The difference between systematic review vs literature review lies in the structured, thorough methodology of a systematic review, which comprehensively evaluates evidence on a specific research question. In contrast, a literature review offers a broader summary of existing research without following a rigid process. In short, systematic reviews aim for completeness and objectivity, while literature reviews are more subjective and less exhaustive. A literature review is typically part of a larger work, like a dissertation or journal article introduction, whereas a systematic review is usually a standalone publication designed to answer a focused research question thoroughly.
Read this blog post to understand the main differences between a systematic review vs literature review, including when and how to use each approach in academic and professional settings. It also explains the structure, methodology and purpose of both review types and discusses their applications in research. Additionally, readers will learn about the processes involved in preparing these reviews for publication, from selecting relevant studies to organising and presenting findings effectively.
- What is a literature review?
- Literature review structure
- What is a systematic review?
- Systematic review structure
- Systematic review vs literature review
- Resources for writing a literature review
- Resources for writing a systematic review
- Using editing services to improve a literature or systematic review
What is a literature review?
A literature review is a comprehensive summary and analysis of existing research, theories and published materials on a particular topic. It aims to provide an overview of the current knowledge, identify gaps and highlight critical findings or trends in the literature. In academic writing, literature reviews contextualise research within the broader field and support the development of new studies or arguments.
A literature review is best suited when the goal is to provide a general overview of a research topic, summarise key studies or discuss trends, theories and gaps in a field. It is appropriate for introductory sections of theses, dissertations or journal articles where a broad context is needed without requiring comprehensive coverage of every study.
Examples of literature review applications include:
- Introduction to a dissertation or thesis
- Background section of a journal article
- Literature review chapter in a research report
- Contextual section in a grant or funding proposal
- Preliminary review for a theoretical paper or conceptual framework
- White paper or policy report introduction
- Conference presentation on trends in a specific field
- Background chapter in a textbook or monograph
- Review section for a course syllabus or academic curriculum design
- Preface to a research monograph or an edited volume
Structure of a literature review
The structure of a literature review typically includes an introduction, theoretical framework/background, a thematic, chronological or methodological discussion of relevant studies, analysis and synthesis and conclusion. Here is a more in-depth explanation of these components of a literature review:
- Introduction briefly introduces the topic, outlines the objectives of the review and explains the importance of the literature being reviewed. It may also state the scope of the review and the criteria for selecting the literature.
- Theoretical framework or background provides a foundation for the topic by explaining fundamental concepts, theories and definitions that frame the review.
- Themes or categories: The main body of the literature review is often organised thematically, chronologically or methodologically. Each section may summarise and synthesise key studies by comparing and contrasting different findings, perspectives or approaches.
- Critical analysis and synthesis discuss the strengths, weaknesses and gaps in the literature. This section evaluates the quality of the studies and how they contribute to understanding the topic.
- Conclusion summarises the key insights of the review and highlights the main trends, gaps and areas for future research. It may also propose how the reviewed literature informs the current study or recommend new research directions.
- References list all the sources cited in the review, formatted according to a specified referencing style (e.g. APA, MLA).
What is a systematic review?
A systematic review is a rigorous and structured method of reviewing existing research on a specific question or topic. It involves a well-defined process of identifying, selecting and critically evaluating all relevant studies. This analysis is followed by a synthesis of the findings in a transparent and replicable way. Systematic reviews aim to minimise bias and summarise objectively the best available evidence. For this reason, they are often used to guide decision-making in healthcare, policy and other fields.
A systematic review is necessary when there is a need to answer precisely a specific research question. Examples of application of systematic review include:
- Standalone systematic review article in a scientific journal
- Evidence synthesis in healthcare guidelines or clinical practice documents
- Meta-analysis for a PhD thesis in fields like medicine or psychology
- Basis for a Cochrane review in medical or health policy research
- Background for a government or non-profit report on intervention effectiveness
- Systematic review section in a research funding proposal
- Regulatory or policy decision reports
- Systematic review component in academic peer-reviewed books
- Pre-registration protocols for clinical trials or experimental studies
- Formal review section in policy-making documents for evidence-based legislation
Structure of a systematic review
The structure of a systematic review typically has a highly organised and detailed format to ensure transparency and replicability. The key sections are introduction, methods, results, discussion and conclusion. Here is a breakdown of each section:
- Introduction provides background information on the topic and outlines the research question or objective. It explains the importance of the review and may mention gaps in current research that the systematic review aims to address.
- Methods
- Search strategy describes how the literature search was conducted, including databases used (e.g. PubMed, Scopus), search terms and inclusion/exclusion criteria for selecting studies.
- Study selection details the process for screening and selecting studies (e.g. PRISMA flowchart), including how many studies were identified, screened and ultimately included.
- Data extraction outlines the procedure for extracting relevant data from the studies (e.g. study design, sample size, outcome measures).
- Quality assessment describes how the quality of the included studies was assessed (e.g. using tools like Cochrane Risk of Bias).
- Results section summarises the key findings of the included studies. It often includes tables to present detailed data (e.g. study characteristics, outcomes). It may also discuss the diversity of content across the studies and the results of any meta-analysis if conducted.
- Discussion interprets the results, highlighting key patterns, strengths and limitations of the included studies. The discussion should also contextualise the findings within the broader literature and address any conflicting evidence.
- Conclusion summarises the key takeaways from the review, including implications for practice, policy or future research. It may also recommend areas where further research is needed.
- References list all the sources cited throughout the systematic review.
- Supplementary materials (if relevant) include appendices or supplementary materials such as search strategies, data extraction forms or detailed quality assessment tables.
Systematic review vs literature reviews
When comparing a systematic review vs literature review, a systematic review is more structured, objective and time-consuming, and it focuses on a specific research question with a rigorous methodology, while a literature review is more flexible and narrative-driven and offers a broader overview of a topic.
Similarities
- Purpose: Both reviews aim to summarise and evaluate existing research on a particular topic or research question.
- Activities involved: Both require searching for relevant literature, reviewing studies, analysing findings and synthesising information.
- Usage: Both are used to contextualise new research, identify gaps in the literature and provide an overview of current knowledge.
Differences
Purpose
- Systematic review: To provide a comprehensive, unbiased and replicable synthesis of all available evidence on a specific research question, often used to inform decision-making in healthcare and policy.
- Literature review: To provide a general summary of what is known about a topic, identifying trends, gaps and critical studies, often used as a background or theoretical foundation for research.
Tasks involved
- Systematic review: Follows a structured methodology, including developing a research question, defining inclusion/exclusion criteria, conducting exhaustive database searches, assessing study quality and synthesising results quantitatively or qualitatively.
- Literature review: Involves selecting relevant studies based on the author’s judgement, often without predefined criteria. It may focus on summarising key works and discussing theoretical perspectives without standardising the process.
Usage
- Systematic review: Primarily used in evidence-based fields like medicine, psychology and social sciences to guide clinical or policy decisions.
- Literature review: Common across disciplines, used in the introduction of research papers, theses and dissertations to provide context and show the state of research in the area.
Structure
- Systematic review: Highly structured, including sections like introduction, methods (search strategy, study selection, quality assessment), results and discussion.
- Literature review: More flexible structure, often divided by themes, trends or chronological order, without rigid methodological requirements.
Methodology
- Systematic review: Follows a predefined, transparent methodology with clear inclusion/exclusion criteria, quality assessment of studies and a replicable process.
- Literature review: Methodology is often subjective, with the scope and selection of literature based on the author’s discretion, making it less replicable.
Scope
- Systematic review: Narrow scope, focused on a specific research question and aims to include all relevant studies that meet the inclusion criteria.
- Literature review: Broad scope, covering various aspects of a topic, often highlighting significant theories, methods and studies without aiming for completeness.
Time and structure
- Literature review: Less time-consuming, flexible in structure, with no rigid methodological rules.
- Systematic review: More time-intensive, with a highly structured and transparent approach that can be replicated.
Resources for writing a literature review
- Google Scholar, JSTOR and Scopus: For finding relevant academic articles and studies
- EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley: For reference management and source organisation
- Cite This for Me: For generating citations in various formats
- Purdue OWL: For guidelines for academic writing and citation styles
- The Literature Review: Six Steps to Success by Lawrence A. Machi and Brenda T. McEvoy
- Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper by Arlene Fink
- Writing the Literature Review: A Practical Guide by Sara Efrat Efron and Ruth Ravid
- Succeeding with Your Literature Review: A Handbook for Students by Paul Oliver
Resources for writing a systematic review
- Cochrane Library: For systematic reviews in healthcare and medicine
- PRISMA Guidelines: For conducting and reporting systematic reviews
- Covidence: For streamlining the systematic review process, including study screening and data extraction
- RevMan: For preparing and maintaining Cochrane systematic reviews
- Rayyan: For systematic review screening and collaboration
- GRADEpro: For assessing the quality of evidence in systematic reviews
- PROSPERO: For registering your systematic review protocol
- PubMed: For finding peer-reviewed biomedical and life sciences literature
- EndNote, Zotero or Mendeley: For reference management and source organisation
- Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences: A Practical Guide by Mark Petticrew and Helen Roberts
- Introduction to Systematic Reviews by David Gough, Sandy Oliver and James Thomas
- Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions by Julian Higgins and Sally Green
- Doing a Systematic Review: A Student’s Guide by Angela Boland, M. Gemma Cherry and Rumona Dickson
How can editing services help improve a systematic review or a literature review?
Professional editing services enhance the quality of systematic and literature reviews by directly improving key aspects of the manuscript, such as clarity and coherence, accuracy and precision, structure and organisation and many others.
Clarity and coherence
Copyediting and line editing ensure the writing remains clear and easy to follow. Editors refine sentence structure, remove ambiguity and enhance readability so complex ideas flow logically from one point to the next. This clarity makes it easier for readers and reviewers to engage with the content.
Accuracy and precision
Proofreaders catch and correct minor errors like spelling, grammar and punctuation. This is especially important in systematic reviews, where precise language is crucial to present accurately data, methods and findings. Meanwhile, copyeditors ensure consistency in terminology and style to sharpen the overall accuracy.
Structure and organisation
Developmental editing helps authors organise their content logically. In literature reviews, editors ensure themes are well-defined and develop smoothly. For systematic reviews, they guide the arrangement of sections like methods, results and discussions to create a coherent and well-structured manuscript.
Adherence to guidelines
Editors ensure the review follows all necessary guidelines. Copyediting focuses on proper formatting, referencing and structure and aligns them with specific journal or institutional requirements. For systematic reviews, copyeditors check for adherence to frameworks like PRISMA to ensure compliance with reporting standards and citation styles like APA or MLA.
Consistency and tone
Line editors make sure the manuscript maintains a consistent tone and voice throughout. In literature reviews, they balance the author’s voice with academic standards. For systematic reviews, editors ensure the tone stays formal and objective and fits the review’s evidence-based nature.
Argument and evidence presentation
Developmental editors strengthen the manuscript by refining arguments and improving how authors present and synthesise evidence. In systematic reviews, editors ensure the data and evidence follow a clear logical progression and conclusions match the presented findings.
Conciseness
Line editing and copyediting remove unnecessary words, sentences and repetitive information. In systematic reviews, keeping the text concise ensures that readers focus on the critical findings and methodologies without getting distracted by redundancies.
Objectivity
Editors play a key role in keeping the review objective. Line editing helps authors maintain neutrality, particularly in systematic reviews where biased language can affect the interpretation of results. Editors keep the tone of the review balanced by removing subjective phrasing and aligning the tone with the systematic methodology.
Final polish
Proofreading provides the final touch. Proofreaders remove any remaining errors, ensure consistent formatting and double-check references. This work ensures the manuscript is ready for submission or publication.
Key takeaways
In conclusion, systematic review vs literature review highlights clear distinctions in methodology, scope and purpose. Systematic reviews follow a structured, rigorous approach to analyse evidence on a specific research question and they typically act as standalone publications for healthcare, policy or other data-driven fields. Literature reviews, by contrast, offer a more flexible, broader summary of research and often are a part of larger works like dissertations or journal articles. Both review types provide valuable insights, but systematic reviews aim for objectivity and completeness, while literature reviews focus on summarising existing knowledge with more subjectivity.
Contact me if you are an academic author looking for editing or indexing services. I am an experienced editor offering a free sample edit and an early bird discount.
