhead comprehensive strategic planning initiatives across programs, shaping the trajectory of service delivery and operational strategies.
• Supply budgeting, financial and staffing input to the Director for the development of proposals.
• Direct executive management meetings and deliver comprehensive progress reports on project progress.
• Direct and advise staff and local team members on operational issues including those relating to grants and compliance, technology, and facility needs.
• Pioneer and manage initiatives that will enhance and advance commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion.
• Participate in Board meetings (and Committee meetings as needed) and review and provide feedback on reports to be delivered at meetings.
• Abide by all applicable professional standards of ethics and practice adhering to CUIMC policies.
• Performs related duties & responsibilities as assigned/requested.

Minimum Qualifications

• Bachelor’s degree or equivalent in education and experience required; plus, five years of related experience.

Preferred Qualifications

• 8-10+ years of experience progressively responsible for designing, implementing, and directing nonprofit operation workflows.
• A passion for the organization's mission with a demonstrated history supporting international humanitarian organizations.
• Excellent oral and written communication skills with the ability to communicate with the executive leadership team, community members, and donors.
• Experience with Microsoft Office programs, social media platforms, ticket purchasing systems, and project management software.
• Ability to work collaboratively in a team setting listening to ideas from all parties.
• Ability and willingness to travel to program sites and international meetings.
• Demonstrated competence in working with diverse clients, client communities and organizations. Strong sense of customer service and the ability to follow through on projects and deliverables.
• Strong coaching, teaching, training, organizational and time management skills.
• Proven ability and willingness to work under pressure, meet tight deadlines and handle multiple tasks simultaneously while maintaining attention to detail.
• Excellent analytical and problem-solving skills.
• Demonstrated resourcefulness and ability to take initiative in development and completion of projects. 

Equal Opportunity Employer / Disability / Veteran

Columbia University is committed to the hiring of qualified local residents.

Commitment to Diversity 

Columbia university is dedicated to increasing diversity in its workforce, its student body, and its educational programs. achieving continued academic excellence and creating a vibrant university community require nothing less. in fulfilling its mission to advance diversity at the university, columbia seeks to hire, retain, and promote exceptionally talented individuals from diverse backgrounds.  , share this job.

Thank you - we'll send an email shortly.

Other Recently Posted Jobs

Non-Student Short-Term Casual

Refer someone to this job

• ©2022 Columbia University
• Accessibility
• Administrator Log in

Wait! Before you go, are you interested in a career at Columbia University? Sign up here! 

Thank you, for sharing your information. A member of our team will reach out to you soon!

This website uses cookies as well as similar tools and technologies to understand visitors' experiences. By continuing to use this website, you consent to Columbia University's usage of cookies and similar technologies, in accordance with the Columbia University Website Cookie Notice .

Department of English and Related Literature

Janine Bradbury announced New Generation Thinker

The BBC and the AHRC reveal Janine Bradbury as one of ten 2024 New Generation Thinkers.

From hundreds of applications, these New Generation Thinkers represent some of the best early career researchers in the country. They will be given the opportunity to share their pioneering research with BBC Radio 4 listeners, as well as being provided with unique access to training and support from the AHRC and BBC.

An award-winning poet and critic, Janine Bradbury’s research and creative practice is wide-ranging. Her work on Grace Jones, American professional wrestling, passing-for-white, comedy, Toni Morrison, and motherhood has been published by Bloomsbury, Palgrave Macmillan, Routledge, the Guardian, the Young Vic Theatre and elsewhere, and she has contributed to BBC Radio 4’s Woman’s Hour and Great Lives.  Her current work explores the relationship between love, feeling, and reading. Her debut poetry pamphlet  Sometimes Real Love Comes Quick and Easy  (2024, ignitionpress) explores sentimentality.

You can read the University's full press release here .

[email protected] (44) 1904 323366