Types of reviews
A PhD or a Masters by Research thesis will include a chapter devoted to a review of the literature. This type of review is known as a traditional or narrative review, or simply a literature review.
The following table outlines the different features of a systematic review and a traditional literature review.
| Features | Systematic review | Literature review |
|---|---|---|
| Aim | Tightly specified objectives to answer a specific research question | Gain a broad understanding and description of a field |
| Scope | Narrow focus | Big picture |
| Planning the review | Transparent process with documented audit trail defined in a protocol | Nothing defined, allows for creativity and exploration |
| Searches | Rigorous and comprehensive search for ALL studies, explicit search strategy across numerous sources | Searching is probing, moving from study to study, following-up leads |
| Study selection | Predetermined criteria for including and excluding studies uniformly applied | Selection is variable as determined by the reviewer |
| Appraisal | Checklists to assess the quality of studies | Based on the reviewer’s opinion |
| Synthesis | Tabular format with short summary answers | Discursive |
| Methodology | Must be presented for transparency | Not necessarily provided |
| Inferences | Based on all available evidence | Based on a sample of the evidence |
| Timeline | Months to years (average 18 months) | Weeks to months |
| Authors | Three or more | One or more |
| Value | Connects practising clinicians to high-quality evidence; Informs evidence-based practice | Provides a summary of literature on a topic |
Some brief information about other types of reviews, such as scoping reviews, rapid reviews, and meta-analyses is available from the online library guide: Systematic Reviews
Activity
Watch the following short video to learn about the difference between a systematic review and a meta-analysis.
The Difference Between a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis (4:44 mins) by UniSA Library (YouTube)
