Module 1: Types of Reviews
Literature vs Systematic Reviews
Both literature and systematic reviews are aimed at assembling, critically evaluating and reviewing existing research on a central topic or research question. Some differences between them include the method for determining what research to include or exclude, the extent or scope of the review, and the duration of time required to complete the process. To help you determine which review is most appropriate, please see Table 1.1 below for a detailed explanation of each as well as the differences between each type of review.
| Component | Literature Review | Systematic reviews |
|---|---|---|
| Definition | A literature review is a qualitative integrative summary of published research on a specific topic. The literature review seeks to synthesize what is already known about the topic, and sometimes, explicitly state what is not known, or not well understood. | Systematic reviews bring together information from a range of sources to answer a specific research question. They differ from a traditional literature review or narrative review, in that they aim to synthesize and analyze the research in an unbiased, rigorous and systematic way so that it can be used to support evidence-based practice. |
| Goals |
|
|
| Question |
|
|
| Components |
OR
|
|
| Number of Authors |
|
|
| Timeline |
|
|
| Requirement |
|
|
| Value |
|
|
Adapted from Kysh, Lynn (2013): Difference between a systematic review and a literature review. Figshare (Poster). Licensed under Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 /order and some words changed.
Note on Table 1.1.
There are two ways to present a literature review: it can be one section in an original study, or it can be a standalone full review. More examples are given in the section on Literature Reviews.
Clinical research is a branch of healthcare science that determines the safety and effectiveness (efficacy) of medications, devices, diagnostic products and treatment regimens intended for human use.