critical literature review paper

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

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). When we say “literature review” or refer to “the literature,” we are talking about the research ( scholarship ) in a given field. You will often see the terms “the research,” “the scholarship,” and “the literature” used mostly interchangeably.

Where, when, and why would I write a lit review?

There are a number of different situations where you might write a literature review, each with slightly different expectations; different disciplines, too, have field-specific expectations for what a literature review is and does. For instance, in the humanities, authors might include more overt argumentation and interpretation of source material in their literature reviews, whereas in the sciences, authors are more likely to report study designs and results in their literature reviews; these differences reflect these disciplines’ purposes and conventions in scholarship. You should always look at examples from your own discipline and talk to professors or mentors in your field to be sure you understand your discipline’s conventions, for literature reviews as well as for any other genre.

A literature review can be a part of a research paper or scholarly article, usually falling after the introduction and before the research methods sections. In these cases, the lit review just needs to cover scholarship that is important to the issue you are writing about; sometimes it will also cover key sources that informed your research methodology.

Lit reviews can also be standalone pieces, either as assignments in a class or as publications. In a class, a lit review may be assigned to help students familiarize themselves with a topic and with scholarship in their field, get an idea of the other researchers working on the topic they’re interested in, find gaps in existing research in order to propose new projects, and/or develop a theoretical framework and methodology for later research. As a publication, a lit review usually is meant to help make other scholars’ lives easier by collecting and summarizing, synthesizing, and analyzing existing research on a topic. This can be especially helpful for students or scholars getting into a new research area, or for directing an entire community of scholars toward questions that have not yet been answered.

What are the parts of a lit review?

Most lit reviews use a basic introduction-body-conclusion structure; if your lit review is part of a larger paper, the introduction and conclusion pieces may be just a few sentences while you focus most of your attention on the body. If your lit review is a standalone piece, the introduction and conclusion take up more space and give you a place to discuss your goals, research methods, and conclusions separately from where you discuss the literature itself.

Introduction:

• An introductory paragraph that explains what your working topic and thesis is
• A forecast of key topics or texts that will appear in the review
• Potentially, a description of how you found sources and how you analyzed them for inclusion and discussion in the review (more often found in published, standalone literature reviews than in lit review sections in an article or research paper)
• Summarize and synthesize: Give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
• Analyze and interpret: Don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
• Critically Evaluate: Mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
• Write in well-structured paragraphs: Use transition words and topic sentence to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.

Conclusion:

• Summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance
• Connect it back to your primary research question

How should I organize my lit review?

Lit reviews can take many different organizational patterns depending on what you are trying to accomplish with the review. Here are some examples:

• Chronological : The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time, which helps familiarize the audience with the topic (for instance if you are introducing something that is not commonly known in your field). If you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. Try to analyze the patterns, turning points, and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred (as mentioned previously, this may not be appropriate in your discipline — check with a teacher or mentor if you’re unsure).
• Thematic : If you have found some recurring central themes that you will continue working with throughout your piece, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic. For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women.
• Qualitative versus quantitative research
• Empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the research by sociological, historical, or cultural sources
• Theoretical : In many humanities articles, the literature review is the foundation for the theoretical framework. You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts. You can argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach or combine various theorical concepts to create a framework for your research.

What are some strategies or tips I can use while writing my lit review?

Any lit review is only as good as the research it discusses; make sure your sources are well-chosen and your research is thorough. Don’t be afraid to do more research if you discover a new thread as you’re writing. More info on the research process is available in our "Conducting Research" resources .

As you’re doing your research, create an annotated bibliography ( see our page on the this type of document ). Much of the information used in an annotated bibliography can be used also in a literature review, so you’ll be not only partially drafting your lit review as you research, but also developing your sense of the larger conversation going on among scholars, professionals, and any other stakeholders in your topic.

Usually you will need to synthesize research rather than just summarizing it. This means drawing connections between sources to create a picture of the scholarly conversation on a topic over time. Many student writers struggle to synthesize because they feel they don’t have anything to add to the scholars they are citing; here are some strategies to help you:

• It often helps to remember that the point of these kinds of syntheses is to show your readers how you understand your research, to help them read the rest of your paper.
• Writing teachers often say synthesis is like hosting a dinner party: imagine all your sources are together in a room, discussing your topic. What are they saying to each other?
• Look at the in-text citations in each paragraph. Are you citing just one source for each paragraph? This usually indicates summary only. When you have multiple sources cited in a paragraph, you are more likely to be synthesizing them (not always, but often
• Read more about synthesis here.

The most interesting literature reviews are often written as arguments (again, as mentioned at the beginning of the page, this is discipline-specific and doesn’t work for all situations). Often, the literature review is where you can establish your research as filling a particular gap or as relevant in a particular way. You have some chance to do this in your introduction in an article, but the literature review section gives a more extended opportunity to establish the conversation in the way you would like your readers to see it. You can choose the intellectual lineage you would like to be part of and whose definitions matter most to your thinking (mostly humanities-specific, but this goes for sciences as well). In addressing these points, you argue for your place in the conversation, which tends to make the lit review more compelling than a simple reporting of other sources.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

Published on January 2, 2023 by Shona McCombes . Revised on September 11, 2023.

What is a literature review? 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 that you can later apply to your paper, thesis, or dissertation topic .

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

• Search for relevant literature
• Evaluate sources
• Identify themes, debates, and gaps
• Outline the structure
• Write your literature review

A good literature review doesn’t just summarize sources—it analyzes, synthesizes , and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

What is the purpose of a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1 – search for relevant literature, step 2 – evaluate and select sources, step 3 – identify themes, debates, and gaps, step 4 – outline your literature review’s structure, step 5 – write your literature review, free lecture slides, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions, introduction.

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

When you write a thesis , dissertation , or research paper , you will likely have to conduct a literature review to situate your research within existing knowledge. The literature review gives you a chance to:

• Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and its scholarly context
• Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
• Position your work in relation to other researchers and theorists
• Show how your research addresses a gap or contributes to a debate
• Evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of the scholarly debates around your topic.

Writing literature reviews is a particularly important skill if you want to apply for graduate school or pursue a career in research. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Writing literature reviews can be quite challenging! A good starting point could be to look at some examples, depending on what kind of literature review you’d like to write.

• Example literature review #1: “Why Do People Migrate? A Review of the Theoretical Literature” ( Theoretical literature review about the development of economic migration theory from the 1950s to today.)
• Example literature review #2: “Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines” ( Methodological literature review about interdisciplinary knowledge acquisition and production.)
• Example literature review #3: “The Use of Technology in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Thematic literature review about the effects of technology on language acquisition.)
• Example literature review #4: “Learners’ Listening Comprehension Difficulties in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Chronological literature review about how the concept of listening skills has changed over time.)

You can also check out our templates with literature review examples and sample outlines at the links below.

Download Word doc Download Google doc

Before you begin searching for literature, you need a clearly defined topic .

If you are writing the literature review section of a dissertation or research paper, you will search for literature related to your research problem and questions .

Make a list of keywords

Start by creating a list of keywords related to your research question. Include each of the key concepts or variables you’re interested in, and list any synonyms and related terms. You can add to this list as you discover new keywords in the process of your literature search.

• Social media, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, TikTok
• Body image, self-perception, self-esteem, mental health
• Generation Z, teenagers, adolescents, youth

Search for relevant sources

Use your keywords to begin searching for sources. Some useful databases to search for journals and articles include:

• Your university’s library catalogue
• Google Scholar
• Project Muse (humanities and social sciences)
• Medline (life sciences and biomedicine)
• EconLit (economics)
• Inspec (physics, engineering and computer science)

You can also use boolean operators to help narrow down your search.

Make sure to read the abstract to find out whether an article is relevant to your question. When you find a useful book or article, you can check the bibliography to find other relevant sources.

You likely won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on your topic, so it will be necessary to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your research question.

For each publication, ask yourself:

• What question or problem is the author addressing?
• What are the key concepts and how are they defined?
• What are the key theories, models, and methods?
• Does the research use established frameworks or take an innovative approach?
• What are the results and conclusions of the study?
• How does the publication relate to other literature in the field? Does it confirm, add to, or challenge established knowledge?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research?

Make sure the sources you use are credible , and make sure you read any landmark studies and major theories in your field of research.

You can use our template to summarize and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using. Click on either button below to download.

Take notes and cite your sources

As you read, you should also begin the writing process. Take notes that you can later incorporate into the text of your literature review.

It is important to keep track of your sources with citations to avoid plagiarism . It can be helpful to make an annotated bibliography , where you compile full citation information and write a paragraph of summary and analysis for each source. This helps you remember what you read and saves time later in the process.

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students. Free citation check included.

Try for free

To begin organizing your literature review’s argument and structure, be sure you understand the connections and relationships between the sources you’ve read. Based on your reading and notes, you can look for:

• Trends and patterns (in theory, method or results): do certain approaches become more or less popular over time?
• Themes: what questions or concepts recur across the literature?
• Debates, conflicts and contradictions: where do sources disagree?
• Pivotal publications: are there any influential theories or studies that changed the direction of the field?
• Gaps: what is missing from the literature? Are there weaknesses that need to be addressed?

This step will help you work out the structure of your literature review and (if applicable) show how your own research will contribute to existing knowledge.

• Most research has focused on young women.
• There is an increasing interest in the visual aspects of social media.
• But there is still a lack of robust research on highly visual platforms like Instagram and Snapchat—this is a gap that you could address in your own research.

There are various approaches to organizing the body of a literature review. Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time. However, if you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order.

Try to analyze patterns, turning points and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred.

If you have found some recurring central themes, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic.

For example, if you are reviewing literature about inequalities in migrant health outcomes, key themes might include healthcare policy, language barriers, cultural attitudes, legal status, and economic access.

Methodological

If you draw your sources from different disciplines or fields that use a variety of research methods , you might want to compare the results and conclusions that emerge from different approaches. For example:

• Look at what results have emerged in qualitative versus quantitative research
• Discuss how the topic has been approached by empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the literature into sociological, historical, and cultural sources

Theoretical

A literature review is often the foundation for a theoretical framework . You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts.

You might argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach, or combine various theoretical concepts to create a framework for your research.

Like any other academic text , your literature review should have an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion . What you include in each depends on the objective of your literature review.

The introduction should clearly establish the focus and purpose of the literature review.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you might want to divide the body into subsections. You can use a subheading for each theme, time period, or methodological approach.

As you write, you can follow these tips:

• Summarize and synthesize: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
• Analyze and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers — add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
• Critically evaluate: mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
• Write in well-structured paragraphs: use transition words and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts

In the conclusion, you should summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance.

When you’ve finished writing and revising your literature review, don’t forget to proofread thoroughly before submitting. Not a language expert? Check out Scribbr’s professional proofreading services !

This article has been adapted into lecture slides that you can use to teach your students about writing a literature review.

Scribbr slides are free to use, customize, and distribute for educational purposes.

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

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.

There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:

• To familiarize yourself with the current state of knowledge on your topic
• To ensure that you’re not just repeating what others have already done
• To identify gaps in knowledge and unresolved problems that your research can address
• To develop your theoretical framework and methodology
• To provide an overview of the key findings and debates on the topic

Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.

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 literature review is a survey of credible sources on a topic, often used in dissertations , theses, and research papers . Literature reviews give an overview of knowledge on a subject, helping you identify relevant theories and methods, as well as gaps in existing research. Literature reviews are set up similarly to other  academic texts , with an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion .

An  annotated bibliography is a list of  source references that has a short description (called an annotation ) for each of the sources. It is often assigned as part of the research process for a  paper .  

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved September 3, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

What is a Literature Review? How to Write It (with Examples)

A literature review is a critical analysis and synthesis of existing research on a particular topic. It provides an overview of the current state of knowledge, identifies gaps, and highlights key findings in the literature. 1 The purpose of a literature review is to situate your own research within the context of existing scholarship, demonstrating your understanding of the topic and showing how your work contributes to the ongoing conversation in the field. Learning how to write a literature review is a critical tool for successful research. Your ability to summarize and synthesize prior research pertaining to a certain topic demonstrates your grasp on the topic of study, and assists in the learning process. 

Table of Contents

What is the purpose of literature review , a. habitat loss and species extinction: , b. range shifts and phenological changes: , c. ocean acidification and coral reefs: , d. adaptive strategies and conservation efforts: .

• Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question: 
• Decide on the Scope of Your Review: 
• Select Databases for Searches: 
• Conduct Searches and Keep Track: 
• Review the Literature: 
• Organize and Write Your Literature Review: 
• How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal? 

Frequently asked questions 

What is a literature review .

A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with the existing literature, establishes the context for their own research, and contributes to scholarly conversations on the topic. One of the purposes of a literature review is also to help researchers avoid duplicating previous work and ensure that their research is informed by and builds upon the existing body of knowledge.

A literature review serves several important purposes within academic and research contexts. Here are some key objectives and functions of a literature review: 2  

1. Contextualizing the Research Problem: The literature review provides a background and context for the research problem under investigation. It helps to situate the study within the existing body of knowledge. 

2. Identifying Gaps in Knowledge: By identifying gaps, contradictions, or areas requiring further research, the researcher can shape the research question and justify the significance of the study. This is crucial for ensuring that the new research contributes something novel to the field.

Find academic papers related to your research topic faster. Try Research on Paperpal

3. Understanding Theoretical and Conceptual Frameworks: Literature reviews help researchers gain an understanding of the theoretical and conceptual frameworks used in previous studies. This aids in the development of a theoretical framework for the current research. 

4. Providing Methodological Insights: Another purpose of literature reviews is that it allows researchers to learn about the methodologies employed in previous studies. This can help in choosing appropriate research methods for the current study and avoiding pitfalls that others may have encountered. 

5. Establishing Credibility: A well-conducted literature review demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with existing scholarship, establishing their credibility and expertise in the field. It also helps in building a solid foundation for the new research. 

6. Informing Hypotheses or Research Questions: The literature review guides the formulation of hypotheses or research questions by highlighting relevant findings and areas of uncertainty in existing literature. 

Literature review example 

Let’s delve deeper with a literature review example: Let’s say your literature review is about the impact of climate change on biodiversity. You might format your literature review into sections such as the effects of climate change on habitat loss and species extinction, phenological changes, and marine biodiversity. Each section would then summarize and analyze relevant studies in those areas, highlighting key findings and identifying gaps in the research. The review would conclude by emphasizing the need for further research on specific aspects of the relationship between climate change and biodiversity. The following literature review template provides a glimpse into the recommended literature review structure and content, demonstrating how research findings are organized around specific themes within a broader topic. 

Literature Review on Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity:  

Climate change is a global phenomenon with far-reaching consequences, including significant impacts on biodiversity. This literature review synthesizes key findings from various studies: 

Climate change-induced alterations in temperature and precipitation patterns contribute to habitat loss, affecting numerous species (Thomas et al., 2004). The review discusses how these changes increase the risk of extinction, particularly for species with specific habitat requirements. 

Observations of range shifts and changes in the timing of biological events (phenology) are documented in response to changing climatic conditions (Parmesan & Yohe, 2003). These shifts affect ecosystems and may lead to mismatches between species and their resources. 

The review explores the impact of climate change on marine biodiversity, emphasizing ocean acidification’s threat to coral reefs (Hoegh-Guldberg et al., 2007). Changes in pH levels negatively affect coral calcification, disrupting the delicate balance of marine ecosystems. 

Recognizing the urgency of the situation, the literature review discusses various adaptive strategies adopted by species and conservation efforts aimed at mitigating the impacts of climate change on biodiversity (Hannah et al., 2007). It emphasizes the importance of interdisciplinary approaches for effective conservation planning. 

Strengthen your literature review with factual insights. Try Research on Paperpal for free!

How to write a good literature review 

Writing a literature review involves summarizing and synthesizing existing research on a particular topic. A good literature review format should include the following elements. 

Introduction: The introduction sets the stage for your literature review, providing context and introducing the main focus of your review. 

• Opening Statement: Begin with a general statement about the broader topic and its significance in the field. 
• Scope and Purpose: Clearly define the scope of your literature review. Explain the specific research question or objective you aim to address. 
• Organizational Framework: Briefly outline the structure of your literature review, indicating how you will categorize and discuss the existing research. 
• Significance of the Study: Highlight why your literature review is important and how it contributes to the understanding of the chosen topic. 
• Thesis Statement: Conclude the introduction with a concise thesis statement that outlines the main argument or perspective you will develop in the body of the literature review. 

Body: The body of the literature review is where you provide a comprehensive analysis of existing literature, grouping studies based on themes, methodologies, or other relevant criteria. 

• Organize by Theme or Concept: Group studies that share common themes, concepts, or methodologies. Discuss each theme or concept in detail, summarizing key findings and identifying gaps or areas of disagreement. 
• Critical Analysis: Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each study. Discuss the methodologies used, the quality of evidence, and the overall contribution of each work to the understanding of the topic. 
• Synthesis of Findings: Synthesize the information from different studies to highlight trends, patterns, or areas of consensus in the literature. 
• Identification of Gaps: Discuss any gaps or limitations in the existing research and explain how your review contributes to filling these gaps. 
• Transition between Sections: Provide smooth transitions between different themes or concepts to maintain the flow of your literature review. 

Write and Cite as yo u go with Paperpal Research. Start now for free!

Conclusion: The conclusion of your literature review should summarize the main findings, highlight the contributions of the review, and suggest avenues for future research. 

• Summary of Key Findings: Recap the main findings from the literature and restate how they contribute to your research question or objective. 
• Contributions to the Field: Discuss the overall contribution of your literature review to the existing knowledge in the field. 
• Implications and Applications: Explore the practical implications of the findings and suggest how they might impact future research or practice. 
• Recommendations for Future Research: Identify areas that require further investigation and propose potential directions for future research in the field. 
• Final Thoughts: Conclude with a final reflection on the importance of your literature review and its relevance to the broader academic community. 

Conducting a literature review 

Conducting a literature review is an essential step in research that involves reviewing and analyzing existing literature on a specific topic. It’s important to know how to do a literature review effectively, so here are the steps to follow: 1  

Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question:  

• Select a topic that is relevant to your field of study. 
• Clearly define your research question or objective. Determine what specific aspect of the topic do you want to explore? 

Decide on the Scope of Your Review:  

• Determine the timeframe for your literature review. Are you focusing on recent developments, or do you want a historical overview? 
• Consider the geographical scope. Is your review global, or are you focusing on a specific region? 
• Define the inclusion and exclusion criteria. What types of sources will you include? Are there specific types of studies or publications you will exclude? 

Select Databases for Searches:  

• Identify relevant databases for your field. Examples include PubMed, IEEE Xplore, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. 
• Consider searching in library catalogs, institutional repositories, and specialized databases related to your topic. 

Conduct Searches and Keep Track:  

• Develop a systematic search strategy using keywords, Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT), and other search techniques. 
• Record and document your search strategy for transparency and replicability. 
• Keep track of the articles, including publication details, abstracts, and links. Use citation management tools like EndNote, Zotero, or Mendeley to organize your references. 

Review the Literature:  

• Evaluate the relevance and quality of each source. Consider the methodology, sample size, and results of studies. 
• Organize the literature by themes or key concepts. Identify patterns, trends, and gaps in the existing research. 
• Summarize key findings and arguments from each source. Compare and contrast different perspectives. 
• Identify areas where there is a consensus in the literature and where there are conflicting opinions. 
• Provide critical analysis and synthesis of the literature. What are the strengths and weaknesses of existing research? 

Organize and Write Your Literature Review:  

• Literature review outline should be based on themes, chronological order, or methodological approaches. 
• Write a clear and coherent narrative that synthesizes the information gathered. 
• Use proper citations for each source and ensure consistency in your citation style (APA, MLA, Chicago, etc.). 
• Conclude your literature review by summarizing key findings, identifying gaps, and suggesting areas for future research. 

Whether you’re exploring a new research field or finding new angles to develop an existing topic, sifting through hundreds of papers can take more time than you have to spare. But what if you could find science-backed insights with verified citations in seconds? That’s the power of Paperpal’s new Research feature!  

How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal?  

Paperpal, an AI writing assistant, integrates powerful academic search capabilities within its writing platform. With the Research | Cite feature, you get 100% factual insights, with citations backed by 250M+ verified research articles, directly within your writing interface. It also allows you auto-cite references in 10,000+ styles and save relevant references in your Citation Library. By eliminating the need to switch tabs to find answers to all your research questions, Paperpal saves time and helps you stay focused on your writing.   

Here’s how to use the Research feature:  

• Ask a question: Get started with a new document on paperpal.com. Click on the “Research | Cite” feature and type your question in plain English. Paperpal will scour over 250 million research articles, including conference papers and preprints, to provide you with accurate insights and citations. 

• Review and Save: Paperpal summarizes the information, while citing sources and listing relevant reads. You can quickly scan the results to identify relevant references and save these directly to your built-in citations library for later access. 
• Cite with Confidence: Paperpal makes it easy to incorporate relevant citations and references in 10,000+ styles into your writing, ensuring your arguments are well-supported by credible sources. This translates to a polished, well-researched literature review. 

The literature review sample and detailed advice on writing and conducting a review will help you produce a well-structured report. But remember that a good literature review is an ongoing process, and it may be necessary to revisit and update it as your research progresses. By combining effortless research with an easy citation process, Paperpal Research streamlines the literature review process and empowers you to write faster and with more confidence. Try Paperpal Research now and see for yourself.  

A literature review is a critical and comprehensive analysis of existing literature (published and unpublished works) on a specific topic or research question and provides a synthesis of the current state of knowledge in a particular field. A well-conducted literature review is crucial for researchers to build upon existing knowledge, avoid duplication of efforts, and contribute to the advancement of their field. It also helps researchers situate their work within a broader context and facilitates the development of a sound theoretical and conceptual framework for their studies.

Literature review is a crucial component of research writing, providing a solid background for a research paper’s investigation. The aim is to keep professionals up to date by providing an understanding of ongoing developments within a specific field, including research methods, and experimental techniques used in that field, and present that knowledge in the form of a written report. Also, the depth and breadth of the literature review emphasizes the credibility of the scholar in his or her field.  

Before writing a literature review, it’s essential to undertake several preparatory steps to ensure that your review is well-researched, organized, and focused. This includes choosing a topic of general interest to you and doing exploratory research on that topic, writing an annotated bibliography, and noting major points, especially those that relate to the position you have taken on the topic. 

Literature reviews and academic research papers are essential components of scholarly work but serve different purposes within the academic realm. 3 A literature review aims to provide a foundation for understanding the current state of research on a particular topic, identify gaps or controversies, and lay the groundwork for future research. Therefore, it draws heavily from existing academic sources, including books, journal articles, and other scholarly publications. In contrast, an academic research paper aims to present new knowledge, contribute to the academic discourse, and advance the understanding of a specific research question. Therefore, it involves a mix of existing literature (in the introduction and literature review sections) and original data or findings obtained through research methods. 

Literature reviews are essential components of academic and research papers, and various strategies can be employed to conduct them effectively. If you want to know how to write a literature review for a research paper, here are four common approaches that are often used by researchers.  Chronological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the chronological order of publication. It helps to trace the development of a topic over time, showing how ideas, theories, and research have evolved.  Thematic Review: Thematic reviews focus on identifying and analyzing themes or topics that cut across different studies. Instead of organizing the literature chronologically, it is grouped by key themes or concepts, allowing for a comprehensive exploration of various aspects of the topic.  Methodological Review: This strategy involves organizing the literature based on the research methods employed in different studies. It helps to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of various methodologies and allows the reader to evaluate the reliability and validity of the research findings.  Theoretical Review: A theoretical review examines the literature based on the theoretical frameworks used in different studies. This approach helps to identify the key theories that have been applied to the topic and assess their contributions to the understanding of the subject.  It’s important to note that these strategies are not mutually exclusive, and a literature review may combine elements of more than one approach. The choice of strategy depends on the research question, the nature of the literature available, and the goals of the review. Additionally, other strategies, such as integrative reviews or systematic reviews, may be employed depending on the specific requirements of the research.

The literature review format can vary depending on the specific publication guidelines. However, there are some common elements and structures that are often followed. Here is a general guideline for the format of a literature review:  Introduction:   Provide an overview of the topic.  Define the scope and purpose of the literature review.  State the research question or objective.  Body:   Organize the literature by themes, concepts, or chronology.  Critically analyze and evaluate each source.  Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the studies.  Highlight any methodological limitations or biases.  Identify patterns, connections, or contradictions in the existing research.  Conclusion:   Summarize the key points discussed in the literature review.  Highlight the research gap.  Address the research question or objective stated in the introduction.  Highlight the contributions of the review and suggest directions for future research.

Both annotated bibliographies and literature reviews involve the examination of scholarly sources. While annotated bibliographies focus on individual sources with brief annotations, literature reviews provide a more in-depth, integrated, and comprehensive analysis of existing literature on a specific topic. The key differences are as follows: 

References 

• Denney, A. S., & Tewksbury, R. (2013). How to write a literature review.  Journal of criminal justice education ,  24 (2), 218-234. 
• Pan, M. L. (2016).  Preparing literature reviews: Qualitative and quantitative approaches . Taylor & Francis. 
• Cantero, C. (2019). How to write a literature review.  San José State University Writing Center . 

Paperpal is a comprehensive AI writing toolkit that helps students and researchers achieve 2x the writing in half the time. It leverages 22+ years of STM experience and insights from millions of research articles to provide in-depth academic writing, language editing, and submission readiness support to help you write better, faster.  

Get accurate academic translations, rewriting support, grammar checks, vocabulary suggestions, and generative AI assistance that delivers human precision at machine speed. Try for free or upgrade to Paperpal Prime starting at US$19 a month to access premium features, including consistency, plagiarism, and 30+ submission readiness checks to help you succeed.  

Experience the future of academic writing – Sign up to Paperpal and start writing for free!  

Related Reads:

• Empirical Research: A Comprehensive Guide for Academics 
• How to Write a Scientific Paper in 10 Steps 
• How Long Should a Chapter Be?
• How to Use Paperpal to Generate Emails & Cover Letters?

6 Tips for Post-Doc Researchers to Take Their Career to the Next Level

Self-plagiarism in research: what it is and how to avoid it, you may also like, academic integrity vs academic dishonesty: types & examples, dissertation printing and binding | types & comparison , what is a dissertation preface definition and examples , the ai revolution: authors’ role in upholding academic..., the future of academia: how ai tools are..., how to write a research proposal: (with examples..., how to write your research paper in apa..., how to choose a dissertation topic, how to write a phd research proposal, how to write an academic paragraph (step-by-step guide).

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• CAREER FEATURE
• 04 December 2020
• Correction 09 December 2020

How to write a superb literature review

Andy Tay is a freelance writer based in Singapore.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Literature reviews are important resources for scientists. They provide historical context for a field while offering opinions on its future trajectory. Creating them can provide inspiration for one’s own research, as well as some practice in writing. But few scientists are trained in how to write a review — or in what constitutes an excellent one. Even picking the appropriate software to use can be an involved decision (see ‘Tools and techniques’). So Nature asked editors and working scientists with well-cited reviews for their tips.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03422-x

Interviews have been edited for length and clarity.

Updates & Corrections

Correction 09 December 2020 : An earlier version of the tables in this article included some incorrect details about the programs Zotero, Endnote and Manubot. These have now been corrected.

Hsing, I.-M., Xu, Y. & Zhao, W. Electroanalysis 19 , 755–768 (2007).

Article   Google Scholar  

Ledesma, H. A. et al. Nature Nanotechnol. 14 , 645–657 (2019).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Brahlek, M., Koirala, N., Bansal, N. & Oh, S. Solid State Commun. 215–216 , 54–62 (2015).

Choi, Y. & Lee, S. Y. Nature Rev. Chem . https://doi.org/10.1038/s41570-020-00221-w (2020).

Download references

Related Articles

• Research management

Massive Attack’s science-led drive to lower music’s carbon footprint

Career Feature 04 SEP 24

Tales of a migratory marine biologist

Career Feature 28 AUG 24

Nail your tech-industry interviews with these six techniques

Career Column 28 AUG 24

Why I’m committed to breaking the bias in large language models

Career Guide 04 SEP 24

Binning out-of-date chemicals? Somebody think about the carbon!

Correspondence 27 AUG 24

No more hunting for replication studies: crowdsourced database makes them easy to find

Nature Index 27 AUG 24

Publishing nightmare: a researcher’s quest to keep his own work from being plagiarized

News 04 SEP 24

Intellectual property and data privacy: the hidden risks of AI

How can I publish open access when I can’t afford the fees?

Career Feature 02 SEP 24

Postdoctoral Associate- Genetic Epidemiology

Houston, Texas (US)

Baylor College of Medicine (BCM)

NOMIS Foundation ETH Postdoctoral Fellowship

The NOMIS Foundation ETH Fellowship Programme supports postdoctoral researchers at ETH Zurich within the Centre for Origin and Prevalence of Life ...

Zurich, Canton of Zürich (CH)

Centre for Origin and Prevalence of Life at ETH Zurich

13 PhD Positions at Heidelberg University

GRK2727/1 – InCheck Innate Immune Checkpoints in Cancer and Tissue Damage

Heidelberg, Baden-Württemberg (DE) and Mannheim, Baden-Württemberg (DE)

Medical Faculties Mannheim & Heidelberg and DKFZ, Germany

Postdoctoral Associate- Environmental Epidemiology

Open faculty positions at the state key laboratory of brain cognition & brain-inspired intelligence.

The laboratory focuses on understanding the mechanisms of brain intelligence and developing the theory and techniques of brain-inspired intelligence.

Shanghai, China

CAS Center for Excellence in Brain Science and Intelligence Technology (CEBSIT)

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Dissertation
• What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples

Published on 22 February 2022 by Shona McCombes . Revised on 7 June 2022.

What is a literature review? 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
• Outline the structure
• Write your literature review

A good literature review doesn’t just summarise sources – it analyses, synthesises, and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Be assured that you'll submit flawless writing. Upload your document to correct all your mistakes.

Table of contents

Why write a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1: search for relevant literature, step 2: evaluate and select sources, step 3: identify themes, debates and gaps, step 4: outline your literature review’s structure, step 5: write your literature review, frequently asked questions about literature reviews, introduction.

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

When you write a dissertation or thesis, you will have to conduct a literature review to situate your research within existing knowledge. The literature review gives you a chance to:

• Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and scholarly context
• Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
• Position yourself in relation to other researchers and theorists
• Show how your dissertation addresses a gap or contributes to a debate

You might also have to write a literature review as a stand-alone assignment. In this case, the purpose is to evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of scholarly debates around a topic.

The content will look slightly different in each case, but the process of conducting a literature review follows the same steps. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

Correct my document today

Writing literature reviews can be quite challenging! A good starting point could be to look at some examples, depending on what kind of literature review you’d like to write.

• Example literature review #1: “Why Do People Migrate? A Review of the Theoretical Literature” ( Theoretical literature review about the development of economic migration theory from the 1950s to today.)
• Example literature review #2: “Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines” ( Methodological literature review about interdisciplinary knowledge acquisition and production.)
• Example literature review #3: “The Use of Technology in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Thematic literature review about the effects of technology on language acquisition.)
• Example literature review #4: “Learners’ Listening Comprehension Difficulties in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Chronological literature review about how the concept of listening skills has changed over time.)

You can also check out our templates with literature review examples and sample outlines at the links below.

Download Word doc Download Google doc

Before you begin searching for literature, you need a clearly defined topic .

If you are writing the literature review section of a dissertation or research paper, you will search for literature related to your research objectives and questions .

If you are writing a literature review as a stand-alone assignment, you will have to choose a focus and develop a central question to direct your search. Unlike a dissertation research question, this question has to be answerable without collecting original data. You should be able to answer it based only on a review of existing publications.

Make a list of keywords

Start by creating a list of keywords related to your research topic. Include each of the key concepts or variables you’re interested in, and list any synonyms and related terms. You can add to this list if you discover new keywords in the process of your literature search.

• Social media, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, TikTok
• Body image, self-perception, self-esteem, mental health
• Generation Z, teenagers, adolescents, youth

Search for relevant sources

Use your keywords to begin searching for sources. Some databases to search for journals and articles include:

• Your university’s library catalogue
• Google Scholar
• Project Muse (humanities and social sciences)
• Medline (life sciences and biomedicine)
• EconLit (economics)
• Inspec (physics, engineering and computer science)

You can use boolean operators to help narrow down your search:

Read the abstract to find out whether an article is relevant to your question. When you find a useful book or article, you can check the bibliography to find other relevant sources.

To identify the most important publications on your topic, take note of recurring citations. If the same authors, books or articles keep appearing in your reading, make sure to seek them out.

You probably won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on the topic – you’ll have to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your questions.

For each publication, ask yourself:

• What question or problem is the author addressing?
• What are the key concepts and how are they defined?
• What are the key theories, models and methods? Does the research use established frameworks or take an innovative approach?
• What are the results and conclusions of the study?
• How does the publication relate to other literature in the field? Does it confirm, add to, or challenge established knowledge?
• How does the publication contribute to your understanding of the topic? What are its key insights and arguments?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research?

Make sure the sources you use are credible, and make sure you read any landmark studies and major theories in your field of research.

You can find out how many times an article has been cited on Google Scholar – a high citation count means the article has been influential in the field, and should certainly be included in your literature review.

The scope of your review will depend on your topic and discipline: in the sciences you usually only review recent literature, but in the humanities you might take a long historical perspective (for example, to trace how a concept has changed in meaning over time).

Remember that you can use our template to summarise and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using!

Take notes and cite your sources

As you read, you should also begin the writing process. Take notes that you can later incorporate into the text of your literature review.

It’s important to keep track of your sources with references to avoid plagiarism . It can be helpful to make an annotated bibliography, where you compile full reference information and write a paragraph of summary and analysis for each source. This helps you remember what you read and saves time later in the process.

You can use our free APA Reference Generator for quick, correct, consistent citations.

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

To begin organising your literature review’s argument and structure, you need to understand the connections and relationships between the sources you’ve read. Based on your reading and notes, you can look for:

• Trends and patterns (in theory, method or results): do certain approaches become more or less popular over time?
• Themes: what questions or concepts recur across the literature?
• Debates, conflicts and contradictions: where do sources disagree?
• Pivotal publications: are there any influential theories or studies that changed the direction of the field?
• Gaps: what is missing from the literature? Are there weaknesses that need to be addressed?

This step will help you work out the structure of your literature review and (if applicable) show how your own research will contribute to existing knowledge.

• Most research has focused on young women.
• There is an increasing interest in the visual aspects of social media.
• But there is still a lack of robust research on highly-visual platforms like Instagram and Snapchat – this is a gap that you could address in your own research.

There are various approaches to organising the body of a literature review. You should have a rough idea of your strategy before you start writing.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time. However, if you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarising sources in order.

Try to analyse patterns, turning points and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred.

If you have found some recurring central themes, you can organise your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic.

For example, if you are reviewing literature about inequalities in migrant health outcomes, key themes might include healthcare policy, language barriers, cultural attitudes, legal status, and economic access.

Methodological

If you draw your sources from different disciplines or fields that use a variety of research methods , you might want to compare the results and conclusions that emerge from different approaches. For example:

• Look at what results have emerged in qualitative versus quantitative research
• Discuss how the topic has been approached by empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the literature into sociological, historical, and cultural sources

Theoretical

A literature review is often the foundation for a theoretical framework . You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts.

You might argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach, or combine various theoretical concepts to create a framework for your research.

Like any other academic text, your literature review should have an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion . What you include in each depends on the objective of your literature review.

The introduction should clearly establish the focus and purpose of the literature review.

If you are writing the literature review as part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate your central problem or research question and give a brief summary of the scholarly context. You can emphasise the timeliness of the topic (“many recent studies have focused on the problem of x”) or highlight a gap in the literature (“while there has been much research on x, few researchers have taken y into consideration”).

Depending on the length of your literature review, you might want to divide the body into subsections. You can use a subheading for each theme, time period, or methodological approach.

As you write, make sure to follow these tips:

• Summarise and synthesise: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole.
• Analyse and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole.
• Critically evaluate: mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources.
• Write in well-structured paragraphs: use transitions and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts.

In the conclusion, you should summarise the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasise their significance.

If the literature review is part of your dissertation or thesis, reiterate how your research addresses gaps and contributes new knowledge, or discuss how you have drawn on existing theories and methods to build a framework for your research. This can lead directly into your methodology section.

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 dissertation , thesis, research paper , or proposal .

There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:

• To familiarise yourself with the current state of knowledge on your topic
• To ensure that you’re not just repeating what others have already done
• To identify gaps in knowledge and unresolved problems that your research can address
• To develop your theoretical framework and methodology
• To provide an overview of the key findings and debates on the topic

Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.

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 .

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

McCombes, S. (2022, June 07). What is a Literature Review? | Guide, Template, & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 3 September 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/thesis-dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, how to write a dissertation proposal | a step-by-step guide, what is a theoretical framework | a step-by-step guide, what is a research methodology | steps & tips.

How to Write Critical Reviews

When you are asked to write a critical review of a book or article, you will need to identify, summarize, and evaluate the ideas and information the author has presented. In other words, you will be examining another person’s thoughts on a topic from your point of view.

Your stand must go beyond your “gut reaction” to the work and be based on your knowledge (readings, lecture, experience) of the topic as well as on factors such as criteria stated in your assignment or discussed by you and your instructor.

Make your stand clear at the beginning of your review, in your evaluations of specific parts, and in your concluding commentary.

Remember that your goal should be to make a few key points about the book or article, not to discuss everything the author writes.

Understanding the Assignment

To write a good critical review, you will have to engage in the mental processes of analyzing (taking apart) the work–deciding what its major components are and determining how these parts (i.e., paragraphs, sections, or chapters) contribute to the work as a whole.

Analyzing the work will help you focus on how and why the author makes certain points and prevent you from merely summarizing what the author says. Assuming the role of an analytical reader will also help you to determine whether or not the author fulfills the stated purpose of the book or article and enhances your understanding or knowledge of a particular topic.

Be sure to read your assignment thoroughly before you read the article or book. Your instructor may have included specific guidelines for you to follow. Keeping these guidelines in mind as you read the article or book can really help you write your paper!

Also, note where the work connects with what you’ve studied in the course. You can make the most efficient use of your reading and notetaking time if you are an active reader; that is, keep relevant questions in mind and jot down page numbers as well as your responses to ideas that appear to be significant as you read.

Please note: The length of your introduction and overview, the number of points you choose to review, and the length of your conclusion should be proportionate to the page limit stated in your assignment and should reflect the complexity of the material being reviewed as well as the expectations of your reader.

Write the introduction

Below are a few guidelines to help you write the introduction to your critical review.

Introduce your review appropriately

Begin your review with an introduction appropriate to your assignment.

If your assignment asks you to review only one book and not to use outside sources, your introduction will focus on identifying the author, the title, the main topic or issue presented in the book, and the author’s purpose in writing the book.

If your assignment asks you to review the book as it relates to issues or themes discussed in the course, or to review two or more books on the same topic, your introduction must also encompass those expectations.

Explain relationships

For example, before you can review two books on a topic, you must explain to your reader in your introduction how they are related to one another.

Within this shared context (or under this “umbrella”) you can then review comparable aspects of both books, pointing out where the authors agree and differ.

In other words, the more complicated your assignment is, the more your introduction must accomplish.

Finally, the introduction to a book review is always the place for you to establish your position as the reviewer (your thesis about the author’s thesis).

As you write, consider the following questions:

• Is the book a memoir, a treatise, a collection of facts, an extended argument, etc.? Is the article a documentary, a write-up of primary research, a position paper, etc.?
• Who is the author? What does the preface or foreword tell you about the author’s purpose, background, and credentials? What is the author’s approach to the topic (as a journalist? a historian? a researcher?)?
• What is the main topic or problem addressed? How does the work relate to a discipline, to a profession, to a particular audience, or to other works on the topic?
• What is your critical evaluation of the work (your thesis)? Why have you taken that position? What criteria are you basing your position on?

Provide an overview

In your introduction, you will also want to provide an overview. An overview supplies your reader with certain general information not appropriate for including in the introduction but necessary to understanding the body of the review.

Generally, an overview describes your book’s division into chapters, sections, or points of discussion. An overview may also include background information about the topic, about your stand, or about the criteria you will use for evaluation.

The overview and the introduction work together to provide a comprehensive beginning for (a “springboard” into) your review.

• What are the author’s basic premises? What issues are raised, or what themes emerge? What situation (i.e., racism on college campuses) provides a basis for the author’s assertions?
• How informed is my reader? What background information is relevant to the entire book and should be placed here rather than in a body paragraph?

Write the body

The body is the center of your paper, where you draw out your main arguments. Below are some guidelines to help you write it.

Organize using a logical plan

Organize the body of your review according to a logical plan. Here are two options:

• First, summarize, in a series of paragraphs, those major points from the book that you plan to discuss; incorporating each major point into a topic sentence for a paragraph is an effective organizational strategy. Second, discuss and evaluate these points in a following group of paragraphs. (There are two dangers lurking in this pattern–you may allot too many paragraphs to summary and too few to evaluation, or you may re-summarize too many points from the book in your evaluation section.)
• Alternatively, you can summarize and evaluate the major points you have chosen from the book in a point-by-point schema. That means you will discuss and evaluate point one within the same paragraph (or in several if the point is significant and warrants extended discussion) before you summarize and evaluate point two, point three, etc., moving in a logical sequence from point to point to point. Here again, it is effective to use the topic sentence of each paragraph to identify the point from the book that you plan to summarize or evaluate.

Questions to keep in mind as you write

With either organizational pattern, consider the following questions:

• What are the author’s most important points? How do these relate to one another? (Make relationships clear by using transitions: “In contrast,” an equally strong argument,” “moreover,” “a final conclusion,” etc.).
• What types of evidence or information does the author present to support his or her points? Is this evidence convincing, controversial, factual, one-sided, etc.? (Consider the use of primary historical material, case studies, narratives, recent scientific findings, statistics.)
• Where does the author do a good job of conveying factual material as well as personal perspective? Where does the author fail to do so? If solutions to a problem are offered, are they believable, misguided, or promising?
• Which parts of the work (particular arguments, descriptions, chapters, etc.) are most effective and which parts are least effective? Why?
• Where (if at all) does the author convey personal prejudice, support illogical relationships, or present evidence out of its appropriate context?

Keep your opinions distinct and cite your sources

Remember, as you discuss the author’s major points, be sure to distinguish consistently between the author’s opinions and your own.

Keep the summary portions of your discussion concise, remembering that your task as a reviewer is to re-see the author’s work, not to re-tell it.

And, importantly, if you refer to ideas from other books and articles or from lecture and course materials, always document your sources, or else you might wander into the realm of plagiarism.

Include only that material which has relevance for your review and use direct quotations sparingly. The Writing Center has other handouts to help you paraphrase text and introduce quotations.

Write the conclusion

You will want to use the conclusion to state your overall critical evaluation.

You have already discussed the major points the author makes, examined how the author supports arguments, and evaluated the quality or effectiveness of specific aspects of the book or article.

Now you must make an evaluation of the work as a whole, determining such things as whether or not the author achieves the stated or implied purpose and if the work makes a significant contribution to an existing body of knowledge.

Consider the following questions:

• Is the work appropriately subjective or objective according to the author’s purpose?
• How well does the work maintain its stated or implied focus? Does the author present extraneous material? Does the author exclude or ignore relevant information?
• How well has the author achieved the overall purpose of the book or article? What contribution does the work make to an existing body of knowledge or to a specific group of readers? Can you justify the use of this work in a particular course?
• What is the most important final comment you wish to make about the book or article? Do you have any suggestions for the direction of future research in the area? What has reading this work done for you or demonstrated to you?

Academic and Professional Writing

This is an accordion element with a series of buttons that open and close related content panels.

Analysis Papers

Reading Poetry

A Short Guide to Close Reading for Literary Analysis

Using Literary Quotations

Play Reviews

Writing a Rhetorical Précis to Analyze Nonfiction Texts

Incorporating Interview Data

Grant Proposals

Planning and Writing a Grant Proposal: The Basics

Additional Resources for Grants and Proposal Writing

Job Materials and Application Essays

Writing Personal Statements for Ph.D. Programs

• Before you begin: useful tips for writing your essay
• Guided brainstorming exercises
• Get more help with your essay
• Frequently Asked Questions

Resume Writing Tips

CV Writing Tips

Cover Letters

Business Letters

Proposals and Dissertations

Resources for Proposal Writers

Resources for Dissertators

Research Papers

Planning and Writing Research Papers

Quoting and Paraphrasing

Writing Annotated Bibliographies

Creating Poster Presentations

Writing an Abstract for Your Research Paper

Thank-You Notes

Advice for Students Writing Thank-You Notes to Donors

Reading for a Review

Critical Reviews

Writing a Review of Literature

Scientific Reports

Scientific Report Format

Sample Lab Assignment

Writing for the Web

Writing an Effective Blog Post

Writing for Social Media: A Guide for Academics

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• PLoS Comput Biol
• v.9(7); 2013 Jul

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review

Marco pautasso.

1 Centre for Functional and Evolutionary Ecology (CEFE), CNRS, Montpellier, France

2 Centre for Biodiversity Synthesis and Analysis (CESAB), FRB, Aix-en-Provence, France

Literature reviews are in great demand in most scientific fields. Their need stems from the ever-increasing output of scientific publications [1] . For example, compared to 1991, in 2008 three, eight, and forty times more papers were indexed in Web of Science on malaria, obesity, and biodiversity, respectively [2] . Given such mountains of papers, scientists cannot be expected to examine in detail every single new paper relevant to their interests [3] . Thus, it is both advantageous and necessary to rely on regular summaries of the recent literature. Although recognition for scientists mainly comes from primary research, timely literature reviews can lead to new synthetic insights and are often widely read [4] . For such summaries to be useful, however, they need to be compiled in a professional way [5] .

When starting from scratch, reviewing the literature can require a titanic amount of work. That is why researchers who have spent their career working on a certain research issue are in a perfect position to review that literature. Some graduate schools are now offering courses in reviewing the literature, given that most research students start their project by producing an overview of what has already been done on their research issue [6] . However, it is likely that most scientists have not thought in detail about how to approach and carry out a literature review.

Reviewing the literature requires the ability to juggle multiple tasks, from finding and evaluating relevant material to synthesising information from various sources, from critical thinking to paraphrasing, evaluating, and citation skills [7] . In this contribution, I share ten simple rules I learned working on about 25 literature reviews as a PhD and postdoctoral student. Ideas and insights also come from discussions with coauthors and colleagues, as well as feedback from reviewers and editors.

Rule 1: Define a Topic and Audience

How to choose which topic to review? There are so many issues in contemporary science that you could spend a lifetime of attending conferences and reading the literature just pondering what to review. On the one hand, if you take several years to choose, several other people may have had the same idea in the meantime. On the other hand, only a well-considered topic is likely to lead to a brilliant literature review [8] . 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
• a well-defined issue (otherwise you could potentially include thousands of publications, which would make the review unhelpful).

Ideas for potential reviews may come from papers providing lists of key research questions to be answered [9] , but also from serendipitous moments during desultory reading and discussions. In addition to choosing your topic, you should also select a target audience. In many cases, the topic (e.g., web services in computational biology) will automatically define an audience (e.g., computational biologists), but that same topic may also be of interest to neighbouring fields (e.g., computer science, biology, etc.).

Rule 2: Search and Re-search the Literature

After having chosen your topic and audience, start by checking the literature and downloading relevant papers. Five pieces of advice here:

• keep track of the search items you use (so that your search can be replicated [10] ),
• keep a list of papers whose pdfs you cannot access immediately (so as to retrieve them later with alternative strategies),
• use a paper management system (e.g., Mendeley, Papers, Qiqqa, Sente),
• define early in the process some criteria for exclusion of irrelevant papers (these criteria can then be described in the review to help define its scope), and
• do not just look for research papers in the area you wish to review, but also seek previous reviews.

The chances are high that someone will already have published a literature review ( Figure 1 ), if not exactly on the issue you are planning to tackle, at least on a related topic. If there are already a few or several reviews of the literature on your issue, my advice is not to give up, but to carry on with your own literature review,

The bottom-right situation (many literature reviews but few research papers) is not just a theoretical situation; it applies, for example, to the study of the impacts of climate change on plant diseases, where there appear to be more literature reviews than research studies [33] .

• discussing in your review the approaches, limitations, and conclusions of past reviews,
• trying to find a new angle that has not been covered adequately in the previous reviews, and
• incorporating new material that has inevitably accumulated since their appearance.

When searching the literature for pertinent papers and reviews, the usual rules apply:

• be thorough,
• use different keywords and database sources (e.g., DBLP, Google Scholar, ISI Proceedings, JSTOR Search, Medline, Scopus, Web of Science), and
• look at who has cited past relevant papers and book chapters.

Rule 3: Take Notes While Reading

If you read the papers first, and only afterwards start writing the review, you will need a very good memory to remember who wrote what, and what your impressions and associations were while reading each single paper. My advice is, while reading, to start writing down interesting pieces of information, insights about how to organize the review, and thoughts on what to write. This way, by the time you have read the literature you selected, you will already have a rough draft of the review.

Of course, this draft will still need much rewriting, restructuring, and rethinking to obtain a text with a coherent argument [11] , but you will have avoided the danger posed by staring at a blank document. Be careful when taking notes to use quotation marks if you are provisionally copying verbatim from the literature. It is advisable then to reformulate such quotes with your own words in the final draft. It is important to be careful in noting the references already at this stage, so as to avoid misattributions. Using referencing software from the very beginning of your endeavour will save you time.

Rule 4: Choose the Type of Review You Wish to Write

After having taken notes while reading the literature, you will have a rough idea of the amount of material available for the review. This is probably a good time to decide whether to go for a mini- or a full review. Some journals are now favouring the publication of rather short reviews focusing on the last few years, with a limit on the number of words and citations. A mini-review is not necessarily a minor review: it may well attract more attention from busy readers, although it will inevitably simplify some issues and leave out some relevant material due to space limitations. A full review will have the advantage of more freedom to cover in detail the complexities of a particular scientific development, but may then be left in the pile of the very important papers “to be read” by readers with little time to spare for major monographs.

There is probably a continuum between mini- and full reviews. The same point applies to the dichotomy of descriptive vs. integrative reviews. While descriptive reviews focus on the methodology, findings, and interpretation of each reviewed study, integrative reviews attempt to find common ideas and concepts from the reviewed material [12] . A similar distinction exists between narrative and systematic reviews: while narrative reviews are qualitative, systematic reviews attempt to test a hypothesis based on the published evidence, which is gathered using a predefined protocol to reduce bias [13] , [14] . When systematic reviews analyse quantitative results in a quantitative way, they become meta-analyses. The choice between different review types will have to be made on a case-by-case basis, depending not just on the nature of the material found and the preferences of the target journal(s), but also on the time available to write the review and the number of coauthors [15] .

Rule 5: Keep the Review Focused, but Make It of Broad Interest

Whether your plan is to write a mini- or a full review, it is good advice to keep it focused 16 , 17 . Including material just for the sake of it can easily lead to reviews that are trying to do too many things at once. The need to keep a review focused can be problematic for interdisciplinary reviews, where the aim is to bridge the gap between fields [18] . If you are writing a review on, for example, how epidemiological approaches are used in modelling the spread of ideas, you may be inclined to include material from both parent fields, epidemiology and the study of cultural diffusion. This may be necessary to some extent, but in this case a focused review would only deal in detail with those studies at the interface between epidemiology and the spread of ideas.

While focus is an important feature of a successful review, this requirement has to be balanced with the need to make the review relevant to a broad audience. This square may be circled by discussing the wider implications of the reviewed topic for other disciplines.

Rule 6: Be Critical and Consistent

Reviewing the literature is not stamp collecting. A good review does not just summarize the literature, but discusses it critically, identifies methodological problems, and points out research gaps [19] . After having read a review of the literature, a reader should have a rough idea of:

• the major achievements in the reviewed field,
• the main areas of debate, and
• the outstanding research questions.

It is challenging to achieve a successful review on all these fronts. A solution can be to involve a set of complementary coauthors: some people are excellent at mapping what has been achieved, some others are very good at identifying dark clouds on the horizon, and some have instead a knack at predicting where solutions are going to come from. If your journal club has exactly this sort of team, then you should definitely write a review of the literature! In addition to critical thinking, a literature review needs consistency, for example in the choice of passive vs. active voice and present vs. past tense.

Rule 7: Find a Logical Structure

Like a well-baked cake, a good review has a number of telling features: it is worth the reader's time, timely, systematic, well written, focused, and critical. It also needs a good structure. With reviews, the usual subdivision of research papers into introduction, methods, results, and discussion does not work or is rarely used. However, a general introduction of the context and, toward the end, a recapitulation of the main points covered and take-home messages make sense also in the case of reviews. For systematic reviews, there is a trend towards including information about how the literature was searched (database, keywords, time limits) [20] .

How can you organize the flow of the main body of the review so that the reader will be drawn into and guided through it? It is generally helpful to draw a conceptual scheme of the review, e.g., with mind-mapping techniques. Such diagrams can help recognize a logical way to order and link the various sections of a review [21] . This is the case not just at the writing stage, but also for readers if the diagram is included in the review as a figure. A careful selection of diagrams and figures relevant to the reviewed topic can be very helpful to structure the text too [22] .

Rule 8: Make Use of Feedback

Reviews of the literature are normally peer-reviewed in the same way as research papers, and rightly so [23] . As a rule, incorporating feedback from reviewers greatly helps improve a review draft. Having read the review with a fresh mind, reviewers may spot inaccuracies, inconsistencies, and ambiguities that had not been noticed by the writers due to rereading the typescript too many times. It is however advisable to reread the draft one more time before submission, as a last-minute correction of typos, leaps, and muddled sentences may enable the reviewers to focus on providing advice on the content rather than the form.

Feedback is vital to writing a good review, and should be sought from a variety of colleagues, so as to obtain a diversity of views on the draft. This may lead in some cases to conflicting views on the merits of the paper, and on how to improve it, but such a situation is better than the absence of feedback. A diversity of feedback perspectives on a literature review can help identify where the consensus view stands in the landscape of the current scientific understanding of an issue [24] .

Rule 9: Include Your Own Relevant Research, but Be Objective

In many cases, reviewers of the literature will have published studies relevant to the review they are writing. This could create a conflict of interest: how can reviewers report objectively on their own work [25] ? Some scientists may be overly enthusiastic about what they have published, and thus risk giving too much importance to their own findings in the review. However, bias could also occur in the other direction: some scientists may be unduly dismissive of their own achievements, so that they will tend to downplay their contribution (if any) to a field when reviewing it.

In general, a review of the literature should neither be a public relations brochure nor an exercise in competitive self-denial. If a reviewer is up to the job of producing a well-organized and methodical review, which flows well and provides a service to the readership, then it should be possible to be objective in reviewing one's own relevant findings. In reviews written by multiple authors, this may be achieved by assigning the review of the results of a coauthor to different coauthors.

Rule 10: Be Up-to-Date, but Do Not Forget Older Studies

Given the progressive acceleration in the publication of scientific papers, today's reviews of the literature need awareness not just of the overall direction and achievements of a field of inquiry, but also of the latest studies, so as not to become out-of-date before they have been published. Ideally, a literature review should not identify as a major research gap an issue that has just been addressed in a series of papers in press (the same applies, of course, to older, overlooked studies (“sleeping beauties” [26] )). This implies that literature reviewers would do well to keep an eye on electronic lists of papers in press, given that it can take months before these appear in scientific databases. Some reviews declare that they have scanned the literature up to a certain point in time, but given that peer review can be a rather lengthy process, a full search for newly appeared literature at the revision stage may be worthwhile. Assessing the contribution of papers that have just appeared is particularly challenging, because there is little perspective with which to gauge their significance and impact on further research and society.

Inevitably, new papers on the reviewed topic (including independently written literature reviews) will appear from all quarters after the review has been published, so that there may soon be the need for an updated review. But this is the nature of science [27] – [32] . I wish everybody good luck with writing a review of the literature.

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to M. Barbosa, K. Dehnen-Schmutz, T. Döring, D. Fontaneto, M. Garbelotto, O. Holdenrieder, M. Jeger, D. Lonsdale, A. MacLeod, P. Mills, M. Moslonka-Lefebvre, G. Stancanelli, P. Weisberg, and X. Xu for insights and discussions, and to P. Bourne, T. Matoni, and D. Smith for helpful comments on a previous draft.

Funding Statement

This work was funded by the French Foundation for Research on Biodiversity (FRB) through its Centre for Synthesis and Analysis of Biodiversity data (CESAB), as part of the NETSEED research project. The funders had no role in the preparation of the manuscript.

Literature Reviews

What is a Literature Review?

• Steps for Creating a Literature Review
• Providing Evidence / Critical Analysis
• Challenges when writing a Literature Review
• Systematic Literature Reviews

A literature review is an academic text that surveys, synthesizes, and critically evaluates the existing literature on a specific topic. It is typically required for theses, dissertations, or long reports and  serves several key purposes:

• Surveying the Literature : It involves a comprehensive search and examination of relevant academic books, journal articles, and other sources related to the chosen topic.
• Synthesizing Information : The literature review summarizes and organizes the information found in the literature, often identifying patterns, themes, and gaps in the current knowledge.
• Critical Analysis : It critically analyzes the collected information, highlighting limitations, gaps, and areas of controversy, and suggests directions for future research.
• Establishing Context : It places the current research within the broader context of the field, demonstrating how the new research builds on or diverges from previous studies.

Types of Literature Reviews

Literature reviews can take various forms, including:

• Narrative Reviews : These provide a qualitative summary of the literature and are often used to give a broad overview of a topic. They may be less structured and more subjective, focusing on synthesizing the literature to support a particular viewpoint.
• Systematic Reviews : These are more rigorous and structured, following a specific methodology to identify, evaluate, and synthesize all relevant studies on a particular question. They aim to minimize bias and provide a comprehensive summary of the existing evidence.
• Integrative Reviews : Similar to systematic reviews, but they aim to generate new knowledge by integrating findings from different studies to develop new theories or frameworks.

Importance of Literature Reviews

• Foundation for Research : They provide a solid background for new research projects, helping to justify the research question and methodology.

Identifying Gaps : Literature reviews highlight areas where knowledge is lacking, guiding future research efforts.

• Building Credibility : Demonstrating familiarity with existing research enhances the credibility of the researcher and their work.

In summary, a literature review is a critical component of academic research that helps to frame the current state of knowledge, identify gaps, and provide  a basis for new research.

The research, the body of current literature, and the particular objectives should all influence the structure of a literature review. It is also critical to remember that creating a literature review is an ongoing process - as one reads and analyzes the literature, one's understanding may change, which could require rearranging the literature review.

Paré, G. and Kitsiou, S. (2017) 'Methods for Literature Reviews' , in: Lau, F. and Kuziemsky, C. (eds.)  Handbook of eHealth evaluation: an evidence-based approach . Victoria (BC): University of Victoria.

Perplexity AI (2024) Perplexity AI response to Kathy Neville, 31 July.       

Royal Literary Fund (2024)  The structure of a literature review.  Available at: https://www.rlf.org.uk/resources/the-structure-of-a-literature-review/ (Accessed: 23 July 2024).

Library Services for Undergraduate Research (2024) Literature review: a definition . Available at: https://libguides.wustl.edu/our?p=302677 (Accessed: 31 July 2024).

Further Reading:

Methods for Literature Reviews

Literature Review (The University of Edinburgh)

Literature Reviews (University of Sheffield)

• How to Write a Literature Review Paper? Wee, Bert Van ; Banister, David ISBN: 0144-1647

• Next: Steps for Creating a Literature Review >>
• Last Updated: Sep 4, 2024 11:43 AM
• URL: https://library.lsbu.ac.uk/literaturereviews

• Search This Site All UCSD Sites Faculty/Staff Search Term
• Contact & Directions
• Climate Statement
• Cognitive Behavioral Neuroscience
• Cognitive Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Adjunct Faculty
• Non-Senate Instructors
• Researchers
• Psychology Grads
• Affiliated Grads
• New and Prospective Students
• Honors Program
• Experiential Learning
• Programs & Events
• Psi Chi / Psychology Club
• Prospective PhD Students
• Current PhD Students
• Area Brown Bags
• Colloquium Series
• Anderson Distinguished Lecture Series
• Speaker Videos
• Undergraduate Program
• Academic and Writing Resources

Writing Research Papers

• Writing a Literature Review

When writing a research paper on a specific topic, you will often need to include an overview of any prior research that has been conducted on that topic.  For example, if your research paper is describing an experiment on fear conditioning, then you will probably need to provide an overview of prior research on fear conditioning.  That overview is typically known as a literature review.  

Please note that a full-length literature review article may be suitable for fulfilling the requirements for the Psychology B.S. Degree Research Paper .  For further details, please check with your faculty advisor.

Different Types of Literature Reviews

Literature reviews come in many forms.  They can be part of a research paper, for example as part of the Introduction section.  They can be one chapter of a doctoral dissertation.  Literature reviews can also “stand alone” as separate articles by themselves.  For instance, some journals such as Annual Review of Psychology , Psychological Bulletin , and others typically publish full-length review articles.  Similarly, in courses at UCSD, you may be asked to write a research paper that is itself a literature review (such as, with an instructor’s permission, in fulfillment of the B.S. Degree Research Paper requirement). Alternatively, you may be expected to include a literature review as part of a larger research paper (such as part of an Honors Thesis). 

Literature reviews can be written using a variety of different styles.  These may differ in the way prior research is reviewed as well as the way in which the literature review is organized.  Examples of stylistic variations in literature reviews include: 

• Summarization of prior work vs. critical evaluation. In some cases, prior research is simply described and summarized; in other cases, the writer compares, contrasts, and may even critique prior research (for example, discusses their strengths and weaknesses).
• Chronological vs. categorical and other types of organization. In some cases, the literature review begins with the oldest research and advances until it concludes with the latest research.  In other cases, research is discussed by category (such as in groupings of closely related studies) without regard for chronological order.  In yet other cases, research is discussed in terms of opposing views (such as when different research studies or researchers disagree with one another).

Overall, all literature reviews, whether they are written as a part of a larger work or as separate articles unto themselves, have a common feature: they do not present new research; rather, they provide an overview of prior research on a specific topic . 

How to Write a Literature Review

When writing a literature review, it can be helpful to rely on the following steps.  Please note that these procedures are not necessarily only for writing a literature review that becomes part of a larger article; they can also be used for writing a full-length article that is itself a literature review (although such reviews are typically more detailed and exhaustive; for more information please refer to the Further Resources section of this page).

Steps for Writing a Literature Review

1. Identify and define the topic that you will be reviewing.

The topic, which is commonly a research question (or problem) of some kind, needs to be identified and defined as clearly as possible.  You need to have an idea of what you will be reviewing in order to effectively search for references and to write a coherent summary of the research on it.  At this stage it can be helpful to write down a description of the research question, area, or topic that you will be reviewing, as well as to identify any keywords that you will be using to search for relevant research.

2. Conduct a literature search.

Use a range of keywords to search databases such as PsycINFO and any others that may contain relevant articles.  You should focus on peer-reviewed, scholarly articles.  Published books may also be helpful, but keep in mind that peer-reviewed articles are widely considered to be the “gold standard” of scientific research.  Read through titles and abstracts, select and obtain articles (that is, download, copy, or print them out), and save your searches as needed.  For more information about this step, please see the Using Databases and Finding Scholarly References section of this website.

3. Read through the research that you have found and take notes.

Absorb as much information as you can.  Read through the articles and books that you have found, and as you do, take notes.  The notes should include anything that will be helpful in advancing your own thinking about the topic and in helping you write the literature review (such as key points, ideas, or even page numbers that index key information).  Some references may turn out to be more helpful than others; you may notice patterns or striking contrasts between different sources ; and some sources may refer to yet other sources of potential interest.  This is often the most time-consuming part of the review process.  However, it is also where you get to learn about the topic in great detail.  For more details about taking notes, please see the “Reading Sources and Taking Notes” section of the Finding Scholarly References page of this website.

4. Organize your notes and thoughts; create an outline.

At this stage, you are close to writing the review itself.  However, it is often helpful to first reflect on all the reading that you have done.  What patterns stand out?  Do the different sources converge on a consensus?  Or not?  What unresolved questions still remain?  You should look over your notes (it may also be helpful to reorganize them), and as you do, to think about how you will present this research in your literature review.  Are you going to summarize or critically evaluate?  Are you going to use a chronological or other type of organizational structure?  It can also be helpful to create an outline of how your literature review will be structured.

5. Write the literature review itself and edit and revise as needed.

The final stage involves writing.  When writing, keep in mind that literature reviews are generally characterized by a summary style in which prior research is described sufficiently to explain critical findings but does not include a high level of detail (if readers want to learn about all the specific details of a study, then they can look up the references that you cite and read the original articles themselves).  However, the degree of emphasis that is given to individual studies may vary (more or less detail may be warranted depending on how critical or unique a given study was).   After you have written a first draft, you should read it carefully and then edit and revise as needed.  You may need to repeat this process more than once.  It may be helpful to have another person read through your draft(s) and provide feedback.

6. Incorporate the literature review into your research paper draft.

After the literature review is complete, you should incorporate it into your research paper (if you are writing the review as one component of a larger paper).  Depending on the stage at which your paper is at, this may involve merging your literature review into a partially complete Introduction section, writing the rest of the paper around the literature review, or other processes.

Further Tips for Writing a Literature Review

Full-length literature reviews

• Many full-length literature review articles use a three-part structure: Introduction (where the topic is identified and any trends or major problems in the literature are introduced), Body (where the studies that comprise the literature on that topic are discussed), and Discussion or Conclusion (where major patterns and points are discussed and the general state of what is known about the topic is summarized)

Literature reviews as part of a larger paper

• An “express method” of writing a literature review for a research paper is as follows: first, write a one paragraph description of each article that you read. Second, choose how you will order all the paragraphs and combine them in one document.  Third, add transitions between the paragraphs, as well as an introductory and concluding paragraph. 1
• A literature review that is part of a larger research paper typically does not have to be exhaustive. Rather, it should contain most or all of the significant studies about a research topic but not tangential or loosely related ones. 2   Generally, literature reviews should be sufficient for the reader to understand the major issues and key findings about a research topic.  You may however need to confer with your instructor or editor to determine how comprehensive you need to be.

Benefits of Literature Reviews

By summarizing prior research on a topic, literature reviews have multiple benefits.  These include:

• Literature reviews help readers understand what is known about a topic without having to find and read through multiple sources.
• Literature reviews help “set the stage” for later reading about new research on a given topic (such as if they are placed in the Introduction of a larger research paper). In other words, they provide helpful background and context.
• Literature reviews can also help the writer learn about a given topic while in the process of preparing the review itself. In the act of research and writing the literature review, the writer gains expertise on the topic .

Downloadable Resources

• How to Write APA Style Research Papers (a comprehensive guide) [ PDF ]
• Tips for Writing APA Style Research Papers (a brief summary) [ PDF ]
• Example APA Style Research Paper (for B.S. Degree – literature review) [ PDF ]

Further Resources

How-To Videos     

• Writing Research Paper Videos
• UCSD Library Psychology Research Guide: Literature Reviews

External Resources

• Developing and Writing a Literature Review from N Carolina A&T State University
• Example of a Short Literature Review from York College CUNY
• How to Write a Review of Literature from UW-Madison
• Writing a Literature Review from UC Santa Cruz  
• Pautasso, M. (2013). Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review. PLoS Computational Biology, 9 (7), e1003149. doi : 1371/journal.pcbi.1003149

1 Ashton, W. Writing a short literature review . [PDF]     

2 carver, l. (2014).  writing the research paper [workshop]. , prepared by s. c. pan for ucsd psychology.

Back to top

• Research Paper Structure
• Formatting Research Papers
• Using Databases and Finding References
• What Types of References Are Appropriate?
• Evaluating References and Taking Notes
• Citing References
• Writing Process and Revising
• Improving Scientific Writing
• Academic Integrity and Avoiding Plagiarism
• Writing Research Papers Videos

• UWF Libraries

Literature Review: Conducting & Writing

• Sample Literature Reviews
• Steps for Conducting a Lit Review
• Finding "The Literature"
• Organizing/Writing
• APA Style This link opens in a new window
• Chicago: Notes Bibliography This link opens in a new window
• MLA Style This link opens in a new window

Sample Lit Reviews from Communication Arts

Have an exemplary literature review.

• Literature Review Sample 1
• Literature Review Sample 2
• Literature Review Sample 3

Have you written a stellar literature review you care to share for teaching purposes?

Are you an instructor who has received an exemplary literature review and have permission from the student to post?

Please contact Britt McGowan at [email protected] for inclusion in this guide. All disciplines welcome and encouraged.

• << Previous: MLA Style
• Next: Get Help! >>
• Last Updated: Aug 8, 2024 11:00 AM
• URL: https://libguides.uwf.edu/litreview

• Jump to menu
• Student Home
• Accept your offer
• How to enrol
• Student ID card
• Set up your IT
• Orientation Week
• Fees & payment
• Academic calendar
• Special consideration
• Transcripts
• The Nucleus: Student Hub
• Referencing
• Essay writing
• Learning abroad & exchange
• Professional development & UNSW Advantage
• Employability
• Financial assistance
• International students
• Equitable learning
• Postgraduate research
• Health Service
• Events & activities
• Emergencies
• Volunteering
• Clubs and societies
• Accommodation
• Health services
• Sport and gym
• Arc student organisation
• Security on campus
• Maps of campus
• Careers portal
• Change password

Structure of a Critical Review

Critical reviews, both short (one page) and long (four pages), usually have a similar structure. Check your assignment instructions for formatting and structural specifications. Headings are usually optional for longer reviews and can be helpful for the reader.

Introduction

The length of an introduction is usually one paragraph for a journal article review and two or three paragraphs for a longer book review. Include a few opening sentences that announce the author(s) and the title, and briefly explain the topic of the text. Present the aim of the text and summarise the main finding or key argument. Conclude the introduction with a brief statement of your evaluation of the text. This can be a positive or negative evaluation or, as is usually the case, a mixed response.

Present a summary of the key points along with a limited number of examples. You can also briefly explain the author’s purpose/intentions throughout the text and you may briefly describe how the text is organised. The summary should only make up about a third of the critical review.

The critique should be a balanced discussion and evaluation of the strengths, weakness and notable features of the text. Remember to base your discussion on specific criteria. Good reviews also include other sources to support your evaluation (remember to reference).

You can choose how to sequence your critique. Here are some examples to get you started:

• Most important to least important conclusions you make about the text.
• If your critique is more positive than negative, then present the negative points first and the positive last.
• If your critique is more negative than positive, then present the positive points first and the negative last.
• If there are both strengths and weakness for each criterion you use, you need to decide overall what your judgement is. For example, you may want to comment on a key idea in the text and have both positive and negative comments. You could begin by stating what is good about the idea and then concede and explain how it is limited in some way. While this example shows a mixed evaluation, overall you are probably being more negative than positive.
• In long reviews, you can address each criterion you choose in a paragraph, including both negative and positive points. For very short critical reviews (one page or less), where your comments will be briefer, include a paragraph of positive aspects  and another of negative.
• You can also include recommendations for how the text can be improved in terms of ideas, research approach; theories or frameworks used can also be included in the critique section.

Conclusion & References

This is usually a very short paragraph.

• Restate your overall opinion of the text.
• Briefly present recommendations.
• If necessary, some further qualification or explanation of your judgement can be included. This can help your critique sound fair and reasonable.

If you have used other sources in you review you should also include a list of references at the end of the review.

Summarising and paraphrasing for the critical review

The best way to summarise

• Scan the text. Look for information that can be deduced from the introduction, conclusion, title, and headings. What do these tell you about the main points of the article?
• Locate the topic sentences and highlight the main points as you read.
• Reread the text and make separate notes of the main points. Examples and evidence do not need to be included at this stage. Usually they are used selectively in your critique.

Paraphrasing means putting it into your own words. Paraphrasing offers an alternative to using direct quotations in your summary (and the critique) and can be an efficient way to integrate your summary notes.

The best way to paraphrase

• Review your summary notes
• Rewrite them in your own words and in complete sentences
• Use reporting verbs and phrases, e.g. 'The author describes…', 'Smith argues that …'.
• Use quotation marks if If you include unique or specialist phrases from the text.

  Next: Some general criteria for evaluating texts

Essay and assignment writing guide.

• Essay writing basics
• Essay and assignment planning
• Answering assignment questions
• Editing checklist
• Structure of a critical review
• General criteria for evaluating
• Sample extracts
• Annotated bibliography
• Reflective writing
• ^ More support

News and notices

Guide to Using Microsoft Copilot with Commercial Data Protection for UNSW Students Published:  20 May 2024

Literature Review Guide: Examples of Literature Reviews

• What is a Literature Review?
• How to start?
• Picking your research question and searching
• Search strategies and Databases
• How to organise the review
• Examples of Literature Reviews
• Library summary

All good quality journal articles will include a small Literature Review after the Introduction paragraph.  It may not be called a Literature Review but gives you an idea of how one is created in miniature.

Sample Literature Reviews as part of a articles or Theses

• Hackett, G and Melia, D . The hotel as the holiday/stay destination:trends and innovations. Presented at TRIC Conference, Belfast, Ireland- June 2012 and EuroCHRIE Conference

Links to sample Literature Reviews from other libraries

• Sample literature reviews from University of West Florida

Irish Theses

• Phillips, Martin (2015) European airline performance: a data envelopment analysis with extrapolations based on model outputs. Master of Business Studies thesis, Dublin City University.
• The customers’ perception of servicescape’s influence on their behaviours, in the food retail industry : Dublin Business School 2015
• Coughlan, Ray (2015) What was the role of leadership in the transformation of a failing Irish Insurance business. Masters thesis, Dublin, National College of Ireland.
• << Previous: How to organise the review
• Next: Library summary >>
• Last Updated: Sep 6, 2024 3:37 PM
• URL: https://ait.libguides.com/literaturereview

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Critical factors driving construction project performance in integrated 5d building information modeling.

1. Introduction

2. materials and methods, 2.1. procedure for the systematic literature review, 2.2. search strategy, 2.3. tools and software, 2.4. data resources, 2.5. prisma flow for systematic review, 2.6. network analysis, 3.1. development trends for 5d bim in the construction industry, 3.1.1. publications per year, 3.1.2. major countries or regions undertaking research, 3.1.3. key productive authors, 3.1.4. keyword co-occurrence and cluster identification, 3.2. factors significantly affecting the adoption of 5d bim, 3.3. key project performance factors affected by the implementation of 5d bim, 4. discussion, 4.1. evolution of 5d bim in the construction industry, 4.1.1. citation bursts and trend evaluation, 4.1.2. cluster analysis, 4.2. critical factors influencing the implementation of 5d bim, 4.2.1. technology factors, 4.2.2. organizational factors, 4.2.3. environmental factors, 4.2.4. operator factors, 4.2.5. project factors, 4.2.6. government policy, 4.3. key performance indicators affected by the implementation of 5d bim, 4.3.1. project cost performance, 4.3.2. project time performance, 4.3.3. project quality performance, 5. limitations and future research directions, 6. conclusions, author contributions, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

• Abubakar, A.S.; Haron, N.A.; Alias, A.H.; Teik Hua, L. Exploring quality dimensions from a construction perspective: A literature review. J. Teknol. 2023 , 85 , 133–141. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hofstadler, C.; Kummer, M. Influence of project preparation quality on the project outcome: A qualitative approach. In Proceedings of the 10th International Structural Engineering and Construction Conference, Chicago, IL, USA, 20–25 May 2019; Volume 6. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Anoop, T.; Asadi, S.; Prasad, A.V.S. The critical success factors affecting the performance of construction industry. Int. J. Civ. Eng. Technol. 2016 , 7 , 669–675. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wong, P.F.; Salleh, H.; Rahim, F.A.M. A Relationship Framework for Building Information Modeling (BIM) Capability in Quantity Surveying Practice and Project Performance. Inf. Constr. 2015 , 67 , e119. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Emadi, S.; Emadi, S. Analyzing Cost and Time Objectives in the Construction Projects Using Artificial Neural Network. IRECE 2022 , 13 , 91. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cavalline, T.L.; Morian, D.A.; Schexnayder, C.J. Construction Quality in the Alternate Project Delivery Environment ; American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE): Reston, VA, USA, 2021; p. 446. ISBN 978-078448363-3. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jaafar, K.; Watfa, M. A Multi-Objective Optimization Approach for the Cost-Time-Quality Trade-Off in Construction Projects. J. Mod. Proj. Manag. 2021 , 10 , 187–197. [ Google Scholar ]
• Galjanić, K.; Marović, I.; Jajac, N. Decision Support Systems for Managing Construction Projects: A Scientific Evolution Analysis. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 4977. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Luo, L.; He, Q.; Jaselskis, E.J.; Xie, J. Construction Project Complexity: Research Trends and Implications. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2017 , 143 , 04017019. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhu, F.; Wang, X.; Wang, L.; Yu, M. Project Manager’s Emotional Intelligence and Project Performance: The Mediating Role of Project Commitment. Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2021 , 39 , 788–798. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vasiliev, A.; Bruskin, S. Key Indicators, Innovations, Trends, and Main Factors Influencing Transformation of the Building Construction Industry in Russia. In Digitalization of Society, Economics and Management ; Springer International Publishing: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022; Volume 53, pp. 15–28. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ershadi, M.; Lijauco, F. A Framework for Digitalizing Construction Businesses: Drivers, Barriers and Outcomes. Smart Sustain. Built Environ. 2024 , 13 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sezer, A.A.; Thunberg, M.; Wernicke, B. Digitalization Index: Developing a Model for Assessing the Degree of Digitalization of Construction Projects. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2021 , 147 , 04021119. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Stoyanova, M. Good Practices and Recommendations for Success in Construction Digitalization. TEM J. 2020 , 9 , 42–47. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Marhraoui, M.A. Digital Skills for Project Managers: A Systematic Literature Review. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2023 , 219 , 1591–1598. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bosch-Sijtsema, P.; Claeson-Jonsson, C.; Johansson, M.; Roupe, M. The Hype Factor of Digital Technologies in AEC. CI 2021 , 21 , 899–916. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tatjana, B. The Application of BIM Technology and Its Reliability in the Static Load Analysis. Teh. Vjesn. 2016 , 23 , 1221–1226. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ahmed, Y.A.; Shehzad, H.M.F.; Khurshid, M.M.; Abbas Hassan, O.H.; Abdalla, S.A.; Alrefai, N. Examining the Effect of Interoperability Factors on Building Information Modelling (BIM) Adoption in Malaysia. Constr. Innov. 2024 , 24 , 606–642. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Platonov, A.; Larionova, V.; Davy, Y. Development of Approaches and Organizational Models for the Mass Implementation of Information Modeling Technologies in the Investment and Construction Sphere. J. Risk. Financ. Manag. 2023 , 16 , 118. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pakhale, P.D.; Pal, A. Digital Project Management in Infrastructure Project: A Case Study of Nagpur Metro Rail Project. Asian J. Civ. Eng. 2020 , 21 , 639–647. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hosamo, H.H.; Rolfsen, C.N.; Zeka, F.; Sandbeck, S.; Said, S.; Sætre, M.A. Navigating the Adoption of 5D Building Information Modeling: Insights from Norway. Infrastructures 2024 , 9 , 75. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pan, H.; Pan, Y.; Wu, C. Research on Integrated Management of L Hotel Construction Project Based on BIM5D. In Proceedings of the ICCREM 2022, American Society of Civil Engineers, Virtual, 15 December 2022; pp. 461–469. [ Google Scholar ]
• Xu, J. Research on Application of BIM 5D Technology in Central Grand Project. Procedia Eng. 2017 , 174 , 600–610. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• MacFeely, S. Measuring the Sustainable Development Goal Indicators: An Unprecedented Statistical Challenge. J. Off. Stat. 2020 , 36 , 361–378. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Abdelwahab, M.A.; Nassar, A.H. Legal Barriers and Associated Solutions of BIM Implementation in the Egyptian AEC Industry. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2023 , 24 , 1431–1443. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Belay, S.; Goedert, J.; Woldesenbet, A.; Rokooei, S. Enhancing BIM Implementation in the Ethiopian Public Construction Sector: An Empirical Study. Cogent Eng. 2021 , 8 , 1886476. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chan, D.W.M.; Olawumi, T.O.; Ho, A.M.L. Perceived Benefits of and Barriers to Building Information Modelling (BIM) Implementation in Construction: The Case of Hong Kong. J. Build. Eng. 2019 , 25 , 100764. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tai, S.; Zhang, Y.; Li, T. Factors Affecting BIM Application in China: A Social Network Model. JEDT 2021 , 19 , 373–384. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Olsen, D.; Taylor, J.M. Quantity Take-Off Using Building Information Modeling (BIM), and Its Limiting Factors. Procedia Eng. 2017 , 196 , 1098–1105. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mesároš, P.; Smetanková, J.; Mandičák, T. The Fifth Dimension of BIM—Implementation Survey. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science ; IOP Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2019; Volume 222. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hashim, M.Z.; Othman, I.; Khalid, N.S.M.; Hassan, S.H.; Musa, M.K. Construction Players’ Awareness on the Use of Building Information Modelling (BIM) and Industrialized Building System (IBS) in Malaysian Construction Industry. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Emerging Smart Cities (ICESC2022), Kuching, Malaysia, 1–2 December 2022; Springer Nature: Singapore, 2024; Volume 324, pp. 491–504. [ Google Scholar ]
• Arellano, K.; Castillo, T. Assessment of BIM Use in the Early Stages of Implementation Evaluación Del Uso de BIM En Las Primeras Fases de Aplicación. Rev. Ing. Constr. 2021 , 36 , 311–321. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sattineni, A.; Macdonald, J.A. 5D-BIM: A case study of an implementation strategy in the construction industry. In ISARC. Proceedings of the International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction ; IAARC Publications: Sydney, Australia, 2014. [ Google Scholar ]
• Stanley, R.; Thurnell, D. The Benefits of, and Barriers to, Implementation of 5D BIM for Quantity Surveying in New Zealand. Australas. J. Constr. Econ. Build. 2014 , 14 , 105–117. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Thurairajah, N.; Goucher, D. Advantages and Challenges of Using BIM: A Cost Consultant’s Perspective. In Proceedings of the 49th ASC Annual International Conference, San Luis Obispo, CA, USA, 10–13 April 2013. [ Google Scholar ]
• Hasan, A.N.; Rasheed, S.M. The Benefits of and Challenges to Implement 5D BIM in Construction Industry. Civ. Eng. J. 2019 , 5 , 412–421. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Harrison, C.; Thurnell, D. BIM Implementation in a New Zealand Consulting Quantity Surveying Practice. IJCSCM 2015 , 5 , 1–15. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Girginkaya Akdag, S.; Maqsood, U. A Roadmap for BIM Adoption and Implementation in Developing Countries: The Pakistan Case. Archnet-IJAR 2020 , 14 , 112–132. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alhasan, S.; Kumar, B.; Thanikal, J.V. Effectiveness of Implementing 5D Functions of Building Information Modeling on Professions of Quantity Surveying—A Review. Int.J. Civ. Eng. Technol. 2017 , 8 , 783–800. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ahmad, A.; Sarip, S.; Fathi, M.S.; Abd Fatah, A.Y. Application of 5D BIM to Improve the Oil and Gas Project Cost Performance. In AIP Conference Proceedings ; American Institute of Physics Inc.: College Park, MD, USA, 2023; Volume 2827. [ Google Scholar ]
• Moses, T.; Heesom, D.; Oloke, D. Implementing 5D BIM on Construction Projects: Contractor Perspectives from the UK Construction Sector. J. Eng. Des. Technol. 2020 , 18 , 1867–1888. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Aladağ, H.; Demirdöğen, G.; Demirbağ, A.T.; Işık, Z. Understanding the Perception Differences on BIM Adoption Factors across the Professions of AEC Industry. Ain Shams Eng. J. 2023 , 14 , 102545. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Van Tam, N.; Diep, T.N.; Quoc Toan, N.; Le Dinh Quy, N. Factors Affecting Adoption of Building Information Modeling in Construction Projects: A Case of Vietnam. Cogent Bus. Manag. 2021 , 8 , 1918848. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Abbas, S.K.; Ansari, U.A.; Ahmed, B.; Asif, J. Identify the Effect of Awareness Upon Mutual Funds Investor Base in Pakistan Using Moderation. Eurasian J. Anal. Chem. 2018 , 13 , 224–233. [ Google Scholar ]
• Moradi, S.; Ansari, R.; Taherkhani, R. A Systematic Analysis of Construction Performance Management: Key Performance Indicators from 2000 to 2020. Iran. J. Sci. Technol. Trans. Civ. Eng. 2022 , 46 , 15–31. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mutia Hanuun Ufaira, A.; Yusuf, Y. Risks in the Use of BIM 5D in the Estimated Cost of the Project Tender Phase. In AIP Conference Proceedings ; AIP Publishing: College Park, MD, USA, 2024; pp. 020118-1–020118-6. [ Google Scholar ]
• Herdyana, H.; Suroso, A. The Impacts of 5D-Building Information Modeling on Construction’s Time and Cost Performance. Sinergi 2023 , 27 , 393–404. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kunkcu, H.; Koc, K.; Dagou, H.H.; Gurgun, A.P. Using key performance indicators in construction project literature. Proc. Int. Struct. Eng. Constr. 2022 , 9 , 1–6. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ngacho, C.; Das, D. A Performance Evaluation Framework of Construction Projects: Insights from Literature. IJPOM 2015 , 7 , 151. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chan, A.P.C.; Chan, A.P.L. Key Performance Indicators for Measuring Construction Success. Benchmarking Int. J. 2004 , 11 , 203–221. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, T.; Abdallah, M.; Clevenger, C.; Monghasemi, S. Time–Cost–Quality Trade-off Analysis for Planning Construction Projects. ECAM 2021 , 28 , 82–100. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hashim Yas, A.; Neamah Ahmed, M.; Abdulhadi, A.M. Decision Support System Based on BWM for Analyzing Success Factors Affecting the Quality in the Iraqi Construction Projects. PEN 2023 , 11 , 131. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Albtoush, A.M.F.; Doh, S.I.; Rahman, R.A.; Al-Momani, A.H. Critical Success Factors of Construction Projects in Jordan: An Empirical Investigation. Asian J. Civ. Eng. 2022 , 23 , 1087–1099. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hu, W.; He, X. An Innovative Time-Cost-Quality Tradeoff Modeling of Building Construction Project Based on Resource Allocation. Sci. World J. 2014 , 2014 , 673248. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Rajabi, M.S.; Radzi, A.R.; Rezaeiashtiani, M.; Famili, A.; Rashidi, M.E.; Rahman, R.A. Key Assessment Criteria for Organizational BIM Capabilities: A Cross-Regional Study. Buildings 2022 , 12 , 1013. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Adriaanse, A.; Voordijk, H.; Dewulf, G. The Use of Interorganisational ICT in United States Construction Projects. Autom. Constr. 2010 , 19 , 73–83. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Park, H.; Choi, S.O. Digital Innovation Adoption and Its Economic Impact Focused on Path Analysis at National Level. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2019 , 5 , 56. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Krüger, J.; Lausberger, C.; Von Nostitz-Wallwitz, I.; Saake, G.; Leich, T. Search. Review. Repeat? An empirical study of threats to replicating SLR searches. Empir. Softw. Eng. 2020 , 25 , 627–677. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Apóstolo, J.L.A.; Jla, A. Decoding the Synthesis of Evidence: Concepts. Online Braz. J. Nurs. 2016 , 15 , 336–340. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, G.; Liu, Z.; Wang, H. Key Factors Affecting BIM Adoption Is China Based on TOEaRC. In Proceedings of the 2016 International Conference on Mechanics, Materials and Structural Engineering, Jeju Island, Republic of Korea, 18–20 March 2016; Atlantis Press: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tornatzky, L.G.; Fleischer, M.; Chakrabarti, A.K. The Processes of Technological Innovation ; Lexington Books: Lanham, MD, USA, 1990; ISBN 0-669-20348-3. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sun, Y.; Tan, C.; Lim, K.H.; Liang, T.; Yeh, Y. Strategic Contexts, Strategic Orientations and Organisational Technology Adoption: A Configurational Approach. Inf. Syst. J. 2024 , 34 , 1355–1401. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Creswell, J.W. Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches , 3rd ed.; Sage Publications: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2009; ISBN 978-1-4129-6556-9. [ Google Scholar ]
• Purushothaman, M.B.; Seadon, J. System-Wide Construction Waste and Their Connectivity to Construction Phases, Impacting 5M Factors and Effects: A Systematic Review. Smart Sustain. Built Environ. 2024 , 13 , 354–369. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Moher, D.; Shamseer, L.; Clarke, M.; Ghersi, D.; Liberati, A.; Petticrew, M.; Shekelle, P.; Stewart, L.A. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 Statement. Syst. Rev. 2015 , 4 , 1. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Pawson, R.; Greenhalgh, T.; Harvey, G.; Walshe, K. Realist Review—A New Method of Systematic Review Designed for Complex Policy Interventions. J. Health Serv. Res. Policy 2005 , 10 , 21–34. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• PRISMA 2020. Available online: https://www.prisma-statement.org/ (accessed on 1 March 2024).
• Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Software Survey: VOSviewer, a Computer Program for Bibliometric Mapping. Scientometrics 2010 , 84 , 523–538. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yang, M.; Zhao, S.; Zeng, W. The Analysis of Knowledge Base, Theme Evolution and Research Hotspot of Ideological and Political Theory Course in Colleges and Universities Based on CiteSpace. In Proceedings of the 2021 2nd International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Education (ICAIE), Dali, China, 18–20 June 2021; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2021; pp. 460–467. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhao, Y.; Taib, N. Cloud-Based Building Information Modelling (Cloud-BIM): Systematic Literature Review and Bibliometric-Qualitative Analysis. Autom. Constr. 2022 , 142 , 104468. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Singh, V.K.; Singh, P.; Karmakar, M.; Leta, J.; Mayr, P. The Journal Coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A Comparative Analysis. Scientometrics 2021 , 126 , 5113–5142. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Birkle, C.; Pendlebury, D.A.; Schnell, J.; Adams, J. Web of Science as a Data Source for Research on Scientific and Scholarly Activity. Quant. Sci. Stud. 2020 , 1 , 363–376. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Codina, L.; Morales-Vargas, A.; Rodríguez-Martínez, R.; Pérez-Montoro, M. Uso de Scopus y Web of Science para investigar y evaluar en comunicación social: Análisis comparativo y caracterización. Index Comun. 2020 , 10 , 235–261. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Osei-Kyei, R.; Narbaev, T.; Ampratwum, G. A Scientometric Analysis of Studies on Risk Management in Construction Projects. Buildings 2022 , 12 , 1342. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Padwiansyah, M.R.; Wahyuningsih, R.S.H.; Handayani, S.D. Analyzing Sustainable Organizational Development with VOSviewer: A Bibliometric Analysis. Multidiscip. Rev. 2023 , 6 , 2023023. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alnajem, M.; Mostafa, M.M.; ElMelegy, A.R. Mapping the First Decade of Circular Economy Research: A Bibliometric Network Analysis. J. Ind. Prod. Eng. 2021 , 38 , 29–50. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Samad, S.A.; Harun, A.N.; Nawi, M.N.M.; Haron, N.A. The potential use of BIM through an electronic submission: A preliminary study. Malays. Constr. Res. J. 2018 , 3 , 82–96. [ Google Scholar ]
• Abdel-Hamid, M.; Abdelhaleem, H.M. Project Cost Control Using Five Dimensions Building Information Modelling. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2023 , 23 , 405–409. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Smith, P. Project Cost Management with 5D BIM. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2016 , 226 , 193–200. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mayouf, M.; Gerges, M.; Cox, S. 5D BIM: An Investigation into the Integration of Quantity Surveyors within the BIM Process. J. Eng. Des. Technol. 2019 , 17 , 537–553. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Aibinu, A.; Venkatesh, S. Status of BIM Adoption and the BIM Experience of Cost Consultants in Australia. J. Prof. Issues Eng. Educ. Pract. 2014 , 140 , 04013021. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Abdullahi, A.M.; Mohamed, S.F.; Misnan, M.S.; Abanda, F.H.; Abdulrahman, F.H. Recent Advances in 5D BIM Cost Control: A Novel Ontological Approach. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth International Conference on Construction in the 21st Century (CITC-13), Arnhem, The Netherlands, 8–11 May 2023. [ Google Scholar ]
• Smith, P. BIM & the 5D Project Cost Manager. Procedia—Soc. Behav. Sci. 2014 , 119 , 475–484. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kapogiannis, G.; Gaterell, M.; Oulasoglou, E. Identifying Uncertainties Toward Sustainable Projects. Procedia Eng. 2015 , 118 , 1077–1085. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sun, H.; Khoo, T.J.; Ha, C.Y.; Chen, S.; Deng, Z.; Shi, Y. The Impacts of 5D Building Information Modelling towards Cost Management in the Construction Industry. J. Adv. Res. Appl. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2023 , 32 , 471–487. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, C.; Tang, L.C.M.; Jin, Y. Development of 5D Bim-Based Management System for Pre-Fabricated Construction in China. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Smart Infrastructure and Construction 2019 (ICSIC) Driving Data-Informed Decision-Making, Cambridge, UK, 8–10 July 2019; ICE Publishing: Lancashire, UK, 2019; pp. 215–224. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ingle, P.V.; Mahesh, G. Construction Project Performance Areas for Indian Construction Projects. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2022 , 22 , 1443–1454. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ofori, G. Get Construction Project Performance Parameters Right to Attain Sustainable Development Goals. Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 13360. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Famiyeh, S.; Amoatey, C.T.; Adaku, E.; Agbenohevi, C.S. Major Causes of Construction Time and Cost Overruns: A Case of Selected Educational Sector Projects in Ghana. JEDT 2017 , 15 , 181–198. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mering, M.M.; Aminudin, E.; Chai, C.S.; Zakaria, R.; Tan, C.S.; Lee, Y.Y.; Redzuan, A.A. Adoption of Building Information Modelling in Project Planning Risk Management. In IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering ; Institute of Physics Publishing: Bristol, UK, 2017; Volume 271. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vigneault, M.-A.; Boton, C.; Chong, H.-Y.; Cooper-Cooke, B. An Innovative Framework of 5D BIM Solutions for Construction Cost Management: A Systematic Review. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2020 , 27 , 1013–1030. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, X.; Yung, P.; Luo, H.; Truijens, M. An Innovative Method for Project Control in LNG Project through 5D CAD: A Case Study. Autom. Constr. 2014 , 45 , 126–135. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gohil, P.P.; Malek, M.; Bachwani, D.; Patel, D.; Upadhyaya, D.; Hathiwala, A. Application of 5D Building Information Modeling for Construction Management. ECS Trans. 2022 , 107 , 2637–2649. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hussain, O.A.I.; Moehler, R.C.; Walsh, S.D.C.; Ahiaga-Dagbui, D.D. Minimizing Cost Overrun in Rail Projects through 5D-BIM: A Systematic Literature Review. Infrastructures 2023 , 8 , 93. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Leicht, D.; Castro-Fresno, D.; Diaz, J.; Baier, C. Multidimensional Construction Planning and Agile Organized Project Execution-The 5D-PROMPT Method. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 6340. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nast, A.; Koch, C. Practical Experiences with 5D Building Information Modeling—A Systematic Literature Review. In Proceedings of the ECPPM 2022-eWork and eBusiness in Architecture, Engineering and Construction 2022, Trondheim, Norway, 14–16 September 2022; Hjelseth, E., Sujan, S.F., Scherer, R.J., Eds.; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2023; pp. 508–515. [ Google Scholar ]
• Azhar, S. Building Information Modeling (BIM): Trends, Benefits, Risks, and Challenges for the AEC Industry. Leadersh. Manag. Eng. 2011 , 11 , 241–252. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Choi, H.; Zo, H. Assessing the Efficiency of National Innovation Systems in Developing Countries. Sci. Public Policy 2019 , 46 , 530–540. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hu, X.; Chen, Y. Impact of BIM on Project Performance. In Proceedings of the EC3 Conference 2023 European Council on Computing in Construction, Crete, Greece, 10 July 2023. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rohani, M.; Shafabakhsh, G.; Haddad, A.; Asnaashari, E. Strategy Management of Construction Workspaces by Conflict Resolution Algorithm and Visualization Model. Eng. Constr. Archit. Manag. 2018 , 25 , 1053–1074. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lu, Q.; Won, J.; Cheng, J.C.P. A Financial Decision Making Framework for Construction Projects Based on 5D Building Information Modeling (BIM). Int. J. Proj. Manag. 2016 , 34 , 3–21. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Scheer, S.; Mendes, R.; Campestrini, T.F.; Garrido, M.C. On-Site BIM Model Use to Integrate 4D/5D Activities and Construction Works: A Case Study on a Brazilian Low Income Housing Enterprise. Comput. Civ. Build. Eng. 2014 , 2014 , 455–462. [ Google Scholar ]
• ElQasaby, A.R.; Alqahtani, F.K.; Alheyf, M. Automated Schedule and Cost Control Using 3D Sensing Technologies. Appl. Sci. 2023 , 13 , 783. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Agostinelli, S.; Cinquepalmi, F.; Ruperto, F. 5d Bim: Tools and Methods for Digital Project Construction Management. WIT Trans. Built Environ. 2019 , 192 , 205–215. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nicolas, S.; Daniel, F.; Conrad, B. An Interactive Decision-Support Tool to Improve Construction Cost Management with Building Information Modeling. In Proceedings of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineering Annual Conference; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2023; Volume 363, pp. 687–698. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kang, L.S.; Kim, H.S.; Moon, H.S.; Kim, S.-K. Managing Construction Schedule by Telepresence: Integration of Site Video Feed with an Active nD CAD Simulation. Autom. Constr. 2016 , 68 , 32–43. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ybañez, R.S.; De La Cruz, A.R. Related Literature Review 5D Model for Project and Operation/Maintenance Remote Monitoring of Equipment and Piping System. JESA 2023 , 56 , 355–364. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• He, C.; Hou, Y.; Ding, L.; Li, P. Visualized Literature Review on Sustainable Building Renovation. J. Build. Eng. 2021 , 44 , 102622. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, Z.-S.; Yang, Y.; Wang, X.-J.; Chin, K.-S.; Tsui, K.-L. Fostering Linguistic Decision-Making under Uncertainty: A Proportional Interval Type-2 Hesitant Fuzzy TOPSIS Approach Based on Hamacher Aggregation Operators and Andness Optimization Models. Inf. Sci. 2019 , 500 , 229–258. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, C.; Ibekwe-SanJuan, F.; Hou, J. The Structure and Dynamics of Cocitation Clusters: A Multiple-perspective Cocitation Analysis. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. 2010 , 61 , 1386–1409. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chai, C.; Mustafa, K.; Kuppusamy, S.; Yusof, A.; Lim, C.S.; Wai, S.H. BIM Integration in Augmented Reality Model. IJTech 2019 , 10 , 1266. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wu, W.; Issa, R.R.A. Key Issues in Workforce Planning and Adaptation Strategies for BIM Implementation in Construction Industry. In Proceedings of the Construction Research Congress 2014, American Society of Civil Engineers, Atlanta, GA, USA, 13 May 2014; pp. 847–856. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wu, Q.; Chen, L.; Shi, P.; Wang, W.; Xu, S. Identifying Impact Factors of MEP Installation Productivity: An Empirical Study. Buildings 2022 , 12 , 565. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Awwad, K.A.; Shibani, A.; Ghostin, M. Exploring the Critical Success Factors Influencing BIM Level 2 Implementation in the UK Construction Industry: The Case of SMEs. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2022 , 22 , 1894–1901. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Belay, S.; Goedert, J.; Woldesenbet, A.; Rokooei, S.; Matos, J. Building Information Modeling Implementation Strategies for Public Infrastructure Projects in Emerging Markets: The Case of Ethiopia. Cogent Eng. 2023 , 10 , 2220481. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Muthusamy, K.; Chew, L. Critical Success Factors for the Implementation of Building Information Modeling (BIM) among Construction Industry Development Board (CIDB) G7 Contractors in the Klang Valley, Malaysia. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE European Technology and Engineering Management Summit (E-TEMS), Dortmund, Germany, 5–7 March 2020; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2020; pp. 1–6. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chulok, A.; Kotsemir, M.; Radomirova, Y.; Shashnov, S. Setting S&T Perspective Priorities in an Era of Complexity and Uncertainty: A Case for Megacities. Foresight 2024 , 26 , 365–391. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rusnák, J.; Ďurček, P.; Korec, P.; Plešivčák, M. Questing for Contexts in the Research of Regional Inequalities in Slovakia: Application of the Concept of Critical Realism. Acta Geogr. Univ. Comen. 2023 , 67 , 187–215. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zhao, S.L.; Zhu, D.Y.; Peng, X.B.; Song, W. An Empirical Analysis of the Regional Competitiveness Based on S&T Talents Flow. Hum. Syst. Manag. 2016 , 35 , 1–10. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yao, Y.; Qin, H.; Wang, J. Barriers of 5D BIM Implementation in Prefabrication Construction of Buildings. In IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science ; IOP Publishing Ltd.: Bristol, UK, 2020; Volume 580. [ Google Scholar ]
• Calado, M.P.; Ramos, A.; Fabiano, D. eHealth in Hospital Information Management. In Proceedings of the 2019 IST-Africa Week Conference (IST-Africa), Nairobi, Kenya, 8–10 May 2019; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2019; pp. 1–6. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kovacic, I.; Oberwinter, L.; Müller, C.; Achammer, C. The “BIM-Sustain” Experiment—Simulation of BIM-Supported Multi-Disciplinary Design. Vis. Eng. 2013 , 1 , 13. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chowdhury, M.; Hosseini, M.R.; Edwards, D.J.; Martek, I.; Shuchi, S. Comprehensive Analysis of BIM Adoption: From Narrow Focus to Holistic Understanding. Autom. Constr. 2024 , 160 , 105301. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hsiao, H.-C.; Chang, J.-C.; Chen, S.-C. The Influence of Support for Innovation on Organizational Innovation: Taking Organizational Learning as a Mediator. Asia-Pac. Edu Res. 2014 , 23 , 463–472. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wangchuk, J.; Banihashemi, S.; Abbasianjahromi, H.; Antwi-Afari, M.F. Building Information Modelling in Hydropower Infrastructures: Design, Engineering and Management Perspectives. Infrastructures 2024 , 9 , 98. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alnaser, A.A.; Hassan Ali, A.; Elmousalami, H.H.; Elyamany, A.; Gouda Mohamed, A. Assessment Framework for BIM-Digital Twin Readiness in the Construction Industry. Buildings 2024 , 14 , 268. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Olatunji, O.A.; Sher, W.; Ogunsemi, D.R. The Impact of Building Information Modelling on Construction Cost Estimation. In Proceedings of the W055-Special Track 18th CIB World Building Congress, Salford, UK, 10–13 May 2010; CIB Publication: Kanata, ON, Canada, 2010; pp. 193–201. [ Google Scholar ]
• Abualdenien, J.; Borrmann, A. Levels of Detail, Development, Definition, and Information Need: A Critical Literature Review. ITcon 2022 , 27 , 363–392. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tan, S.; Gumusburun Ayalp, G. Root Factors Limiting BIM Implementation in Developing Countries: Sampling the Turkish AEC Industry. Open House INT 2022 , 47 , 732–762. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rajabi, M.S.; Rezaeiashtiani, M.; Radzi, A.R.; Famili, A.; Rezaeiashtiani, A.; Rahman, R.A. Underlying Factors and Strategies for Organizational BIM Capabilities: The Case of Iran. ASI 2022 , 5 , 109. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fan, S.-L. Intellectual Property Rights in Building Information Modeling Application in Taiwan. J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 2014 , 140 , 04013058. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Adibfar, A.; Costin, A.; Issa, R.R. Review of Copyright Challenges in AECO Industry and Prospective Developments for Building Information Modeling (BIM). In Proceedings of the Construction Research Congress 2020, American Society of Civil Engineers, Tempe, AZ, USA, 9 November 2020; pp. 1168–1176. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cheng, T.F.; Soon, L.K. Industry-Wide Adoption through a Comprehensive Building Information Modelling (BIM) Roadmap and BIM Electronic Regulatory Submission. In Proceedings of the Open Systems: 18th International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia (CAADRIA 2013), Singapore, 15–18 May 2013; pp. 743–745. [ Google Scholar ]
• Masum, K.; Marma, B.; Islam, M.S.; Gazder, U. Fuzzy-Based Performance Measurement of Building Construction Projects: A Case Study. In Proceedings of the 7th IET Smart Cities Symposium (SCS 2023), Institution of Engineering and Technology, Hybrid Conference, Manama, Bahrain, 3–5 December 2023; pp. 23–26. [ Google Scholar ]
• Siddika, A.; Masfiqul Alam Bhuiyan, M. Methodological Analysis of KPIs to Evaluate Contractor Performance of the Construction Project. In Proceedings of the Canadian Society of Civil Engineering Annual Conference 2022; Springer Nature: Cham, Switzerland, 2024; Volume 367, pp. 639–652. [ Google Scholar ]
• Choi, K.; Yin, Y.; Goehl, D.; Jeong, H.D. Alternative Contracting Methods: Modeling and Assessing the Effects of Contract Type on Time-Cost-Change Performance. J. Manage. Eng. 2021 , 37 , 04020096. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chicoca, D.; Utomo, C. Developers’ Perception of Cost Drivers Influencing Project Cost Performance on Surabaya High-Rise Residential, Indonesia. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019 , 650 , 012009. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kim, B.-C. Probabilistic Evaluation of Cost Performance Stability in Earned Value Management. J. Manag. Eng. 2016 , 32 , 04015025. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Grau, D.; Back, W.E.; Abbaszadegan, A.; Sirven, R. The Predictability Index-a Novel Project Performance Metric to Assess the Early Prediction of Cost and Time Outcomes. In Proceedings of the Construction Research Congress 2014: Construction in a Global Network; American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE): Reston, VA, USA, 2014; pp. 2306–2314. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tajziyehchi, N.; Moshirpour, M.; Jergeas, G.; Sadeghpour, F. A Predictive Model of Cost Growth in Construction Projects Using Feature Selection. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE Third International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Knowledge Engineering (AIKE), Laguna Hills, CA, USA, 9–13 December 2020; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2020; pp. 142–147. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ajayi, A.A.; Mohamed, S.F. Cost Performance and Change Managementcapability Level of Contractors: A Relational Quantitative Study. Adv. Sci. Lett. 2015 , 21 , 1553–1556. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sibiya, M.; Aigbavboa, C.; Thwala, W. Construction Projects’ Key Performance Indicators: A Case of the South African Construction Industry. In Proceedings of the ICCREM 2015, American Society of Civil Engineers, Luleå, Sweden, 28 September 2015; pp. 954–960. [ Google Scholar ]
• Nwadigo, O.; Naismith, N.N.; Ghaffarianhoseini, A.; Ghaffarian Hoseini, A.; Tookey, J. Dynamic Bayesian Network Modelling for Predicting Adaptability of Time Performance during Time Influencing Factors Disruptions in Construction Enterprise. ECAM 2021 , 28 , 2994–3013. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Musselwhite, D.; Gledson, B.; Greenwood, D. Matters affecting construction project-level planning effectiveness: A literature review. In Proceedings of the 37th Annual ARCOM Conference, ARCOM 2021, Virtual, Glasgow, UK, 6 September 2021; pp. 542–551. [ Google Scholar ]
• Perera, B.A.K.S.; Perera, C.S.R.; Jayalath, C. Contractor’s Perspective on Key Performance Indicators of Cost Control in Asian, Middle Eastern, and European Construction Projects. Int. J. Constr. Educ. Res. 2022 , 18 , 217–233. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Safapour, E.; Kermanshachi, S. Investigation and Analysis of Human, Organizational, and Project Based Rework Indicators in Construction Projects. In Proceedings of the Computing in Civil Engineering 2019, American Society of Civil Engineers, Atlanta, GA, USA, 13 June 2019; pp. 505–512. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bingol, B.N.; Polat, G. Measuring Managerial Capability of Subcontractors Using a KPI Model. Procedia Eng. 2017 , 196 , 68–75. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chidiebere, E.E.; Ebhohimen, I.J. Impact of Rework on Building Project and Organisation Performance: A View of Construction Professionals in Nigeria. IJSCET 2018 , 9 , 29–43. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nokulunga, M.; Didi, T.; Clinton, A. Cost of Poor Quality in Construction Projects in Swaziland. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Washington, DC, USA, 27–29 September 2018. [ Google Scholar ]
• Koo, H.J.; O’Connor, J.; Sprouse, R. Analyzing the Characteristics of Design Defect Leading Indicators on Building Construction Projects. Int. J. Constr. Manag. 2024 , 24 , 834–842. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Heydari, M.; Heravi, G. A BIM-Based Framework for Optimization and Assessment of Buildings’ Cost and Carbon Emissions. J. Build. Eng. 2023 , 79 , 107762. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zarei, B.; Sharifi, H.; Chaghouee, Y. Delay Causes Analysis in Complex Construction Projects: A Semantic Network Analysis Approach. Prod. Plan. Control 2018 , 29 , 29–40. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mitchell, D. 5D BIM: Creating Cost Certainty and Better Buildings. In eWork and eBusiness in Architecture, Engineering and Construction—Proceedings of the European Conference on Product and Process Modelling 2012 ; Routledge: Oxfordshire, UK, 2012; pp. 253–258. [ Google Scholar ]
• Oyebisi, S.O.; Okeke, C.A.; Alayande, T.A.; Oluwafemi, J.O. Performance Evaluation in a Construction Project: An Empirical Study of Canaan City Housing Estate, Ota, Nigeria. Int. J. Qual. Eng. Technol. 2019 , 7 , 385–405. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Baldrich Aragó, A.; Roig Hernando, J.; Llovera Saez, F.J.; Coll Bertran, J. Quantity Surveying and BIM 5D. Its Implementation and Analysis Based on a Case Study Approach in Spain. J. Build. Eng. 2021 , 44 , 103234. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Sun, H.; Khoo, T.J.; Esa, M.; Mahdiyar, A.; Li, J. Critical Factors Driving Construction Project Performance in Integrated 5D Building Information Modeling. Buildings 2024 , 14 , 2807. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14092807

Sun H, Khoo TJ, Esa M, Mahdiyar A, Li J. Critical Factors Driving Construction Project Performance in Integrated 5D Building Information Modeling. Buildings . 2024; 14(9):2807. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14092807

Sun, Hui, Terh Jing Khoo, Muneera Esa, Amir Mahdiyar, and Jiguang Li. 2024. "Critical Factors Driving Construction Project Performance in Integrated 5D Building Information Modeling" Buildings 14, no. 9: 2807. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings14092807

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

• Open access
• Published: 30 August 2024

Barriers in providing quality end-of-life care as perceived by nurses working in critical care units: an integrative review

• Yousef Saleh Rubbai 1 , 2 ,
• Mei Chan Chong 1 ,
• Li Yoong Tang 1 ,
• Khatijah Lim Abdullah 3 ,
• Walid Theib Mohammad 6 ,
• Samira Mohajer   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-7118-1783 1 , 4 &
• Mohammad Namazinia   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2198-7556 5  

BMC Palliative Care volume  23 , Article number:  217 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Despite increasing interest in quality end-of-life care (EOLC), critically ill patients often receive suboptimal care. Critical care nurses play a crucial role in EOLC, but face numerous barriers that hinder their ability to provide compassionate and effective care.

An integrative literature review was conducted to investigate barriers impacting the quality of end-of-life care. This review process involved searching database like MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL, EBSCO, and ScienceDirect up to November 2023. Search strategies focused on keywords related to barriers in end-of-life care and critical care nurses from October 30th to November 10th, 2023. The inclusion criteria specified full-text English articles published between 2010 and 2023 that addressed barriers perceived by critical care nurses. This integrative review employs an integrated thematic analysis approach, which combines elements of deductive and inductive analysis, to explore the identified barriers, with coding and theme development overseen by the primary and secondary authors.

Out of 103 articles published, 11 articles were included in the review. There were eight cross-sectional descriptive studies and three qualitative studies, which demonstrated barriers affecting end-of-life care quality. Quality appraisal using the Mixed Method Appraisal Tool was completed by two authors confirmed the high credibility of the selected studies, indicating the presence of high-quality evidence across the reviewed articles. Thematic analysis led to the three main themes (1) barriers related to patients and their families, (2) barriers related to nurses and their demographic characteristics, and (3) barriers related to health care environment and institutions.

This review highlights barriers influencing the quality of end of life care perceived by critical care nurses and the gaps that need attention to improve the quality of care provided for patients in their final stages and their fsmilies within the context of critical care. This review also notes the need for additional research to investigate the uncover patterns and insights that have not been fully explored in the existing literature to enhance understanding of these barriers. This can help to inform future research, care provision, and policy-making. Specifically, this review examines how these barriers interact, their cumulative impact on care quality, and potential strategies to overcome.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

It was estimated that 56.8 million people, including 25.7 million at the end of life, need palliative care; however, only about 14% of people who need palliative care currently receive it [ 1 ]. The need for acute care settings increased in response to life-threatening emergencies and the acute exacerbation of diseases [ 2 , 3 ]. These settings were developed to meet the need for providing optimal health care, saving patient lives and decreasing the rate of mortality using advanced technology [ 2 , 4 ]. Caring in intensive care units sometimes involves withholding or withdrawing treatments that have lasted a lifetime, and in these cases, the role of ICU nurses goes from providing life-saving measures to end-of-life care [ 5 ]. Care at the end of a life is a special kind of health care for individuals and families who are living with a life-limiting illness [ 6 ]. End-of-life care (EOLC) includes a crucial component of intensive care nurses’ work; nurses are in a unique position to cooperate with families to provide care for patients at the end of their lives [ 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 43 ].

Advanced technology in critical care units has led to improved nursing care in many areas, such as End-Of-Life-Care (EOLC) [ 11 ]. This type of care has moved towards enhancing comfort and reducing patients’ suffering [ 12 ]. As EOLC involves enhancing the physical, emotional, and spiritual quality of life for critically ill patients, traditional measures are now challenged as advanced technology has revolutionized nursing care through innovations such as adjustable beds and pressure-relieving mattresses, which help optimize patient comfort, and advanced communication technologies, for example, video conferencing facilitating communication between patients, families, and healthcare providers, allowing for ongoing support, counseling, and decision-making discussions throughout the end-of-life journey. Therefore, quality EOLC has become a significant concern for healthcare decision-makers, healthcare providers, researchers, patients, and families [ 13 ]. Despite the increased interest and demand in providing good EOLC, this care is still limited In the critical care and does not meet the recommended standards [ 14 ]. Critical Care Nurses spend more time with patients compared to other members of the multidisciplinary team. They serve as implementers, educators, and coordinators in end-of-life care. Their role in delivering EOLC is essential as they are presumably prepared to provide this care and meet patients and their family’s needs, including pain control, management of physical, emotional, spiritual, and social needs, and communication with patients and their families [ 15 ]. Therefore, it is important to look into the factors that impede the provision of quality end-of-life care from their perspectives. Many barriers affecting the provision of EOLC in critical care areas have been reported in the literature [ 13 , 16 , 17 ].

End-of-life care (EOLC) involves caring for and managing terminally ill patients and families. The quality of EOLC in critical care units has been evaluated based on factors such as patient/family involvement in decision-making, professional communication between health professionals and patients/families, care quality, support types, illness and symptom management, spirituality, and organizational support for critical care nurses [ 18 ]. Furthermore, working in a critical care unit environment is stressful and emotionally taxing for health professionals such as nurses. Carers of terminally ill patients may experience distressing emotions such as helplessness, loss of power, sadness, and hopelessness [ 18 ]. These feelings make it difficult to provide optimal end-of-life care. Additionally, nurses focus on managing symptoms, disease prognosis, treatment options, and physical aspects, but in fact, caring in critical care units follows a universal and holistic model. Previous research has shown that patients and families are not receiving adequate care at the end of life.

Researchers categorized factors that affect EOLC into barriers and challenges [ 13 ]. Barriers have been classified into three categories: patient and family-related, nurses and other health care workers’ related, and health care institutions’ related [ 16 , 17 ].

Barriers related to communication between health care providers and patients and families and characteristics of critical care nurses, including nurses’ age, gender, educational level, and end-of-life care training, significantly affect providing good EOLC [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 ]. this integrative review aims to go beyond merely identifying and categorizing barriers. By synthesizing results from a wide range of studies, the review seeks to uncover patterns and insights that have not been fully explored in the existing literature to enhance understanding of these barriers. This can help to inform future research, care provision, and policy-making. Specifically, this review will examine how these barriers interact, their cumulative impact on care quality, and potential strategies to overcome Despite the fact that EOLC is decisive to patient care, appropriate provision of this service is still lacking in several aspects. In the ICUs, EOLC must be considered an essential factor. However, owing to the existing practices of nurses, the adequate delivery of EOLC tends to bear various inefficiencies.

Nurses and other healthcare staff seem to come across multiple barriers that hinder their ability to offer effective care to critically ill patients. Considering the given dearth of research in this context, we intend to present a comprehensive insight into the issue. In this review, we focused on EOLC provided by critical care nurses, who were defined as nurses dealing with patients suffering from acute health problems due to injury, surgery, or exacerbated chronic diseases and need close monitoring in units such as intensive care units (surgical, medical, and pediatric) and cardiac care units. Due to the importance of exploring these barriers in determining the quality of EOLC, this integrative review paper was conducted to examine and highlight evidence from the literature on these barriers that affect the provision of quality EOLC. This paper explores and identifies current published peer-reviewed studies addressing barriers that affect the quality of EOLC as perceived by critical care nurses. This integrative review seeks to answer the following question: What barriers affect the quality of end-of-life care perceived by nurses working in critical care units?

An integrative review design was the most suitable method to explore and produce a new understanding from various types of literature (experimental, non-experimental, and theoretical) to enhance understanding of the phenomenon under investigation (i.e., EOLC). This method also facilitated nursing science by informing further research, care provision, and policy-making. It also highlights strengths, weaknesses, limitations, and gaps in knowledge, and supports what is already known about theories relevant to our topic [ 24 ]. Therefore, this design helps meet this review’s purposes.

Search strategies

The search process involved four phases which were developed by the first author (YR) and validated by two expert authors (MCC and KLA) as follows: (1) identifying the problems related to the research question, (2) conducting a systematic literature search, (3) screening the articles to develop themes, and (4) performing critical analysis to develop the themes.

From October 30, 2023, to November 10, 2023, electronic literature searches were conducted using major databases such as MEDLINE, Cochrane, CINAHL, EBSCO, and ScienceDirect.

Search methods were defined using the MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) descriptors of the keywords “end-of-life care,” “barriers,” and “critical care nurses.” Additionally, the reference lists of all identified articles were manually searched for additional studies. The operators used in this search included “AND” and “OR,” as well as the truncation tools of each database. A refined search was performed with terms such as “critical care nurses’ perceptions” OR “opinions” AND “quality end-of-life care” OR “quality of death and dying.” Subsequently, terms like “barriers” OR “obstacles” OR “challenges” AND “quality end-of-life care” OR “quality of death and dying” were employed. Finally, the descriptors “critical care nurses’ perceptions,” “barriers,” and “quality end-of-life care” were used (Fig.  1 ).

PRISMA search flow diagram

Inclusion and exclusion criteria

The inclusion criteria for this search to select relevant articles were as follows: (1) Full-text articles, (2) Papers published in the English language from 2010 to 2023, and (3) Articles that specifically describe the barriers perceived by critical care nurses that affect the quality of end-of-life care.

Intervention studies and studies that describe barriers to providing quality end-of-life care from other perspectives, such as physicians and patients’ families were excluded. For the studies who included nurses and other health care workers within the context of critical care, the researchers included the results that relevant to nurses and excluded the others.

Data extraction

The data extraction and analysis were carried out to collect and consolidate the data from the selected studies into a standard format relevant to the research field. The extracted data included specific descriptions of the settings, populations, study methods, and outcome measures (Table  31 ). Two authors (YSR and KLA) independently extracted the data and reached an agreement after discussion with the third author (MCC).

Included and excluded studies

Following the review process, the authors made the final decision on studies that met the study criteria. Out of a total of 103 articles, 9 duplicates were removed. The abstracts of the remaining 94 articles were initially found to be somewhat relevant to the research topic. However, after examining the articles in terms of research methodology and results, 36 articles that matched the selection criteria for this study were ultimately chosen. The full text of the 36 articles was reexamined based on the title first for suitability. Subsequently, the abstracts of the studies were reviewed, leading to the exclusion of 23 articles for various reasons, leaving 13 studies for further consideration in this study. However, two articles were disqualified as they did not contain a specific research methodology or reviewed literature papers; they relied solely on theoretical information. This step resulted in the inclusion of 11 research articles in this integrative review of the literature (Table  1 ).

Quality appraisal

To ensure the methodology’s quality and avoid bias in the design, highly credible and respected search engines were adopted to select peer-reviewed studies according to the inclusion criteria in this review. The articles chosen in this review were categorized into two sections based on study design and research methodology: quantitative and qualitative studies. These were evaluated manually and independently for each study, with any disagreements resolved by two experts (KLA, Professor, and MCC, Associate Professor) who have experience in research methodology, using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 [ 25 ]. This tool includes specific criteria for evaluating the quality of quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-method studies. The MMAT consists of a checklist of five research components for each type of study with a rating scale including “Yes,” “No,” and “Can’t tell.” The overall results suggest that the evidence quality across the ten studies was high (Table  2 ).

Data synthesis

Thematic analysis in this review involves a systematic process of coding and theme development, using both inductive and deductive approaches. This method ensures a comprehensive synthesis of diverse data sources, providing valuable insights into the research topic [ 24 , 26 ]. Thematic analysis was employed for all studies to investigate the subject of interest. The coding for the themes in this review followed the six recommended phases: Familiarizing with the data; making initial codes; searching for themes; reviewing themes and making a thematic plan; defining and naming themes; generating the final picture of the report [ 24 ]. The coding was conducted by the primary author (YSR) and confirmed by the three secondary authors (LH, SM, and LY). Any discrepancies were discussed and resolved through consensus.

Search outcomes

The search process yielded a total of 103 articles. All articles resulting from the search process were independently reviewed by all authors in this study for the research process, purpose, methodology, tools, main findings, recommendations, and limitations.

Characteristics of included studies

Eight cross-sectional descriptive studies and three qualitative studies were selected, which were conducted in the following countries: two from the USA [ 27 , 28 ] and a single study from each of the following countries: Saudi Arabia [ 22 ], Jordan [ 29 ], Egypt [ 12 ], Malaysia [ 13 ], Scotland [ 30 ], Poland [ 31 ], Hong Kong [ 32 ], South Africa [ 33 ], and China [ 34 ].

In this comprehensive analysis of 11 studies, a diverse range of methodologies and findings were examined across different countries and healthcare settings. The studies included a mix of quantitative and qualitative approaches, with sample sizes varying from small convenience samples to larger cohorts. Key barriers to providing End of Life Care (EOLC) were identified, such as challenges in communication with families, lack of support from managers, and insufficient training in EOLC. The studies highlighted the importance of addressing these barriers to improve the quality of care provided by nurses in critical care settings. Notably, demographic characteristics and their impact on EOLC provision were not consistently addressed across the studies, indicating a potential area for further research and exploration in this field (Table  31 ).

The thematic analysis of included studies revealed several key themes and sub-themes related to barriers in End of Life Care (EOLC). These themes encompassed various aspects, including challenges related to patients and their families, healthcare institutions and the environment, as well as barriers specific to nurses. Communication and collaboration between patients, nurses, and families included issues such as seeking updates about patient status, misunderstandings about life-saving measures, misunderstanding poor prognosis, troubled family dynamics, and conflicts within families regarding life support decisions [ 22 , 34 ]. Additionally, barriers related to Institution Policy and procedures highlighted concerns such as insufficient standard procedures, communication challenges in decision-making, inadequate ICU design, inappropriate staffing policies, and deficiencies in rooms, supplies, and noise control. Furthermore, barriers associated with nurses encompassed their emotional experiences and socio-demographic characteristics [ 12 ] (Table  4 ).

Among the results of the selected articles on nurses’ perceptions of barriers affecting quality EOLC, three main themes were identified: (1) Communication and collaboration between patients, nurses, and families (2) Institution Policy and procedural barriers, and (3) barriers related to nurses and their demographics. An overlap in some of these areas, such as the themes addressing barriers related to patients and their families, was identified [ 11 , 22 , 35 ]. This overlap indicates a high level of consensus between the authors in identifying the barriers affecting the quality of end-of-life care.

Communication and collaboration between patients, nurses, and families

After reviewing the existing body of literature in this domain, it was observed that some familial factors had been largely perceived as prominent barriers to providing EOLC by the nurses. Although some authors concluded family issues as the highest-ranking concern for nurses in providing quality EOLC, there were variations in the type of barriers they encountered [ 11 , 28 , 35 ]. For example, continuous requests for updates on patients’ status from their families were identified as the top-rated barrier affecting the quality of EOLC from the perspective of critical care nurses. In addition, family misunderstandings about life-saving measures, as well as doubts and uncertainties regarding prognosis, resulted in a lack of time for nurses to provide quality EOLC, as they spent significant time explaining these matters [ 29 ]. Similarly, continuous phone calls from family members seeking updates on patients’ conditions were ranked highest (M = 4.23) among barriers affecting EOLC [ 28 ]. Additionally, dealing with distressed family members also received the highest total mean score (M = 3.3) [ 13 ]. On the contrary, another study found that out of 70 nurses, the practice of calling nurses for updates on patients’ conditions had the lowest impact on EOLC practice (62.2%), while misunderstanding about life-saving measures (65.7%) played a crucial role in determining the quality of EOLC [ 36 ]. The study concluded that the primary barrier related to patients and their families was the lack of understanding among family members about what life-saving measures entailed. Similarly, another source also reported consistent findings indicating that families often did not accept poor prognoses for patients and struggled to grasp the significance of life-saving measures [ 22 ].

Furthermore, previous studies have indicated that barriers affecting EOLC and thereby the quality of care include the presence of family members with patients, inadequate communication with patients’ families, lack of involvement in discussions about patient care decisions, conflicts among family members regarding decisions to cease or continue life support treatment, and unrealistic expectations regarding prognosis [ 22 , 30 , 37 ].

Communication and collaboration among doctors and nurses are vital in designing an effective healthcare plan for patients. However, inadequate and inappropriate collaboration and support, such as conflicting opinions, disagreements, and insufficient cooperation between them, can lead to various difficulties that may result in poor patient care [ 22 ]. Research scholars who have conducted studies in this area have acknowledged that agreement between nurses and physicians regarding care directions for patients at the end of life is one of the most critical barriers to enhancing the quality of EOLC [ 29 ].

Similarly, another study found that poor communication between nurses and physicians resulted in inappropriate decision-making and disagreement about care plans, which subsequently impacted the quality of care [ 13 ]. Additionally, inadequate and poor communication between nurses and other healthcare teams diverted attention from the goal of care [ 28 ].

Failures in communication between nurses and other healthcare providers can lead to misunderstandings of care messages, which can affect EOLC practices [ 30 ]. It also highlighted the lack of communication and cooperation between doctors and other healthcare team members; nurses emphasized the need for a communication training course [ 11 ].

Good communication between nurses and physicians and consideration of nurses’ opinions were found to enhance the quality of EOLC [ 12 ]. Furthermore, educating critical care nurses about communication and collaboration skills was reported as crucial for improving the quality of EOLC [ 13 ].

Barriers related to nurses

The given three sub-themes were identified regarding the impact of nurses-related barriers and the influence of some of their demographic factors on the quality of EOLC:

Lack of opportunities for training and education.

Emotional and psychological issue.

Nurses’ socio -demographic factors.

Lack of opportunities for training and education

It was reported that critical care nurses were not adequately prepared to provide EOLC; nurses needed to increase their knowledge about cultural aspects, ethical issues, skills, communication, and training regarding the continuity of care and the management of physical and psychosocial symptoms [ 11 , 13 , 28 ]. Furthermore, nurses who did not participate in any EOLC training course perceived more barriers to delivering quality EOLC than those who had participated in introductory training courses [ 13 , 28 ]. Attia et al. [ 12 ]. reported that 60% of critical care nurses perceived that they had received poor education and training concerning family grieving, symptom management, and quality EOLC. Furthermore, Holms et al. [ 30 ]. found that all participants acknowledged that they had received very little formal education and training on EOLC, particularly those who worked in intensive care. In a study by Jordan et al. [ 37 ], nurses emphasized that EOLC education is essential during the orientation period before starting their ICU jobs.

Emotional and psychological issue

Five articles in this review have studied the effect of nurses’ feelings and emotions as barriers to providing quality EOLC [ 11 , 13 , 28 , 30 , 37 ]. Nurses stated that they feel sad when they cannot help the patients to die peacefully, and they lack emotional support, considering this one of the main barriers to providing EOLC [ 11 ]. Staff morale distress was reported repeatedly during interviews with ICU nurses about their experience of EOLC. This feeling of despair is accompanied by many causes, such as lack of staff experience, poor communication, inadequate training about EOLC, lack of a suitable environment, and lack of support from senior staff [ 30 ]. Nurses acknowledged that they felt like they were participating in decisions to withdraw or withhold life-sustaining treatment, resulting in conflicting emotions and feeling helpless in advocating for the patients with mixed feelings of sadness, grief, anger, and frustration [ 37 ]. Lastly, Crump et al. [ 28 ] and Omar Daw Hussin et al. [ 13 ] observed that critical care nurses received inadequate emotional support from managers and experts within healthcare institutions, which affects the quality of EOLC they provide.

Nurses’ socio -demographic factors

It has been identified that some socio-demographic characteristics of nurses also play a significant role in shaping their opinions regarding perceived barriers. For example, age, education, experience in the field, and other similar factors profoundly impact their perceptions of the barriers to providing EOLC. A study by Omar Daw Hussin et al. [ 13 ] revealed that nurses ( n  = 553) aged 21–30 years old had the highest mean total score for barrier factors to provide quality EOLC compared to other age groups. This was also higher in diploma holders than in nurses with certificates and bachelor’s degrees. Regarding years of experience as critical care nurses, they found that nurses with minimal years of experience (1–10 years) had the highest mean total score for difficulties. Similarly, Chan et al. [ 38 ] found that nurses’ age, qualifications, and experience in caring for patients at EOL were significantly associated with their perceived barriers. Nurses’ distress in intensive care units was linked to various factors, one of which is the lack of experience in providing EOLC, as reported by Holms et al. [ 30 ].

Institution Policy and procedural barriers

Healthcare facilities and the surrounding environment where patients stay have a significant influence on their quick recovery, mental and physical health, as well as health progress [ 11 ]. Therefore, healthcare institutions ought to establish a healthy environment for patients’ well-being. However, in the current review, it was understood that nurses identified a group of barriers related to hospital settings, such as the insufficiency of standard procedures pertaining to EOLC in place at the institution, inappropriate staffing policies in the ICU, lack of rooms prepared for EOLC, insufficient supplies to assist families in EOLC, and a noisy environment with bright lights in patients’ rooms [ 11 ]. Likewise, researchers concluded that intensive care unit nurses face time constraints due to heavy workloads; they also reported that intensive care units have poor designs that interrupt patients’ privacy and affect the provision of quality EOLC [ 12 , 28 ]. Previous studies identified a lack of EOLC rules and guidelines governing the provision of quality EOLC in critical care units, such as limited visiting hours, guiding preferred care pathways, and excessive paperwork burdens [ 12 , 13 , 30 ].

In this section, we discuss the results of this review on the barriers to providing quality end-of-life care derived from the literature and compare them with the results of previous studies.

The themes emerging from the data helped us understand that some familial factors play a decisive role in hindering timely and effective EOLC provision to patients. Our findings are consistent with Beckstrand et al. [ 36 ] and Friedenberg et al. [ 39 ], who also found that families’ lack of understanding or insufficient understanding of the life-saving measures performed for patients often contributes to delayed EOLC provision, due to their ambiguous opinions and uncertainty about the treatment given. Additionally, before taking any action, barriers related to other factors such as cultural aspects, not covered in this paper, should not be disregarded as they may have a significant influence on the outcomes.

There was agreement among all the authors in this review that communication and collaboration issues were at the forefront of factors that affect the quality of EOLC.in critical care setings, poor communication and collaboration between nurses and physicians makes nurses perceive their roles as secondary in the decision-making process. Additionally, critical care nurses also noted that interrupted communication leads to misunderstandings and conflicts in decision-making, diverting them from the goal of EOLC. It was also agreed that communication breakdown and conflicts in decision-making among healthcare teams impact the quality of care for patients with chronic end-stage diseases [ 40 ].

Reviewing the selected studies made us aware that nurses perceived inadequate training and education about EOLC significantly impacts their practice in delivering quality EOLC. The nurses also acknowledged the importance of receiving training and education regarding EOLC, such as symptom management, dealing with grieving families, and communication skills during the orientation period before starting their work in critical care units. Therefore, critical care nurses need to enhance their knowledge about cultural aspects, ethical issues, communication skills, and training related to the continuity of care and the management of physical and psychosocial symptoms [ 36 ].

Apart from training issues, we found that the feeling of not being able to provide proper care to some patients, consistent distress due to increased workload, or managing patients with critical conditions such as prolonging unavoidable death could be attributed to their deteriorating mental health, which they perceive as a barrier to offering EOLC. These results were also supported by Calvin et al. [ 41 ], who found that novice cardiac care unit nurses expressed more fear and discomfort while caring for dying patients and communicating with their families.

This review further shows that healthcare organizations lack policies and guidelines that govern EOLC, such as staffing policies and scheduling visiting hours, leading to a shortage of nurses, increased workload, and decreased presence of family members with their patients. This lack of policies was also indicated in their study [ 36 ]. Critical care units in this review have a poor design that challenges nurses when providing EOLC and interrupts patient privacy. This is consistent with Sheward et al. [ 42 ], who found that the poor design of critical care units may compromise patients’ confidentiality and affect the provision of quality EOLC.

In summary, our findings revealed that some familial factors play a decisive role in hindering timely and effective EOLC provision to patients. Moreover, nurses perceived that inadequate training and education about EOLC significantly impact their practice in providing good EOLC. Therefore, these aspects of our results are confirmed by broader literature, as evidenced before. The ceuurent review highlights the importance of enhancing family communication throught the needs for conducting education and training programs among health care profesionals in crirical care settings about communication skills. Additionally, healthcare organizations lack policies and guidelines that lead to a shortage of nurses, increased workload, and decreased family members’ presence with their patients, governing EOLC. Thus, this integrative review addresses the question of what barriers affect the quality of end-of-life care as perceived by nurses working in critical care units. Combining diverse methodologies can lead to inadequate rigor, imprecision, bias, flawed analysis, synthesis, and deductions. Therefore, there is a need for future studies to further refine the key indicators.

Strengths and limitations

The selected studies were conducted in several countries, which may enhance the generalizability of the study findings. The limitations of this review study are that it focused mainly on descriptive and non-experimental studies. Additionally, the assessment of quality appraisal for selected studies was subjective to the authors according to MMAT, which could affect the studies’ appraisal. The selection of only English articles may introduce bias regarding barriers beyond EOLC in countries where English is not commonly spoken.

The review indicated that healthcare organizations must provide critical care nurses with evidence-based pathways and guidelines to guide them in providing EOLC, increase emotional support from nursing managers and supervisors, and improve critical care settings design. Further studies need to be conducted on the barriers that affect the quality of EOLC and suggestions to overcome these barriers at the level of patients and families, nurses, physicians, other healthcare providers, and healthcare organizations to enhance teamwork and collaboration and improve the quality of EOLC.

This review also calls for additional research to be conducted to explore the barriers that affect the quality of end-of-life care. These studies should investigate barriers at multiple levels, including those affecting patients and families, nurses, physicians, other healthcare providers, and healthcare organizations. By identifying and understanding these barriers, recommendations can be made to overcome them, ultimately enhancing teamwork, collaboration, and the overall quality of end-of-life care.

International implications for practice

Many tools can be easily used to assess barriers to end-of-life care in critical care settings. We recommend monitoring and evaluating them regularly among nurses because they are significantly linked to the quality of end-of-life care. Furthermore, we advise to assess the quality of end-of-life care from patients and their families perspectives and provide them with greif and emotional support if they are unable to contribute in providing feedback that help in assissing the quality of end-of- life care. Refreshing training and education courses about end-of-life care aspects are significantly associated with the quality of care. We advise nursing management to conduct such courses for critical care nurses periodically. In general, there is an opportunity for improvement in terms of the quality of end-of-life care in critical care settings. As the critical care unit is part of a larger institution, it is worthwhile for the hospital’s management to adjust their policies regarding staffing, ICU design, visiting hours, and provide evidence-based guidelines so they can enhance the quality of end-of-life care.

Data availability

The data used to support the findings of this study are included within the article.

Abbreviations

End-Of-Life-Care

Mixed Method Appraisal Tool

World Health Organization W. palliative care key facts 2022, 2022(8 aug 2022).

Ransea K, Yatesb P, Coyer F. Modelling end-of-life care practices: factorsassociated with critical care nurseengagement in care provision. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2016;33:48–55.

Article   Google Scholar  

Haji Ali Beigloo R, Mohajer S, Eshraghi A, Mazlom SR. Self-administered medications in Cardiovascular Ward: a study on patients’ Self-efficacy, knowledge and satisfaction. Evid Based Care. 2019;9(1):16–25.

Google Scholar  

Ghasemi A, Karimi Moonaghi H, Mohajer S, Mazlom SR, Shoeibi N. Effect of self-management educational program on vision-related quality of life among elderly with visual impairment. Evid Based Care. 2018;8(1):35–44.

Kisorio LC, Langley GCJI, Nursing CC. Intensive care nurses’ experiences of end-of-life care. 2016, 33:30–8.

Fraser J. Palliative and End-Of-Life Care Provincial Roundtable Report. Queen’s Print Ont 2016 2016:1–31.

Ranse K, Yates P, Coyer F. End-of-life care practices of critical care nurses: a national cross-sectional survey. Australian Crit Care. 2016;29(2):83–9.

Namazinia M, Mazlum SR, Mohajer S, Lopez V. Effects of laughter yoga on health-related quality of life in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy: a randomized clinical trial. BMC Complement Med Ther. 2023;23(1):192.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Mohajer S, Mazlum SR, Rajabzadeh M, Namazinia M. The effect of laughter yoga on depression in cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy: a randomized clinical trial. Hayat. 2022;28(3):284–95.

Bagheri S, Valizadeh Zare N, Mazlom SR, Mohajer S, Soltani M. Effect of implementing family-centered empowerment model on burden of care in caregivers of the elderly with Parkinson’s disease. Evid Based Care. 2019;9(3):41–8.

Ozga D, Woźniak K, Gurowiec PJ. Difficulties perceived by ICU nurses providing end-of-life care: a qualitative study. Global Adv Health Med. 2020;9:2164956120916176.

Attia AK, Abd-Elaziz WW, Kandeel NA. Critical care nurses’ perception of barriers and supportive behaviors in end-of-life care. Am J Hospice Palliat Medicine ® . 2013;30(3):297–304.

Omar Daw Hussin E, Wong LP, Chong MC, Subramanian P. Nurses’ perceptions of barriers and facilitators and their associations with the quality of end-of‐life care. J Clin Nurs. 2018;27(3–4):e688–702.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Gott M, Ingleton C, Bennett MI, Gardiner C. Transitions to palliative care in acute hospitals in England: qualitative study. BMJ 2011, 342.

Blackman I, Adesina MT, Zannettino L, DeBellis DA. Factors that influence graduating nursing students’ consensus about learning and end of life nursing care Background; Graduating nursing students’ attitudes and behaviours towards learning and end of life nursing care. ergo 2014, 3(3).

Dening KH, Greenish W, Jones L, Mandal U, Sampson EL. Barriers to providing end-of-life care for people with dementia: a whole-system qualitative study. BMJ Supportive Palliat care. 2012;2(2):103–7.

Dufour B. Barriers Faced by Nurses Caring For End-of-Life Patients on a Medical Surgical Unit. 2018.

Sharour LA, Subih M, Salameh O, Alrshoud M. End-of-life care (EOLC) in Jordanian critical care units: barriers and strategies for improving. Crit Care Shock. 2019;22:88–97.

Ayed A, Sayej S, Harazneh L, Fashafsheh I, Eqtait F. The nurses’ knowledge and attitudes towards the Palliative Care. J Educ Pract. 2015;6(4):91–9.

Cavaye J, Watts JH. End-of-life education in the pre-registration nursing curriculum: patient, carer, nurse and student perspectives. Volume 17. London, England: Sage Publications Sage UK; 2012. pp. 317–26.

Coffey A, McCarthy G, Weathers E, Friedman MI, Gallo K, Ehrenfeld M, Chan S, Li WH, Poletti P, Zanotti R. Nurses’ knowledge of advance directives and perceived confidence in end-of‐life care: a cross‐sectional study in five countries. Int J Nurs Pract. 2016;22(3):247–57.

Mani ZA, Ibrahim MA. Intensive care unit nurses’ perceptions of the obstacles to the end of life care in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Med J. 2017;38(7):715.

Sinuff T, Dodek P, You JJ, Barwich D, Tayler C, Downar J, Hartwick M, Frank C, Stelfox HT, Heyland DK. Improving end-of-life communication and decision making: the development of a conceptual framework and quality indicators. J Pain Symptom Manag. 2015;49(6):1070–80.

Whittemore R, Knafl K. The integrative review: updated methodology. J Adv Nurs. 2005;52(5):546–53.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hong QN, Pluye P, Fàbregues S, Bartlett G, Boardman F, Cargo M, Dagenais P. Gagnon M-P, Griffiths F, NICOLAU B: mixed methods appraisal tool (MMAT) version française 2018. In.

Whittemore R, Knafl K. The integrative review: updated methodology. J Adv Nurs. 2008;52(5):546–53.

Beckstrand RL, Lamoreaux N, Luthy KE, Macintosh JL. Critical care nurses’ perceptions of end-of-life care obstacles: comparative 17-year data. %J Dimensions Crit Care Nurs. 2017;36(2):94–105.

Crump SK, Schaffer MA, Schulte E. Critical care nurses’ perceptions of obstacles, supports, and knowledge needed in providing quality end-of-life care. Dimens Crit Care Nurs. 2010;29(6):297–306.

Sharour LA, Subih M, Salameh O, Alrshoud M. End-of-life care (EOLC) in Jordanian critical care units: barriers and strategies for improving. Crit Care Shock 2019, 22(2).

Holms N, Milligan S, Kydd A. A study of the lived experiences of registered nurses who have provided end-of-life care within an intensive care unit. Int J Palliat Nurs. 2014;20(11):549–56.

Ozga D, Woźniak K, Gurowiec PJ. Difficulties perceived by ICU nurses providing end-of-Life Care: a qualitative study. J Global Adv Health Med. 2020;9:2164956120916176.

Chan CW, Chow MC, Chan S, Sanson-Fisher R, Waller A, Lai TT, Kwan CW. Nurses’ perceptions of and barriers to the optimal end‐of‐life care in hospitals: a cross‐sectional study. %J J Clin Nurs. 2020;29(7–8):1209–19.

Jordan PJ, Williams M, Clifford I. The experiences of critical care nurses with regard to end-of-life issues in the intensive care unit. Afr J Nurs Midwifery. 2014;16(2):71–84.

Xu D-d, Luo D, Chen J, Zeng J-l, Cheng X-l, Li J, Pei J-j, Hu F. Nurses’ perceptions of barriers and supportive behaviors in end-of-life care in the intensive care unit: a cross-sectional study. BMC Palliat Care. 2022;21(1):1–10.

Beckstrand RL, Lamoreaux N, Luthy KE, Macintosh JL. Critical care nurses’ perceptions of end-of-life care obstacles: comparative 17-year data. Dimens Crit Care Nurs. 2017;36(2):94–105.

Beckstrand RL, Callister LC, Kirchhoff KT. Providing a good death: critical care nurses’ suggestions for improving end-of-life care. Am J Crit Care. 2006;15(1):38–45.

Jordan P, Clifford I, Williams M. The experiences of critical care nurses with regard to end-of-life issues in the intensive care unit. Afr J Nurs Midwifery. 2014;16(2):71–84.

Chan CW, Chow MC, Chan S, Sanson-Fisher R, Waller A, Lai TT, Kwan CW. Nurses’ perceptions of and barriers to the optimal end‐of‐life care in hospitals: a cross‐sectional study. J Clin Nurs. 2020;29(7–8):1209–19.

Friedenberg AS, Levy MM, Ross S, Evans LE. Barriers to end-of-life care in the intensive care unit: perceptions vary by level of training, discipline, and institution. J Palliat Med. 2012;15(4):404–11.

Stajduhar K, Sawatzky R, Robin Cohen S, Heyland DK, Allan D, Bidgood D, Norgrove L, Gadermann AM. Bereaved family members’ perceptions of the quality of end-of-life care across four types of inpatient care settings. BMC Palliat care. 2017;16:1–12.

Calvin AO, Lindy CM, Clingon SL. The cardiovascular intensive care unit nurse’s experience with end-of-life care: a qualitative descriptive study. Intensive Crit Care Nurs. 2009;25(4):214–20.

Sheward K, Clark J, Marshall B, Allan S. Staff perceptions of end-of-life care in the acute care setting: a New Zealand perspective. J Palliat Med. 2011;14(5):623–30.

Nia MN, Mohajer S, Ghahramanzadeh M, Mazlom SR: Effect of Laughter Yoga on Mental Well-Being of Cancer Patients Undergoing Chemotherapy. Journal of Evidence-based Care 2019, 9(3).

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

This research received no external funding.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Nursing Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Yousef Saleh Rubbai, Mei Chan Chong, Li Yoong Tang & Samira Mohajer

Princess Aisha bint AL-Hussein College of Nursing and Health Science, Al-Hussein Bin Talal University, Maan, Jordan

Yousef Saleh Rubbai

Department of Nursing, School of Medical and Life Science, Sunway University, Bandar Sunway, 46200, Malaysia

Khatijah Lim Abdullah

Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran

Samira Mohajer

Department of Nursing, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Torbat Heydariyeh University of Medical Sciences, Torbat Heydariyeh, Iran

Mohammad Namazinia

Faculty of medicine, Yarmouk University , Irbid, Jordan

Walid Theib Mohammad

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

YSR and KLA set up the search strategy, with the verification of MCC. MCC, LYT, WTM analyzed results. All authors wrote and approved the final manuscript. SM, MN provided critical review and significant revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content, proof-read, and supervised the preparation of the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Yousef Saleh Rubbai or Mei Chan Chong .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate, consent for publication, competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Rubbai, Y.S., Chong, M.C., Tang, L.Y. et al. Barriers in providing quality end-of-life care as perceived by nurses working in critical care units: an integrative review. BMC Palliat Care 23 , 217 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12904-024-01543-y

Download citation

Received : 17 August 2023

Accepted : 08 August 2024

Published : 30 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12904-024-01543-y

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Quality end-of-life care
• Critical care units

BMC Palliative Care

ISSN: 1472-684X

• General enquiries: [email protected]