literature review article meaning

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

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

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 This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission.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

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

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

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

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

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

What are the parts of a lit review?

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

Introduction:

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

Conclusion:

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

How should I organize my lit review?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

University Libraries

Literature review.

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

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

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

 "In writing the literature review, the purpose is to convey to the reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. The literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (eg. your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries.( http://www.writing.utoronto.ca/advice/specific-types-of-writing/literature-review )

Recommended Reading

• Next: What is Its Purpose? >>
• Last Updated: Oct 2, 2023 12:34 PM

Libraries | Research Guides

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

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

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

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

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

• University of Texas Libraries

Literature Reviews

• What is a literature review?
• Steps in the Literature Review Process
• Define your research question
• Determine inclusion and exclusion criteria
• Choose databases and search
• Review Results
• Synthesize Results
• Analyze Results
• Librarian Support
• Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools

What is a Literature Review?

A literature or narrative review is a comprehensive review and analysis of the published literature on a specific topic or research question. The literature that is reviewed contains: books, articles, academic articles, conference proceedings, association papers, and dissertations. It contains the most pertinent studies and points to important past and current research and practices. It provides background and context, and shows how your research will contribute to the field. 

A literature review should: 

• Provide a comprehensive and updated review of the literature;
• Explain why this review has taken place;
• Articulate a position or hypothesis;
• Acknowledge and account for conflicting and corroborating points of view

From  S age Research Methods

Purpose of a Literature Review

A literature review can be written as an introduction to a study to:

• Demonstrate how a study fills a gap in research
• Compare a study with other research that's been done

Or it can be a separate work (a research article on its own) which:

• Organizes or describes a topic
• Describes variables within a particular issue/problem

Limitations of a Literature Review

Some of the limitations of a literature review are:

• It's a snapshot in time. Unlike other reviews, this one has beginning, a middle and an end. There may be future developments that could make your work less relevant.
• It may be too focused. Some niche studies may miss the bigger picture.
• It can be difficult to be comprehensive. There is no way to make sure all the literature on a topic was considered.
• It is easy to be biased if you stick to top tier journals. There may be other places where people are publishing exemplary research. Look to open access publications and conferences to reflect a more inclusive collection. Also, make sure to include opposing views (and not just supporting evidence).

Source: Grant, Maria J., and Andrew Booth. “A Typology of Reviews: An Analysis of 14 Review Types and Associated Methodologies.” Health Information & Libraries Journal, vol. 26, no. 2, June 2009, pp. 91–108. Wiley Online Library, doi:10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x.

Meryl Brodsky : Communication and Information Studies

Hannah Chapman Tripp : Biology, Neuroscience

Carolyn Cunningham : Human Development & Family Sciences, Psychology, Sociology

Larayne Dallas : Engineering

Janelle Hedstrom : Special Education, Curriculum & Instruction, Ed Leadership & Policy ​

Susan Macicak : Linguistics

Imelda Vetter : Dell Medical School

For help in other subject areas, please see the guide to library specialists by subject .

Periodically, UT Libraries runs a workshop covering the basics and library support for literature reviews. While we try to offer these once per academic year, we find providing the recording to be helpful to community members who have missed the session. Following is the most recent recording of the workshop, Conducting a Literature Review. To view the recording, a UT login is required.

• October 26, 2022 recording
• Last Updated: Jun 18, 2024 1:00 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.utexas.edu/literaturereviews

Reference management. Clean and simple.

What is a literature review? [with examples]

What is a literature review?

The purpose of a literature review, how to write a literature review, the format of a literature review, general formatting rules, the length of a literature review, literature review examples, frequently asked questions about literature reviews, related articles.

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

In a literature review, you’re expected to report on the existing scholarly conversation, without adding new contributions.

If you are currently writing one, you've come to the right place. In the following paragraphs, we will explain:

• the objective of a literature review
• how to write a literature review
• the basic format of a literature review

Tip: It’s not always mandatory to add a literature review in a paper. Theses and dissertations often include them, whereas research papers may not. Make sure to consult with your instructor for exact requirements.

The four main objectives of a literature review are:

• Studying the references of your research area
• Summarizing the main arguments
• Identifying current gaps, stances, and issues
• Presenting all of the above in a text

Ultimately, the main goal of a literature review is to provide the researcher with sufficient knowledge about the topic in question so that they can eventually make an intervention.

The format of a literature review is fairly standard. It includes an:

• introduction that briefly introduces the main topic
• body that includes the main discussion of the key arguments
• conclusion that highlights the gaps and issues of the literature

➡️ Take a look at our guide on how to write a literature review to learn more about how to structure a literature review.

First of all, a literature review should have its own labeled section. You should indicate clearly in the table of contents where the literature can be found, and you should label this section as “Literature Review.”

➡️ For more information on writing a thesis, visit our guide on how to structure a thesis .

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

Take a look at these three theses featuring great literature reviews:

• School-Based Speech-Language Pathologist's Perceptions of Sensory Food Aversions in Children [ PDF , see page 20]
• Who's Writing What We Read: Authorship in Criminological Research [ PDF , see page 4]
• A Phenomenological Study of the Lived Experience of Online Instructors of Theological Reflection at Christian Institutions Accredited by the Association of Theological Schools [ PDF , see page 56]

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

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

No. A literature review should have its own independent section. You should indicate clearly in the table of contents where the literature review can be found, and label this section as “Literature Review.”

The main goal of a literature review is to provide the researcher with sufficient knowledge about the topic in question so that they can eventually make an intervention.

• 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

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

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

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

Table of Contents

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

How to write a good literature review 

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

What is a literature review?

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

What is the purpose of literature review?

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Literature review example

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

Literature Review on Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity:

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

a. Habitat Loss and Species Extinction:

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

b. Range Shifts and Phenological Changes:

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

c. Ocean Acidification and Coral Reefs:

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

d. Adaptive Strategies and Conservation Efforts:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conducting a literature review

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

Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question:

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

Decide on the Scope of Your Review:

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

Select Databases for Searches:

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

Conduct Searches and Keep Track:

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

Review the Literature:

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

Organize and Write Your Literature Review:

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

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

How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal?

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

Here’s how to use the Research feature:  

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

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

Frequently asked questions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References 

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

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

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

Related Reads:

• Empirical Research: A Comprehensive Guide for Academics 
• How to Write a Scientific Paper in 10 Steps 
• How Long Should a Chapter Be?
• How to Use Paperpal to Generate Emails & Cover Letters?

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

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

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Clinics (Sao Paulo)

Approaching literature review for academic purposes: The Literature Review Checklist

Debora f.b. leite.

I Departamento de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, Faculdade de Ciencias Medicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, SP, BR

II Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Pernambuco, PE, BR

III Hospital das Clinicas, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Pernambuco, PE, BR

Maria Auxiliadora Soares Padilha

Jose g. cecatti.

A sophisticated literature review (LR) can result in a robust dissertation/thesis by scrutinizing the main problem examined by the academic study; anticipating research hypotheses, methods and results; and maintaining the interest of the audience in how the dissertation/thesis will provide solutions for the current gaps in a particular field. Unfortunately, little guidance is available on elaborating LRs, and writing an LR chapter is not a linear process. An LR translates students’ abilities in information literacy, the language domain, and critical writing. Students in postgraduate programs should be systematically trained in these skills. Therefore, this paper discusses the purposes of LRs in dissertations and theses. Second, the paper considers five steps for developing a review: defining the main topic, searching the literature, analyzing the results, writing the review and reflecting on the writing. Ultimately, this study proposes a twelve-item LR checklist. By clearly stating the desired achievements, this checklist allows Masters and Ph.D. students to continuously assess their own progress in elaborating an LR. Institutions aiming to strengthen students’ necessary skills in critical academic writing should also use this tool.

INTRODUCTION

Writing the literature review (LR) is often viewed as a difficult task that can be a point of writer’s block and procrastination ( 1 ) in postgraduate life. Disagreements on the definitions or classifications of LRs ( 2 ) may confuse students about their purpose and scope, as well as how to perform an LR. Interestingly, at many universities, the LR is still an important element in any academic work, despite the more recent trend of producing scientific articles rather than classical theses.

The LR is not an isolated section of the thesis/dissertation or a copy of the background section of a research proposal. It identifies the state-of-the-art knowledge in a particular field, clarifies information that is already known, elucidates implications of the problem being analyzed, links theory and practice ( 3 - 5 ), highlights gaps in the current literature, and places the dissertation/thesis within the research agenda of that field. Additionally, by writing the LR, postgraduate students will comprehend the structure of the subject and elaborate on their cognitive connections ( 3 ) while analyzing and synthesizing data with increasing maturity.

At the same time, the LR transforms the student and hints at the contents of other chapters for the reader. First, the LR explains the research question; second, it supports the hypothesis, objectives, and methods of the research project; and finally, it facilitates a description of the student’s interpretation of the results and his/her conclusions. For scholars, the LR is an introductory chapter ( 6 ). If it is well written, it demonstrates the student’s understanding of and maturity in a particular topic. A sound and sophisticated LR can indicate a robust dissertation/thesis.

A consensus on the best method to elaborate a dissertation/thesis has not been achieved. The LR can be a distinct chapter or included in different sections; it can be part of the introduction chapter, part of each research topic, or part of each published paper ( 7 ). However, scholars view the LR as an integral part of the main body of an academic work because it is intrinsically connected to other sections ( Figure 1 ) and is frequently present. The structure of the LR depends on the conventions of a particular discipline, the rules of the department, and the student’s and supervisor’s areas of expertise, needs and interests.

Interestingly, many postgraduate students choose to submit their LR to peer-reviewed journals. As LRs are critical evaluations of current knowledge, they are indeed publishable material, even in the form of narrative or systematic reviews. However, systematic reviews have specific patterns 1 ( 8 ) that may not entirely fit with the questions posed in the dissertation/thesis. Additionally, the scope of a systematic review may be too narrow, and the strict criteria for study inclusion may omit important information from the dissertation/thesis. Therefore, this essay discusses the definition of an LR is and methods to develop an LR in the context of an academic dissertation/thesis. Finally, we suggest a checklist to evaluate an LR.

WHAT IS A LITERATURE REVIEW IN A THESIS?

Conducting research and writing a dissertation/thesis translates rational thinking and enthusiasm ( 9 ). While a strong body of literature that instructs students on research methodology, data analysis and writing scientific papers exists, little guidance on performing LRs is available. The LR is a unique opportunity to assess and contrast various arguments and theories, not just summarize them. The research results should not be discussed within the LR, but the postgraduate student tends to write a comprehensive LR while reflecting on his or her own findings ( 10 ).

Many people believe that writing an LR is a lonely and linear process. Supervisors or the institutions assume that the Ph.D. student has mastered the relevant techniques and vocabulary associated with his/her subject and conducts a self-reflection about previously published findings. Indeed, while elaborating the LR, the student should aggregate diverse skills, which mainly rely on his/her own commitment to mastering them. Thus, less supervision should be required ( 11 ). However, the parameters described above might not currently be the case for many students ( 11 , 12 ), and the lack of formal and systematic training on writing LRs is an important concern ( 11 ).

An institutional environment devoted to active learning will provide students the opportunity to continuously reflect on LRs, which will form a dialogue between the postgraduate student and the current literature in a particular field ( 13 ). Postgraduate students will be interpreting studies by other researchers, and, according to Hart (1998) ( 3 ), the outcomes of the LR in a dissertation/thesis include the following:

• To identify what research has been performed and what topics require further investigation in a particular field of knowledge;
• To determine the context of the problem;
• To recognize the main methodologies and techniques that have been used in the past;
• To place the current research project within the historical, methodological and theoretical context of a particular field;
• To identify significant aspects of the topic;
• To elucidate the implications of the topic;
• To offer an alternative perspective;
• To discern how the studied subject is structured;
• To improve the student’s subject vocabulary in a particular field; and
• To characterize the links between theory and practice.

A sound LR translates the postgraduate student’s expertise in academic and scientific writing: it expresses his/her level of comfort with synthesizing ideas ( 11 ). The LR reveals how well the postgraduate student has proceeded in three domains: an effective literature search, the language domain, and critical writing.

Effective literature search

All students should be trained in gathering appropriate data for specific purposes, and information literacy skills are a cornerstone. These skills are defined as “an individual’s ability to know when they need information, to identify information that can help them address the issue or problem at hand, and to locate, evaluate, and use that information effectively” ( 14 ). Librarian support is of vital importance in coaching the appropriate use of Boolean logic (AND, OR, NOT) and other tools for highly efficient literature searches (e.g., quotation marks and truncation), as is the appropriate management of electronic databases.

Language domain

Academic writing must be concise and precise: unnecessary words distract the reader from the essential content ( 15 ). In this context, reading about issues distant from the research topic ( 16 ) may increase students’ general vocabulary and familiarity with grammar. Ultimately, reading diverse materials facilitates and encourages the writing process itself.

Critical writing

Critical judgment includes critical reading, thinking and writing. It supposes a student’s analytical reflection about what he/she has read. The student should delineate the basic elements of the topic, characterize the most relevant claims, identify relationships, and finally contrast those relationships ( 17 ). Each scientific document highlights the perspective of the author, and students will become more confident in judging the supporting evidence and underlying premises of a study and constructing their own counterargument as they read more articles. A paucity of integration or contradictory perspectives indicates lower levels of cognitive complexity ( 12 ).

Thus, while elaborating an LR, the postgraduate student should achieve the highest category of Bloom’s cognitive skills: evaluation ( 12 ). The writer should not only summarize data and understand each topic but also be able to make judgments based on objective criteria, compare resources and findings, identify discrepancies due to methodology, and construct his/her own argument ( 12 ). As a result, the student will be sufficiently confident to show his/her own voice .

Writing a consistent LR is an intense and complex activity that reveals the training and long-lasting academic skills of a writer. It is not a lonely or linear process. However, students are unlikely to be prepared to write an LR if they have not mastered the aforementioned domains ( 10 ). An institutional environment that supports student learning is crucial.

Different institutions employ distinct methods to promote students’ learning processes. First, many universities propose modules to develop behind the scenes activities that enhance self-reflection about general skills (e.g., the skills we have mastered and the skills we need to develop further), behaviors that should be incorporated (e.g., self-criticism about one’s own thoughts), and each student’s role in the advancement of his/her field. Lectures or workshops about LRs themselves are useful because they describe the purposes of the LR and how it fits into the whole picture of a student’s work. These activities may explain what type of discussion an LR must involve, the importance of defining the correct scope, the reasons to include a particular resource, and the main role of critical reading.

Some pedagogic services that promote a continuous improvement in study and academic skills are equally important. Examples include workshops about time management, the accomplishment of personal objectives, active learning, and foreign languages for nonnative speakers. Additionally, opportunities to converse with other students promotes an awareness of others’ experiences and difficulties. Ultimately, the supervisor’s role in providing feedback and setting deadlines is crucial in developing students’ abilities and in strengthening students’ writing quality ( 12 ).

HOW SHOULD A LITERATURE REVIEW BE DEVELOPED?

A consensus on the appropriate method for elaborating an LR is not available, but four main steps are generally accepted: defining the main topic, searching the literature, analyzing the results, and writing ( 6 ). We suggest a fifth step: reflecting on the information that has been written in previous publications ( Figure 2 ).

First step: Defining the main topic

Planning an LR is directly linked to the research main question of the thesis and occurs in parallel to students’ training in the three domains discussed above. The planning stage helps organize ideas, delimit the scope of the LR ( 11 ), and avoid the wasting of time in the process. Planning includes the following steps:

• Reflecting on the scope of the LR: postgraduate students will have assumptions about what material must be addressed and what information is not essential to an LR ( 13 , 18 ). Cooper’s Taxonomy of Literature Reviews 2 systematizes the writing process through six characteristics and nonmutually exclusive categories. The focus refers to the reviewer’s most important points of interest, while the goals concern what students want to achieve with the LR. The perspective assumes answers to the student’s own view of the LR and how he/she presents a particular issue. The coverage defines how comprehensive the student is in presenting the literature, and the organization determines the sequence of arguments. The audience is defined as the group for whom the LR is written.
• Designating sections and subsections: Headings and subheadings should be specific, explanatory and have a coherent sequence throughout the text ( 4 ). They simulate an inverted pyramid, with an increasing level of reflection and depth of argument.
• Identifying keywords: The relevant keywords for each LR section should be listed to guide the literature search. This list should mirror what Hart (1998) ( 3 ) advocates as subject vocabulary . The keywords will also be useful when the student is writing the LR since they guide the reader through the text.
• Delineating the time interval and language of documents to be retrieved in the second step. The most recently published documents should be considered, but relevant texts published before a predefined cutoff year can be included if they are classic documents in that field. Extra care should be employed when translating documents.

Second step: Searching the literature

The ability to gather adequate information from the literature must be addressed in postgraduate programs. Librarian support is important, particularly for accessing difficult texts. This step comprises the following components:

• Searching the literature itself: This process consists of defining which databases (electronic or dissertation/thesis repositories), official documents, and books will be searched and then actively conducting the search. Information literacy skills have a central role in this stage. While searching electronic databases, controlled vocabulary (e.g., Medical Subject Headings, or MeSH, for the PubMed database) or specific standardized syntax rules may need to be applied.

In addition, two other approaches are suggested. First, a review of the reference list of each document might be useful for identifying relevant publications to be included and important opinions to be assessed. This step is also relevant for referencing the original studies and leading authors in that field. Moreover, students can directly contact the experts on a particular topic to consult with them regarding their experience or use them as a source of additional unpublished documents.

Before submitting a dissertation/thesis, the electronic search strategy should be repeated. This process will ensure that the most recently published papers will be considered in the LR.

• Selecting documents for inclusion: Generally, the most recent literature will be included in the form of published peer-reviewed papers. Assess books and unpublished material, such as conference abstracts, academic texts and government reports, are also important to assess since the gray literature also offers valuable information. However, since these materials are not peer-reviewed, we recommend that they are carefully added to the LR.

This task is an important exercise in time management. First, students should read the title and abstract to understand whether that document suits their purposes, addresses the research question, and helps develop the topic of interest. Then, they should scan the full text, determine how it is structured, group it with similar documents, and verify whether other arguments might be considered ( 5 ).

Third step: Analyzing the results

Critical reading and thinking skills are important in this step. This step consists of the following components:

• Reading documents: The student may read various texts in depth according to LR sections and subsections ( defining the main topic ), which is not a passive activity ( 1 ). Some questions should be asked to practice critical analysis skills, as listed below. Is the research question evident and articulated with previous knowledge? What are the authors’ research goals and theoretical orientations, and how do they interact? Are the authors’ claims related to other scholars’ research? Do the authors consider different perspectives? Was the research project designed and conducted properly? Are the results and discussion plausible, and are they consistent with the research objectives and methodology? What are the strengths and limitations of this work? How do the authors support their findings? How does this work contribute to the current research topic? ( 1 , 19 )
• Taking notes: Students who systematically take notes on each document are more readily able to establish similarities or differences with other documents and to highlight personal observations. This approach reinforces the student’s ideas about the next step and helps develop his/her own academic voice ( 1 , 13 ). Voice recognition software ( 16 ), mind maps ( 5 ), flowcharts, tables, spreadsheets, personal comments on the referenced texts, and note-taking apps are all available tools for managing these observations, and the student him/herself should use the tool that best improves his/her learning. Additionally, when a student is considering submitting an LR to a peer-reviewed journal, notes should be taken on the activities performed in all five steps to ensure that they are able to be replicated.

Fourth step: Writing

The recognition of when a student is able and ready to write after a sufficient period of reading and thinking is likely a difficult task. Some students can produce a review in a single long work session. However, as discussed above, writing is not a linear process, and students do not need to write LRs according to a specific sequence of sections. Writing an LR is a time-consuming task, and some scholars believe that a period of at least six months is sufficient ( 6 ). An LR, and academic writing in general, expresses the writer’s proper thoughts, conclusions about others’ work ( 6 , 10 , 13 , 16 ), and decisions about methods to progress in the chosen field of knowledge. Thus, each student is expected to present a different learning and writing trajectory.

In this step, writing methods should be considered; then, editing, citing and correct referencing should complete this stage, at least temporarily. Freewriting techniques may be a good starting point for brainstorming ideas and improving the understanding of the information that has been read ( 1 ). Students should consider the following parameters when creating an agenda for writing the LR: two-hour writing blocks (at minimum), with prespecified tasks that are possible to complete in one section; short (minutes) and long breaks (days or weeks) to allow sufficient time for mental rest and reflection; and short- and long-term goals to motivate the writing itself ( 20 ). With increasing experience, this scheme can vary widely, and it is not a straightforward rule. Importantly, each discipline has a different way of writing ( 1 ), and each department has its own preferred styles for citations and references.

Fifth step: Reflecting on the writing

In this step, the postgraduate student should ask him/herself the same questions as in the analyzing the results step, which can take more time than anticipated. Ambiguities, repeated ideas, and a lack of coherence may not be noted when the student is immersed in the writing task for long periods. The whole effort will likely be a work in progress, and continuous refinements in the written material will occur once the writing process has begun.

LITERATURE REVIEW CHECKLIST

In contrast to review papers, the LR of a dissertation/thesis should not be a standalone piece or work. Instead, it should present the student as a scholar and should maintain the interest of the audience in how that dissertation/thesis will provide solutions for the current gaps in a particular field.

A checklist for evaluating an LR is convenient for students’ continuous academic development and research transparency: it clearly states the desired achievements for the LR of a dissertation/thesis. Here, we present an LR checklist developed from an LR scoring rubric ( 11 ). For a critical analysis of an LR, we maintain the five categories but offer twelve criteria that are not scaled ( Figure 3 ). The criteria all have the same importance and are not mutually exclusive.

First category: Coverage

1. justified criteria exist for the inclusion and exclusion of literature in the review.

This criterion builds on the main topic and areas covered by the LR ( 18 ). While experts may be confident in retrieving and selecting literature, postgraduate students must convince their audience about the adequacy of their search strategy and their reasons for intentionally selecting what material to cover ( 11 ). References from different fields of knowledge provide distinct perspective, but narrowing the scope of coverage may be important in areas with a large body of existing knowledge.

Second category: Synthesis

2. a critical examination of the state of the field exists.

A critical examination is an assessment of distinct aspects in the field ( 1 ) along with a constructive argument. It is not a negative critique but an expression of the student’s understanding of how other scholars have added to the topic ( 1 ), and the student should analyze and contextualize contradictory statements. A writer’s personal bias (beliefs or political involvement) have been shown to influence the structure and writing of a document; therefore, the cultural and paradigmatic background guide how the theories are revised and presented ( 13 ). However, an honest judgment is important when considering different perspectives.

3. The topic or problem is clearly placed in the context of the broader scholarly literature

The broader scholarly literature should be related to the chosen main topic for the LR ( how to develop the literature review section). The LR can cover the literature from one or more disciplines, depending on its scope, but it should always offer a new perspective. In addition, students should be careful in citing and referencing previous publications. As a rule, original studies and primary references should generally be included. Systematic and narrative reviews present summarized data, and it may be important to cite them, particularly for issues that should be understood but do not require a detailed description. Similarly, quotations highlight the exact statement from another publication. However, excessive referencing may disclose lower levels of analysis and synthesis by the student.

4. The LR is critically placed in the historical context of the field

Situating the LR in its historical context shows the level of comfort of the student in addressing a particular topic. Instead of only presenting statements and theories in a temporal approach, which occasionally follows a linear timeline, the LR should authentically characterize the student’s academic work in the state-of-art techniques in their particular field of knowledge. Thus, the LR should reinforce why the dissertation/thesis represents original work in the chosen research field.

5. Ambiguities in definitions are considered and resolved

Distinct theories on the same topic may exist in different disciplines, and one discipline may consider multiple concepts to explain one topic. These misunderstandings should be addressed and contemplated. The LR should not synthesize all theories or concepts at the same time. Although this approach might demonstrate in-depth reading on a particular topic, it can reveal a student’s inability to comprehend and synthesize his/her research problem.

6. Important variables and phenomena relevant to the topic are articulated

The LR is a unique opportunity to articulate ideas and arguments and to purpose new relationships between them ( 10 , 11 ). More importantly, a sound LR will outline to the audience how these important variables and phenomena will be addressed in the current academic work. Indeed, the LR should build a bidirectional link with the remaining sections and ground the connections between all of the sections ( Figure 1 ).

7. A synthesized new perspective on the literature has been established

The LR is a ‘creative inquiry’ ( 13 ) in which the student elaborates his/her own discourse, builds on previous knowledge in the field, and describes his/her own perspective while interpreting others’ work ( 13 , 17 ). Thus, students should articulate the current knowledge, not accept the results at face value ( 11 , 13 , 17 ), and improve their own cognitive abilities ( 12 ).

Third category: Methodology

8. the main methodologies and research techniques that have been used in the field are identified and their advantages and disadvantages are discussed.

The LR is expected to distinguish the research that has been completed from investigations that remain to be performed, address the benefits and limitations of the main methods applied to date, and consider the strategies for addressing the expected limitations described above. While placing his/her research within the methodological context of a particular topic, the LR will justify the methodology of the study and substantiate the student’s interpretations.

9. Ideas and theories in the field are related to research methodologies

The audience expects the writer to analyze and synthesize methodological approaches in the field. The findings should be explained according to the strengths and limitations of previous research methods, and students must avoid interpretations that are not supported by the analyzed literature. This criterion translates to the student’s comprehension of the applicability and types of answers provided by different research methodologies, even those using a quantitative or qualitative research approach.

Fourth category: Significance

10. the scholarly significance of the research problem is rationalized.

The LR is an introductory section of a dissertation/thesis and will present the postgraduate student as a scholar in a particular field ( 11 ). Therefore, the LR should discuss how the research problem is currently addressed in the discipline being investigated or in different disciplines, depending on the scope of the LR. The LR explains the academic paradigms in the topic of interest ( 13 ) and methods to advance the field from these starting points. However, an excess number of personal citations—whether referencing the student’s research or studies by his/her research team—may reflect a narrow literature search and a lack of comprehensive synthesis of ideas and arguments.

11. The practical significance of the research problem is rationalized

The practical significance indicates a student’s comprehensive understanding of research terminology (e.g., risk versus associated factor), methodology (e.g., efficacy versus effectiveness) and plausible interpretations in the context of the field. Notably, the academic argument about a topic may not always reflect the debate in real life terms. For example, using a quantitative approach in epidemiology, statistically significant differences between groups do not explain all of the factors involved in a particular problem ( 21 ). Therefore, excessive faith in p -values may reflect lower levels of critical evaluation of the context and implications of a research problem by the student.

Fifth category: Rhetoric

12. the lr was written with a coherent, clear structure that supported the review.

This category strictly relates to the language domain: the text should be coherent and presented in a logical sequence, regardless of which organizational ( 18 ) approach is chosen. The beginning of each section/subsection should state what themes will be addressed, paragraphs should be carefully linked to each other ( 10 ), and the first sentence of each paragraph should generally summarize the content. Additionally, the student’s statements are clear, sound, and linked to other scholars’ works, and precise and concise language that follows standardized writing conventions (e.g., in terms of active/passive voice and verb tenses) is used. Attention to grammar, such as orthography and punctuation, indicates prudence and supports a robust dissertation/thesis. Ultimately, all of these strategies provide fluency and consistency for the text.

Although the scoring rubric was initially proposed for postgraduate programs in education research, we are convinced that this checklist is a valuable tool for all academic areas. It enables the monitoring of students’ learning curves and a concentrated effort on any criteria that are not yet achieved. For institutions, the checklist is a guide to support supervisors’ feedback, improve students’ writing skills, and highlight the learning goals of each program. These criteria do not form a linear sequence, but ideally, all twelve achievements should be perceived in the LR.

CONCLUSIONS

A single correct method to classify, evaluate and guide the elaboration of an LR has not been established. In this essay, we have suggested directions for planning, structuring and critically evaluating an LR. The planning of the scope of an LR and approaches to complete it is a valuable effort, and the five steps represent a rational starting point. An institutional environment devoted to active learning will support students in continuously reflecting on LRs, which will form a dialogue between the writer and the current literature in a particular field ( 13 ).

The completion of an LR is a challenging and necessary process for understanding one’s own field of expertise. Knowledge is always transitory, but our responsibility as scholars is to provide a critical contribution to our field, allowing others to think through our work. Good researchers are grounded in sophisticated LRs, which reveal a writer’s training and long-lasting academic skills. We recommend using the LR checklist as a tool for strengthening the skills necessary for critical academic writing.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Leite DFB has initially conceived the idea and has written the first draft of this review. Padilha MAS and Cecatti JG have supervised data interpretation and critically reviewed the manuscript. All authors have read the draft and agreed with this submission. Authors are responsible for all aspects of this academic piece.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are grateful to all of the professors of the ‘Getting Started with Graduate Research and Generic Skills’ module at University College Cork, Cork, Ireland, for suggesting and supporting this article. Funding: DFBL has granted scholarship from Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education (CAPES) to take part of her Ph.D. studies in Ireland (process number 88881.134512/2016-01). There is no participation from sponsors on authors’ decision to write or to submit this manuscript.

No potential conflict of interest was reported.

1 The questions posed in systematic reviews usually follow the ‘PICOS’ acronym: Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Study design.

2 In 1988, Cooper proposed a taxonomy that aims to facilitate students’ and institutions’ understanding of literature reviews. Six characteristics with specific categories are briefly described: Focus: research outcomes, research methodologies, theories, or practices and applications; Goals: integration (generalization, conflict resolution, and linguistic bridge-building), criticism, or identification of central issues; Perspective: neutral representation or espousal of a position; Coverage: exhaustive, exhaustive with selective citations, representative, central or pivotal; Organization: historical, conceptual, or methodological; and Audience: specialized scholars, general scholars, practitioners or policymakers, or the general public.

• University of Oregon Libraries
• Research Guides

How to Write a Literature Review

What's a literature review.

• Literature Reviews: A Recap
• Reading Journal Articles
• Does it Describe a Literature Review?
• 1. Identify the Question
• 2. Review Discipline Styles
• Searching Article Databases
• Finding Full-Text of an Article
• Citation Chaining
• When to Stop Searching
• 4. Manage Your References
• 5. Critically Analyze and Evaluate
• 6. Synthesize
• 7. Write a Literature Review

What's a Literature Review? 

A literature review (or "lit review," for short) is an in-depth critical analysis of published scholarly research related to a specific topic. Published scholarly research (aka, "the literature") may include journal articles, books, book chapters, dissertations and thesis, or conference proceedings. 

A solid lit review must:

• be organized around and related directly to the thesis or research question you're developing
• synthesize results into a summary of what is and is not known
• identify areas of controversy in the literature
• formulate questions that need further research

• << Previous: Start
• Next: Literature Reviews: A Recap >>
• Last Updated: May 3, 2024 5:17 PM
• URL: https://researchguides.uoregon.edu/litreview

Contact Us Library Accessibility UO Libraries Privacy Notices and Procedures

1501 Kincaid Street Eugene, OR 97403 P: 541-346-3053 F: 541-346-3485

• Visit us on Facebook
• Visit us on Twitter
• Visit us on Youtube
• Visit us on Instagram
• Report a Concern
• Nondiscrimination and Title IX
• Accessibility
• Privacy Policy
• Find People

What Is A Literature Review?

A plain-language explainer (with examples).

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

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

Literature Review 101

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

What is a literature review?

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

Reviewing the literature

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

The literature review chapter

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

What’s the purpose of a literature review?

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

Purpose #1 – Demonstrate your topic knowledge

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

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

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

Purpose #3 – Lay the foundation for your conceptual framework

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

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

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

Purpose #4 – To inform your methodology

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

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

How do I find articles for my literature review?

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

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

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

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

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

Need a helping hand?

How should I structure my literature review?

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

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

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

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

Example of a literature review

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

Wrapping Up

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

Psst… there’s more!

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

16 Comments

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

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

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

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

Timothy T. Chol [email protected]

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

This was so useful. Thank you so much.

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

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

Great Brief Explanation, thanks

So helpful to me as a student

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

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

Well-presented overview of the literature!

This was brilliant. So clear. Thank you

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

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

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

• Print Friendly

Frequently asked questions

What is a literature review.

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

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

Frequently asked questions: Academic writing

A rhetorical tautology is the repetition of an idea of concept using different words.

Rhetorical tautologies occur when additional words are used to convey a meaning that has already been expressed or implied. For example, the phrase “armed gunman” is a tautology because a “gunman” is by definition “armed.”

A logical tautology is a statement that is always true because it includes all logical possibilities.

Logical tautologies often take the form of “either/or” statements (e.g., “It will rain, or it will not rain”) or employ circular reasoning (e.g., “she is untrustworthy because she can’t be trusted”).

You may have seen both “appendices” or “appendixes” as pluralizations of “ appendix .” Either spelling can be used, but “appendices” is more common (including in APA Style ). Consistency is key here: make sure you use the same spelling throughout your paper.

The purpose of a lab report is to demonstrate your understanding of the scientific method with a hands-on lab experiment. Course instructors will often provide you with an experimental design and procedure. Your task is to write up how you actually performed the experiment and evaluate the outcome.

In contrast, a research paper requires you to independently develop an original argument. It involves more in-depth research and interpretation of sources and data.

A lab report is usually shorter than a research paper.

The sections of a lab report can vary between scientific fields and course requirements, but it usually contains the following:

• Title: expresses the topic of your study
• Abstract: summarizes your research aims, methods, results, and conclusions
• Introduction: establishes the context needed to understand the topic
• Method: describes the materials and procedures used in the experiment
• Results: reports all descriptive and inferential statistical analyses
• Discussion: interprets and evaluates results and identifies limitations
• Conclusion: sums up the main findings of your experiment
• References: list of all sources cited using a specific style (e.g. APA)
• Appendices: contains lengthy materials, procedures, tables or figures

A lab report conveys the aim, methods, results, and conclusions of a scientific experiment . Lab reports are commonly assigned in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields.

The abstract is the very last thing you write. You should only write it after your research is complete, so that you can accurately summarize the entirety of your thesis , dissertation or research paper .

If you’ve gone over the word limit set for your assignment, shorten your sentences and cut repetition and redundancy during the editing process. If you use a lot of long quotes , consider shortening them to just the essentials.

If you need to remove a lot of words, you may have to cut certain passages. Remember that everything in the text should be there to support your argument; look for any information that’s not essential to your point and remove it.

To make this process easier and faster, you can use a paraphrasing tool . With this tool, you can rewrite your text to make it simpler and shorter. If that’s not enough, you can copy-paste your paraphrased text into the summarizer . This tool will distill your text to its core message.

Revising, proofreading, and editing are different stages of the writing process .

• Revising is making structural and logical changes to your text—reformulating arguments and reordering information.
• Editing refers to making more local changes to things like sentence structure and phrasing to make sure your meaning is conveyed clearly and concisely.
• Proofreading involves looking at the text closely, line by line, to spot any typos and issues with consistency and correct them.

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

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

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

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

Avoid citing sources in your abstract . There are two reasons for this:

• The abstract should focus on your original research, not on the work of others.
• The abstract should be self-contained and fully understandable without reference to other sources.

There are some circumstances where you might need to mention other sources in an abstract: for example, if your research responds directly to another study or focuses on the work of a single theorist. In general, though, don’t include citations unless absolutely necessary.

An abstract is a concise summary of an academic text (such as a journal article or dissertation ). It serves two main purposes:

• To help potential readers determine the relevance of your paper for their own research.
• To communicate your key findings to those who don’t have time to read the whole paper.

Abstracts are often indexed along with keywords on academic databases, so they make your work more easily findable. Since the abstract is the first thing any reader sees, it’s important that it clearly and accurately summarizes the contents of your paper.

In a scientific paper, the methodology always comes after the introduction and before the results , discussion and conclusion . The same basic structure also applies to a thesis, dissertation , or research proposal .

Depending on the length and type of document, you might also include a literature review or theoretical framework before the methodology.

Whether you’re publishing a blog, submitting a research paper , or even just writing an important email, there are a few techniques you can use to make sure it’s error-free:

• Take a break : Set your work aside for at least a few hours so that you can look at it with fresh eyes.
• Proofread a printout : Staring at a screen for too long can cause fatigue – sit down with a pen and paper to check the final version.
• Use digital shortcuts : Take note of any recurring mistakes (for example, misspelling a particular word, switching between US and UK English , or inconsistently capitalizing a term), and use Find and Replace to fix it throughout the document.

If you want to be confident that an important text is error-free, it might be worth choosing a professional proofreading service instead.

Editing and proofreading are different steps in the process of revising a text.

Editing comes first, and can involve major changes to content, structure and language. The first stages of editing are often done by authors themselves, while a professional editor makes the final improvements to grammar and style (for example, by improving sentence structure and word choice ).

Proofreading is the final stage of checking a text before it is published or shared. It focuses on correcting minor errors and inconsistencies (for example, in punctuation and capitalization ). Proofreaders often also check for formatting issues, especially in print publishing.

The cost of proofreading depends on the type and length of text, the turnaround time, and the level of services required. Most proofreading companies charge per word or page, while freelancers sometimes charge an hourly rate.

For proofreading alone, which involves only basic corrections of typos and formatting mistakes, you might pay as little as $0.01 per word, but in many cases, your text will also require some level of editing , which costs slightly more.

It’s often possible to purchase combined proofreading and editing services and calculate the price in advance based on your requirements.

There are many different routes to becoming a professional proofreader or editor. The necessary qualifications depend on the field – to be an academic or scientific proofreader, for example, you will need at least a university degree in a relevant subject.

For most proofreading jobs, experience and demonstrated skills are more important than specific qualifications. Often your skills will be tested as part of the application process.

To learn practical proofreading skills, you can choose to take a course with a professional organization such as the Society for Editors and Proofreaders . Alternatively, you can apply to companies that offer specialized on-the-job training programmes, such as the Scribbr Academy .

Ask our team

Want to contact us directly? No problem.  We  are always here for you.

• Email [email protected]
• Start live chat
• Call +1 (510) 822-8066
• WhatsApp +31 20 261 6040

Our team helps students graduate by offering:

• A world-class citation generator
• Plagiarism Checker software powered by Turnitin
• Innovative Citation Checker software
• Professional proofreading services
• Over 300 helpful articles about academic writing, citing sources, plagiarism, and more

Scribbr specializes in editing study-related documents . We proofread:

• PhD dissertations
• Research proposals
• Personal statements
• Admission essays
• Motivation letters
• Reflection papers
• Journal articles
• Capstone projects

Scribbr’s Plagiarism Checker is powered by elements of Turnitin’s Similarity Checker , namely the plagiarism detection software and the Internet Archive and Premium Scholarly Publications content databases .

The add-on AI detector is powered by Scribbr’s proprietary software.

The Scribbr Citation Generator is developed using the open-source Citation Style Language (CSL) project and Frank Bennett’s citeproc-js . It’s the same technology used by dozens of other popular citation tools, including Mendeley and Zotero.

You can find all the citation styles and locales used in the Scribbr Citation Generator in our publicly accessible repository on Github .

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

• Strategies to Find Sources

Evaluating Literature Reviews and Sources

Reading critically, tips to evaluate sources.

• Tips for Writing Literature Reviews
• Writing Literature Review: Useful Sites
• Citation Resources
• Other Academic Writings
• Useful Resources

A good literature review evaluates a wide variety of sources (academic articles, scholarly books, government/NGO reports). It also evaluates literature reviews that study similar topics. This page offers you a list of resources and tips on how to evaluate the sources that you may use to write your review.

• A Closer Look at Evaluating Literature Reviews Excerpt from the book chapter, “Evaluating Introductions and Literature Reviews” in Fred Pyrczak’s Evaluating Research in Academic Journals: A Practical Guide to Realistic Evaluation , (Chapter 4 and 5). This PDF discusses and offers great advice on how to evaluate "Introductions" and "Literature Reviews" by listing questions and tips. First part focus on Introductions and in page 10 in the PDF, 37 in the text, it focus on "literature reviews".
• Tips for Evaluating Sources (Print vs. Internet Sources) Excellent page that will guide you on what to ask to determine if your source is a reliable one. Check the other topics in the guide: Evaluating Bibliographic Citations and Evaluation During Reading on the left side menu.

To be able to write a good Literature Review, you need to be able to read critically. Below are some tips that will help you evaluate the sources for your paper.

Reading critically (summary from How to Read Academic Texts Critically)

• Who is the author? What is his/her standing in the field.
• What is the author’s purpose? To offer advice, make practical suggestions, solve a specific problem, to critique or clarify?
• Note the experts in the field: are there specific names/labs that are frequently cited?
• Pay attention to methodology: is it sound? what testing procedures, subjects, materials were used?
• Note conflicting theories, methodologies and results. Are there any assumptions being made by most/some researchers?
• Theories: have they evolved overtime?
• Evaluate and synthesize the findings and conclusions. How does this study contribute to your project?

Useful links:

• How to Read a Paper (University of Waterloo, Canada) This is an excellent paper that teach you how to read an academic paper, how to determine if it is something to set aside, or something to read deeply. Good advice to organize your literature for the Literature Review or just reading for classes.

Criteria to evaluate sources:

• Authority : Who is the author? what is his/her credentials--what university he/she is affliliated? Is his/her area of expertise?
• Usefulness : How this source related to your topic? How current or relevant it is to your topic?
• Reliability : Does the information comes from a reliable, trusted source such as an academic journal?

Useful site - Critically Analyzing Information Sources (Cornell University Library)

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

The Library, Technological University of the Shannon: Midwest

What is a review article?

Learn how to write a review article.

What is a review article? A review article can also be called a literature review, or a review of literature. It is a survey of previously published research on a topic. It should give an overview of current thinking on the topic. And, unlike an original research article, it will not present new experimental results.

Writing a review of literature is to provide a critical evaluation of the data available from existing studies. Review articles can identify potential research areas to explore next, and sometimes they will draw new conclusions from the existing data.

Why write a review article?

To provide a comprehensive foundation on a topic.

To explain the current state of knowledge.

To identify gaps in existing studies for potential future research.

To highlight the main methodologies and research techniques.

Did you know? 

There are some journals that only publish review articles, and others that do not accept them.

Make sure you check the  aims and scope  of the journal you’d like to publish in to find out if it’s the right place for your review article.

How to write a review article

Below are 8 key items to consider when you begin writing your review article.

Check the journal’s aims and scope

Make sure you have read the aims and scope for the journal you are submitting to and follow them closely. Different journals accept different types of articles and not all will accept review articles, so it’s important to check this before you start writing.

Define your scope

Define the scope of your review article and the research question you’ll be answering, making sure your article contributes something new to the field. 

As award-winning author Angus Crake told us, you’ll also need to “define the scope of your review so that it is manageable, not too large or small; it may be necessary to focus on recent advances if the field is well established.” 

Finding sources to evaluate

When finding sources to evaluate, Angus Crake says it’s critical that you “use multiple search engines/databases so you don’t miss any important ones.” 

For finding studies for a systematic review in medical sciences,  read advice from NCBI . 

Writing your title, abstract and keywords

Spend time writing an effective title, abstract and keywords. This will help maximize the visibility of your article online, making sure the right readers find your research. Your title and abstract should be clear, concise, accurate, and informative. 

For more information and guidance on getting these right, read our guide to writing a good abstract and title  and our  researcher’s guide to search engine optimization . 

Introduce the topic

Does a literature review need an introduction? Yes, always start with an overview of the topic and give some context, explaining why a review of the topic is necessary. Gather research to inform your introduction and make it broad enough to reach out to a large audience of non-specialists. This will help maximize its wider relevance and impact. 

Don’t make your introduction too long. Divide the review into sections of a suitable length to allow key points to be identified more easily.

Include critical discussion

Make sure you present a critical discussion, not just a descriptive summary of the topic. If there is contradictory research in your area of focus, make sure to include an element of debate and present both sides of the argument. You can also use your review paper to resolve conflict between contradictory studies.

What researchers say

Angus Crake, researcher

As part of your conclusion, include making suggestions for future research on the topic. Focus on the goal to communicate what you understood and what unknowns still remains.

Use a critical friend

Always perform a final spell and grammar check of your article before submission. 

You may want to ask a critical friend or colleague to give their feedback before you submit. If English is not your first language, think about using a language-polishing service.

Find out more about how  Taylor & Francis Editing Services can help improve your manuscript before you submit.

What is the difference between a research article and a review article?

Before you submit your review article…

Complete this checklist before you submit your review article:

Have you checked the journal’s aims and scope?

Have you defined the scope of your article?

Did you use multiple search engines to find sources to evaluate?

Have you written a descriptive title and abstract using keywords?

Did you start with an overview of the topic?

Have you presented a critical discussion?

Have you included future suggestions for research in your conclusion?

Have you asked a friend to do a final spell and grammar check?

Expert help for your manuscript

Taylor & Francis Editing Services  offers a full range of pre-submission manuscript preparation services to help you improve the quality of your manuscript and submit with confidence.

Related resources

How to edit your paper

Writing a scientific literature review

• Open access
• Published: 09 July 2024

Implement social prescribing successfully towards embedding: what works, for whom and in which context? A rapid realist review

• C. Bos 1 , 4 ,
• E. de Weger 2 ,
• I. Wildeman 3 ,
• N. Pannebakker 3 &
• P. F. Kemper 1  

BMC Public Health volume  24 , Article number:  1836 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

66 Accesses

Metrics details

Some clients who access healthcare services experience problems due to the wider determinants of health which cannot be addressed (solely) by the medical sector. Social Prescribing (SP) addresses clients ’ wider health needs and is based on linkworkers who support primary care clients in accessing social, community and voluntary care services that support their needs. Previous literature has provided valuable insights about what works (or not) in an early stage of implementing SP. However, there is limited insight into what works for the implementation of SP towards embedding. This study provides guiding principles by which SP can be successfully implemented towards the embedding stage and identifies which contextual factors and mechanisms influence these guiding principles.

A Rapid Realist Review was conducted to examine what works, for whom, why, and in which contexts. A local Dutch reference panel consisting of health and care organisations helped to inform the research questions. Additionally, a workshop was held with the panel, to discuss what the international insights mean for their local contexts. This input helped to further refine the literature review’s findings.

Five guiding principles were identified for successful implementation of SP at the embedding stage: • Create awareness for addressing the wider determinants of health and the role SP services can play; • Ensure health and care professionals build trusting relationships with all involved stakeholders to create a cyclical referral process; • Invest in linkworkers’ skills and capacity so that they can act as a bridge between the sectors; • Ensure clients receive appropriate support to improve their self-reliance and increase their community participation; • Invest in the aligning of structures, processes and resources between involved sectors to support the use of SP services.

To embed SP, structural changes on a system level as well as cultural changes are needed. This will require a shift in attitude amongst health and care professionals as well as clients towards the use, role and benefit of SP services in addressing the wider determinants of health. It will also require policymakers and researchers to involve communities and include their perspectives.

Peer Review reports

Health systems worldwide are faced with clients’ increasingly complex health and care needs, growing health inequalities and increasing healthcare costs. These challenges have long underpinned the need to provide better quality and more person-centered care [ 1 , 2 ]. People who access health and care services frequently experience problems due to the wider determinants of health which cannot be addressed (solely) by the medical sector [ 3 ]; e.g. clients experiencing psychosocial problems due to increasing levels of loneliness, uncertainty about finances, housing and unemployment [ 4 , 5 , 6 ]. Many of these clients receive inappropriate care because their non-medical needs are solely treated in the medical sector [ 7 ]. This may lead to overuse and undesirable costs [ 8 , 9 ]. As such, there is an increasing awareness that identifying clients’ non-medical needs is crucial to tackling such problems [ 10 ]. To address clients’ wider, non-medical needs, more integrated and person-centered care is necessary. Health and care organisations (e.g. health, social care and voluntary sector providers, insurance companies, municipalities) are collaborating to implement new and more holistic models of care, such as Social Prescribing (SP).

SP is a relatively new approach which aims to address clients’ non-medical needs and is based on linkworkers who support primary care clients in accessing social care, community and voluntary services for their wider health and wellbeing needs. This approach aims to create a bridge between the medical sector and other sectors like the social, community and voluntary sector. SP includes direct signposting by general practitioners (GPs) to community and statutory services or to a linkworker for more intensive coaching interventions and then referred to the community [ 11 ]. There are a range of different models for SP. These vary in referral pathways, target groups (e.g. clients with psychosocial problems, complex multi-problems, chronic illness), and services and activities; (e.g. gym referrals, community classes, housing advice, gardening clubs, green health interventions) [ 12 , 13 ]. Most SP models have linkworkers within the community [ 14 , 15 ]. Linkworkers address clients’ wider health needs and, together with the client, decide which services are most appropriate. For example, linkworkers may support clients through coaching (e.g. to empower clients’ self-reliance), find an appropriate activity for clients to join, or services which can help solve their (non-medical) problems. Several studies suggest that clients who use SP services experience improvement in their well-being, their self-esteem, and self-reliance through the support of networks [ 16 , 17 , 18 ]. However, some literature indicates that such improvements are not a guarantee for all clients. Clients in more vulnerable circumstances (e.g. with severe mental health, financial problems, or housing issues) may find it difficult to attend SP services [ 19 , 20 ]. Literature from the citizen involvement field suggests that vulnerable, ‘hard-to-reach’ clients face more structural and accessibility barriers, such as power imbalance, lack safe and trusting environment or not supported (e.g. financial) enough to be involved [ 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 ]. Such structural barriers and accessibility issues, if not addressed in the implementation or embedding phases, have the potential to increase health disparities when not properly designed [ 26 , 27 ].

Previous literature has provided valuable insights about what works or not in the early implementation stages. However, insights and an overview of what works for the implementation of SP towards embedding is missing. An implementation process consists of different stages (i.e. orientation, insight, acceptation, change and embedding) [ 28 ] and should be seen as iterative rather than linear [ 29 , 30 ]. This research focuses on the stages after pilot/orientation towards embedding. According to the normalization theory, embedding means that SP becomes so embedded into routine practices that it ‘disappears’ from view (i.e., it is normalized) [ 31 , 32 ]. Insights in the early stages of implementation (i.e. as pilots) are, for instance, highlight the need for training about the meaning of SP for GPs, the importance of connecting GPs with linkworkers and the need for health and care professionals to learn and collaborate on behalf of SP [ 4 , 33 , 34 ]. However, SP services are being increasingly implemented worldwide and some health and care organizations are ready to move beyond the pilot phase and are looking for guidance to further implement SP towards embedding. For instance, in the Netherlands there are several models of SP that have been piloted which means organisations are now searching for how to further implement SP towards embedding in their own local contexts. Insights from other studies are helpful to reflect on what is needed throughout the implementation process towards embedding after SP models were launched as a pilot. However, while earlier literature studies provided valuable insights, these are mainly focused on pilots testing how the SP interventions work or are focused on the use of SP by one specific profession [ 4 , 14 , 35 ]. They do not give a complete, system-wide overview of what is needed to further implement SP to make it part of the daily practice of health and care professionals (embedding), and what works, why and in which contexts of social prescribing. To start providing such an overview, this rapid realist review (RRR) set out to develop guiding principles to successfully implement SP towards embedding. The principles are based on international literature about social prescribing and is a substantiation of which Social Prescribing interventions work, for whom, how, to what extent and in which contexts. The principles are useful for policymakers and the health and care professionals to explore when struggling with the implementation and embedding of social prescribing in their own context. The review addressed the following research questions:

What are the guiding principles by which social prescribing can be successfully implemented towards embedding?

What are the underlying contextual factors and mechanisms influencing these guiding principles?

This study is part of a larger action research study ‘wellbeing on prescription’ (a social prescribing model) from the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), in collaboration with the Dutch organization for Applied Scientific Research (TNO). This study aims to understand what is needed to further implement wellbeing on prescription towards embedding. The first phase of this study was this RRR to gain insights into the international literature and lessons learned. The second phase of this study is a participatory action study to follow different health and care organisations from four different regions to gain insight into the enablers and barriers during the implementation process to continue with embedding ‘wellbeing on prescription’ and which enablers should be considered. This paper focuses on the first phase of the study, the RRR.

Research design

This study applied the rapid realist review (RRR) approach. The realist synthesis approach is an approach designed for analyzing complex programs of interventions [ 36 ]. It is used to gain a deep understanding of ‘what works for whom, in which context and with which outcomes’, based on the argument that the interaction between the contextual factors and mechanism has impact on the intervention outcomes (Pawson and Tilly, 1997). In the Realist approach the relationships between the context (C), the mechanism (M) and the outcome (O) are identified through context-mechanism-outcome configurations. For this study, configurations helped explain why implementing a social prescribing program is successful in context A, but not in context B [ 37 , 38 ]. The aim of the RRR is the same as a traditional Realist Review, but it is a time-responsive method allowing the generation of findings to inform policy and involved stakeholders [ 39 , 40 ]. This review followed several steps based on examples of Saul and Stolee and Willis, which are related to: developing & refining research questions, searching & retrieving information, screening & appraising information, synthesizing information and interpreting information [ 38 , 40 , 41 ].

The first step was to align the research questions with a reference panel. The reference panel for this study consisted of Dutch health and care organisations who were involved in the previously described participatory action research (see ‘setting’). These health and care organisations helped to inform the research questions. Because there are such wide ranging definitions and interpretations of SP, an important first step before the search process was to agree on one clear definition of the approach which the authors could then apply throughout each stage of the review. Based on a preliminary search of the literature and early consultations with the panel, the authors chose the following definition of social prescribing:

‘a means of enabling general practitioners and other frontline healthcare professionals to refer clients to a link worker – to provide them with a (face-to-face or digital) conversation. During this conversation clients can learn about the possibilities of services or activities provided by the social, voluntary and community sector, so clients with social, emotional or practical needs are empowered to find solutions which will improve their health and well-being’ (based on SPN, 2016) [ 42 ].

Search process

In consultation with the library scientist at the RIVM, the review search terms and search strings were (See appendix 1 ) applied in the electronic database Medline and Embase. The search terms were based on the research of Mesman [ 43 ]. After the removal of duplicates, the search resulted in 310 potentially relevant papers (see Fig.  1 ). The inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed by the researchers (Fig.  1 ). The researchers (ChB and EdW) screened the papers in two stages. During the first stage the two researchers applied the criteria to the titles and abstracts of the included papers. The two researchers screened each of the papers and then cross-checked to discuss these papers. After the first title and abstract screening stage, 82 papers were selected to continue to the second full text screening stage (see Fig.  1 ). During the second screening stage, the two researchers assessed the full text of those 82 selected papers with the established criteria. Both screened the same 10 papers and then checked for inter coder agreement/ cross-checked the coding. After this each reviewer screened the rest of the papers and then cross-checked to discuss these papers. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) was used for methodological rigour and relevance [ 44 ]. Finally a total of 22 papers were included in literature review (Aughterson, 2020; Bertotti, 2018; Calderón-Larrañaga 2022; Carnes, 2017; Calderón-Larrañaga, 2021; Chang, 2021; Costa, 2021; Elliott, 2022; Fixsen, 2020; Gibson, 2021; Hazeldine, 2021; Holding, 2020; Islam, 2020; Khan, 2021; McHals, 2020; Pescheny, 2018; Pescheny, 2018, Rhodes, 2021; Scott, 2021; Thomas, 2021; Tierney, 2020; Wood, 2021).

Prisma flowchart of document inclusion and exclusion process

Data extraction was conducted on the final set of 22 selected papers using the computer software programme MaXQDa. A coding tree was made based on existing literature, experts and professional opinion. The coding tree was used to analyse the intervention logic, strategy, lessons, professionals and clients’ needs, experiences and perceptions, interventions aspects and resources and determinants of implementation towards embedding. For transparency and to ensure consistency in the analysis of the realist concepts, the authors specified the definitions of the context, mechanisms and outcomes that were used in this study with a focus on the implementation of social prescribing towards embedding related definitions of important realist concepts (see Table  1 ). Two researchers (ChB and EdW) formed Context- Mechanism-Outcome (CMO) configurations within each of the papers. Each researcher formed CMOs in half of the papers and cross-checked the other half of the papers. The agreed upon CMOs were thematically clustered based on the combination of mechanisms and outcomes into overarching themes. ChB made a first draft of guiding principles based on these overarching themes. This draft was checked by EdW. These initial guiding principles were tested and validated with the Dutch local reference panel within a workshop.

All of the included 22 papers about Social prescribing have similar starting points, namely clients’ (wider) health needs, but the choice of focus regarding health problems and target groups varied. Examples of SP services are described in Table  2 . For example, most of the articles focused on the activation of clients through short-term conversations with the linkworker combined with participation and connection to social and health activities. This is especially the case for clients with mild- psychosocial problems (e.g. loneliness) or clients with chronic health conditions who want to live healthier lives or are looking for meaningfulness [ 3 , 4 , 33 , 45 , 46 , 47 , 48 , 49 ]. Other articles focused on providing clients’ longer-term problem-solving support through multiple sessions with the linkworker combined with the use of services. This is especially the case for clients who experience housing, financial, unemployment or serious mental health problems [ 14 , 35 , 47 ]. Finally, some articles focus on SP with a combination of activation and longer term problem-solving support for clients. This is especially the case for clients with multiple and complex problems. Such clients need help with solving their problems and reconnecting with their community, e.g. by joining an activity. Studies that focus on both were situated in high deprivation areas [ 13 , 50 ].

A total of five guiding principles for implementation of SP towards embedding were identified through the literature, and validated by the panel’s input. Appendix 2 gives an overview of the CMOs underpinning the principles (full list of CMOs available upon request). The following sections first describe each principle using the evidence from the literature review. It is important to note that the guiding principles do not stand alone, but are seen as an interconnected set to improve the implementation of SP towards embedding. After the principles, the panel’s reflections will be summarized. The panel’s reflections did not change the wording of the principles and instead triangulated and enriched the literature findings. Table  3 summarizes the key lessons and practical tools applied in interventions, enabling contexts and mechanism underpinning the principles that policymakers and health and care organisations can build on successfully implement SP towards embedding. It is worth noting that constraining contexts and mechanisms are largely two sides of the same coin [ 51 ].

Guiding principle 1: Create awareness for addressing wider determinants of health and the role social prescribing services can play

For the successful implementation of SP towards embedding several articles discussed the need for creating awareness of the importance of addressing clients’ problems based on the wider determinants of health and for the fact that SP services are a valid treatment option. A shift in attitude of all involved stakeholders (the whole health and landscape including clients themselves) towards the use of SP services is needed [ 14 , 33 , 47 , 48 , 52 , 53 , 54 ]. Health and care professionals nor clients are familiar with the need to investigate problems related to the wider determinants of health underlying health complaints [ 46 ],This is especially important in deprived areas because there are more clients who experience multiple and complex problems affecting different areas of life [ 13 , 14 , 35 , 47 , 50 ]. Thus professionals and clients should be encouraged to think beyond the medical domain. When both are aware of addressing the (wider) health needs and recognize the value of operating with other sectors outside the medical domain, they are more likely to use SP services [ 33 ].

Several articles describe that the use of SP services by healthcare professionals and clients is uncommon [ 48 , 52 , 54 ]. For example, some professionals are unfamiliar with what SP services can offer and do not always recognize the value (e.g. joint activities in the local community as a therapeutic resource). One of the articles shows that health and care professionals are mostly driven by high quality of care for clients (mechanism). Thus, when aiming to recognize the value of SP services in a context where general practitioners are asked to refer clients to a linkworker, or to join an activity in the community ( context ), they get regular feedback about how the client was getting after their initial referral and have some positive experiences with these referrals ( mechanism ). This positive experience, related to the quality of care caused the general practitioners to use SP services more and were also more engaged ( outcome ) [ 4 ]. Reversely, when GPs require formal evidence regarding the effective of SP services on client outcomes ( context ) and there is too much focus on gathering formal evidence which may create less attention for actually addressing clients’ (wider) needs ( mechanism ), because clients need to fill continuous questionnaires which results in research getting in the way of offering clients appropriate support based on the (wider) needs ( outcome ) [ 4 ]. Such increased awareness will enable health and care professionals to better explain what SP services entail and how referrals to other sectors can help address clients’ wider needs. For example Pescheny, et all (2018) describe one example of when health and care professionals are not fully aware of what SP services entail they provide clients with inconsistent and incomplete information which creates confusion and false expectations about what SP services have to offer [ 53 ].

Guiding principle 2: Ensure health and care professionals build trusting relationships with all involved stakeholders to create a cyclical referral process

Successful implementation of social prescribing towards embedding requires building trusting relationships with all involved stakeholders (e.g. GPs, linkworkers, volunteers, clients and communities) to create a cyclical referral process to help clients with different (wider) needs and to react when updating and revising plans based on clients’ changing needs, so clients can move back and forth across settings and sectors according to their (changing) needs [ 4 , 12 , 55 ].

Creating shared understanding about expectations (e.g. task descriptions and roles) regarding all involved health and care professionals is required because this creates clarity about the collaboration and referral processes across sectors (including the community and voluntary sectors). In addition, setting up new signposting and referral processes, either through setting up entirely new pathways or by integrating within existing pathways ( context ) requires residents and organisations from the local community to build relationships and work together with health and care professionals to improve shared understanding about SP and increase confidence about new activities or interventions for clients (mechanism). This makes it more likely to get new and more referrals to new (SP) activities or interventions ( outcome ) [ 12 ]. An key enabler is to create shared leadership between different sectors to create a cross organizational collaboration [ 34 ]. Furthermore, an enabler is to create a learning environment with all involved stakeholders to learn and interact with each other [ 34 ].

Furthermore, trusting relationship with clients is very important. When clients trust their health and care professional(s), on the one hand they feel safe enough to share their problems about their daily lives so all problems of the wider determinants of health can be addressed and on the other hand they are more willing to participate in a recommended community services [ 33 , 56 ]. An enabler which contributes to clients’ trust in SP services is that SP services can maintain continuity in local services, particularly a low turnover in health and care professionals. This way the professionals have an established relationship with each other and can collaborate better around clients’ needs [ 4 ]. For clients a key enabler is that the linkworker comes from the same local community. Such linkworkers can help build trust between SP services and local community, which in turn helps to engage clients with SP services and helps to align services to community needs [ 49 ]. Finally a key enabler to build trusting relationships is having enough time to spend with clients. This means taking enough time to have face to face connections between all those involved stakeholders and taking the time to address clients’ wider determinants of health [ 4 , 15 , 33 , 46 ].

Guiding principle 3: Invest in linkworkers’ skills and capacity so that they can act as a bridge between the sectors

SP linkworkers can play a key role as a bridge between the sectors to support clients and to and refer them to the services or activities most appropriate for their (wider) needs. To fulfill this role linkworkers must be able to [ 1 ] understand and acknowledge the challenges organisations from different sectors face to be able to connect these organisations to organize care and support around the (wider) needs of clients [ 2 ], to create an overview of the locally available social infrastructure (e.g. services and activities) and ensure that their knowledge of available services is always up-to-date [ 3 ], to provide support to all kinds of (vulnerable) clients and communities with complex needs by coaching to create behavioral change and by addressing their (wider) health needs to find an appropriate services or activity [ 33 , 45 , 48 , 50 , 54 , 55 , 57 ]. Several articles discussed the role of linkworkers in social prescribing initiatives [ 14 , 33 , 35 , 45 ]. In these articles, linkworkers have different backgrounds (e.g. psychotherapy, psychology and coaching), but mostly linkworkers do not have (professional) specific backgrounds, or work as volunteer.

According to the literature multiple skills are required to able to act as a bridge between the sectors. An example of when linkworkers organize the care and support around the needs of clients described by Calderon– Larrangaga, et al. 2022. SP is largely dependent on the infrastructure of local communities including the availability of community activities and transport which varied across localities (context), so when there are no available services some linkworkers use innovative strategies by developing self-sustainable groups around the clients’ interest linkworkers which motivate clients to join these self-sustainable groups (mechanism), this makes it possible for clients to join an activity or meet clients with the same needs (outcome) [ 55 ].

Investment in specific skills (e.g. coaching, active listening, motivational techniques) and capacity (e.g. enough time) is important, to enable that linkworkers can receive and help a large variety of clients with different ages and problems. However, to deal with these varied groups of clients, referrers have to stay on top of inappropriate referrals due to a lack of immediately accessible alternatives (e.g. long waiting list for statutory services) to prevent the linkworker become overstretched [ 45 , 56 ]. Furthermore, investment is important so that other stakeholders involved in SP services see linkworkers as competent professionals to whom clients can be referred. Seeing a linkworker as a competent professional strengthens other stakeholders’ confidence and belief in SP services and helps them to accept and support the role of linkworker [ 56 ]. For clients, especially with multiple and complex needs, it is important to have contact with one person (linkworker) who has a network with stakeholders from different sectors and know where to refer a client onto based om their (wider) needs. For example, Bertotti, et al. (2018) describe that when clients with multiple and complex needs are referred to a linkworker (context) and linkworkers are empathetic with good knowledge of social support infrastructure available locally, it gives clients a sense of agency and control over their time with non-imposing support (mechanism). This has a beneficial impact on the client and especially for clients with multiple and complex needs (outcome) [ 33 ].

To fulfil the role as linkworker can be complex and demanding so different ways of support should be offered. To support linkworkers’ skills-development it is important to offer education, training and courses [ 14 , 33 , 47 , 55 , 56 ]. Another enabler to support growth in their role is offering supervision or peer to peer support, so they can share experiences and difficulties related to their role [ 3 , 35 ]. Finally, an enabler is offering support by management to meet the (wider) needs of clients (e.g. help with in house clearance) [ 50 ].

Guiding principle 4: Ensure clients receive appropriate support to improve their self-reliance and increase their community participation

Providing clients appropriate support may increase the chance to improve their self-reliance and stimulate the use of SP services [ 50 , 55 , 58 ]. There are a lot of clients who regularly visit the healthcare sector where problems surrounding their wider health needs are not adequately addressed or solved. Especially in vulnerable neighborhoods clients often experience multiple problems in different areas of life (e.g. financial, housing, domestic problems or trauma’s from the past) and also a lack of connection to a social network. With such problems it is important that problems related to livelihood security are solved in combination with participation in activities the community. When problems related to livelihood security regarding their financial security (e.g. unemployment, debt) are solved, clients feel more confident to participate in the community and feel less dependent on healthcare professionals [ 55 ]. For example Gibson, et al. 2021 describe how linkworkers try to remove feelings of discomfort and unfamiliarity with new situations (context), but clients’ deeper feelings about the past remain. Because of these persistent feelings of uncertainty and discomfort linkworkers are not always enough to help clients feel prepared enough for new and unfamiliar fields of practices, (mechanism). This means often time another intervention is needed first before such clients can participate in a community activity (outcome) [ 13 ]. However, when SP services are aimed at addressing wider determinants of health (context) and clients experience a lack of self-perception, motivation and confidence it is seen by health and care professionals as a barrier for successful engagement and behavioral change and makes clients deemed too dependent on SP services (mechanism) which is thought as a threat to SP implementation and delivery (outcome) [ 55 ].

To stimulate self-reliance there are different ways to support clients. Health and care professionals can support clients by informing them well so clients can take the next step themselves and find their way in all different sectors. Some clients need a boost to join SP services or community activities. So when clients are referred to SP services (context) and linkworkers contact clients after receiving a referral and give emotional and practical support to overcome barriers that prevented them from engaging (mechanism) and prevents dropouts and enables people to push themselves harder than they would have by themselves and they were more likely to participate (outcome) [ 55 ]. Clients also feel supported when they meet other people in similar situations, as they can support each other in an informal manner and share their experiences. Furthermore, another key enabler to support clients is to give them funding or give them access to transport to join activities [ 14 , 45 ].

Guiding principle 5: Invest in aligning structures, processes and resources between involved sectors to support the use of SP services

To improve the referral processes to SP services investment in shared resources and structural finances for SP services are necessary to make involved sectors less fragmented and improve opportunities for collaboration and communication [ 14 , 45 , 57 ]. Currently, the medical sector has arguably more formalized governance structures compared to other sectors (e.g. social, community and voluntary) regarding (e.g. confidentiality, data storage, (data) infrastructures, ways of processing referrals, staff training requirements or structural finance). For example, Wood et al. 2021 describe that many SP services and activities take place in the voluntary sector and are isolated from the formalized processes and structures (context) the lack of professional status and standards of SP staff prevent them from using the same resources as the medical sector (mechanism), which leads health and care professionals to have relevant information about what they can or cannot share with them and so prevent clients from constantly having to retell their story (outcome) [ 14 , 45 , 50 , 54 , 57 , 59 ]. An enabler is to create clear guidance, standards for SP services and professional standards for linkworkers to improve the alignment between involved sectors and support the use of SP services [ 48 , 50 ]. Furthermore a key enabler is to invest in a clear line of accountability and governance between all involved stakeholders of SP services at all stages of the process [ 48 , 50 ].

Moreover, to improve the referral process to the social, community and voluntary sectors which ensures that referrals to traditional services are not the first default option. For example Scott, et al. 2021 describe (context) that triage and referrals pathways are key determinants of SP in prehospital care as these help identify to which services a potential clients can be referred (context) the lack of an automated system to other sectors causes referrals to traditional services because it feels time consuming (mechanism), which lead to reduced referrals to SP services and highlight the potential need to redraw referral pathways to better include SP services (outcome) [ 54 ]. So a key enabler is an automated digital system between all involved sectors and making sure that all involved SP stakeholders have access. Furthermore, a key enabler is to improve the referral process with general practices who offer linkworkers an open environment and practices support by offering a suitable location (e.g. access to practices to speak with practice staff and access practice resources; information system, advertising in waiting rooms) [ 14 ].

It is important to formalize SP services and make structural funding possible for SP service, because due to a lack of investment (e.g. structural funding) SP services and community activities cannot continue [ 4 , 49 ] The continuity of activities and services is important for the trust of clients as well as health and care professionals. For example Khan, et al. (2021) describe short-term funding and the corresponding closure of organizations and activities negatively impacting citizens trust to join local services [ 49 ]. In addition when community activities are short-lived, it makes it difficult for health and care professionals to keep up their knowledge about local services up to date [ 33 ].

Local reference panel reflections

The guiding principles were tested and validated with the Dutch local reference panel. The panel recognized the guiding principles within their own contexts. During the panel discussion there were many similarities, but also some refinements and additions to the guiding principles. An important point that panel members mentioned is especially clients who are still unfamiliar with the concept SP of services and are also unfamiliar with what organisations in the local community can offer. Clients were said to often have other expectations when they visit a GP with what they perceive to be physical/medical complains. In such cases, panel members felt it was important to highlight that another professional, besides the GP, can help clients further with problems about their (wider) health needs. In addition, the panel members mentioned the importance that of the linkworker works in the same building as the primary care professionals. This was thought to improve the referral process by enabling healthcare professionals to know each other and know who they are referring clients to. Also it prevented client drop-outs because when they have to go to other places there is a higher chance they are not going. Another important validation of the literature findings is that the panel recognized the three main tasks of linkworker to enabling them to act as a bridge between sectors.

A refinement to the literature findings is that apart from being aware of SP services and activities it is also important to connect more with the local and informal networks in the community and to maintain relationships with e.g. community-led initiatives. Another refinement is that it is important that clients feel they have ownership of their wider health needs, because SP is centered on the idea that it is their needs which are central to find appropriate activities or services. Some new and additional information based on the results that panel members mentioned is that clients have sometimes lost confidence in the community sector because they did not get the help they needed or that choices through the community sector can be made that do not meet the needs of the clients.

While aiming to provide insights for further implementation towards the embedding of social prescribing, results in this study showed that most experiences with SP are aligned with the middle stages (e.g. insights, acceptation and change) of the implementations process [ 28 ]. Embedding SP into routine practice remains a challenge. This is in line with findings in the wider integrated care literature which shows that most studies of implementation relate to action for implementation of integrated care. These on the target group and service delivery, but not to the system level [ 60 , 61 ]. In line with the wider literature, the guiding principles also found that to properly implement SP towards embedding, changes on different layers, macro (system integration), meso (organisations, professional) and micro – level (citizens, clients), are needed [ 62 ]. For example, the guiding principle about investing in alignment of structures and processes, and the panel’s input, show that health and care professionals who work with SP still have difficulty with preconditions among others on system level to make SP part of their daily practice. This seems to indicate that structural embedding is possible after changes on the system level have been implemented (e.g. finances, data infrastructure).

In addition to structural changes on a system level cultural changes (e.g. different ways of working) are necessary for further implementation of SP towards embedding. Reflecting on the NPT [ 31 , 32 ] organisations and health and care professionals are not ready for embedding when, for example, they still need reminders about the existence of SP and when there is a lack of shared understanding about the daily operation of SP. Also health and care professionals receive limited feedback and proof about the impact on clients outcomes. Highlights the benefits to clients outcomes may help change attitudes towards the use of SP, because health and care professionals are motivated to offer clients appropriate support. Clients and communities are not ready for embedding because they do not always know about the existence of SP services and do not always know other ways than access the healthcare system then GPs despite their non-medical needs. For example, culture changes (e.g. stimulate working together with volunteers and residents of the community), some preconditions (e.g. space to collaborate and get to know each other) work through all layers (system, organizational, professionals and clients) and depend on each other.

Despite SP being centred on referrals to social, voluntary and the community sector, this study highlights that there is much unknown about the role communities and community-led initiatives can play, or to collaborate more successfully with them [ 14 , 33 , 45 ]. The role of the community is important because this study show that unfamiliarity with the community may hinder the use of SP for health and care professionals as well as clients, and also as long as the community and voluntary sector services are underrepresented GPs will always be first point of contact for clients. Khan, et al. (2021) highlight the importance of the collaboration with people in the community because they have the local knowledge and insights that help support the delivery of SP to better meet the needs of clients [ 49 ]. Furthermore, it is important when designing or further implementing SP services towards the embedding stages, that the needs of more vulnerable and ‘hard-to-reach’ groups are considered. According to de Weger (2022) and Cyril (2015) it is important to make enough space, by reaching out to these groups on their own terms to share their experiences, ideas and needs to improve SP services [ 22 , 24 ]. Without giving special consideration to the needs and priorities of such groups, SP services may end up actually increasing health inequalities as SP services [ 24 , 25 ] Moreover, Stathi, et al. 2021 highlight the importance of the value of peer volunteers in community initiatives [ 63 ]. To build a real community approach the reference panel suggest, for example, not only networking with formal services and activities is important but also connecting with the local informal networks and maintaining relationships with them. De Weger (2022) suggest investing in cultural changes to help community-led initiatives to flourish in the roles they wish to take on themselves (e.g. extend their role and contribute more) [ 21 ].

Strengths and limitations

A strength of this study is that the guiding principles are validated with health and care organisations that work with SP in practice. However, important to mention is that the reference panel only consisted of Dutch health and care organisations, which makes that international lessons are only tested and refined by the Dutch context. Despite the validation through the Dutch panel it is also useful for other countries because al guiding principles based on international studies were recognized. However, to be sure each country can use the guiding principles as well as all context factors and mechanism it can be used as starting point to test the meaning in their own context.

Future research

The guiding principles and their underlying CMOs are created for successful implementation towards embedding of SP. Future research can focus on how these five guiding principles can affect various stages of the implementation process. Also future research can focus on the connection with the community and their role within SP which also includes the perspectives of the community. Finally, future research should focus more on which changes in the system could contribute to making SP part of the daily practice of organisations, professionals, people and communities.

Conclusions

The study demonstrates which principles can be followed for a successful implementation towards embedding of social prescribing. Most experiences are still aligned with the early and middle stages of the implementation process. To embed SP, structural changes on a system level are needed as well as cultural changes towards the attitude of using SP. By highlighting the contextual factors and mechanisms which influences the implementation outcomes of SP, the five guiding principles can guide policymakers and health and care professionals for a successful implementation of SP. While these contextual factors and mechanisms focus on health and care professionals, future policymakers and researchers need to be encouraged to include the role of the community and their perspectives to be sure SP services meet the needs of clients who need it the most. This paper provides valuable insights to embed and normalize SP services, which can bridge the gap between the medical and non-medical sectors. Ultimately this is needed to transform our health and care systems to become more person-centred and holistic.

Data availability

Full list of individual CMO configurations available upon request. Data request can be made by the authors.

Abbreviations

Social Prescribing

National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (Dutch: Rijkstinstituut voor Volksgezondheid en Milieu)

Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research

Context-Mechanism-outcome configurations

Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool

Rapid Realist Review

General Practitioners

OECD. Fiscal sustainability of health systems: bridging health and finance perspectives 2015.

Berwick D, Nolan T, Whittington J. The Triple Aim: care, health and cost. Health Aff 2008.

Carnes D, Sohanpal R, Frostick C, Hull S, Mathur R, Netuveli G, Tong J, Hutt P, Bertotti M. The impact of a social prescribing service on patients in primary care: a mixed methods evaluation. BMC Health Serv Res. 2017;17(1):835.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Aughterson H, Baxter L, Fancourt D. Social prescribing for individuals with mental health problems: a qualitative study of barriers and enablers experienced by general practitioners. BMC Fam Pract. 2020;21(1):194.

Dalhgren G, Whitehead M. Policies and strategies to promote social equity in health. 1991.

Dahlgren G, Whitehead M. The Dahlgren-Whitehead model of health determinants: 30 years on and still chasing rainbows. Elsevier; 2021.

Torjesen I. Social prescribing could help alleviate pressure on GPs. BMJ. 2016.

Health. Do. Improving quality of life for people with long term conditions. 2013.

England PH. Effectiveness of social prescribing: an evidence synthesis. 2019.

J. S. A guide to community-centred approaches for health and wellbeing. Prev Libr. 2020.

Kimberlee R. What is Social Prescribing? Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal. 2015.

McHale S, Pearsons A, Neubeck L, Hanson CL. Green health partnerships in Scotland; pathways for social prescribing and physical activity referral. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(18):1–13.

Article   Google Scholar  

Gibson K, Pollard TM, Moffatt S. Social prescribing and classed inequality: a journey of upward health mobility? Soc Sci Med. 2021;280.

Hazeldine E, Gowan G, Wigglesworth R, Pollard J, Asthana S, Husk K. Link worker perspectives of early implementation of social prescribing: a ‘Researcher-in-Residence’ study. Health Soc Care Commun. 2021;29(6):1844–51.

Frostick C, Bertotti M. The frontline of social prescribing – how do we ensure Link workers can work safely and effectively within primary care? Chronic Illn. 2021;17(4):404–15.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Dayson C, Damm C, Bennett E, Sanderson E. The Rotherham Social Prescribing Service for People with Long-Term Health Conditions. 2016.

Kilgarriff-Foster A, O’Cathain A. Exploring the components and impact of social prescribing. J Public Mental Health. 2015;14:127–34.

Chatterjee HJ, Camic PM, Lockyer B, Thomson LJ. Non-clinical community interventions: a systematised review of social prescribing schemes. Arts Health: Int J Res Policy Pract. 2018;10(2):97–123.

Hanson S, Guell C, Jones A. Walking groups in socioeconomically deprived communities: a qualitative study using photo elicitation. Health Place 2016.

Matthews A, Brennan G, Kelly P, McAdem C, Mutrie N, Foster C. Don’t wait for them to come to you, you go to them. A qualitative study of recruitment approaches in community based walking programmes in the UK. BMC Public Health 2021.

De Weger E. A work in progress: successfully engaging communities for health and wellbeing. A Realist evaluation. Ipskamp Print. 2022:317.

De Weger E, Baan CA, Bos C, Luijkx KG, Drewes HW. ‘They need to ask me first’. Community engagement with low-income citizens. A realist qualitative case‐study. Health Expectations.2022.

Holley K. The Principles For Equitable And Inclusive Civic Engagement. A Guide To Transformative Change. 2016.

Cyril S, Smith BJ, Possamai-Inesedy A, Renzaho. A M N. exploring the role of community engagement in improving the health of disadvantaged populations: a systematic review. Global Health Action. 2015.

Rifkin SB. Examining the links between community participation and health outcomes: a review of the literature. Health Policy Plann. 2014;29(suppl_2):ii98–106.

Foster CE, Brennan G, Matthews A, McAdam C, Fitzsimons C, Mutrie N. Recruiting participants to walking intervention studies: a systematic review. Int J Behav Nutricion Phys Activity. 2011.

Ogilvie D, Foster CE, Rothnie H, Cavill N, Hamilton V, Fitzsimons CF, Mutrie M. Interventions to promote walking: systematic review. BMJ Open. 2007.

Grol R, Wensing M. Implementatie; effectieve verbetering van de patientenzorg. Elservier. 2006.

Campbell NC, Murray E, Darbyshire J, Emery J, Farmer A, Griffiths F et al. Designing and evaluating complex interventions to improve health care. BMJ. 2007.

Craig P, Dieppe P, Macintyre S, Michie S, Nazareth R, Petticrew M. Developing and evaluating complex interventions: the new Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2008.

McEvoy R, Ballini L, Maltoni S, O’Donnell CA, Mair FS, Macfarlane A. A qualitative systematic review of studies using the normalization process theory to research implementation processes. Implementation science: IS; 2014.

Book   Google Scholar  

Murray E, Treweek S, Pope C, MacFarlane A, Ballini L, Dowrick C et al. Normalisation process theory: a framework for developing, evaluating and implementing complex interventions. BMC Med 2010.

Bertotti M, Frostick C, Hutt P, Sohanpal R, Carnes D. A realist evaluation of social prescribing: an exploration into the context and mechanisms underpinning a pathway linking primary care with the voluntary sector. Prim Health care Res Dev. 2018;19(3):232–45.

Chng NR, Hawkins K, Fitzpatrick B, O’Donnell CA, Mackenzie M, Wyke S, Mercer SW. Implementing social prescribing in primary care in areas of high socioeconomic deprivation: process evaluation of the ‘Deep end’ community links Worker Programme. Br J Gen Pract. 2021;71(713):E912–20.

Rhodes J, Bell S. ‘It sounded a lot simpler on the job description’’: A qualitative study exploring the role of social prescribing link workers and their training and support needs (2020). Health Soc Care Commun. 2021;29(6):e338–47.

Pawson R. N. T. realistic evaluation. Sage; 1997.

Jagosh J, Macaulay AC, Pluye P, Salsberg J, Bush PL, Henderson J et al. Uncovering the benefits of participatory research: implications of a realist review for health research and practice. Millbank Q 2012(90):311–46.

Willis C, Sail J, Bevan H, Scheirer M, Best A, Greenhalgh T. Sustaining organizational culture change in health systems. J Health Organ Manag 2016;30.

Khangura S, Konnyu K, Cushman R, Grimshaw J, Moher D. Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach. Syst Rev. 2012.

CD. W JES, Best JB. A. A time-responsive tool for informing policy making: rapid realist review. Implementation science: IS; 2013.

Google Scholar  

Stolee P, Elliott J, McNeil H. Choosing healthcare options by Involving Canada;s Elderly; a protool for the CHOICE realist synthesis project on engaging older persons in healthcare decision making. BMJ Open. 2015.

Network SP. Report of the Annual Social Prescribing Network Conference. 2016.

Mesman R, Ranke S, Groenewoud S, Heijnders M. Essentiële bestanddelen van Welzijn op Recept. huisarts en wetenschap. 2020.

Pluye P, Robert E, Cargo M. A mixed methods appraisal tool for systematic mixed studies reviews. 2017.

Holding E, Thompson J, Foster A, Haywood A. Connecting communities: a qualitative investigation of the challenges in delivering a national social prescribing service to reduce loneliness. Health Soc Care Commun. 2020;28(5):1535–43.

Pescheny J, Randhawa G, Pappas Y. Patient uptake and adherence to social prescribing: a qualitative study. BJGP Open. 2018;2(3).

Fixsen A, Seers H, Polley M, Robins J. Applying critical systems thinking to social prescribing: a relational model of stakeholder buy-in. BMC Health Serv Res. 2020;20(1):580.

Islam MM. Social Prescribing-An Effort to apply a common knowledge: Impelling forces and challenges. Front Public Health. 2020;8:515469.

Khan K, Ward F, Halliday E, Holt V. Public perspectives of social prescribing. J Public Health. 2022;44(2):e227–33.

Wood E, Ohlsen S, Fenton SJ, Connell J, Weich S. Social prescribing for people with complex needs: a realist evaluation. BMC Fam Pract. 2021;22(1):53.

De. Weger E, Van Vooren N, Luijkx KG, Baan CA, Drewes HW. Achieving successful community engagement: a rapid realist review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018.

Costa A, Lopes J, Sousa CJ, Santos O, Virgolino A, Nogueira P, et al. Developing a social prescribing local system in a European Mediterranean country: a feasibility study to promote active and healthy aging. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021;21(1):1164.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Pescheny JV, Pappas Y, Randhawa G. Facilitators and barriers of implementing and delivering social prescribing services: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 2018;18(1):86.

Scott J, Fidler G, Monk D, Flynn D, Heavey E. Exploring the potential for social prescribing in pre-hospital emergency and urgent care: a qualitative study. Health Soc Care Commun. 2021;29(3):654–63.

Calderón-Larrañaga S, Greenhalgh T, Finer S, Clinch M. What does the literature mean by social prescribing? A critical review using discourse analysis. Sociol Health Illn. 2022;44(4–5):848–68.

Tierney S, Wong G, Roberts N, Boylan AM, Park S, Abrams R et al. Supporting social prescribing in primary care by linking people to local assets: a realist review. BMC Med. 2020;18(1).

Thomas G, Lynch M, Spencer LH. A systematic review to examine the evidence in developing Social Prescribing interventions that apply a Co-Productive, Co-designed Approach to improve well-being outcomes in a community setting. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18.

Dayson C, Painter J, Bennett E. Social prescribing for patients of secondary mental health services: emotional, psychological and social well-being outcomes. J Public Mental Health. 2020;19(4):271–9.

Thomas G, Lynch M, Spencer LH. Review a systematic review to examine the evidence in developing social prescribing interventions that apply a co-productive, co-designed approach to improve well-being outcomes in a community setting. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(8).

Leijten FRM. The Selfie framework for integrated care for multi-morbidity:Development and description. Health Policy. 2017.

Looman W. Drivers of successful implementation of integrated care for multi-morbidity: mechanisms identified in 17 case studies from 8 European countries. Social Science & Medicine; 2021.

Valentijn P. Towards a taxonomy for integrated care: a mixed-methods study. Int J Interated Care 2015.

Stathi A, Withall J, Agyapong-Badu S, Barrett E, Kritz M, Wills D et al. Mobilising people as assets for active ageing promotion: a multi-stakeholder perspective on peer volunteering initiatives. BMC Public Health. 2021.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to acknowledge and thank the local reference panel for their valuable time, insight and guidance.

This research received no external funding.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), Centre for Public Health, Care and Society, Department of health and Care Nationally, P.O. Box 1, Bilthoven, 3720 BA, The Netherlands

C. Bos & P. F. Kemper

Vrije universiteit Amsterdam, Athena Instituut, de Boelelaan 1085, Amsterdam, 1081 HV, The Netherlands

E. de Weger

TNO child health, Sylviusweg 71, Leiden, 2333 BE, The Netherlands

I. Wildeman & N. Pannebakker

Research group Innovation in Preventive Healthcare, HU University of Applied Sciences Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 7, Utrecht , 3584 CS, The Netherlands

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

The design of the research was developed by CB and EdW, and was initiated by IW, NP and PK. ChB collected the data and data analysis was performed by ChB and EdW. ChB wrote the article, and the rest of the research team provided cyclical feedback on the writing process (EdW, IW, NP and PK). All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Bos .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Ethics approval was not required as data was retrieved through a literature review. The local reference panel was verbally informed of the fact that anonymous meeting notes (e.g. without any person-identifiable information, including initials) would be taken with the sole purpose of refining the literature review data. Each member of the local reference panel provided verbal consent. This is in compliance with Dutch national guidelines: https://www.tilburguniversity.edu/upload/ddc3ce11-1e82-4bf7-ac6d-e813999e5037_CODE%20OF%20ETHICS%20FOR%20RESEARCH%20IN%20THE%20SOCIAL%20AND%20BEHAVIOURAL%20SCIENCES%20DSW%20 J%20%20%20.pdf and http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/data/ref/fp7/89867/social-sciences-humanities_en.pdf .

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

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

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary Material 1

Supplementary material 2, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Bos, C., de Weger, E., Wildeman, I. et al. Implement social prescribing successfully towards embedding: what works, for whom and in which context? A rapid realist review. BMC Public Health 24 , 1836 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18688-3

Download citation

Received : 30 November 2023

Accepted : 23 April 2024

Published : 09 July 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-18688-3

Share this article

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

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

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Social prescribing
• Implementation
• Rapid realist review
• Integrated care, person-centred care
• Addressing wider health needs

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

• General enquiries: [email protected]

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Creating Stability Is Just as Important as Managing Change

• Ashley Goodall

To do their best work, employees need to feel a sense of consistency — not constant upheaval.

When we think about change at work today, we tend to assume its inevitability and focus our attention on how to manage it — what methods and processes and technology and communication we need to put in place to have it move ahead more smoothly. Of course, some change is necessary, and some is inevitable. But not all of it. What the scientific literature on predictability, agency, belonging, place, and meaning suggests is that before we think about managing change, we should consider the conditions that people need at work in order to be productive. In this article, the author explains why we should cultivate a renewed appreciation for the virtues of stability, together with an understanding of how to practice “stability management.”

Imagine, for a moment, being on the receiving end of the sort of communication that typically heralds a change at work. An email, say, announces a reorganization to be carried out over the course of the next few months. The language is cheery and optimistic, and talks in upbeat terms about the many opportunities that will flow from the latest transformation or realignment.

• Ashley Goodall is a leadership expert who has spent his career exploring large organizations from the inside, most recently as an executive at Cisco. He is the coauthor of Nine Lies About Work , which was selected as the best management book of 2019 by Strategy + Business and as one of Amazon’s best business and leadership books of 2019. Prior to Cisco, he spent fourteen years at Deloitte as a consultant and as the Chief Learning Officer for Leadership and Professional Development. His latest book, The Problem with Change , is available now.

Partner Center