Types of Literature Reviews, Research Paper Example

Traditional or Narrative

This literature review is usually objective and critical analysis of research that has been done on a particular subject. It helps in establishing the theoretical framework of any research. The literature review is important in identifying trends and patterns in previous literature with the goal is pinpointing potential gaps and inconsistencies. It leads the reviewer to sufficiently focus on research questions that finally define and justify the research, (Cronin 2008). Traditional review is further classifies as general, theoretical, methodological or historical literature reviews. The general review contains relevant aspects and information about the existing knowledge on a particular topic, (Byrne 2016). This review is mostly used as an introduction for dissertations and thesis. The theoretical review scrutinizes the way the theory shapes the research. The methodological review has the descriptions of the methods and designs used in the research, (Garrido. The historical explores research for a specified period of time. It outlines the initial the concepts or theory, and tracks its evolution to date. The aim of the historical literature review is to place the research in its historical context and bring out the developments over time, and to project the probable directions the research may take in future.

Systematic Review

Systematic literature review pinpoints, and appraises a research critically to formulate research question. It follows a well-defined plan with some criteria that is determined prior to conducting the review, (Munn 2018). Systematic review is transparent and deep, and grey literature and multiple databased are searched. It involves a good search strategy focusing to address or provide answers to defined questions. The key principles in systematic review include focus, clarify, coverage, equality, integration, transparency, and accessibility. (Pittway 2008). The origin of systematic reviews is in medicine and they are related to practice keen on evidence. The reviews provide comprehensive and clear overviews of evidence and identifies gaps in research on a particular subject. These reviews are mainly used in evidence-based disciplines to inform decision making processes. They can also be utilized in providing comprehensive summaries of relevant literature to research questions.

Argumentative Review

Argumentative literature selectively investigates literature to refute or support arguments, assumptions, and philosophical issues defined in the literature, (Huang 2018). These reviews are used to develop literature to initiate a contrary viewpoint on a given subject. Argumentative approach can be relevant in analyzing literature especially in the nature and social science space. On the other hand, this approach can initiate bias problems if used to summarize claims that cannot be supported.

Integrative Review

Integrative reviews criticize and synthesize literature interactively to generate new viewpoints and perspectives on a given topic, (Perignat & Katz-Buonincontro, 2019). The review contains research addressing research issues and hypothesis. This literature review is mostly used in the social sciences discipline. A good integrative review can be considered to be primary research if it meets standards with regards to thoroughness, coherence, and replication.

Scoping Reviews

They are very similar with systematic but the only key difference is, for scoping review there are no restrictions when it comes to resources and materials the researcher used as it is the case with systematic ones, (Munn 2018). The scoping review is used when a review of all information on the topic is required because of lack of restrictions to resources.

Cochrane Reviews

They are systematic reviews that are focused on research in health policy and health care. They are globally recognized to be of the highest standard because they are evidence-based. The main areas of focus include the effects of treatment, prevention, and rehabilitation interventions. They evaluate the precision of diagnostic tests for given conditions in particular setting or patient group.

Reference List

Amatya, B., Khan, F. and Galea, M., 2019. Rehabilitation for people with multiple sclerosis: an overview of Cochrane Reviews. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (1).

Byrne, J.A., 2016. Improving the peer review of narrative literature reviews. Research integrity and peer review, 1(1), p.12.

Cronin, P., Ryan, F. and Coughlan, M., 2008. Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach. British journal of nursing, 17(1), pp.38-43.

Garrido, S.R., Parent, J., Beaulieu, L. and Revéret, J.P., 2018. A literature review of type ISLCA—making the logic underlying methodological choices explicit. The International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 23(3), pp.432-444.

Huang, T. and Yasuda, K., 2016. Comprehensive review of literature survey articles on ERP. Business Process Management Journal.

Munn, Z., Peters, M.D., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A. and Aromataris, E., 2018. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC medical research methodology, 18(1),    p.143.

Perignat, E. and Katz-Buonincontro, J., 2019. STEAM in practice and research: An integrative literature review. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 31, pp.31-43.