Types of literature review and how to choose one

Narrative (traditional) review

The most common type: the author selects significant works and builds an argument by theme. Suits a paper introduction, a term paper, the theoretical chapter of a thesis. Its weak spot is subjective selection, so describe at least briefly how sources were found.

Systematic review

A review following a pre-registered protocol: exact inclusion criteria, reproducible search across several databases, dual screening, risk-of-bias assessment, standardised data extraction. Answers a narrow question, for example about the effectiveness of an intervention. Takes months and is usually done by a team. The reporting standard is PRISMA.

Meta-analysis

A statistical pooling of results from several studies into one effect estimate. Usually part of a systematic review, but possible only when the studies are sufficiently homogeneous in design and measures.

Scoping review

Maps the field: which studies exist, which methods and concepts are used, where the gaps are. Does not appraise study quality and gives no pooled effect estimate. Good when the question is broad or the field is young and heterogeneous.

Integrative, umbrella and rapid reviews

• An integrative review combines empirical and theoretical work of different designs to build a common framework or model.
• An umbrella review (review of reviews) summarises existing systematic reviews on a broad topic.
• A rapid review is a streamlined systematic review: some steps are shortened for the deadline, which must be stated explicitly.

How to choose a review type

1. Narrow effect question and months available? Systematic review, with a meta-analysis if the data are homogeneous.
2. Broad question or a new field? Scoping review.
3. Need a theoretical chapter or an introduction? Narrative review with a described search method.
4. Field already covered by systematic reviews? Umbrella review.
5. Weeks rather than months? Rapid review with explicit caveats.