View an example
When you place an order, you can specify your field of study and we’ll match you with an editor who has familiarity with this area.
However, our editors are language specialists, not academic experts in your field. Your editor’s job is not to comment on the content of your dissertation, but to improve your language and help you express your ideas as clearly and fluently as possible.
This means that your editor will understand your text well enough to give feedback on its clarity, logic and structure, but not on the accuracy or originality of its content.
Good academic writing should be understandable to a non-expert reader, and we believe that academic editing is a discipline in itself. The research, ideas and arguments are all yours – we’re here to make sure they shine!
After your document has been edited, you will receive an email with a link to download the document.
The editor has made changes to your document using ‘Track Changes’ in Word. This means that you only have to accept or ignore the changes that are made in the text one by one.
It is also possible to accept all changes at once. However, we strongly advise you not to do so for the following reasons:
You choose the turnaround time when ordering. We can return your dissertation within 24 hours , 3 days or 1 week . These timescales include weekends and holidays. As soon as you’ve paid, the deadline is set, and we guarantee to meet it! We’ll notify you by text and email when your editor has completed the job.
Very large orders might not be possible to complete in 24 hours. On average, our editors can complete around 13,000 words in a day while maintaining our high quality standards. If your order is longer than this and urgent, contact us to discuss possibilities.
Always leave yourself enough time to check through the document and accept the changes before your submission deadline.
Scribbr is specialised in editing study related documents. We check:
Calculate the costs
The fastest turnaround time is 24 hours.
You can upload your document at any time and choose between four deadlines:
At Scribbr, we promise to make every customer 100% happy with the service we offer. Our philosophy: Your complaint is always justified – no denial, no doubts.
Our customer support team is here to find the solution that helps you the most, whether that’s a free new edit or a refund for the service.
Yes, in the order process you can indicate your preference for American, British, or Australian English .
If you don’t choose one, your editor will follow the style of English you currently use. If your editor has any questions about this, we will contact you.
Where does the literature review go in a dissertation.
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 .
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:
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 .
There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:
Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.
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.
Avoid citing sources in your abstract . There are two reasons for this:
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:
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:
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 .
Want to contact us directly? No problem. We are always here for you.
Our team helps students graduate by offering:
Scribbr specializes in editing study-related documents . We proofread:
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 .
The introduction to a literature review serves as your reader’s guide through your academic work and thought process. Explore the significance of literature review introductions in review papers, academic papers, essays, theses, and dissertations. We delve into the purpose and necessity of these introductions, explore the essential components of literature review introductions, and provide step-by-step guidance on how to craft your own, along with examples.
In academic writing , the introduction for a literature review is an indispensable component. Effective academic writing requires proper paragraph structuring to guide your reader through your argumentation. This includes providing an introduction to your literature review.
It is imperative to remember that you should never start sharing your findings abruptly. Even if there isn’t a dedicated introduction section .
There are three main scenarios in which you need an introduction for a literature review:
It is crucial to customize the content and depth of your literature review introduction according to the specific format of your academic work.
The introduction of an academic literature review paper, which does not rely on empirical data, often necessitates a more extensive introduction than the brief literature review introductions typically found in empirical papers. It should encompass:
In a standard 8000-word journal article, the literature review section typically spans between 750 and 1250 words. The first few sentences or the first paragraph within this section often serve as an introduction. It should encompass:
Some students choose to incorporate a brief introductory section at the beginning of each chapter, including the literature review chapter. Alternatively, others opt to seamlessly integrate the introduction into the initial sentences of the literature review itself. Both approaches are acceptable, provided that you incorporate the following elements:
Example 1: an effective introduction for an academic literature review paper.
To begin, let’s delve into the introduction of an academic literature review paper. We will examine the paper “How does culture influence innovation? A systematic literature review”, which was published in 2018 in the journal Management Decision.
The second example represents a typical academic paper, encompassing not only a literature review section but also empirical data, a case study, and other elements. We will closely examine the introduction to the literature review section in the paper “The environmentalism of the subalterns: a case study of environmental activism in Eastern Kurdistan/Rojhelat”, which was published in 2021 in the journal Local Environment.
Thus, the author successfully introduces the literature review, from which point onward it dives into the main concept (‘subalternity’) of the research, and reviews the literature on socio-economic justice and environmental degradation.
Numerous universities offer online repositories where you can access theses and dissertations from previous years, serving as valuable sources of reference. Many of these repositories, however, may require you to log in through your university account. Nevertheless, a few open-access repositories are accessible to anyone, such as the one by the University of Manchester . It’s important to note though that copyright restrictions apply to these resources, just as they would with published papers.
Phd thesis literature review chapter introduction, phd thesis literature review introduction.
The last example is the doctoral thesis Metacognitive strategies and beliefs: Child correlates and early experiences Chan, K. Y. M. (Author). 31 Dec 2020 . The author clearly conducted a systematic literature review, commencing the review section with a discussion of the methodology and approach employed in locating and analyzing the selected records.
Master academia, get new content delivered directly to your inbox, the best answers to "what are your plans for the future", 10 tips for engaging your audience in academic writing, related articles, minor revisions: sample peer review comments and examples, sample emails to your thesis supervisor, co-authorship guidelines to successfully co-author a scientific paper, how to select a journal for publication as a phd student.
Saul Mcleod, PhD
Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester
Saul Mcleod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.
Learn about our Editorial Process
Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc
Associate Editor for Simply Psychology
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education
Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.
On This Page:
A scoping review is a type of research synthesis that maps the existing literature on a broad topic to identify key concepts, research gaps, and types of evidence.
This mapping exercise involves systematically searching for, identifying, and charting relevant literature to understand its characteristics, such as the volume of research, types of studies conducted, key concepts addressed, and prevalent research gaps.
Unlike systematic reviews, which aim to answer specific questions, scoping reviews are exploratory and often used to assess the extent of available evidence and inform future research directions. They involve comprehensive searches and data extraction but do not typically include a detailed synthesis of findings or a critical appraisal of study quality.
Scoping reviews can be used as a preliminary step to a systematic review , helping to identify the types of evidence available, potential research questions, and relevant inclusion criteria.
They can save time and resources by identifying potential challenges or limitations before embarking on a full systematic review.
Scoping reviews can help clarify key concepts/definitions in the literature. If a research area has inconsistent terminology or definitions, a scoping review can map out how different concepts are used and potentially propose a unified understanding. This can help refine the focus and scope of a subsequent systematic review.
Scoping reviews help identify areas needing further research, whereas systematic reviews aim to draw conclusions about intervention effectiveness.
Methodological guidelines aim to improve the consistency and transparency of scoping reviews, enabling researchers to synthesize evidence effectively.
Arksey and O’Malley (2005) | Levac et al. (2010) | Joanna Briggs Institute |
---|---|---|
6 stages, including optional consultation; most flexible approach | 6 stages with more detailed guidance; moderate flexibility | More prescriptive approach with additional elements; most structured |
Broad research question | Clearly articulated research question | Clearly defined research question with concept, population, and context |
Study selection process not specified | Recommends two reviewers for study selection | Provides detailed guidance on study selection process |
Basic data charting | More comprehensive data extraction | Detailed guidance on data extraction with specific tools |
Basic summary of findings | Numeric summary and qualitative thematic analysis | Introduces evidence mapping for analysis |
Quality assessment not included | Quality assessment not emphasized | Introduces potential for quality appraisal |
Optional stakeholder consultation | Recommended stakeholder consultation | Stakeholder consultation as an integral part of the process |
Provides basic framework | Offers enhanced detail on methodology | Provides most detailed guidance on conducting scoping reviews |
A well-defined objective and a set of aligned research questions are crucial for a scoping review’s coherence and direction.
They guide the subsequent steps of the review process, including determining the inclusion and exclusion criteria, developing a search strategy, and guiding data extraction and analysis.
This stage involves a thoughtful and iterative process to ensure that the review’s aims and questions are explicitly stated and closely intertwined.
This step outlines the overarching goals of the scoping review. It explains the rationale behind conducting the review and what the reviewers aim to achieve.
The objective statement should succinctly capture the essence of the review and provide a clear understanding of its purpose.
For instance, a scoping review’s objective might be to map the existing literature on a particular topic and identify knowledge gaps.
“Parents, in particular, greatly influence participation at school, at home and in the community. They undertake many actions to improve their children’s participation in daily life. Understanding the actions of parents and also their challenges and needs will contribute to how society can support these parents and thereby enable the participation of children with physical disabilities. Pediatric rehabilitation, aiming for optimal participation, could benefit from this understanding to improve Family-centered services (FCS)… However, it is unclear what kind of information is available in literature about what parents live through, do, and what kind of problems and needs they have in supporting their child’s participation? For these reasons, a scoping review was conducted in order to systematically map the research done in this area, as well as to identify any existing gaps in knowledge”
Piškur, B., Beurskens, A. J., Jongmans, M. J., Ketelaar, M., Norton, M., Frings, C. A., … & Smeets, R. J. (2012). Parents’ actions, challenges, and needs while enabling participation of children with a physical disability: a scoping review. BMC pediatrics , 12 , 1-13.
The research question(s) stem from the objectives and provide a focused roadmap for the review. These questions should be answerable through the scoping review process. The research question(s) should be clear, concise, and directly relevant to the overall objectives.
Using Frameworks: While not mandatory, frameworks can be helpful tools to guide the development of objectives and research questions. Frameworks like PCC (Population, Concept, Context).
How do cultural beliefs and practices ( C -context) influence the ways in which parents ( P -parents of children with physical disabilities) perceive and address ( C -concept) their children’s physical disabilities?
What are the barriers and facilitators ( C -concept) to mental health service utilization ( C -concept) among veterans ( P -population) experiencing homelessness ( C -context)?
This scoping review aims to summarize what is known in the African scientific literature ( C -context) among cisgender persons ( P ) about a) individual experiences of GBS within health care settings ( C -concept) and b) associations between GBS experiences and health care-related outcomes ( C -concept).
What are the main theoretical and methodological characteristics ( C -concept) of the current literature ( C -context) in the area of stigma and hearing loss and stigma and hearing aids in the elderly population ( P -older adults with acquired hearing impairment), and how should future research proceed in expanding this important field of enquiry?
A research protocol is a detailed plan that outlines the methodology to be employed throughout the review process, detailing steps like documenting results, outlining search strategy, and stating the review’s objective
The protocol should be created a priori (before starting the review) to ensure transparency and reproducibility.
While not mandatory, registering your protocol is highly recommended, e.g. FigShare and Open Science Framework (OSF).
Some journals, such as the Journal of Advanced Nursing , Systematic Reviews , BMC Medical Research Methodology , BMJ Open , and JBI Evidence Synthesis , accept scoping review protocols for publication.
It’s important to note that PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews, does not currently accept scoping review protocols for registration.
Registering a scoping review protocol is highly recommended, even if not mandatory, as it promotes transparency, reduces duplication of effort, and helps to prevent publication bias
“Our protocol was drafted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis Protocols (PRISMAP…), which was revised by the research team and members of Health Canada, and was disseminated through our programme’s Twitter account (@KT-Canada) and newsletter to solicit additional feedback. The final protocol was registered prospectively with the Open Science Framework on 6 September 2016 ( https://osf.io/kv9hu/ ).”
Tricco, A. C., Zarin, W., Lillie, E., Pham, B., & Straus, S. E. (2017). Utility of social media and crowd-sourced data for pharmacovigilance: a scoping review protocol. BMJ open , 7 (1), e013474.
“ Our protocol was developed using the scoping review methodological framework proposed by Arksey and O’Malley (2005) [1] and further refined by the Joanna Briggs Institute [3]. The draft protocol was revised upon receiving feedback from the research team, including methodologists and healthcare providers, as well as the peer-review panel of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research. The final version of the protocol is available upon request from the corresponding author. ”
Tricco, A. C., Lillie, E., Zarin, W., O’brien, K., Colquhoun, H., Kastner, M., … & Straus, S. E. (2016). A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews. BMC medical research methodology , 16 , 1-10.
This step involves developing and aligning the inclusion criteria with the objective(s) and question(s).
By providing transparent and well-justified eligibility criteria, researchers can ensure the replicability of their scoping review and allow readers to assess the relevance and appropriateness of the included sources.
When reporting eligibility criteria, emphasize the importance of clarity, justification, and a clear link to the review’s objectives.
By using the PCC framework, researchers can systematically establish boundaries for their scoping review, ensuring that the included sources are relevant to the research question. The framework helps to ensure that the eligibility criteria are comprehensive and well-defined, enabling a more focused and meaningful synthesis of the literature
It is important to note that the absence of an explicitly stated framework (e.g. PCC) does not necessarily mean that the authors did not utilize a systematic approach when developing their eligibility criteria. It is possible that they employed a framework implicitly or that their criteria development was guided by other factors.
The initial set of eligibility criteria outlined in the protocol may be subject to adjustments based on the type and volume of studies identified in the initial searches.
“ Studies that identified the key terms in the title, abstract, article, or MeSH heading were retained for further examination. Studies published as abstracts, conference proceedings or pilot results published in non-peer-reviewed journals were excluded. In addition, books, book chapters, comments on publications, and dissertations were also excluded. No exclusion criteria were established regarding the type of research design. Inclusion criteria were (a) older adults with progressive hearing loss being the population of interest and (b) the outcome measure was clearly focused on (or at least on some aspects of) stigma regarding hearing loss and/or hearing aids. Although given the descriptive aim of the review, no definitions of stigma and/or hearing aids were set a priori, and all articles including these terms were retrieved, the analysis of the data relied on the most common dimensions of the concept of stigma cited in the literarture: the cognitive dimension (i.e., stereotypes), the emotional dimension (i.e., prejudice) and the behavioral dime. ”
“ An extensive search was conducted to locate peer-reviewed articles that addressed questions related to parent involvement in organized youth sport. To guide article retrieval, two inclusion criteria were used. First, articles were required to highlight some form of parent involvement in organized youth sport. In the present study, organized youth sport was operationalized as “adultorganized and controlled athletic programs for young people,” wherein “participants are formally organized [and] attend practices and scheduled competitions under the supervision of an adult leader” (Smoll & Smith, 2002, p. xi). In line with this criterion, we did not include physical activity, exercise, physical education, and free play settings, which comprise a substantial volume of research in sport and exercise psychology. We also excluded research that simply collected data on parents or from parents but did not explicitly assess their involvement in their children’s sport participation. Second, articles were required to have been published in peer-reviewed, Englishlanguage, academic journals. As such, we did not include books, chapters, reviews, conceptual papers, conference proceedings, theses and (Jones, 2004) dissertations, or organizational “white papers” in this scoping review. ”
Dorsch, T. E., Wright, E., Eckardt, V. C., Elliott, S., Thrower, S. N., & Knight, C. J. (2021). A history of parent involvement in organized youth sport: A scoping review. Sport, Exercise, and performance psychology , 10 (4), 536.
“…to be included in the review, papers needed to measure or focus on specific dimensions of treatment burden, developed in the conceptual framework (e.g. financial, medication, administrative, lifestyle, healthcare and time/travel). Peer-reviewed journal papers were included if they were: published between the period of 2000–2016, written in English, involved human participants and described a measure for burden of treatment, e.g. including single measurements, measuring and/or incorporating one or two dimensions of burden of treatment. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed-method studies were included in order to consider different aspects of measuring treatment burden. Papers were excluded if they did not fit into the conceptual framework of the study, focused on a communicable chronic condition, for example human immunodeficiency virus infection and acquired immune deficiency syndrome (HIV/AIDS) or substance abuse. Papers talking about carer burden, in addition to patient burden of treatment, were also included.”
Sav, A., Salehi, A., Mair, F. S., & McMillan, S. S. (2017). Measuring the burden of treatment for chronic disease: implications of a scoping review of the literature. BMC medical research methodology , 17 , 1-14.
Scoping reviews aim to identify a broad range of relevant studies, including both published and unpublished literature, to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic.
The goal is to be inclusive rather than exhaustive, which differentiates scoping reviews from systematic reviews that seek to collate all empirical evidence fitting pre-specified criteria to answer specific research questions.
Information sources for scoping reviews can include a wide range of resources like scholarly databases, unpublished literature, conference papers, books, and even expert consultations.
Report who developed and executed the search strategy, such as an information specialist or librarian. Mention if the search strategy was peer-reviewed using the Peer Review of Electronic Search Strategies (PRESS) checklist.
“To identify potentially relevant documents, the following bibliographic databases were searched from 2004 to June 2015: MEDLINE, EMBASE, LexisNexis Academic, the Legal Scholarship Network, Justis, LegalTrac, QuickLaw, and HeinOnline. The search strategies were drafted by an experienced librarian [name] and further refined through team discussion. The final search strategy for MEDLINE can be found in Additional file 3. The final search results were exported into EndNote, and duplicates were removed by a library technician. The electronic database search was supplemented by searching the Canadian Medical Protective Association website (https://www.cmpa-acpm.ca/en) and scanning relevant reviews.”
Cardoso, R., Zarin, W., Nincic, V., Barber, S. L., Gulmezoglu, A. M., Wilson, C., … & Tricco, A. C. (2017). Evaluative reports on medical malpractice policies in obstetrics: a rapid scoping review. Systematic reviews , 6 , 1-11.
Scoping reviews typically start with a broader, more inclusive search strategy. The initial search is intentionally wide-ranging to capture the breadth of available literature on the topic
To balance breadth and depth in your initial search strategy for a scoping review, consider the following tips based on the gathered search results:
” The planned literature search was developed on June 23, 2022. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were further refined, along with electronic databases to identify psychological and education literature (e.g., ProQuest), programs for storing data (i.e., Covidence, n.d. accessed via https://www.covidence.org/) and key search terms (e.g., resistance and transgender). The key search terms were “transgender/trans/LGBT/gender diverse/gender expansive/nonbinary,” “resistance,” and “faith/economic status/ethnicity/gender.” Daniel Abela used terms such as nonbinary, gender diverse, LGBT, and gender expansive to capture the broad spectrum of language employed in the literature when relating to individuals whose gender identification extends beyond conventional norms associated with their assigned sex at birth. Moreover, the authors wanted a diverse sample through an intersectionality lens; therefore, terms such as faith, economic status, and ethnicity were used. These terms were selected as they were deemed by all authors to be most appropriate to evaluate this study’s research question. A complete list of the final search terms and the entire electronic search strategy for the Ovid database are presented in Table 1. ”
Abela, D., Patlamazoglou, L., & Lea, S. (2024). The resistance of transgender and gender expansive people: A scoping review. Psychology of Sexual Orientation and Gender Diversity .
Search strategy can also be reported in the appendix. For example: Supplementary A: Search strategy for scoping review .
Citation chasing involves reviewing the reference lists of included studies and examining articles that cite those studies to identify additional relevant literature. This process helps ensure that you capture a comprehensive view of the research landscape.
If citation chasing leads to the identification of new keywords or concepts, document these adjustments and how they were incorporated into the overall search strategy.
While articles included in a scoping review are selected systematically, it is important to acknowledge that there is no assumption that the evidence reviewed is exhaustive. This is often due to limitations in the search strategy or difficulty locating specific types of sources.
The goal is to identify relevant studies, with less emphasis on methodological quality. Scoping reviews generally do not appraise the quality of included studies.
Instead, scoping reviews prioritize mapping the existing literature and identifying gaps in research, regardless of the quality of the individual studies.
Two reviewers should independently screen titles and abstracts, removing duplicates and irrelevant studies based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria.
“To increase consistency among reviewers, all reviewers screened the same 50 publications, discussed the results and amended the screening and data extraction manual before beginning screening for this review. Nine reviewers working in pairs sequentially evaluated the titles, abstracts and then full text of all publications identified by our searches for potentially relevant publications. . . . We resolved disagreements on study selection and data extraction by consensus and discussion with other reviewers if needed.”
Duffett, M., Choong, K., Hartling, L., Menon, K., Thabane, L., & Cook, D. J. (2013). Randomized controlled trials in pediatric critical care: a scoping review. Critical care , 17 , 1-9.
Charting, also known as data extraction, is a crucial stage in conducting a scoping review.
This process involves systematically collecting relevant information from the sources included in the review using a structured form. It is considered best practice to have at least two reviewers independently extract data from each source
Data charting in scoping reviews differs from data extraction in systematic reviews. While systematic reviews aim to synthesize the results and assess the quality of individual studies, scoping reviews focus on mapping the existing literature and identifying key concepts, themes, and gaps in the research.
Therefore, the data charting process in scoping reviews is typically broader in scope and may involve collecting a wider range of data items compared to the more focused data extraction process used in systematic reviews.
This process goes beyond simply extracting data; it involves characterizing and summarizing research evidence, which ultimately helps identify research gaps.
“Search results for all databases were merged. Duplicates and nonrelated papers were excluded. Titles and abstracts of the remaining papers were assessed against the inclusion and exclusion criteria independently by both authors. The resulting papers were pooled and disagreements were resolved through discussion based on the full text article. Following this stage, a standardized form was used to summarize the information in each article. The variables extracted were: reference/ country, aim of the study, study design, year of publication, and main finding/results.”
“A data-charting form was jointly developed by two reviewers to determine which variables to extract. The two reviewers independently charted the data, discussed the results and continuously updated the data-charting form in an iterative process.”
Lenzen, S. A., Daniëls, R., van Bokhoven, M. A., van der Weijden, T., & Beurskens, A. (2017). Disentangling self-management goal setting and action planning: A scoping review. PloS one , 12 (11), e0188822.
If an article was eligible for inclusion in this study, data related to the patient-centered care framework or model presented in the article was extracted by the lead author and reviewed by a second author (JCM). Data extracted from the reviewed patient-centered care frameworks and models was entered into data extraction records and synthesized in summary format. Data were systematically charted using the data charting form developed in Microsoft Excel. Information on authorship, article type, population, and patientcentered care approach were recorded on this form. A second data charting form was developed to chart data on the communication systematic reviews identified. Information on clinical context, patient-centered care focus, number of studies reviewed and key findings were recorded on this form.
Constand, M. K., MacDermid, J. C., Dal Bello-Haas, V., & Law, M. (2014). Scoping review of patient-centered care approaches in healthcare. BMC health services research , 14 , 1-9.
The final charting form, which clearly defines each item, should be included in the scoping review as an appendix or supplementary file, if possible.
“We abstracted data on article characteristics (e.g., country of origin, funder), engagement characteristics and contextual factors (e.g., type of knowledge user, country income level, type of engagement activity, frequency and intensity of engagement, use of a framework to inform the intervention), barriers and facilitators to engagement, and results of any formal assessment of engagement (e.g., attitudes, beliefs, knowledge, benefits, unintended consequences).”
Tricco, A. C., Zarin, W., Rios, P., Nincic, V., Khan, P. A., Ghassemi, M., … & Langlois, E. V. (2018). Engaging policy-makers, health system managers, and policy analysts in the knowledge synthesis process: a scoping review. Implementation Science , 13 , 1-19.
The key element of a scoping review is the synthesis: that is the process that brings together the findings from the set of included studies in order to draw conclusions based on the body of evidence.
Data synthesis in a scoping review involves collating, combining, and summarizing findings from the included studies.
This process aims to provide a reliable and comprehensive answer to the review question by considering the strength of the evidence, examining the consistency of observed effects, and investigating any inconsistencies.
The data synthesis will be presented in the results section of the scoping review.
Scoping reviews often use a more descriptive approach to synthesis, summarizing the types of evidence available, key findings, and research gaps.
Remember, the goal in a scoping review is not to critically appraise the quality of individual studies or to provide a definitive answer to a narrow research question.
Instead, the synthesis aims to provide a broad overview of the field, mapping out the existing literature and identifying areas for further research.
This descriptive approach allows for a comprehensive understanding of the landscape of a particular research area.
“We grouped the studies by the types of behavior they analyzed, and summarized the type of settings, populations and study designs for each group, along with the measures used and broad findings. Where we identified a systematic review, we counted the number of studies included in the review that potentially met our inclusion criteria and noted how many studies had been missed by our search.”
Hutchinson, J., Prady, S. L., Smith, M. A., White, P. C., & Graham, H. M. (2015). A scoping review of observational studies examining relationships between environmental behaviors and health behaviors. International journal of environmental research and public health , 12 (5), 4833-4858.
The findings should be presented in a clear and logical way that answers the research question(s). This section might include tables, figures, or narrative summaries to illustrate the data.
Write a clear, concise narrative that brings together all of these elements. This should provide readers with a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge in the field, highlighting both what is known and what remains to be explored.
The primary goal of a narrative summary is to weave together the information extracted from multiple sources into a cohesive and understandable narrative. This story should focus on why a specific action is necessary, should be discontinued, or lacks sufficient evidence to determine its efficacy
A well-crafted narrative summary often utilizes headings and subheadings to organize the synthesized information logically.
This approach makes it easier for readers to follow the thought process and understand the relationships between different pieces of evidence.
Strategies on how to be sensitive to patient needs were primarily discussed in the qualitative research articles included in this review. Such strategies included acknowledging and adapting to unique patient identifiers [19,24,25]. For example, clinicians are urged to observe and reflect on fluctuating levels of patient alertness, patient comfort levels in the presence or absence of family members, and different communication barriers such as hearing loss, in order to facilitate clinical interactions [15,19,22]. Of the articles reviewed, 58% identified that careful observation of unique patient characteristics is necessary to providing care that will lead to optimal patient receptiveness and positive health outcomes.
While narrative summaries primarily use text, incorporating tables, charts, or diagrams can enhance clarity, particularly when presenting complex data patterns.
However, always accompany these visual aids with a clear textual explanation to ensure comprehensive understanding.
Using a PRISMA flowchart in a scoping review is considered good practice. It promotes transparency and allows for a clear understanding of how sources were selected.
The flowchart illustrates the step-by-step process of screening, filtering, and selecting studies based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Petersen, B., Koshy-Chenthittayil, S., DeArmond, M., & Caromile, L. A. (2023). Assessment of diversity-based approaches used by American Universities to increase recruitment and retention of biomedical sciences research faculty members: A scoping review protocol. Plos one , 18 (6), e0276089.
Summarizing the evidence in relation to the purpose of the review, making conclusions and noting any implications of the findings.
It is also essential to remember that scoping reviews, unlike systematic reviews, do not aim to provide concrete recommendations for practice or policy.
Their primary function is to map the existing evidence, identify knowledge gaps, and clarify concepts, rather than synthesize results for direct application in clinical or policy settings
“In this scoping review we identified 88 primary studies addressing dissemination and implementation research across various settings of dementia care published between 1998 and 2015. Our findings indicate a paucity of research focusing specifically on dissemination of knowledge within dementia care and a limited number of studies on implementation in this area. We also found that training and educating professionals, developing stakeholder interrelationships, and using evaluative and iterative strategies are frequently employed to introduce and promote change in practice. However, although important and feasible, these strategies only partly address what is repeatedly highlighted in the evidence base: that organisational factors are reported as the main barrier to implementation of knowledge within dementia care. Moreover, included studies clearly support an increased effort to improve the quality of dementia care provided in residential settings in the last decade.”
Lourida, I., Abbott, R. A., Rogers, M., Lang, I. A., Stein, K., Kent, B., & Thompson Coon, J. (2017). Dissemination and implementation research in dementia care: a systematic scoping review and evidence map. BMC geriatrics , 17 , 1-12.
When considering the limitations of a review process, particularly scoping reviews, it’s essential to acknowledge that the goal is breadth, not depth, of information.
This means that unlike systematic reviews, scoping reviews generally don’t involve a formal appraisal of the methodological quality of included studies, unless specifically required by the review’s aim.
“Our scoping review has some limitations. To make our review more feasible, we were only able to include a random sample of rapid reviews from websites of rapid review producers. Further adding to this issue is that many rapid reviews contain proprietary information and are not publicly available. As such, our results are only likely generalizable to rapid reviews that are publicly available. Furthermore, this scoping review was an enormous undertaking and our results are only up to date as of May 2013.”
Tricco, A. C., Antony, J., Zarin, W., Strifler, L., Ghassemi, M., Ivory, J., … & Straus, S. E. (2015). A scoping review of rapid review methods. BMC medicine , 13 , 1-15.
Discuss implications:.
“The lack of evidence to support physiotherapy interventions for this population appears to pose a challenge to physiotherapists. The aim of this scoping review was to identify gaps in the literature which may guide a future systematic review. However, the lack of evidence found means that undertaking a systematic review is not appropriate or necessary […]. This advocates high quality research being needed to determine what physiotherapy techniques may be of benefit for this population and to help guide physiotherapists as how to deliver this.”
Hall, A. J., Lang, I. A., Endacott, R., Hall, A., & Goodwin, V. A. (2017). Physiotherapy interventions for people with dementia and a hip fracture—a scoping review of the literature. Physiotherapy , 103 (4), 361-368.
Why the Reserve Bank is highly unlikely to lift interest rates next week, even if inflation climbs
The inflation figure due to be released to is different than most. It's focusing the minds of politicians as well as economists.
Inflation has been falling for the past five quarters, getting closer and closer to the Reserve Bank's target band.
At the last quarterly read, three months ago, it wasn't far away. Inflation came in at 3.6 per cent , well down from the peak of 7.8 per cent , and within sight of the 2-3 per cent band.
There had been talk about a cut in interest rates , soon. It's a good idea to ease rates before inflation is actually in the band, for the same reason it's a good idea to ease off on the accelerator and tap on the brakes before you want to stop a car: changes in interest rates affect things with a lag .
Now there are forecasts that the figure out on Wednesday will show inflation has gone up, perhaps to 3.8 per cent , perhaps to 3.9 per cent , or perhaps to 4 per cent or more.
What has politicians transfixed is the possibility that the Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) will conclude that progress on inflation has stalled and it needs to push up interest rates at least one more time to make sure inflation heads back down.
The bank could do that after its board meeting on Tuesday next week , when it publishes its quarterly statement on where the economy is heading.
A rate hike in what's now the lead-up to next year's election might do to the Albanese government what a rate hike before the last election did to the Morrison government — it helped push them out of office.
But I think there's a good chance the Reserve Bank won't push up rates, even if the inflation number is high, for a number of reasons.
One is that the Reserve Bank itself has been forecasting inflation of 3.8 per cent in the year to June. Inflation shot down to 3.6 per cent sooner than it expected in March, and a move back up to 3.8 per cent will return things to where it expected them to be.
What'll matter more to the bank is what's driving inflation. Back in June, the bank's new deputy governor let us in on his thinking about that.
Andrew Hauser took up his position at the Reserve Bank in February, after a career helping set rates at the Bank of England.
He noted that inflation in the price of goods was coming down faster than inflation in the price of services, but said that wasn't unusual. Across most countries, the pictures looked " incredibly similar ".
It might be that high rates were taking "a little bit longer" to crimp inflation in the prices of services than goods. If so, the right response would be to "hold your nerve" and note that services inflation has been coming down but in a "slightly bumpy way".
The other point Hauser was especially keen to make is that the prices of many services are "administered" — that is, set by the government or a tribunal.
The prices of childcare, hospital care, electricity, water, gas and public transport are, to a large extent, administered. They are beyond the scope of the Reserve Bank to influence by moving interest rates.
There was "an interesting question". Should the Reserve Bank strip out these prices out of the inflation measure it targets, given that it can't target them, and just target the rest? Or should it push down on the rest "a little bit further" to bring total inflation back to target?
Hauser spoke as if someone calculated the inflation rate on only the things the Reserve Bank could influence, they would find out it was already very low.
So this week, the ANZ Bank economist Blair Chapman did that — and that's what he found. Inflation in the prices the Reserve Bank could easily influence was already back within its target band.
Inflation in other prices — in administered prices, or prices automatically indexed to previous inflation — remained above the band, but was coming down.
And Hauser made another point he thought was exceptionally important to him, as a new arrival from the United Kingdom: Australia isn't the UK .
In the UK, the Bank of England's primary goal is to bring inflation back to target. Everything else is secondary, subject to the overriding goal, including supporting economic growth and employment.
In Australia, there's a "more balanced objective".
Here, the Reserve Bank has two goals , neither of which trumps the other.
One is "consumer price inflation between 2 per cent and 3 per cent".
The other is "sustained and inclusive full employment where everyone who wants a job can find one without searching for too long".
The Reserve Bank doesn't have the right to put one ahead of the other.
Australia has chosen to give a greater weight to employment than the UK, and Hauser said "to be honest, so far that strategy has worked".
The number of jobs that are being created is just enormous. Sometimes you talk about not celebrating success enough; this is an incredible achievement. When you think about adjustments of this scale in the past, they have always involved very, very sharp adjustment in the labour market.
Hauser likes what he sees about Australia. There is "not much to not like here".
If the price of Australia's focus on jobs is that "services inflation is taking a bit longer to come down," he gives the impression he is not too concerned.
When it makes its decision next Tuesday, the Reserve Bank will be concerned not so much with where inflation has been (that's what this week's figures will tell us), but where it is going — which is probably down.
And it'll be concerned with where employment is going, which is probably also down given very weak economic growth .
If Wednesday's figures show inflation alarmingly high, the Reserve Bank will have choice no but to push up rates next week. But otherwise, it's likely to hold its nerve and watch as inflation continues to decline.
Peter Martin is visiting fellow at the Crawford School of Public Policy, Australian National University. This article originally appeared on The Conversation .
Why the rba should hold off on rate hikes.
We use some essential cookies to make this website work.
We’d like to set additional cookies to understand how you use GOV.UK, remember your settings and improve government services.
We also use cookies set by other sites to help us deliver content from their services.
You have accepted additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.
You have rejected additional cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.
Recommendations from the NHS Pay Review Body on the pay of NHS staff paid on Agenda for Change terms and conditions in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Nhs pay review body thirty-seventh report 2024.
Ref: ISBN 978-1-5286-5002-1, CP 1119
PDF , 2.2 MB , 137 pages
Order a copy
This file may not be suitable for users of assistive technology.
This report sets out the NHSPRB ’s analysis of evidence provided by relevant organisations and makes observations on the pay of NHS staff paid under Agenda for Change for 2024. The NHSPRB provides independent advice on the pay of NHS staff to the:
Sign up for emails or print this page, is this page useful.
Don’t include personal or financial information like your National Insurance number or credit card details.
To help us improve GOV.UK, we’d like to know more about your visit today. Please fill in this survey (opens in a new tab) .
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
A literature review is a survey of scholarly knowledge on a topic. Our guide with examples, video, and templates can help you write yours.
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).
The topic must at least be: interesting to you (ideally, you should have come across a series of recent papers related to your line of work that call for a critical summary), an important aspect of the field (so that many readers will be interested in the review and there will be enough material to write it), and.
Don't let a bad structure ruin your literature review. Learn how to structure your literature review and download our free template.
A literature review may consist of simply a summary of key sources, but in the social sciences, a literature review usually has an organizational pattern and combines both summary and synthesis, often within specific conceptual categories.
How do you write a good literature review? This step-by-step guide on how to write an excellent literature review covers all aspects of planning and writing literature reviews for academic papers and theses.
A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research. There are five key steps to writing a literature review: Search for relevant literature. Evaluate sources. Identify themes, debates and gaps.
Compiling and synthesizing literature as a justification for one's own research is a key element of most academic work. Nonetheless, both the strategies and components of literature reviews vary based on the genre, length, and prospective audience of a text. This resource gives advice on how to effectively assess, synthesize, summarize, and make connections between a variety of sources.
This guide will help you understand what is a Literature Review, why it is important and how it is done.
INTRODUCTION Whatever stage you are at in your academic life, you will have to review the literature and write about it. You will be asked to do this as a student when you write essays, dissertations and theses. Later, whenever you write an academic paper, there will usually be some element of literature review in the introduction. And if you have to write a grant application, you will be ...
A formal literature review is an evidence-based, in-depth analysis of a subject. There are many reasons for writing one and these will influence the length and style of your review, but in essence a literature review is a critical appraisal of the current collective knowledge on a subject. Rather than just being an exhaustive list of all that ...
A literature review is a comprehensive analysis of existing research on a topic, identifying trends, gaps, and insights to inform new scholarly contributions. Read this comprehensive article to learn how to write a literature review, with examples.
Learn everything you need to know about how to write literature reviews — how long it should be, the different types, how to write a literature review, among many other things.
Steps to Completing a Literature Review. Find. Conduct searches for relevant information. Evaluate. Critically review your sources. Summarize. Determine the most important and relevant information from each source, theories, findings, etc. Synthesize. Create a synthesis matrix to find connections between resources, and ensure your sources ...
This puzzle leads to your research question and clarifies which literature(s) you should draw on at the beginning of your literature review. Theorize that tokens in the workplace experience isolation and obstacles to advancement. They attribute this to the the tokens low numbers and low status.
Your literature review should be guided by your central research question. The literature represents background and research developments related to a specific research question, interpreted and analyzed by you in a synthesized way.
Definition. 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.
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 ...
Literature Review is a comprehensive survey of the works published in a particular field of study or line of research, usually over a specific period of time, in the form of an in-depth, critical bibliographic essay or annotated list in which attention is drawn to the most significant works. Also, we can define a literature review as the ...
In this article, through a systematic search on the methodology of literature review, we categorize a typology of literature reviews, discuss steps in conducting a systematic literature review, and provide suggestions on how to enhance rigor in literature reviews in planning education and research.
Where does the literature review go in a dissertation? The literature review usually comes near the beginning of your dissertation. After the introduction, it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology.
Where does the literature review go in a dissertation? 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.
The introduction to a literature review serves as your reader's guide through your academic work and thought process. Explore the significance of literature review introductions in review papers, academic papers, essays, theses, and dissertations. We delve into the purpose and necessity of these introductions, explore the essential components of literature review introductions, and provide ...
A scoping review is a type of research synthesis that aims to map the existing literature on a broad topic to identify key concepts, gaps, and types of evidence.
The RBA will decide whether to hike or hold rates next Tuesday. The bank's new deputy governor has offered us some clues to which way they might go.
Recommendations from the NHS Pay Review Body on the pay of NHS staff paid on Agenda for Change terms and conditions in England, Wales and Northern Ireland.