literature review of research methods

Research Methods

• Getting Started
• Literature Review Research
• Research Design
• Research Design By Discipline
• SAGE Research Methods
• Teaching with SAGE Research Methods

Literature Review

• What is a Literature Review?
• What is NOT a Literature Review?
• Purposes of a Literature Review
• Types of Literature Reviews
• Literature Reviews vs. Systematic Reviews
• Systematic vs. Meta-Analysis

Literature Review  is a comprehensive survey of the works published in a particular field of study or line of research, usually over a specific period of time, in the form of an in-depth, critical bibliographic essay or annotated list in which attention is drawn to the most significant works.

Also, we can define a literature review as the collected body of scholarly works related to a topic:

• Summarizes and analyzes previous research relevant to a topic
• Includes scholarly books and articles published in academic journals
• Can be an specific scholarly paper or a section in a research paper

The objective of a Literature Review is to find previous published scholarly works relevant to an specific topic

• Help gather ideas or information
• Keep up to date in current trends and findings
• Help develop new questions

A literature review is important because it:

• Explains the background of research on a topic.
• Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area.
• Helps focus your own research questions or problems
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
• Suggests unexplored ideas or populations
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
• Tests assumptions; may help counter preconceived ideas and remove unconscious bias.
• Identifies critical gaps, points of disagreement, or potentially flawed methodology or theoretical approaches.
• Indicates potential directions for future research.

All content in this section is from Literature Review Research from Old Dominion University 

Keep in mind the following, a literature review is NOT:

Not an essay 

Not an annotated bibliography  in which you summarize each article that you have reviewed.  A literature review goes beyond basic summarizing to focus on the critical analysis of the reviewed works and their relationship to your research question.

Not a research paper   where you select resources to support one side of an issue versus another.  A lit review should explain and consider all sides of an argument in order to avoid bias, and areas of agreement and disagreement should be highlighted.

A literature review serves several purposes. For example, it

• provides thorough knowledge of previous studies; introduces seminal works.
• helps focus one’s own research topic.
• identifies a conceptual framework for one’s own research questions or problems; indicates potential directions for future research.
• suggests previously unused or underused methodologies, designs, quantitative and qualitative strategies.
• identifies gaps in previous studies; identifies flawed methodologies and/or theoretical approaches; avoids replication of mistakes.
• helps the researcher avoid repetition of earlier research.
• suggests unexplored populations.
• determines whether past studies agree or disagree; identifies controversy in the literature.
• tests assumptions; may help counter preconceived ideas and remove unconscious bias.

As Kennedy (2007) notes*, it is important to think of knowledge in a given field as consisting of three layers. First, there are the primary studies that researchers conduct and publish. Second are the reviews of those studies that summarize and offer new interpretations built from and often extending beyond the original studies. Third, there are the perceptions, conclusions, opinion, and interpretations that are shared informally that become part of the lore of field. In composing a literature review, it is important to note that it is often this third layer of knowledge that is cited as "true" even though it often has only a loose relationship to the primary studies and secondary literature reviews.

Given this, while literature reviews are designed to provide an overview and synthesis of pertinent sources you have explored, there are several approaches to how they can be done, depending upon the type of analysis underpinning your study. Listed below are definitions of types of literature reviews:

Argumentative Review      This form examines literature selectively in order to support or refute an argument, deeply imbedded assumption, or philosophical problem already established in the literature. The purpose is to develop a body of literature that establishes a contrarian viewpoint. Given the value-laden nature of some social science research [e.g., educational reform; immigration control], argumentative approaches to analyzing the literature can be a legitimate and important form of discourse. However, note that they can also introduce problems of bias when they are used to to make summary claims of the sort found in systematic reviews.

Integrative Review      Considered a form of research that reviews, critiques, and synthesizes representative literature on a topic in an integrated way such that new frameworks and perspectives on the topic are generated. The body of literature includes all studies that address related or identical hypotheses. A well-done integrative review meets the same standards as primary research in regard to clarity, rigor, and replication.

Historical Review      Few things rest in isolation from historical precedent. Historical reviews are focused on examining research throughout a period of time, often starting with the first time an issue, concept, theory, phenomena emerged in the literature, then tracing its evolution within the scholarship of a discipline. The purpose is to place research in a historical context to show familiarity with state-of-the-art developments and to identify the likely directions for future research.

Methodological Review      A review does not always focus on what someone said [content], but how they said it [method of analysis]. This approach provides a framework of understanding at different levels (i.e. those of theory, substantive fields, research approaches and data collection and analysis techniques), enables researchers to draw on a wide variety of knowledge ranging from the conceptual level to practical documents for use in fieldwork in the areas of ontological and epistemological consideration, quantitative and qualitative integration, sampling, interviewing, data collection and data analysis, and helps highlight many ethical issues which we should be aware of and consider as we go through our study.

Systematic Review      This form consists of an overview of existing evidence pertinent to a clearly formulated research question, which uses pre-specified and standardized methods to identify and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect, report, and analyse data from the studies that are included in the review. Typically it focuses on a very specific empirical question, often posed in a cause-and-effect form, such as "To what extent does A contribute to B?"

Theoretical Review      The purpose of this form is to concretely examine the corpus of theory that has accumulated in regard to an issue, concept, theory, phenomena. The theoretical literature review help establish what theories already exist, the relationships between them, to what degree the existing theories have been investigated, and to develop new hypotheses to be tested. Often this form is used to help establish a lack of appropriate theories or reveal that current theories are inadequate for explaining new or emerging research problems. The unit of analysis can focus on a theoretical concept or a whole theory or framework.

* Kennedy, Mary M. "Defining a Literature."  Educational Researcher  36 (April 2007): 139-147.

All content in this section is from The Literature Review created by Dr. Robert Larabee USC

Robinson, P. and Lowe, J. (2015),  Literature reviews vs systematic reviews.  Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 39: 103-103. doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12393

What's in the name? The difference between a Systematic Review and a Literature Review, and why it matters . By Lynn Kysh from University of Southern California

Systematic review or meta-analysis?

A  systematic review  answers a defined research question by collecting and summarizing all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria.

A  meta-analysis  is the use of statistical methods to summarize the results of these studies.

Systematic reviews, just like other research articles, can be of varying quality. They are a significant piece of work (the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at York estimates that a team will take 9-24 months), and to be useful to other researchers and practitioners they should have:

• clearly stated objectives with pre-defined eligibility criteria for studies
• explicit, reproducible methodology
• a systematic search that attempts to identify all studies
• assessment of the validity of the findings of the included studies (e.g. risk of bias)
• systematic presentation, and synthesis, of the characteristics and findings of the included studies

Not all systematic reviews contain meta-analysis. 

Meta-analysis is the use of statistical methods to summarize the results of independent studies. By combining information from all relevant studies, meta-analysis can provide more precise estimates of the effects of health care than those derived from the individual studies included within a review.  More information on meta-analyses can be found in  Cochrane Handbook, Chapter 9 .

A meta-analysis goes beyond critique and integration and conducts secondary statistical analysis on the outcomes of similar studies.  It is a systematic review that uses quantitative methods to synthesize and summarize the results.

An advantage of a meta-analysis is the ability to be completely objective in evaluating research findings.  Not all topics, however, have sufficient research evidence to allow a meta-analysis to be conducted.  In that case, an integrative review is an appropriate strategy. 

Some of the content in this section is from Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: step by step guide created by Kate McAllister.

• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: Research Design >>
• Last Updated: Jul 15, 2024 10:34 AM
• URL: https://guides.lib.udel.edu/researchmethods

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.

Libraries | Research Guides

Literature reviews, what is a literature review, learning more about how to do a literature review.

• Planning the Review
• The Research Question
• Choosing Where to Search
• Organizing the Review
• Writing the Review

A literature review is a review and synthesis of existing research on a topic or research question. A literature review is meant to analyze the scholarly literature, make connections across writings and identify strengths, weaknesses, trends, and missing conversations. A literature review should address different aspects of a topic as it relates to your research question. A literature review goes beyond a description or summary of the literature you have read. 

• Sage Research Methods Core This link opens in a new window SAGE Research Methods supports research at all levels by providing material to guide users through every step of the research process. SAGE Research Methods is the ultimate methods library with more than 1000 books, reference works, journal articles, and instructional videos by world-leading academics from across the social sciences, including the largest collection of qualitative methods books available online from any scholarly publisher. – Publisher

• Next: Planning the Review >>
• Last Updated: Jul 8, 2024 11:22 AM
• URL: https://libguides.northwestern.edu/literaturereviews

• UConn Library
• Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide
• Introduction

Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide — Introduction

• Getting Started
• How to Pick a Topic
• Strategies to Find Sources
• Evaluating Sources & Lit. Reviews
• Tips for Writing Literature Reviews
• Writing Literature Review: Useful Sites
• Citation Resources
• Other Academic Writings

What are Literature Reviews?

So, what is a literature review? "A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries." Taylor, D.  The literature review: A few tips on conducting it . University of Toronto Health Sciences Writing Centre.

Goals of Literature Reviews

What are the goals of creating a Literature Review?  A literature could be written to accomplish different aims:

• To develop a theory or evaluate an existing theory
• To summarize the historical or existing state of a research topic
• Identify a problem in a field of research 

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1997). Writing narrative literature reviews .  Review of General Psychology , 1 (3), 311-320.

What kinds of sources require a Literature Review?

• A research paper assigned in a course
• A thesis or dissertation
• A grant proposal
• An article intended for publication in a journal

All these instances require you to collect what has been written about your research topic so that you can demonstrate how your own research sheds new light on the topic.

Types of Literature Reviews

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

Narrative review: The purpose of this type of review is to describe the current state of the research on a specific topic/research and to offer a critical analysis of the literature reviewed. Studies are grouped by research/theoretical categories, and themes and trends, strengths and weakness, and gaps are identified. The review ends with a conclusion section which summarizes the findings regarding the state of the research of the specific study, the gaps identify and if applicable, explains how the author's research will address gaps identify in the review and expand the knowledge on the topic reviewed.

• Example : Predictors and Outcomes of U.S. Quality Maternity Leave: A Review and Conceptual Framework:  10.1177/08948453211037398  

Systematic review : "The authors of a systematic review use a specific procedure to search the research literature, select the studies to include in their review, and critically evaluate the studies they find." (p. 139). Nelson, L. K. (2013). Research in Communication Sciences and Disorders . Plural Publishing.

• Example : The effect of leave policies on increasing fertility: a systematic review:  10.1057/s41599-022-01270-w

Meta-analysis : "Meta-analysis is a method of reviewing research findings in a quantitative fashion by transforming the data from individual studies into what is called an effect size and then pooling and analyzing this information. The basic goal in meta-analysis is to explain why different outcomes have occurred in different studies." (p. 197). Roberts, M. C., & Ilardi, S. S. (2003). Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology . Blackwell Publishing.

• Example : Employment Instability and Fertility in Europe: A Meta-Analysis:  10.1215/00703370-9164737

Meta-synthesis : "Qualitative meta-synthesis is a type of qualitative study that uses as data the findings from other qualitative studies linked by the same or related topic." (p.312). Zimmer, L. (2006). Qualitative meta-synthesis: A question of dialoguing with texts .  Journal of Advanced Nursing , 53 (3), 311-318.

• Example : Women’s perspectives on career successes and barriers: A qualitative meta-synthesis:  10.1177/05390184221113735

Literature Reviews in the Health Sciences

• UConn Health subject guide on systematic reviews Explanation of the different review types used in health sciences literature as well as tools to help you find the right review type
• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: How to Pick a Topic >>
• Last Updated: Sep 21, 2022 2:16 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uconn.edu/literaturereview

• Privacy Policy

Home » Literature Review – Types Writing Guide and Examples

Literature Review – Types Writing Guide and Examples

Table of Contents

Literature Review

Definition:

A literature review is a comprehensive and critical analysis of the existing literature on a particular topic or research question. It involves identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing relevant literature, including scholarly articles, books, and other sources, to provide a summary and critical assessment of what is known about the topic.

Types of Literature Review

Types of Literature Review are as follows:

• Narrative literature review : This type of review involves a comprehensive summary and critical analysis of the available literature on a particular topic or research question. It is often used as an introductory section of a research paper.
• Systematic literature review: This is a rigorous and structured review that follows a pre-defined protocol to identify, evaluate, and synthesize all relevant studies on a specific research question. It is often used in evidence-based practice and systematic reviews.
• Meta-analysis: This is a quantitative review that uses statistical methods to combine data from multiple studies to derive a summary effect size. It provides a more precise estimate of the overall effect than any individual study.
• Scoping review: This is a preliminary review that aims to map the existing literature on a broad topic area to identify research gaps and areas for further investigation.
• Critical literature review : This type of review evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of the existing literature on a particular topic or research question. It aims to provide a critical analysis of the literature and identify areas where further research is needed.
• Conceptual literature review: This review synthesizes and integrates theories and concepts from multiple sources to provide a new perspective on a particular topic. It aims to provide a theoretical framework for understanding a particular research question.
• Rapid literature review: This is a quick review that provides a snapshot of the current state of knowledge on a specific research question or topic. It is often used when time and resources are limited.
• Thematic literature review : This review identifies and analyzes common themes and patterns across a body of literature on a particular topic. It aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the literature and identify key themes and concepts.
• Realist literature review: This review is often used in social science research and aims to identify how and why certain interventions work in certain contexts. It takes into account the context and complexities of real-world situations.
• State-of-the-art literature review : This type of review provides an overview of the current state of knowledge in a particular field, highlighting the most recent and relevant research. It is often used in fields where knowledge is rapidly evolving, such as technology or medicine.
• Integrative literature review: This type of review synthesizes and integrates findings from multiple studies on a particular topic to identify patterns, themes, and gaps in the literature. It aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current state of knowledge on a particular topic.
• Umbrella literature review : This review is used to provide a broad overview of a large and diverse body of literature on a particular topic. It aims to identify common themes and patterns across different areas of research.
• Historical literature review: This type of review examines the historical development of research on a particular topic or research question. It aims to provide a historical context for understanding the current state of knowledge on a particular topic.
• Problem-oriented literature review : This review focuses on a specific problem or issue and examines the literature to identify potential solutions or interventions. It aims to provide practical recommendations for addressing a particular problem or issue.
• Mixed-methods literature review : This type of review combines quantitative and qualitative methods to synthesize and analyze the available literature on a particular topic. It aims to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the research question by combining different types of evidence.

Parts of Literature Review

Parts of a literature review are as follows:

Introduction

The introduction of a literature review typically provides background information on the research topic and why it is important. It outlines the objectives of the review, the research question or hypothesis, and the scope of the review.

Literature Search

This section outlines the search strategy and databases used to identify relevant literature. The search terms used, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and any limitations of the search are described.

Literature Analysis

The literature analysis is the main body of the literature review. This section summarizes and synthesizes the literature that is relevant to the research question or hypothesis. The review should be organized thematically, chronologically, or by methodology, depending on the research objectives.

Critical Evaluation

Critical evaluation involves assessing the quality and validity of the literature. This includes evaluating the reliability and validity of the studies reviewed, the methodology used, and the strength of the evidence.

The conclusion of the literature review should summarize the main findings, identify any gaps in the literature, and suggest areas for future research. It should also reiterate the importance of the research question or hypothesis and the contribution of the literature review to the overall research project.

The references list includes all the sources cited in the literature review, and follows a specific referencing style (e.g., APA, MLA, Harvard).

How to write Literature Review

Here are some steps to follow when writing a literature review:

• Define your research question or topic : Before starting your literature review, it is essential to define your research question or topic. This will help you identify relevant literature and determine the scope of your review.
• Conduct a comprehensive search: Use databases and search engines to find relevant literature. Look for peer-reviewed articles, books, and other academic sources that are relevant to your research question or topic.
• Evaluate the sources: Once you have found potential sources, evaluate them critically to determine their relevance, credibility, and quality. Look for recent publications, reputable authors, and reliable sources of data and evidence.
• Organize your sources: Group the sources by theme, method, or research question. This will help you identify similarities and differences among the literature, and provide a structure for your literature review.
• Analyze and synthesize the literature : Analyze each source in depth, identifying the key findings, methodologies, and conclusions. Then, synthesize the information from the sources, identifying patterns and themes in the literature.
• Write the literature review : Start with an introduction that provides an overview of the topic and the purpose of the literature review. Then, organize the literature according to your chosen structure, and analyze and synthesize the sources. Finally, provide a conclusion that summarizes the key findings of the literature review, identifies gaps in knowledge, and suggests areas for future research.
• Edit and proofread: Once you have written your literature review, edit and proofread it carefully to ensure that it is well-organized, clear, and concise.

Examples of Literature Review

Here’s an example of how a literature review can be conducted for a thesis on the topic of “ The Impact of Social Media on Teenagers’ Mental Health”:

• Start by identifying the key terms related to your research topic. In this case, the key terms are “social media,” “teenagers,” and “mental health.”
• Use academic databases like Google Scholar, JSTOR, or PubMed to search for relevant articles, books, and other publications. Use these keywords in your search to narrow down your results.
• Evaluate the sources you find to determine if they are relevant to your research question. You may want to consider the publication date, author’s credentials, and the journal or book publisher.
• Begin reading and taking notes on each source, paying attention to key findings, methodologies used, and any gaps in the research.
• Organize your findings into themes or categories. For example, you might categorize your sources into those that examine the impact of social media on self-esteem, those that explore the effects of cyberbullying, and those that investigate the relationship between social media use and depression.
• Synthesize your findings by summarizing the key themes and highlighting any gaps or inconsistencies in the research. Identify areas where further research is needed.
• Use your literature review to inform your research questions and hypotheses for your thesis.

For example, after conducting a literature review on the impact of social media on teenagers’ mental health, a thesis might look like this:

“Using a mixed-methods approach, this study aims to investigate the relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes in teenagers. Specifically, the study will examine the effects of cyberbullying, social comparison, and excessive social media use on self-esteem, anxiety, and depression. Through an analysis of survey data and qualitative interviews with teenagers, the study will provide insight into the complex relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes, and identify strategies for promoting positive mental health outcomes in young people.”

Reference: Smith, J., Jones, M., & Lee, S. (2019). The effects of social media use on adolescent mental health: A systematic review. Journal of Adolescent Health, 65(2), 154-165. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.03.024

Reference Example: Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (Year). Title of article. Title of Journal, volume number(issue number), page range. doi:0000000/000000000000 or URL

Applications of Literature Review

some applications of literature review in different fields:

• Social Sciences: In social sciences, literature reviews are used to identify gaps in existing research, to develop research questions, and to provide a theoretical framework for research. Literature reviews are commonly used in fields such as sociology, psychology, anthropology, and political science.
• Natural Sciences: In natural sciences, literature reviews are used to summarize and evaluate the current state of knowledge in a particular field or subfield. Literature reviews can help researchers identify areas where more research is needed and provide insights into the latest developments in a particular field. Fields such as biology, chemistry, and physics commonly use literature reviews.
• Health Sciences: In health sciences, literature reviews are used to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments, identify best practices, and determine areas where more research is needed. Literature reviews are commonly used in fields such as medicine, nursing, and public health.
• Humanities: In humanities, literature reviews are used to identify gaps in existing knowledge, develop new interpretations of texts or cultural artifacts, and provide a theoretical framework for research. Literature reviews are commonly used in fields such as history, literary studies, and philosophy.

Role of Literature Review in Research

Here are some applications of literature review in research:

• Identifying Research Gaps : Literature review helps researchers identify gaps in existing research and literature related to their research question. This allows them to develop new research questions and hypotheses to fill those gaps.
• Developing Theoretical Framework: Literature review helps researchers develop a theoretical framework for their research. By analyzing and synthesizing existing literature, researchers can identify the key concepts, theories, and models that are relevant to their research.
• Selecting Research Methods : Literature review helps researchers select appropriate research methods and techniques based on previous research. It also helps researchers to identify potential biases or limitations of certain methods and techniques.
• Data Collection and Analysis: Literature review helps researchers in data collection and analysis by providing a foundation for the development of data collection instruments and methods. It also helps researchers to identify relevant data sources and identify potential data analysis techniques.
• Communicating Results: Literature review helps researchers to communicate their results effectively by providing a context for their research. It also helps to justify the significance of their findings in relation to existing research and literature.

Purpose of Literature Review

Some of the specific purposes of a literature review are as follows:

• To provide context: A literature review helps to provide context for your research by situating it within the broader body of literature on the topic.
• To identify gaps and inconsistencies: A literature review helps to identify areas where further research is needed or where there are inconsistencies in the existing literature.
• To synthesize information: A literature review helps to synthesize the information from multiple sources and present a coherent and comprehensive picture of the current state of knowledge on the topic.
• To identify key concepts and theories : A literature review helps to identify key concepts and theories that are relevant to your research question and provide a theoretical framework for your study.
• To inform research design: A literature review can inform the design of your research study by identifying appropriate research methods, data sources, and research questions.

Characteristics of Literature Review

Some Characteristics of Literature Review are as follows:

• Identifying gaps in knowledge: A literature review helps to identify gaps in the existing knowledge and research on a specific topic or research question. By analyzing and synthesizing the literature, you can identify areas where further research is needed and where new insights can be gained.
• Establishing the significance of your research: A literature review helps to establish the significance of your own research by placing it in the context of existing research. By demonstrating the relevance of your research to the existing literature, you can establish its importance and value.
• Informing research design and methodology : A literature review helps to inform research design and methodology by identifying the most appropriate research methods, techniques, and instruments. By reviewing the literature, you can identify the strengths and limitations of different research methods and techniques, and select the most appropriate ones for your own research.
• Supporting arguments and claims: A literature review provides evidence to support arguments and claims made in academic writing. By citing and analyzing the literature, you can provide a solid foundation for your own arguments and claims.
• I dentifying potential collaborators and mentors: A literature review can help identify potential collaborators and mentors by identifying researchers and practitioners who are working on related topics or using similar methods. By building relationships with these individuals, you can gain valuable insights and support for your own research and practice.
• Keeping up-to-date with the latest research : A literature review helps to keep you up-to-date with the latest research on a specific topic or research question. By regularly reviewing the literature, you can stay informed about the latest findings and developments in your field.

Advantages of Literature Review

There are several advantages to conducting a literature review as part of a research project, including:

• Establishing the significance of the research : A literature review helps to establish the significance of the research by demonstrating the gap or problem in the existing literature that the study aims to address.
• Identifying key concepts and theories: A literature review can help to identify key concepts and theories that are relevant to the research question, and provide a theoretical framework for the study.
• Supporting the research methodology : A literature review can inform the research methodology by identifying appropriate research methods, data sources, and research questions.
• Providing a comprehensive overview of the literature : A literature review provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge on a topic, allowing the researcher to identify key themes, debates, and areas of agreement or disagreement.
• Identifying potential research questions: A literature review can help to identify potential research questions and areas for further investigation.
• Avoiding duplication of research: A literature review can help to avoid duplication of research by identifying what has already been done on a topic, and what remains to be done.
• Enhancing the credibility of the research : A literature review helps to enhance the credibility of the research by demonstrating the researcher’s knowledge of the existing literature and their ability to situate their research within a broader context.

Limitations of Literature Review

Limitations of Literature Review are as follows:

• Limited scope : Literature reviews can only cover the existing literature on a particular topic, which may be limited in scope or depth.
• Publication bias : Literature reviews may be influenced by publication bias, which occurs when researchers are more likely to publish positive results than negative ones. This can lead to an incomplete or biased picture of the literature.
• Quality of sources : The quality of the literature reviewed can vary widely, and not all sources may be reliable or valid.
• Time-limited: Literature reviews can become quickly outdated as new research is published, making it difficult to keep up with the latest developments in a field.
• Subjective interpretation : Literature reviews can be subjective, and the interpretation of the findings can vary depending on the researcher’s perspective or bias.
• Lack of original data : Literature reviews do not generate new data, but rather rely on the analysis of existing studies.
• Risk of plagiarism: It is important to ensure that literature reviews do not inadvertently contain plagiarism, which can occur when researchers use the work of others without proper attribution.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Research Results Section – Writing Guide and...

Significance of the Study – Examples and Writing...

Research Methods – Types, Examples and Guide

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Techniques – Methods, Types and Examples

Research Summary – Structure, Examples and...

Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library

• Collections
• Research Help

YSN Doctoral Programs: Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

• Biomedical Databases
• Global (Public Health) Databases
• Soc. Sci., History, and Law Databases
• Grey Literature
• Trials Registers
• Data and Statistics
• Public Policy
• Google Tips
• Recommended Books
• Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

What is a literature review?

A literature review is an integrated analysis -- not just a summary-- of scholarly writings and other relevant evidence related directly to your research question.  That is, it represents a synthesis of the evidence that provides background information on your topic and shows a association between the evidence and your research question.

A literature review may be a stand alone work or the introduction to a larger research paper, depending on the assignment.  Rely heavily on the guidelines your instructor has given you.

Why is it important?

A literature review is important because it:

• Explains the background of research on a topic.
• Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area.
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
• Identifies critical gaps and points of disagreement.
• Discusses further research questions that logically come out of the previous studies.

APA7 Style resources

APA Style Blog - for those harder to find answers

1. Choose a topic. Define your research question.

Your literature review should be guided by your central research question.  The literature represents background and research developments related to a specific research question, interpreted and analyzed by you in a synthesized way.

• Make sure your research question is not too broad or too narrow.  Is it manageable?
• Begin writing down terms that are related to your question. These will be useful for searches later.
• If you have the opportunity, discuss your topic with your professor and your class mates.

2. Decide on the scope of your review

How many studies do you need to look at? How comprehensive should it be? How many years should it cover? 

• This may depend on your assignment.  How many sources does the assignment require?

3. Select the databases you will use to conduct your searches.

Make a list of the databases you will search. 

Where to find databases:

• use the tabs on this guide
• Find other databases in the Nursing Information Resources web page
• More on the Medical Library web page
• ... and more on the Yale University Library web page

4. Conduct your searches to find the evidence. Keep track of your searches.

• Use the key words in your question, as well as synonyms for those words, as terms in your search. Use the database tutorials for help.
• Save the searches in the databases. This saves time when you want to redo, or modify, the searches. It is also helpful to use as a guide is the searches are not finding any useful results.
• Review the abstracts of research studies carefully. This will save you time.
• Use the bibliographies and references of research studies you find to locate others.
• Check with your professor, or a subject expert in the field, if you are missing any key works in the field.
• Ask your librarian for help at any time.
• Use a citation manager, such as EndNote as the repository for your citations. See the EndNote tutorials for help.

Review the literature

Some questions to help you analyze the research:

• What was the research question of the study you are reviewing? What were the authors trying to discover?
• Was the research funded by a source that could influence the findings?
• What were the research methodologies? Analyze its literature review, the samples and variables used, the results, and the conclusions.
• Does the research seem to be complete? Could it have been conducted more soundly? What further questions does it raise?
• If there are conflicting studies, why do you think that is?
• How are the authors viewed in the field? Has this study been cited? If so, how has it been analyzed?

Tips: 

• Review the abstracts carefully.  
• Keep careful notes so that you may track your thought processes during the research process.
• Create a matrix of the studies for easy analysis, and synthesis, across all of the studies.
• << Previous: Recommended Books
• Last Updated: Jun 20, 2024 9:08 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.yale.edu/YSNDoctoral

Research Methods and Design

• Action Research
• Case Study Design

Literature Review

• Quantitative Research Methods
• Qualitative Research Methods
• Mixed Methods Study
• Indigenous Research and Ethics This link opens in a new window
• Identifying Empirical Research Articles This link opens in a new window
• Research Ethics and Quality
• Data Literacy
• Get Help with Writing Assignments

A literature review is a discussion of the literature (aka. the "research" or "scholarship") surrounding a certain topic. A good literature review doesn't simply summarize the existing material, but provides thoughtful synthesis and analysis. The purpose of a literature review is to orient your own work within an existing body of knowledge. A literature review may be written as a standalone piece or be included in a larger body of work.

You can read more about literature reviews, what they entail, and how to write one, using the resources below. 

Am I the only one struggling to write a literature review?

Dr. Zina O'Leary explains the misconceptions and struggles students often have with writing a literature review. She also provides step-by-step guidance on writing a persuasive literature review.

An Introduction to Literature Reviews

Dr. Eric Jensen, Professor of Sociology at the University of Warwick, and Dr. Charles Laurie, Director of Research at Verisk Maplecroft, explain how to write a literature review, and why researchers need to do so. Literature reviews can be stand-alone research or part of a larger project. They communicate the state of academic knowledge on a given topic, specifically detailing what is still unknown.

This is the first video in a whole series about literature reviews. You can find the rest of the series in our SAGE database, Research Methods:

Videos covering research methods and statistics

Identify Themes and Gaps in Literature (with real examples) | Scribbr

Finding connections between sources is key to organizing the arguments and structure of a good literature review. In this video, you'll learn how to identify themes, debates, and gaps between sources, using examples from real papers.

4 Tips for Writing a Literature Review's Intro, Body, and Conclusion | Scribbr

While each review will be unique in its structure--based on both the existing body of both literature and the overall goals of your own paper, dissertation, or research--this video from Scribbr does a good job simplifying the goals of writing a literature review for those who are new to the process. In this video, you’ll learn what to include in each section, as well as 4 tips for the main body illustrated with an example.

• Literature Review This chapter in SAGE's Encyclopedia of Research Design describes the types of literature reviews and scientific standards for conducting literature reviews.
• UNC Writing Center: Literature Reviews This handout from the Writing Center at UNC will explain what literature reviews are and offer insights into the form and construction of literature reviews in the humanities, social sciences, and sciences.
• Purdue OWL: Writing a Literature Review The overview of literature reviews comes from Purdue's Online Writing Lab. It explains the basic why, what, and how of writing a literature review.

Organizational Tools for Literature Reviews

One of the most daunting aspects of writing a literature review is organizing your research. There are a variety of strategies that you can use to help you in this task. We've highlighted just a few ways writers keep track of all that information! You can use a combination of these tools or come up with your own organizational process. The key is choosing something that works with your own learning style.

Citation Managers

Citation managers are great tools, in general, for organizing research, but can be especially helpful when writing a literature review. You can keep all of your research in one place, take notes, and organize your materials into different folders or categories. Read more about citations managers here:

• Manage Citations & Sources

Concept Mapping

Some writers use concept mapping (sometimes called flow or bubble charts or "mind maps") to help them visualize the ways in which the research they found connects.

There is no right or wrong way to make a concept map. There are a variety of online tools that can help you create a concept map or you can simply put pen to paper. To read more about concept mapping, take a look at the following help guides:

• Using Concept Maps From Williams College's guide, Literature Review: A Self-guided Tutorial

Synthesis Matrix

A synthesis matrix is is a chart you can use to help you organize your research into thematic categories. By organizing your research into a matrix, like the examples below, can help you visualize the ways in which your sources connect. 

• Walden University Writing Center: Literature Review Matrix Find a variety of literature review matrix examples and templates from Walden University.
• Writing A Literature Review and Using a Synthesis Matrix An example synthesis matrix created by NC State University Writing and Speaking Tutorial Service Tutors. If you would like a copy of this synthesis matrix in a different format, like a Word document, please ask a librarian. CC-BY-SA 3.0
• << Previous: Case Study Design
• Next: Quantitative Research Methods >>
• Last Updated: May 7, 2024 9:51 AM

CityU Home - CityU Catalog

Research Methods: Literature Reviews

• Annotated Bibliographies
• Literature Reviews
• Scoping Reviews
• Systematic Reviews
• Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
• Persuasive Arguments
• Subject Specific Methodology

A literature review involves researching, reading, analyzing, evaluating, and summarizing scholarly literature (typically journals and articles) about a specific topic. The results of a literature review may be an entire report or article OR may be part of a article, thesis, dissertation, or grant proposal. A literature review helps the author learn about the history and nature of their topic, and identify research gaps and problems.

Steps & Elements

Problem formulation

• Determine your topic and its components by asking a question
• Research: locate literature related to your topic to identify the gap(s) that can be addressed
• Read: read the articles or other sources of information
• Analyze: assess the findings for relevancy
• Evaluating: determine how the article are relevant to your research and what are the key findings
• Synthesis: write about the key findings and how it is relevant to your research

Elements of a Literature Review

• Summarize subject, issue or theory under consideration, along with objectives of the review
• Divide works under review into categories (e.g. those in support of a particular position, those against, those offering alternative theories entirely)
• Explain how each work is similar to and how it varies from the others
• Conclude which pieces are best considered in their argument, are most convincing of their opinions, and make the greatest contribution to the understanding and development of an area of research

Writing a Literature Review Resources

• How to Write a Literature Review From the Wesleyan University Library
• Write a Literature Review From the University of California Santa Cruz Library. A Brief overview of a literature review, includes a list of stages for writing a lit review.
• Literature Reviews From the University of North Carolina Writing Center. Detailed information about writing a literature review.
• Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach Cronin, P., Ryan, F., & Coughan, M. (2008). Undertaking a literature review: A step-by-step approach. British Journal of Nursing, 17(1), p.38-43

Literature Review Tutorial

• << Previous: Annotated Bibliographies
• Next: Scoping Reviews >>
• Last Updated: Jul 8, 2024 3:13 PM
• URL: https://guides.auraria.edu/researchmethods

1100 Lawrence Street Denver, CO 80204 303-315-7700 Ask Us Directions

Teaching and Research guides

Literature reviews.

• Introduction
• Plan your search
• Where to search
• Refine and update your search
• Finding grey literature
• Writing the review
• Referencing

Research methods overview

Finding literature on research methodologies, sage research methods online.

• Get material not at RMIT
• Further help

What are research methods?

Research methodology is the specific strategies, processes, or techniques utilised in the collection of information that is created and analysed.

The methodology section of a research paper, or thesis, enables the reader to critically evaluate the study’s validity and reliability by addressing how the data was collected or generated, and how it was analysed.

Types of research methods

There are three main types of research methods which use different designs for data collection.  

(1) Qualitative research

Qualitative research gathers data about lived experiences, emotions or behaviours, and the meanings individuals attach to them. It assists in enabling researchers to gain a better understanding of complex concepts, social interactions or cultural phenomena. This type of research is useful in the exploration of how or why things have occurred, interpreting events and describing actions.

Examples of qualitative research designs include:

• focus groups
• observations
• document analysis
• oral history or life stories  

(2) Quantitative research

Quantitative research gathers numerical data which can be ranked, measured or categorised through statistical analysis. It assists with uncovering patterns or relationships, and for making generalisations. This type of research is useful for finding out how many, how much, how often, or to what extent.

Examples of quantitative research designs include:

• surveys or questionnaires
• observation
• document screening
• experiments  

(3) Mixed method research

Mixed Methods research integrates both Qualitative research and Quantitative research. It provides a holistic approach combining and analysing the statistical data with deeper contextualised insights. Using Mixed Methods also enables triangulation, or verification, of the data from two or more sources.

Sometimes in your literature review, you might need to discuss and evaluate relevant research methodologies in order to justify your own choice of research methodology.

When searching for literature on research methodologies it is important to search across a range of sources. No single information source will supply all that you need. Selecting appropriate sources will depend upon your research topic.

Developing a robust search strategy will help reduce irrelevant results. It is good practice to plan a strategy before you start to search.

Search tips

(1) free text keywords.

Free text searching is the use of natural language words to conduct your search. Use selective free text keywords such as: phenomenological, "lived experience", "grounded theory", "life experiences", "focus groups", interview, quantitative, survey, validity, variance, correlation and statistical.

To locate books on your desired methodology, try LibrarySearch . Remember to use  refine  options such as books, ebooks, subject, and publication date.  

(2) Subject headings in Databases

Databases categorise their records using subject terms, or a controlled vocabulary (thesaurus). These subject headings may be useful to use, in addition to utilising free text keywords in a database search.

Subject headings will differ across databases, for example, the PubMed database uses 'Qualitative Research' whilst the CINHAL database uses 'Qualitative Studies.'  

(3) Limiting search results

Databases enable sets of results to be limited or filtered by specific fields, look for options such as Publication Type, Article Type, etc. and apply them to your search.  

(4) Browse the Library shelves

To find books on  research methods  browse the Library shelves at call number  001.42

• SAGE Research Methods Online SAGE Research Methods Online (SRMO) is a research tool supported by a newly devised taxonomy that links content and methods terms. It provides the most comprehensive picture available today of research methods (quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods) across the social and behavioural sciences.

SAGE Research Methods Overview  (2:07 min) by SAGE Publishing  ( YouTube ) 

• << Previous: Referencing
• Next: Get material not at RMIT >>

• Last Updated: Sep 14, 2024 4:19 PM
• URL: https://rmit.libguides.com/literature-review

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• Systematic Review | Definition, Example, & Guide

Systematic Review | Definition, Example & Guide

Published on June 15, 2022 by Shaun Turney . Revised on November 20, 2023.

A systematic review is a type of review that uses repeatable methods to find, select, and synthesize all available evidence. It answers a clearly formulated research question and explicitly states the methods used to arrive at the answer.

They answered the question “What is the effectiveness of probiotics in reducing eczema symptoms and improving quality of life in patients with eczema?”

In this context, a probiotic is a health product that contains live microorganisms and is taken by mouth. Eczema is a common skin condition that causes red, itchy skin.

Table of contents

What is a systematic review, systematic review vs. meta-analysis, systematic review vs. literature review, systematic review vs. scoping review, when to conduct a systematic review, pros and cons of systematic reviews, step-by-step example of a systematic review, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about systematic reviews.

A review is an overview of the research that’s already been completed on a topic.

What makes a systematic review different from other types of reviews is that the research methods are designed to reduce bias . The methods are repeatable, and the approach is formal and systematic:

• Formulate a research question
• Develop a protocol
• Search for all relevant studies
• Apply the selection criteria
• Extract the data
• Synthesize the data
• Write and publish a report

Although multiple sets of guidelines exist, the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews is among the most widely used. It provides detailed guidelines on how to complete each step of the systematic review process.

Systematic reviews are most commonly used in medical and public health research, but they can also be found in other disciplines.

Systematic reviews typically answer their research question by synthesizing all available evidence and evaluating the quality of the evidence. Synthesizing means bringing together different information to tell a single, cohesive story. The synthesis can be narrative ( qualitative ), quantitative , or both.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Systematic reviews often quantitatively synthesize the evidence using a meta-analysis . A meta-analysis is a statistical analysis, not a type of review.

A meta-analysis is a technique to synthesize results from multiple studies. It’s a statistical analysis that combines the results of two or more studies, usually to estimate an effect size .

A literature review is a type of review that uses a less systematic and formal approach than a systematic review. Typically, an expert in a topic will qualitatively summarize and evaluate previous work, without using a formal, explicit method.

Although literature reviews are often less time-consuming and can be insightful or helpful, they have a higher risk of bias and are less transparent than systematic reviews.

Similar to a systematic review, a scoping review is a type of review that tries to minimize bias by using transparent and repeatable methods.

However, a scoping review isn’t a type of systematic review. The most important difference is the goal: rather than answering a specific question, a scoping review explores a topic. The researcher tries to identify the main concepts, theories, and evidence, as well as gaps in the current research.

Sometimes scoping reviews are an exploratory preparation step for a systematic review, and sometimes they are a standalone project.

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

A systematic review is a good choice of review if you want to answer a question about the effectiveness of an intervention , such as a medical treatment.

To conduct a systematic review, you’ll need the following:

• A precise question , usually about the effectiveness of an intervention. The question needs to be about a topic that’s previously been studied by multiple researchers. If there’s no previous research, there’s nothing to review.
• If you’re doing a systematic review on your own (e.g., for a research paper or thesis ), you should take appropriate measures to ensure the validity and reliability of your research.
• Access to databases and journal archives. Often, your educational institution provides you with access.
• Time. A professional systematic review is a time-consuming process: it will take the lead author about six months of full-time work. If you’re a student, you should narrow the scope of your systematic review and stick to a tight schedule.
• Bibliographic, word-processing, spreadsheet, and statistical software . For example, you could use EndNote, Microsoft Word, Excel, and SPSS.

A systematic review has many pros .

• They minimize research bias by considering all available evidence and evaluating each study for bias.
• Their methods are transparent , so they can be scrutinized by others.
• They’re thorough : they summarize all available evidence.
• They can be replicated and updated by others.

Systematic reviews also have a few cons .

• They’re time-consuming .
• They’re narrow in scope : they only answer the precise research question.

The 7 steps for conducting a systematic review are explained with an example.

Step 1: Formulate a research question

Formulating the research question is probably the most important step of a systematic review. A clear research question will:

• Allow you to more effectively communicate your research to other researchers and practitioners
• Guide your decisions as you plan and conduct your systematic review

A good research question for a systematic review has four components, which you can remember with the acronym PICO :

• Population(s) or problem(s)
• Intervention(s)
• Comparison(s)

You can rearrange these four components to write your research question:

• What is the effectiveness of I versus C for O in P ?

Sometimes, you may want to include a fifth component, the type of study design . In this case, the acronym is PICOT .

• Type of study design(s)
• The population of patients with eczema
• The intervention of probiotics
• In comparison to no treatment, placebo , or non-probiotic treatment
• The outcome of changes in participant-, parent-, and doctor-rated symptoms of eczema and quality of life
• Randomized control trials, a type of study design

Their research question was:

• What is the effectiveness of probiotics versus no treatment, a placebo, or a non-probiotic treatment for reducing eczema symptoms and improving quality of life in patients with eczema?

Step 2: Develop a protocol

A protocol is a document that contains your research plan for the systematic review. This is an important step because having a plan allows you to work more efficiently and reduces bias.

Your protocol should include the following components:

• Background information : Provide the context of the research question, including why it’s important.
• Research objective (s) : Rephrase your research question as an objective.
• Selection criteria: State how you’ll decide which studies to include or exclude from your review.
• Search strategy: Discuss your plan for finding studies.
• Analysis: Explain what information you’ll collect from the studies and how you’ll synthesize the data.

If you’re a professional seeking to publish your review, it’s a good idea to bring together an advisory committee . This is a group of about six people who have experience in the topic you’re researching. They can help you make decisions about your protocol.

It’s highly recommended to register your protocol. Registering your protocol means submitting it to a database such as PROSPERO or ClinicalTrials.gov .

Step 3: Search for all relevant studies

Searching for relevant studies is the most time-consuming step of a systematic review.

To reduce bias, it’s important to search for relevant studies very thoroughly. Your strategy will depend on your field and your research question, but sources generally fall into these four categories:

• Databases: Search multiple databases of peer-reviewed literature, such as PubMed or Scopus . Think carefully about how to phrase your search terms and include multiple synonyms of each word. Use Boolean operators if relevant.
• Handsearching: In addition to searching the primary sources using databases, you’ll also need to search manually. One strategy is to scan relevant journals or conference proceedings. Another strategy is to scan the reference lists of relevant studies.
• Gray literature: Gray literature includes documents produced by governments, universities, and other institutions that aren’t published by traditional publishers. Graduate student theses are an important type of gray literature, which you can search using the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (NDLTD) . In medicine, clinical trial registries are another important type of gray literature.
• Experts: Contact experts in the field to ask if they have unpublished studies that should be included in your review.

At this stage of your review, you won’t read the articles yet. Simply save any potentially relevant citations using bibliographic software, such as Scribbr’s APA or MLA Generator .

• Databases: EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, LILACS, and ISI Web of Science
• Handsearch: Conference proceedings and reference lists of articles
• Gray literature: The Cochrane Library, the metaRegister of Controlled Trials, and the Ongoing Skin Trials Register
• Experts: Authors of unpublished registered trials, pharmaceutical companies, and manufacturers of probiotics

Step 4: Apply the selection criteria

Applying the selection criteria is a three-person job. Two of you will independently read the studies and decide which to include in your review based on the selection criteria you established in your protocol . The third person’s job is to break any ties.

To increase inter-rater reliability , ensure that everyone thoroughly understands the selection criteria before you begin.

If you’re writing a systematic review as a student for an assignment, you might not have a team. In this case, you’ll have to apply the selection criteria on your own; you can mention this as a limitation in your paper’s discussion.

You should apply the selection criteria in two phases:

• Based on the titles and abstracts : Decide whether each article potentially meets the selection criteria based on the information provided in the abstracts.
• Based on the full texts: Download the articles that weren’t excluded during the first phase. If an article isn’t available online or through your library, you may need to contact the authors to ask for a copy. Read the articles and decide which articles meet the selection criteria.

It’s very important to keep a meticulous record of why you included or excluded each article. When the selection process is complete, you can summarize what you did using a PRISMA flow diagram .

Next, Boyle and colleagues found the full texts for each of the remaining studies. Boyle and Tang read through the articles to decide if any more studies needed to be excluded based on the selection criteria.

When Boyle and Tang disagreed about whether a study should be excluded, they discussed it with Varigos until the three researchers came to an agreement.

Step 5: Extract the data

Extracting the data means collecting information from the selected studies in a systematic way. There are two types of information you need to collect from each study:

• Information about the study’s methods and results . The exact information will depend on your research question, but it might include the year, study design , sample size, context, research findings , and conclusions. If any data are missing, you’ll need to contact the study’s authors.
• Your judgment of the quality of the evidence, including risk of bias .

You should collect this information using forms. You can find sample forms in The Registry of Methods and Tools for Evidence-Informed Decision Making and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations Working Group .

Extracting the data is also a three-person job. Two people should do this step independently, and the third person will resolve any disagreements.

They also collected data about possible sources of bias, such as how the study participants were randomized into the control and treatment groups.

Step 6: Synthesize the data

Synthesizing the data means bringing together the information you collected into a single, cohesive story. There are two main approaches to synthesizing the data:

• Narrative ( qualitative ): Summarize the information in words. You’ll need to discuss the studies and assess their overall quality.
• Quantitative : Use statistical methods to summarize and compare data from different studies. The most common quantitative approach is a meta-analysis , which allows you to combine results from multiple studies into a summary result.

Generally, you should use both approaches together whenever possible. If you don’t have enough data, or the data from different studies aren’t comparable, then you can take just a narrative approach. However, you should justify why a quantitative approach wasn’t possible.

Boyle and colleagues also divided the studies into subgroups, such as studies about babies, children, and adults, and analyzed the effect sizes within each group.

Step 7: Write and publish a report

The purpose of writing a systematic review article is to share the answer to your research question and explain how you arrived at this answer.

Your article should include the following sections:

• Abstract : A summary of the review
• Introduction : Including the rationale and objectives
• Methods : Including the selection criteria, search method, data extraction method, and synthesis method
• Results : Including results of the search and selection process, study characteristics, risk of bias in the studies, and synthesis results
• Discussion : Including interpretation of the results and limitations of the review
• Conclusion : The answer to your research question and implications for practice, policy, or research

To verify that your report includes everything it needs, you can use the PRISMA checklist .

Once your report is written, you can publish it in a systematic review database, such as the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews , and/or in a peer-reviewed journal.

In their report, Boyle and colleagues concluded that probiotics cannot be recommended for reducing eczema symptoms or improving quality of life in patients with eczema. Note Generative AI tools like ChatGPT can be useful at various stages of the writing and research process and can help you to write your systematic review. However, we strongly advise against trying to pass AI-generated text off as your own work.

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

• Student’s  t -distribution
• Normal distribution
• Null and Alternative Hypotheses
• Chi square tests
• Confidence interval
• Quartiles & Quantiles
• Cluster sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Data cleansing
• Reproducibility vs Replicability
• Peer review
• Prospective cohort study

Research bias

• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Placebo effect
• Hawthorne effect
• Hindsight bias
• Affect heuristic
• Social desirability 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.

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 .  

A systematic review is secondary research because it uses existing research. You don’t collect new data yourself.

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.

Turney, S. (2023, November 20). Systematic Review | Definition, Example & Guide. Scribbr. Retrieved September 16, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/systematic-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shaun Turney

Other students also liked, how to write a literature review | guide, examples, & templates, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, what is critical thinking | definition & examples, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

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

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Clinics (Sao Paulo)

Approaching literature review for academic purposes: The Literature Review Checklist

Debora f.b. leite.

I Departamento de Ginecologia e Obstetricia, Faculdade de Ciencias Medicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, SP, BR

II Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Pernambuco, PE, BR

III Hospital das Clinicas, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, Pernambuco, PE, BR

Maria Auxiliadora Soares Padilha

Jose g. cecatti.

A sophisticated literature review (LR) can result in a robust dissertation/thesis by scrutinizing the main problem examined by the academic study; anticipating research hypotheses, methods and results; and maintaining the interest of the audience in how the dissertation/thesis will provide solutions for the current gaps in a particular field. Unfortunately, little guidance is available on elaborating LRs, and writing an LR chapter is not a linear process. An LR translates students’ abilities in information literacy, the language domain, and critical writing. Students in postgraduate programs should be systematically trained in these skills. Therefore, this paper discusses the purposes of LRs in dissertations and theses. Second, the paper considers five steps for developing a review: defining the main topic, searching the literature, analyzing the results, writing the review and reflecting on the writing. Ultimately, this study proposes a twelve-item LR checklist. By clearly stating the desired achievements, this checklist allows Masters and Ph.D. students to continuously assess their own progress in elaborating an LR. Institutions aiming to strengthen students’ necessary skills in critical academic writing should also use this tool.

INTRODUCTION

Writing the literature review (LR) is often viewed as a difficult task that can be a point of writer’s block and procrastination ( 1 ) in postgraduate life. Disagreements on the definitions or classifications of LRs ( 2 ) may confuse students about their purpose and scope, as well as how to perform an LR. Interestingly, at many universities, the LR is still an important element in any academic work, despite the more recent trend of producing scientific articles rather than classical theses.

The LR is not an isolated section of the thesis/dissertation or a copy of the background section of a research proposal. It identifies the state-of-the-art knowledge in a particular field, clarifies information that is already known, elucidates implications of the problem being analyzed, links theory and practice ( 3 - 5 ), highlights gaps in the current literature, and places the dissertation/thesis within the research agenda of that field. Additionally, by writing the LR, postgraduate students will comprehend the structure of the subject and elaborate on their cognitive connections ( 3 ) while analyzing and synthesizing data with increasing maturity.

At the same time, the LR transforms the student and hints at the contents of other chapters for the reader. First, the LR explains the research question; second, it supports the hypothesis, objectives, and methods of the research project; and finally, it facilitates a description of the student’s interpretation of the results and his/her conclusions. For scholars, the LR is an introductory chapter ( 6 ). If it is well written, it demonstrates the student’s understanding of and maturity in a particular topic. A sound and sophisticated LR can indicate a robust dissertation/thesis.

A consensus on the best method to elaborate a dissertation/thesis has not been achieved. The LR can be a distinct chapter or included in different sections; it can be part of the introduction chapter, part of each research topic, or part of each published paper ( 7 ). However, scholars view the LR as an integral part of the main body of an academic work because it is intrinsically connected to other sections ( Figure 1 ) and is frequently present. The structure of the LR depends on the conventions of a particular discipline, the rules of the department, and the student’s and supervisor’s areas of expertise, needs and interests.

Interestingly, many postgraduate students choose to submit their LR to peer-reviewed journals. As LRs are critical evaluations of current knowledge, they are indeed publishable material, even in the form of narrative or systematic reviews. However, systematic reviews have specific patterns 1 ( 8 ) that may not entirely fit with the questions posed in the dissertation/thesis. Additionally, the scope of a systematic review may be too narrow, and the strict criteria for study inclusion may omit important information from the dissertation/thesis. Therefore, this essay discusses the definition of an LR is and methods to develop an LR in the context of an academic dissertation/thesis. Finally, we suggest a checklist to evaluate an LR.

WHAT IS A LITERATURE REVIEW IN A THESIS?

Conducting research and writing a dissertation/thesis translates rational thinking and enthusiasm ( 9 ). While a strong body of literature that instructs students on research methodology, data analysis and writing scientific papers exists, little guidance on performing LRs is available. The LR is a unique opportunity to assess and contrast various arguments and theories, not just summarize them. The research results should not be discussed within the LR, but the postgraduate student tends to write a comprehensive LR while reflecting on his or her own findings ( 10 ).

Many people believe that writing an LR is a lonely and linear process. Supervisors or the institutions assume that the Ph.D. student has mastered the relevant techniques and vocabulary associated with his/her subject and conducts a self-reflection about previously published findings. Indeed, while elaborating the LR, the student should aggregate diverse skills, which mainly rely on his/her own commitment to mastering them. Thus, less supervision should be required ( 11 ). However, the parameters described above might not currently be the case for many students ( 11 , 12 ), and the lack of formal and systematic training on writing LRs is an important concern ( 11 ).

An institutional environment devoted to active learning will provide students the opportunity to continuously reflect on LRs, which will form a dialogue between the postgraduate student and the current literature in a particular field ( 13 ). Postgraduate students will be interpreting studies by other researchers, and, according to Hart (1998) ( 3 ), the outcomes of the LR in a dissertation/thesis include the following:

• To identify what research has been performed and what topics require further investigation in a particular field of knowledge;
• To determine the context of the problem;
• To recognize the main methodologies and techniques that have been used in the past;
• To place the current research project within the historical, methodological and theoretical context of a particular field;
• To identify significant aspects of the topic;
• To elucidate the implications of the topic;
• To offer an alternative perspective;
• To discern how the studied subject is structured;
• To improve the student’s subject vocabulary in a particular field; and
• To characterize the links between theory and practice.

A sound LR translates the postgraduate student’s expertise in academic and scientific writing: it expresses his/her level of comfort with synthesizing ideas ( 11 ). The LR reveals how well the postgraduate student has proceeded in three domains: an effective literature search, the language domain, and critical writing.

Effective literature search

All students should be trained in gathering appropriate data for specific purposes, and information literacy skills are a cornerstone. These skills are defined as “an individual’s ability to know when they need information, to identify information that can help them address the issue or problem at hand, and to locate, evaluate, and use that information effectively” ( 14 ). Librarian support is of vital importance in coaching the appropriate use of Boolean logic (AND, OR, NOT) and other tools for highly efficient literature searches (e.g., quotation marks and truncation), as is the appropriate management of electronic databases.

Language domain

Academic writing must be concise and precise: unnecessary words distract the reader from the essential content ( 15 ). In this context, reading about issues distant from the research topic ( 16 ) may increase students’ general vocabulary and familiarity with grammar. Ultimately, reading diverse materials facilitates and encourages the writing process itself.

Critical writing

Critical judgment includes critical reading, thinking and writing. It supposes a student’s analytical reflection about what he/she has read. The student should delineate the basic elements of the topic, characterize the most relevant claims, identify relationships, and finally contrast those relationships ( 17 ). Each scientific document highlights the perspective of the author, and students will become more confident in judging the supporting evidence and underlying premises of a study and constructing their own counterargument as they read more articles. A paucity of integration or contradictory perspectives indicates lower levels of cognitive complexity ( 12 ).

Thus, while elaborating an LR, the postgraduate student should achieve the highest category of Bloom’s cognitive skills: evaluation ( 12 ). The writer should not only summarize data and understand each topic but also be able to make judgments based on objective criteria, compare resources and findings, identify discrepancies due to methodology, and construct his/her own argument ( 12 ). As a result, the student will be sufficiently confident to show his/her own voice .

Writing a consistent LR is an intense and complex activity that reveals the training and long-lasting academic skills of a writer. It is not a lonely or linear process. However, students are unlikely to be prepared to write an LR if they have not mastered the aforementioned domains ( 10 ). An institutional environment that supports student learning is crucial.

Different institutions employ distinct methods to promote students’ learning processes. First, many universities propose modules to develop behind the scenes activities that enhance self-reflection about general skills (e.g., the skills we have mastered and the skills we need to develop further), behaviors that should be incorporated (e.g., self-criticism about one’s own thoughts), and each student’s role in the advancement of his/her field. Lectures or workshops about LRs themselves are useful because they describe the purposes of the LR and how it fits into the whole picture of a student’s work. These activities may explain what type of discussion an LR must involve, the importance of defining the correct scope, the reasons to include a particular resource, and the main role of critical reading.

Some pedagogic services that promote a continuous improvement in study and academic skills are equally important. Examples include workshops about time management, the accomplishment of personal objectives, active learning, and foreign languages for nonnative speakers. Additionally, opportunities to converse with other students promotes an awareness of others’ experiences and difficulties. Ultimately, the supervisor’s role in providing feedback and setting deadlines is crucial in developing students’ abilities and in strengthening students’ writing quality ( 12 ).

HOW SHOULD A LITERATURE REVIEW BE DEVELOPED?

A consensus on the appropriate method for elaborating an LR is not available, but four main steps are generally accepted: defining the main topic, searching the literature, analyzing the results, and writing ( 6 ). We suggest a fifth step: reflecting on the information that has been written in previous publications ( Figure 2 ).

First step: Defining the main topic

Planning an LR is directly linked to the research main question of the thesis and occurs in parallel to students’ training in the three domains discussed above. The planning stage helps organize ideas, delimit the scope of the LR ( 11 ), and avoid the wasting of time in the process. Planning includes the following steps:

• Reflecting on the scope of the LR: postgraduate students will have assumptions about what material must be addressed and what information is not essential to an LR ( 13 , 18 ). Cooper’s Taxonomy of Literature Reviews 2 systematizes the writing process through six characteristics and nonmutually exclusive categories. The focus refers to the reviewer’s most important points of interest, while the goals concern what students want to achieve with the LR. The perspective assumes answers to the student’s own view of the LR and how he/she presents a particular issue. The coverage defines how comprehensive the student is in presenting the literature, and the organization determines the sequence of arguments. The audience is defined as the group for whom the LR is written.
• Designating sections and subsections: Headings and subheadings should be specific, explanatory and have a coherent sequence throughout the text ( 4 ). They simulate an inverted pyramid, with an increasing level of reflection and depth of argument.
• Identifying keywords: The relevant keywords for each LR section should be listed to guide the literature search. This list should mirror what Hart (1998) ( 3 ) advocates as subject vocabulary . The keywords will also be useful when the student is writing the LR since they guide the reader through the text.
• Delineating the time interval and language of documents to be retrieved in the second step. The most recently published documents should be considered, but relevant texts published before a predefined cutoff year can be included if they are classic documents in that field. Extra care should be employed when translating documents.

Second step: Searching the literature

The ability to gather adequate information from the literature must be addressed in postgraduate programs. Librarian support is important, particularly for accessing difficult texts. This step comprises the following components:

• Searching the literature itself: This process consists of defining which databases (electronic or dissertation/thesis repositories), official documents, and books will be searched and then actively conducting the search. Information literacy skills have a central role in this stage. While searching electronic databases, controlled vocabulary (e.g., Medical Subject Headings, or MeSH, for the PubMed database) or specific standardized syntax rules may need to be applied.

In addition, two other approaches are suggested. First, a review of the reference list of each document might be useful for identifying relevant publications to be included and important opinions to be assessed. This step is also relevant for referencing the original studies and leading authors in that field. Moreover, students can directly contact the experts on a particular topic to consult with them regarding their experience or use them as a source of additional unpublished documents.

Before submitting a dissertation/thesis, the electronic search strategy should be repeated. This process will ensure that the most recently published papers will be considered in the LR.

• Selecting documents for inclusion: Generally, the most recent literature will be included in the form of published peer-reviewed papers. Assess books and unpublished material, such as conference abstracts, academic texts and government reports, are also important to assess since the gray literature also offers valuable information. However, since these materials are not peer-reviewed, we recommend that they are carefully added to the LR.

This task is an important exercise in time management. First, students should read the title and abstract to understand whether that document suits their purposes, addresses the research question, and helps develop the topic of interest. Then, they should scan the full text, determine how it is structured, group it with similar documents, and verify whether other arguments might be considered ( 5 ).

Third step: Analyzing the results

Critical reading and thinking skills are important in this step. This step consists of the following components:

• Reading documents: The student may read various texts in depth according to LR sections and subsections ( defining the main topic ), which is not a passive activity ( 1 ). Some questions should be asked to practice critical analysis skills, as listed below. Is the research question evident and articulated with previous knowledge? What are the authors’ research goals and theoretical orientations, and how do they interact? Are the authors’ claims related to other scholars’ research? Do the authors consider different perspectives? Was the research project designed and conducted properly? Are the results and discussion plausible, and are they consistent with the research objectives and methodology? What are the strengths and limitations of this work? How do the authors support their findings? How does this work contribute to the current research topic? ( 1 , 19 )
• Taking notes: Students who systematically take notes on each document are more readily able to establish similarities or differences with other documents and to highlight personal observations. This approach reinforces the student’s ideas about the next step and helps develop his/her own academic voice ( 1 , 13 ). Voice recognition software ( 16 ), mind maps ( 5 ), flowcharts, tables, spreadsheets, personal comments on the referenced texts, and note-taking apps are all available tools for managing these observations, and the student him/herself should use the tool that best improves his/her learning. Additionally, when a student is considering submitting an LR to a peer-reviewed journal, notes should be taken on the activities performed in all five steps to ensure that they are able to be replicated.

Fourth step: Writing

The recognition of when a student is able and ready to write after a sufficient period of reading and thinking is likely a difficult task. Some students can produce a review in a single long work session. However, as discussed above, writing is not a linear process, and students do not need to write LRs according to a specific sequence of sections. Writing an LR is a time-consuming task, and some scholars believe that a period of at least six months is sufficient ( 6 ). An LR, and academic writing in general, expresses the writer’s proper thoughts, conclusions about others’ work ( 6 , 10 , 13 , 16 ), and decisions about methods to progress in the chosen field of knowledge. Thus, each student is expected to present a different learning and writing trajectory.

In this step, writing methods should be considered; then, editing, citing and correct referencing should complete this stage, at least temporarily. Freewriting techniques may be a good starting point for brainstorming ideas and improving the understanding of the information that has been read ( 1 ). Students should consider the following parameters when creating an agenda for writing the LR: two-hour writing blocks (at minimum), with prespecified tasks that are possible to complete in one section; short (minutes) and long breaks (days or weeks) to allow sufficient time for mental rest and reflection; and short- and long-term goals to motivate the writing itself ( 20 ). With increasing experience, this scheme can vary widely, and it is not a straightforward rule. Importantly, each discipline has a different way of writing ( 1 ), and each department has its own preferred styles for citations and references.

Fifth step: Reflecting on the writing

In this step, the postgraduate student should ask him/herself the same questions as in the analyzing the results step, which can take more time than anticipated. Ambiguities, repeated ideas, and a lack of coherence may not be noted when the student is immersed in the writing task for long periods. The whole effort will likely be a work in progress, and continuous refinements in the written material will occur once the writing process has begun.

LITERATURE REVIEW CHECKLIST

In contrast to review papers, the LR of a dissertation/thesis should not be a standalone piece or work. Instead, it should present the student as a scholar and should maintain the interest of the audience in how that dissertation/thesis will provide solutions for the current gaps in a particular field.

A checklist for evaluating an LR is convenient for students’ continuous academic development and research transparency: it clearly states the desired achievements for the LR of a dissertation/thesis. Here, we present an LR checklist developed from an LR scoring rubric ( 11 ). For a critical analysis of an LR, we maintain the five categories but offer twelve criteria that are not scaled ( Figure 3 ). The criteria all have the same importance and are not mutually exclusive.

First category: Coverage

1. justified criteria exist for the inclusion and exclusion of literature in the review.

This criterion builds on the main topic and areas covered by the LR ( 18 ). While experts may be confident in retrieving and selecting literature, postgraduate students must convince their audience about the adequacy of their search strategy and their reasons for intentionally selecting what material to cover ( 11 ). References from different fields of knowledge provide distinct perspective, but narrowing the scope of coverage may be important in areas with a large body of existing knowledge.

Second category: Synthesis

2. a critical examination of the state of the field exists.

A critical examination is an assessment of distinct aspects in the field ( 1 ) along with a constructive argument. It is not a negative critique but an expression of the student’s understanding of how other scholars have added to the topic ( 1 ), and the student should analyze and contextualize contradictory statements. A writer’s personal bias (beliefs or political involvement) have been shown to influence the structure and writing of a document; therefore, the cultural and paradigmatic background guide how the theories are revised and presented ( 13 ). However, an honest judgment is important when considering different perspectives.

3. The topic or problem is clearly placed in the context of the broader scholarly literature

The broader scholarly literature should be related to the chosen main topic for the LR ( how to develop the literature review section). The LR can cover the literature from one or more disciplines, depending on its scope, but it should always offer a new perspective. In addition, students should be careful in citing and referencing previous publications. As a rule, original studies and primary references should generally be included. Systematic and narrative reviews present summarized data, and it may be important to cite them, particularly for issues that should be understood but do not require a detailed description. Similarly, quotations highlight the exact statement from another publication. However, excessive referencing may disclose lower levels of analysis and synthesis by the student.

4. The LR is critically placed in the historical context of the field

Situating the LR in its historical context shows the level of comfort of the student in addressing a particular topic. Instead of only presenting statements and theories in a temporal approach, which occasionally follows a linear timeline, the LR should authentically characterize the student’s academic work in the state-of-art techniques in their particular field of knowledge. Thus, the LR should reinforce why the dissertation/thesis represents original work in the chosen research field.

5. Ambiguities in definitions are considered and resolved

Distinct theories on the same topic may exist in different disciplines, and one discipline may consider multiple concepts to explain one topic. These misunderstandings should be addressed and contemplated. The LR should not synthesize all theories or concepts at the same time. Although this approach might demonstrate in-depth reading on a particular topic, it can reveal a student’s inability to comprehend and synthesize his/her research problem.

6. Important variables and phenomena relevant to the topic are articulated

The LR is a unique opportunity to articulate ideas and arguments and to purpose new relationships between them ( 10 , 11 ). More importantly, a sound LR will outline to the audience how these important variables and phenomena will be addressed in the current academic work. Indeed, the LR should build a bidirectional link with the remaining sections and ground the connections between all of the sections ( Figure 1 ).

7. A synthesized new perspective on the literature has been established

The LR is a ‘creative inquiry’ ( 13 ) in which the student elaborates his/her own discourse, builds on previous knowledge in the field, and describes his/her own perspective while interpreting others’ work ( 13 , 17 ). Thus, students should articulate the current knowledge, not accept the results at face value ( 11 , 13 , 17 ), and improve their own cognitive abilities ( 12 ).

Third category: Methodology

8. the main methodologies and research techniques that have been used in the field are identified and their advantages and disadvantages are discussed.

The LR is expected to distinguish the research that has been completed from investigations that remain to be performed, address the benefits and limitations of the main methods applied to date, and consider the strategies for addressing the expected limitations described above. While placing his/her research within the methodological context of a particular topic, the LR will justify the methodology of the study and substantiate the student’s interpretations.

9. Ideas and theories in the field are related to research methodologies

The audience expects the writer to analyze and synthesize methodological approaches in the field. The findings should be explained according to the strengths and limitations of previous research methods, and students must avoid interpretations that are not supported by the analyzed literature. This criterion translates to the student’s comprehension of the applicability and types of answers provided by different research methodologies, even those using a quantitative or qualitative research approach.

Fourth category: Significance

10. the scholarly significance of the research problem is rationalized.

The LR is an introductory section of a dissertation/thesis and will present the postgraduate student as a scholar in a particular field ( 11 ). Therefore, the LR should discuss how the research problem is currently addressed in the discipline being investigated or in different disciplines, depending on the scope of the LR. The LR explains the academic paradigms in the topic of interest ( 13 ) and methods to advance the field from these starting points. However, an excess number of personal citations—whether referencing the student’s research or studies by his/her research team—may reflect a narrow literature search and a lack of comprehensive synthesis of ideas and arguments.

11. The practical significance of the research problem is rationalized

The practical significance indicates a student’s comprehensive understanding of research terminology (e.g., risk versus associated factor), methodology (e.g., efficacy versus effectiveness) and plausible interpretations in the context of the field. Notably, the academic argument about a topic may not always reflect the debate in real life terms. For example, using a quantitative approach in epidemiology, statistically significant differences between groups do not explain all of the factors involved in a particular problem ( 21 ). Therefore, excessive faith in p -values may reflect lower levels of critical evaluation of the context and implications of a research problem by the student.

Fifth category: Rhetoric

12. the lr was written with a coherent, clear structure that supported the review.

This category strictly relates to the language domain: the text should be coherent and presented in a logical sequence, regardless of which organizational ( 18 ) approach is chosen. The beginning of each section/subsection should state what themes will be addressed, paragraphs should be carefully linked to each other ( 10 ), and the first sentence of each paragraph should generally summarize the content. Additionally, the student’s statements are clear, sound, and linked to other scholars’ works, and precise and concise language that follows standardized writing conventions (e.g., in terms of active/passive voice and verb tenses) is used. Attention to grammar, such as orthography and punctuation, indicates prudence and supports a robust dissertation/thesis. Ultimately, all of these strategies provide fluency and consistency for the text.

Although the scoring rubric was initially proposed for postgraduate programs in education research, we are convinced that this checklist is a valuable tool for all academic areas. It enables the monitoring of students’ learning curves and a concentrated effort on any criteria that are not yet achieved. For institutions, the checklist is a guide to support supervisors’ feedback, improve students’ writing skills, and highlight the learning goals of each program. These criteria do not form a linear sequence, but ideally, all twelve achievements should be perceived in the LR.

CONCLUSIONS

A single correct method to classify, evaluate and guide the elaboration of an LR has not been established. In this essay, we have suggested directions for planning, structuring and critically evaluating an LR. The planning of the scope of an LR and approaches to complete it is a valuable effort, and the five steps represent a rational starting point. An institutional environment devoted to active learning will support students in continuously reflecting on LRs, which will form a dialogue between the writer and the current literature in a particular field ( 13 ).

The completion of an LR is a challenging and necessary process for understanding one’s own field of expertise. Knowledge is always transitory, but our responsibility as scholars is to provide a critical contribution to our field, allowing others to think through our work. Good researchers are grounded in sophisticated LRs, which reveal a writer’s training and long-lasting academic skills. We recommend using the LR checklist as a tool for strengthening the skills necessary for critical academic writing.

AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS

Leite DFB has initially conceived the idea and has written the first draft of this review. Padilha MAS and Cecatti JG have supervised data interpretation and critically reviewed the manuscript. All authors have read the draft and agreed with this submission. Authors are responsible for all aspects of this academic piece.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We are grateful to all of the professors of the ‘Getting Started with Graduate Research and Generic Skills’ module at University College Cork, Cork, Ireland, for suggesting and supporting this article. Funding: DFBL has granted scholarship from Brazilian Federal Agency for Support and Evaluation of Graduate Education (CAPES) to take part of her Ph.D. studies in Ireland (process number 88881.134512/2016-01). There is no participation from sponsors on authors’ decision to write or to submit this manuscript.

No potential conflict of interest was reported.

1 The questions posed in systematic reviews usually follow the ‘PICOS’ acronym: Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcomes, Study design.

2 In 1988, Cooper proposed a taxonomy that aims to facilitate students’ and institutions’ understanding of literature reviews. Six characteristics with specific categories are briefly described: Focus: research outcomes, research methodologies, theories, or practices and applications; Goals: integration (generalization, conflict resolution, and linguistic bridge-building), criticism, or identification of central issues; Perspective: neutral representation or espousal of a position; Coverage: exhaustive, exhaustive with selective citations, representative, central or pivotal; Organization: historical, conceptual, or methodological; and Audience: specialized scholars, general scholars, practitioners or policymakers, or the general public.

URP 4600 Research Guide

• Writing a Staff Report
• Writing a White Paper
• Steps to Writing a Research Paper
• Databases and Journals
• Finding Data
• More on GIS
• Google Scholar
• 15-Minute Cities
• Resilient Cities
• New Urbanism
• Public Health and Urban Planning
• Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
• Historic Preservation
• Very Useful Websites
• Info Literacy Instruction Recording and Slides

Step 1: Research Process

Step 2:Literature Review

Review articles give you an overview of your topic on the current state of the research. Review Articles explain:

• the main people working in a field;
• recent major advances and discoveries;
• significant gaps in the research;
• current debates;
• ideas of where research might go next.

This information is based Review Articles - Finding Journal Articles 101.

Image from Stellenbosch University Library

Step 3: Research Design & Methods

What is research design how is it different from research method.

Research design is how you will answer your question. It's a plan to answer your research question.  A research method is your strategy used to implement that plan. These ideas are closely related but research design ensures you will answer your research question more effectively.

Which research method should I choose ?

It depends on your research and the data you are trying to collect. Common research methods used are:

• Observation / Participant Observation
• Focus Groups
• Experiments
• Secondary Data Analysis / Archival Study
• Mixed Methods (combination of some of the above)

Step 4: Findings/Discussion

The step is where you discuss your research in an objective, factual way. You are communicating factual information about your topic based on the evidence you found in articles, books, and media backed by data you have collected. Use the active voice as much as possible (e.g., achieved, improved, report, etc.)

• << Previous: Writing a White Paper
• Next: Databases and Journals >>
• Last Updated: Sep 16, 2024 2:49 PM
• URL: https://libguides.library.cpp.edu/urp4600

A systematic review of vision transformers and convolutional neural networks for Alzheimer’s disease classification using 3D MRI images

• Published: 17 September 2024

Cite this article

• Mario Alejandro Bravo-Ortiz 1 , 2 , 7   na1 ,
• Sergio Alejandro Holguin-Garcia 1 , 2 , 7   na1 ,
• Sebastián Quiñones-Arredondo 1 ,
• Alejandro Mora-Rubio 6 ,
• Ernesto Guevara-Navarro 1 , 2 ,
• Harold Brayan Arteaga-Arteaga 1 ,
• Gonzalo A. Ruz 3 , 4 , 5 &
• Reinel Tabares-Soto 1 , 2 , 3  

Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder that mainly affects memory and other cognitive functions, such as thinking, reasoning, and the ability to carry out daily activities. It is considered the most common form of dementia in older adults, but it can appear as early as the age of 25. Although the disease has no cure, treatment can be more effective if diagnosed early. In diagnosing AD, changes in the brain’s morphology are identified macroscopically, which is why deep learning models, such as convolutional neural networks (CNN) or vision transformers (ViT), excel in this task. We followed the Systematic Literature Review process, applying stages of the review protocol from it, which aims to detect the need for a review. Then, search equations were formulated and executed in several literature databases. Relevant publications were scanned and used to extract evidence to answer research questions. Several CNN and ViT approaches have already been tested on problems related to brain image analysis for disease detection. A total of 722 articles were found in the selected databases. Still, a series of filters were performed to decrease the number to 44 articles, focusing specifically on brain image analysis with CNN and ViT methods. Deep learning methods are effective for disease diagnosis, and the surge in research activity underscores its importance. However, the lack of access to repositories may introduce bias into the information. Full access demonstrates transparency and facilitates collaborative work in research.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price excludes VAT (USA) Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Explore related subjects

• Artificial Intelligence
• Medical Imaging

Data availability

Not applicable.

Ballard C, Gauthier S, Corbett A, Brayne C, Aarsland D, Jones E (2011) Alzheimer’s disease. Lancet 377(9770):1019–1031. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61349-9

Google Scholar  

DeTure MA, Dickson DW (2019) The neuropathological diagnosis of alzheimer’s disease. Mol Neurodegenerat 14(1):32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13024-019-0333-5

Moradi E, Pepe A, Gaser C, Huttunen H, Tohka J, Initiative ADN et al (2015) Machine learning framework for early mri-based alzheimer’s conversion prediction in mci subjects. Neuroimage 104:398–412

Hassan SA, Khan T (2017) A machine learning model to predict the onset of alzheimer disease using potential cerebrospinal fluid (csf) biomarkers. Int J Adv Comput Sci Appl 8(12)

Salvatore C, Cerasa A, Battista P, Gilardi MC, Quattrone A, Castiglioni I, Initiative ADN (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging biomarkers for the early diagnosis of alzheimer’s disease: a machine learning approach. Front Neurosci 9:307

Long X, Chen L, Jiang C, Zhang L, Initiative ADN (2017) Prediction and classification of alzheimer disease based on quantification of mri deformation. PloS One 12(3):0173372

LaMontagne PJ, Benzinger TL, Morris JC, Keefe S, Hornbeck R, Xiong C, Grant E, Hassenstab J, Moulder K, Vlassenko AG, et al (2019) Oasis-3: longitudinal neuroimaging, clinical, and cognitive dataset for normal aging and alzheimer disease. MedRxiv

Petersen RC, Aisen P, Beckett LA, Donohue M, Gamst A, Harvey DJ, Jack C, Jagust W, Shaw L, Toga A et al (2010) Alzheimer’s disease neuroimaging initiative (adni): clinical characterization. Neurology 74(3):201–209

Mora-Rubio A, Bravo-Ortíz MA, Arredondo SQ, Torres JMS, Ruz GA, Tabares-Soto R (2023) Classification of alzheimer’s disease stages from magnetic resonance images using deep learning. PeerJ Comput Sci 9:1490

Sharma S, Sharma V, Sharma A (2016) Performance based evaluation of various machine learning classification techniques for chronic kidney disease diagnosis. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.09581

Chan H-P, Samala RK, Hadjiiski LM, Zhou C (2020) Deep learning in medical image analysis. Deep Learn Med Image Anal, pp 3–21

Bravo-Ortíz MA, Arteaga-Arteaga HB, Tabares-Soto KR, Padilla-Buriticá JI, Orozco-Arias S (2021) Cervical cancer classification using convolutional neural networks, transfer learning and data augmentation. Revista EIA 18(35):100–111

Liu S, Liu S, Cai W, Pujol S, Kikinis R, Feng D (2014) Early diagnosis of alzheimer’s disease with deep learning. In: 2014 IEEE 11th international symposium on biomedical imaging (ISBI), pp 1015–1018. IEEE

Chitradevi D, Prabha S (2020) Analysis of brain sub regions using optimization techniques and deep learning method in alzheimer disease. Appl Soft Comput 86:105857

Currie G, Rohren E (2021) Intelligent imaging in nuclear medicine: the principles of artificial intelligence, machine learning and deep learning. In: Seminars in nuclear medicine, vol 51, pp 102–111. Elsevier

Porumb M, Stranges S, Pescapè A, Pecchia L (2020) Precision medicine and artificial intelligence: a pilot study on deep learning for hypoglycemic events detection based on ecg. Sci Rep 10(1):1–16

Karami V, Nittari G, Amenta F (2019) Neuroimaging computer-aided diagnosis systems for alzheimer’s disease. Int J Imag Syst Technol 29(1):83–94

Mohapatra S, Swarnkar T, Das J (2021) Deep convolutional neural network in medical image processing. In: Handbook of deep learning in biomedical engineering, pp 25–60. Elsevier

Shanmugavadivel K, Sathishkumar V, Cho J, Subramanian M (2023) Advancements in computer-assisted diagnosis of alzheimer’s disease: a comprehensive survey of neuroimaging methods and ai techniques for early detection. Ageing Res Rev, 102072

Weimer DL, Sager MA (2009) Early identification and treatment of alzheimer’s disease: social and fiscal outcomes. Alzheimer’s Dementia 5(3):215–226

Sujith A, Sajja GS, Mahalakshmi V, Nuhmani S, Prasanalakshmi B (2022) Systematic review of smart health monitoring using deep learning and artificial intelligence. Neurosci Informat 2(3):100028

Maqsood M, Nazir F, Khan U, Aadil F, Jamal H, Mehmood I, Song O-y (2019) Transfer learning assisted classification and detection of alzheimer’s disease stages using 3d mri scans. Sensors 19(11), 2645

Basaia S, Agosta F, Wagner L, Canu E, Magnani G, Santangelo R, Filippi M (2019) Automated classification of alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment using a single mri and deep neural networks. NeuroImage: Clin 21:101645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2018.101645

Hawkins DM (2004) The problem of overfitting. J Chem Inf Comput Sci 44(1):1–12. https://doi.org/10.1021/ci0342472 . ( PMID: 14741005 )

Liu M, Li F, Yan H, Wang K, Ma Y, Shen L, Xu M (2020) A multi-model deep convolutional neural network for automatic hippocampus segmentation and classification in alzheimer’s disease. NeuroImage 208:116459. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.116459

Hochreiter S (1998) The vanishing gradient problem during learning recurrent neural nets and problem solutions. Int J Uncertainty Fuzziness Knowl Based Syst 6(02):107–116

Li W, Lin X, Chen X (2020) Detecting alzheimer’s disease based on 4d fmri: an exploration under deep learning framework. Neurocomputing 388:280–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2020.01.053

Hochreiter S, Schmidhuber J (1997) Long short-term memory. Neural Comput 9(8):1735–1780

Zhang J, Zheng B, Gao A, Feng X, Liang D, Long X (2021) A 3d densely connected convolution neural network with connection-wise attention mechanism for alzheimer’s disease classification. Magnetic Resonance Imag 78:119–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mri.2021.02.001

Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, Uszkoreit J, Jones L, Gomez AN, Kaiser Ł, Polosukhin I (2017) Attention is all you need. In: Advances in neural information processing systems, pp 5998–6008

Janghel RR, Rathore YK (2021) Deep convolution neural network based system for early diagnosis of alzheimer’s disease. IRBM 42(4):258–267. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.irbm.2020.06.006

Bi X, Li S, Xiao B, Li Y, Wang G, Ma X (2020) Computer aided alzheimer’s disease diagnosis by an unsupervised deep learning technology. Neurocomputing 392:296–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neucom.2018.11.111

Hosseini-Asl E, Keynton R, El-Baz A (2016) Alzheimer’s disease diagnostics by adaptation of 3d convolutional network. In: 2016 IEEE international conference on image processing (ICIP), pp 126–130. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICIP.2016.7532332

Raghavaiah P, Varadarajan S (2021) A cad system design to diagnosize alzheimers disease from mri brain images using optimal deep neural network. Multimedia Tools Appl 80(17):26411–26428

Kang W, Lin L, Zhang B, Shen X, Wu S (2021) Multi-model and multi-slice ensemble learning architecture based on 2d convolutional neural networks for alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. Comput Biol Med 136:104678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2021.104678

Radford A, Metz L, Chintala S (2015) Unsupervised representation learning with deep convolutional generative adversarial networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1511.06434

Dosovitskiy A, Beyer L, Kolesnikov A, Weissenborn D, Zhai X, Unterthiner T, Dehghani M, Minderer M, Heigold G, Gelly S, et al (2020) An image is worth 16x16 words: transformers for image recognition at scale. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.11929

Khan S, Naseer M, Hayat M, Zamir SW, Khan FS, Shah M (2022) Transformers in vision: a survey. ACM Comput Surv (CSUR) 54(10s):1–41

Jang J, Hwang D (2022) M3t: three-dimensional medical image classifier using multi-plane and multi-slice transformer. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pp 20718–20729

Cho K, Kim J, Kim KD, Park S, Kim J, Yun J, Ahn Y, Oh SY, Lee SM, Seo JB et al (2023) Music-vit: A multi-task siamese convolutional vision transformer for differentiating change from no-change in follow-up chest radiographs. Med Image Anal 89:102894

Li J, Liu Z, Li L, Lin J, Yao J, Tu J (2023) Multi-view convolutional vision transformer for 3d object recognition. J Vis Commun Image Represent 95:103906

Bravo-Ortiz MA, Mercado-Ruiz E, Villa-Pulgarin JP, Hormaza-Cardona CA, Quiñones-Arredondo S, Arteaga-Arteaga HB, Orozco-Arias S, Cardona-Morales O, Tabares-Soto R (2024) Cvtstego-net: A convolutional vision transformer architecture for spatial image steganalysis. J Inf Security Appl 81:103695

Holguin-Garcia SA, Guevara-Navarro E, Daza-Chica AE, Patiño-Claro MA, Arteaga-Arteaga HB, Ruz GA, Tabares-Soto R, Bravo-Ortiz MA (2024) A comparative study of cnn-capsule-net, cnn-transformer encoder, and traditional machine learning algorithms to classify epileptic seizure. BMC Med Informat Decis Making 24(1):60

Zhu J, Tan Y, Lin R, Miao J, Fan X, Zhu Y, Liang P, Gong J, He H (2022) Efficient self-attention mechanism and structural distilling model for alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. Comput Biol Med 147:105737

Yin Y, Jin W, Bai J, Liu R, Zhen H (2022) Smil-deit: Multiple instance learning and self-supervised vision transformer network for early alzheimer’s disease classification. In: 2022 international joint conference on neural networks (IJCNN), pp 1–6. IEEE

Li C, Cui Y, Luo N, Liu Y, Bourgeat P, Fripp J, Jiang T (2022) Trans-resnet: Integrating transformers and cnns for alzheimer’s disease classification. In: 2022 IEEE 19th International Symposium on Biomedical Imaging (ISBI), pp. 1–5. IEEE

Kitchenham B, Charters S, et al (2007) Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. UK

Reinel T-S, Raul R-P, Gustavo I (2019) Deep learning applied to steganalysis of digital images: a systematic review. IEEE Access 7:68970–68990

Kitchenham B, Brereton OP, Budgen D, Turner M, Bailey J, Linkman S (2009) Systematic literature reviews in software engineering-a systematic literature review. Inf Softw Technol 51(1):7–15

Anwer F, Aftab S (2017) Latest customizations of xp: a systematic literature review. Int J Mod Educ Comput Sci 9(12):26

Ashraf S, Aftab S (2017) Scrum with the spices of agile family: a systematic mapping. Int J Mod Educ Comput Sci 9(11):58–72

Ahmad M, Aftab S, Bashir MS, Hameed N (2018) Sentiment analysis using svm: a systematic literature review. Int J Adv Comput Sci Appl 9(2)

Matloob F, Ghazal TM, Taleb N, Aftab S, Ahmad M, Khan MA, Abbas S, Soomro TR (2021) Software defect prediction using ensemble learning: a systematic literature review. IEEE Access 9:98754–98771

Wen J, Li S, Lin Z, Hu Y, Huang C (2012) Systematic literature review of machine learning based software development effort estimation models. Inf Softw Technol 54(1):41–59

Yu X, Peng B, Shi J, Zhu J, Dai Y (2019) 3d convolutional networks based automatic diagnosis of alzheimer’s disease using structural mri. In: 2019 12th international congress on image and signal processing, BioMedical Engineering and Informatics (CISP-BMEI), pp 1–6. IEEE

Jin D, Xu J, Zhao K, Hu F, Yang Z, Liu B, Jiang T, Liu Y (2019) Attention-based 3d convolutional network for alzheimer’s disease diagnosis and biomarkers exploration. In: 2019 IEEE 16th international symposium on biomedical imaging (ISBI 2019), pp 1047–1051. IEEE

Ge C, Qu Q, Gu IY-H, Jakola AS (2019) Multiscale deep convolutional networks for characterization and detection of alzheimer’s disease using mr images. In: 2019 IEEE international conference on image processing (ICIP), pp 789–793. IEEE

Goenka N, Tiwari S (2021) Volumetric convolutional neural network for alzheimer detection. In: 2021 5th International conference on trends in electronics and informatics (ICOEI), pp 1500–1505. IEEE

Dua M, Makhija D, Manasa P, Mishra P (2020) A cnn-rnn-lstm based amalgamation for alzheimer’s disease detection. J Med Biol Eng 40(5):688–706

Raju M, Gopi VP, Anitha V, Wahid KA (2020) Multi-class diagnosis of alzheimer’s disease using cascaded three dimensional-convolutional neural network. Phys Eng Sci Med 43(4):1219–1228

Parmar H, Nutter B, Long R, Antani S, Mitra S (2020) Spatiotemporal feature extraction and classification of alzheimer’s disease using deep learning 3d-cnn for fmri data. J Med Imag 7(5):056001

Niu J, Tang X (2020) 3d residual dense convolutional network for diagnosis of alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment. In: 2020 IEEE international conference on mechatronics and automation (ICMA), pp 1581–1586. IEEE

Li A, Li F, Elahifasaee F, Liu M, Zhang L (2021) Hippocampal shape and asymmetry analysis by cascaded convolutional neural networks for alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. Brain Imag Behav 15(5):2330–2339

Basher A, Kim BC, Lee KH, Jung HY (2021) Volumetric feature-based alzheimer’s disease diagnosis from smri data using a convolutional neural network and a deep neural network. IEEE Access 9:29870–29882

Solano-Rojas B, Villalón-Fonseca R (2021) A low-cost three-dimensional densenet neural network for alzheimer’s disease early discovery. Sensors 21(4):1302

Zhang J, Zheng B, Gao A, Feng X, Liang D, Long X (2021) A 3d densely connected convolution neural network with connection-wise attention mechanism for alzheimer’s disease classification. Magnetic Resonance Imag 78:119–126

Katabathula S, Wang Q, Xu R (2021) Predict alzheimer’s disease using hippocampus mri data: a lightweight 3d deep convolutional network model with visual and global shape representations. Alzheimer’s Res Therapy 13(1):1–9

Pei Z, Gou Y, Ma M, Guo M, Leng C, Chen Y, Li J (2021) Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis based on long-range dependency mechanism using convolutional neural network. Multimedia Tools Appl, pp 1–16

Ebrahimi A, Luo S, Chiong R, Initiative ADN et al (2021) Deep sequence modelling for alzheimer’s disease detection using mri. Comput Biol Med 134:104537

Lin C-J, Lin C-W (2021) Using three-dimensional convolutional neural networks for alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. Sens Mater 33(10):3399–3413

Zhang P, Lin S, Qiao J, Tu Y (2021) Diagnosis of alzheimer’s disease with ensemble learning classifier and 3d convolutional neural network. Sensors 21(22):7634

Dwivedi S, Goel T, Sharma R, Murugan R (2021) Structural mri based alzheimer’s disease prognosis using 3d convolutional neural network and support vector machine. In: 2021 Advanced communication technologies and signal processing (ACTS), pp 1–4. IEEE

Bakkouri I, Afdel K, Benois-Pineau J et al (2022) Bg-3dm2f: Bidirectional gated 3d multi-scale feature fusion for alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. Multimedia Tools Appl 81(8):10743–10776

Kadri R, Bouaziz B, Tmar M, Gargouri F (2022) Multimodal deep learning based on the combination of efficientnetv2 and vit for alzheimer’s disease early diagnosis enhanced by sagan data augmentation. Int J Comput Inf Syst Ind Manag Appl 14:313–325

Sarraf S, Sarraf A, DeSouza DD, Anderson JA, Kabia M, Initiative ADN (2023) Ovitad: Optimized vision transformer to predict various stages of alzheimer’s disease using resting-state fmri and structural mri data. Brain Sci 13(2):260

Carcagnì P, Leo M, Del Coco M, Distante C, De Salve A (2023) Convolution neural networks and self-attention learners for alzheimer dementia diagnosis from brain mri. Sensors 23(3):1694

Odusami M, Maskeliūnas R, Damaševičius R (2023) Pixel-level fusion approach with vision transformer for early detection of alzheimer’s disease. Electronics 12(5):1218

Hoang GM, Kim U-H, Kim JG (2023) Vision transformers for the prediction of mild cognitive impairment to alzheimer’s disease progression using mid-sagittal smri. Front Aging Neurosci 15:1102869

Tang C, Wei M, Sun J, Wang S, Zhang Y, Initiative ADN, et al (2023) Csagp: Detecting alzheimer’s disease from multimodal images via dual-transformer with cross-attention and graph pooling. J King Saud Univ Comput Inf Sci, 101618

Zhao Q, Huang G, Xu P, Chen Z, Li W, Yuan X, Zhong G, Pun C-M, Huang Z (2023) Ida-net: Inheritable deformable attention network of structural mri for alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. Biomed Signal Process Control 84:104787

Lyu Y, Yu X, Zhu D, Zhang L (2022) Classification of alzheimer’s disease via vision transformer: Classification of alzheimer’s disease via vision transformer. In: Proceedings of the 15th international conference on pervasive technologies related to assistive environments, pp 463–468

Duan Y, Wang R, Li Y (2023) Aux-vit: Classification of alzheimer’s disease from mri based on vision transformer with auxiliary branch. In: 2023 5th International conference on communications, information system and computer engineering (CISCE), pp 382–386. IEEE

Liu L, Liu S, Zhang L, To XV, Nasrallah F, Chandra SS (2023) Cascaded multi-modal mixing transformers for alzheimer’s disease classification with incomplete data. NeuroImage 277:120267

Zhang J, He X, Liu Y, Cai Q, Chen H, Qing L (2023) Multi-modal cross-attention network for alzheimer’s disease diagnosis with multi-modality data. Comput Biol Med 162:107050

Xin J, Wang A, Guo R, Liu W, Tang X (2023) Cnn and swin-transformer based efficient model for alzheimer’s disease diagnosis with smri. Biomed Signal Process Control 86:105189

Dai Y, Zou B, Zhu C, Li Y, Chen Z, Ji Z, Kui X, Zhang W (2023) De-janet: A unified network based on dual encoder and joint attention for alzheimer’s disease classification using multi-modal data. Comput Biol Med 165:107396

Hu Z, Li Y, Wang Z, Zhang S, Hou W, Initiative ADN et al (2023) Conv-swinformer: Integration of cnn and shift window attention for alzheimer’s disease classification. Comput Biol Med 164:107304

Miao S, Xu Q, Li W, Yang C, Sheng B, Liu F, Bezabih TT, Yu X (2024) Mmtfn: Multi-modal multi-scale transformer fusion network for alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. Int J Imag Syst Technol 34(1):22970

Tang Y, Xiong X, Tong G, Yang Y, Zhang H (2024) Multimodal diagnosis model of alzheimer’s disease based on improved transformer. BioMedical Eng OnLine 23(1):8

Wang C, Piao S, Huang Z, Gao Q, Zhang J, Li Y, Shan H, Initiative ADN et al (2024) Joint learning framework of cross-modal synthesis and diagnosis for alzheimer’s disease by mining underlying shared modality information. Med Image Anal 91:103032

Khan AA, Mahendran RK, Perumal K, Faheem M (2024) Dual-3dm 3-ad: Mixed transformer based semantic segmentation and triplet pre-processing for early multi-class alzheimer’s diagnosis. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabilit Eng

Khatri U, Kwon G-R (2024) Diagnosis of alzheimer’s disease via optimized lightweight convolution-attention and structural mri. Comput Biol Med, 108116

Chen Q, Fu Q, Bai H, Hong Y (2024) Longformer: Longitudinal transformer for alzheimer’s disease classification with structural mris. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF winter conference on applications of computer vision, pp 3575–3584

Wang Y, Chen K, Zhang Y, Wang H (2024) Medtransformer: accurate ad diagnosis for 3d mri images through 2d vision transformers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.06349

Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, PRISMA Group* t (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the prisma statement. Ann Internal Med 151(4):264–269

Reinel T-S, Brayan A-AH, Alejandro B-OM, Alejandro M-R, Daniel A-G, Alejandro A-GJ, Buenaventura B-JA, Simon O-A, Gustavo I, Raul R-P (2021) Gbras-net: a convolutional neural network architecture for spatial image steganalysis. IEEE Access 9:14340–14350

Orozco-Arias S, Isaza G, Guyot R, Tabares-Soto R (2019) A systematic review of the application of machine learning in the detection and classification of transposable elements. PeerJ 7:8311

Chen T, Guestrin C (2016) Xgboost: A scalable tree boosting system. In: Proceedings of the 22nd Acm Sigkdd international conference on knowledge discovery and data mining, pp 785–794

Basher A, Choi KY, Lee JJ, Lee B, Kim BC, Lee KH, Jung HY (2019) Hippocampus localization using a two-stage ensemble hough convolutional neural network. IEEE Access 7:73436–73447

Basher A, Kim BC, Lee KH, Jung HY (2020) Automatic localization and discrete volume measurements of hippocampi from mri data using a convolutional neural network. IEEE Access 8:91725–91739. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.2994388

Zavaliangos-Petropul A, Tubi MA, Zhu A, Haddad E, Jahanshad N, Thompson PM, Liew S-L (2020) Automated hippocampal segmentation improved by convolutional neural network approach in participants with a history of cerebrovascular accident: Neuroimaging/new imaging methods. Alzheimer’s Dementia 16:041634

Wu H, Xiao B, Codella N, Liu M, Dai X, Yuan L, Zhang L (2021) Cvt: Introducing convolutions to vision transformers. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pp 22–31

Download references

Acknowledgements

Mario Alejandro Bravo-Ortiz is supported by a Ph.D. grant Convocatoria 22 OCAD de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación del Sistema General de Regalías de Colombia y Ministerio de Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación de Colombia. We would like to thank Universidad Autónoma de Manizales for making this paper as part of the “Clasificación de los estadios del Alzheimer utilizando Imágenes de Resonancia Magnética Nuclear y datos clínicos a partir de técnicas de Deep Learning” with code 873-139 and "Aplicación de Vision Transformer para clasificar estadios del Alzheimer utilizando imágenes de resonancia magnética nuclear y datos clínicos" project with code 847-2023 TD. Additionally, we acknowledge the support from the projects ANID PIA/BASAL FB0002 and ANID/PIA/ANILLO ACT210096. We also extend our gratitude to Universidad de Caldas for their support, as this paper is part of the project “Plataforma tecnológica para la clasificación de los estadios de la enfermedad de alzheimer utilizando imágenes de resonancia magnética nuclear, datos clínicos y técnicas de deep learning.” with code PRY-89. We also thank the National Agency for Research and Development (ANID); Applied Research Subdirection (SIA); through the instrument IDeA I+D 2023, code ID23I10357, and ORIGEN 0011323, Sistema General de Regalías (SGR) - Asignación para la Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación, project BPIN 2021000100368, and PRY-121 - Interactive Virtual Didactic Strategy for the Promotion of ICT Skills and their Relationship with Computational Thinking.

This work was funded by Universidad Autonoma de Manizales as part of the project “Clasificación de los estadios del Alzheimer utilizando Imágenes de Resonancia Magnética Nuclear y datos clínicos a partir de técnicas de Deep Learning” with code 873-139, and also by the projects “CH-T1246: Oportunidades de Mercado para las Empresas de Tecnología-Compras Públicas de Algoritmos Responsables, Éticos y Transparentes,” ANID PIA/BASAL FB0002, and ANID/PIA/ANILLOS ACT210096.

Author information

Mario Alejandro Bravo-Ortiz and Sergio Alejandro Holguin-Garcia have contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

Departamento de Electrónica y Automatización, Universidad Autónoma de Manizales, Manizales, 170001, Caldas, Colombia

Mario Alejandro Bravo-Ortiz, Sergio Alejandro Holguin-Garcia, Sebastián Quiñones-Arredondo, Ernesto Guevara-Navarro, Harold Brayan Arteaga-Arteaga & Reinel Tabares-Soto

Departamento de Sistemas e Informática, Universidad de Caldas, Manizales, 170004, Caldas, Colombia

Mario Alejandro Bravo-Ortiz, Sergio Alejandro Holguin-Garcia, Ernesto Guevara-Navarro & Reinel Tabares-Soto

Facultad de Ingeniería y Ciencias, Universidad Adolfo Ibáñez, 7941169, Santiago, Chile

Gonzalo A. Ruz & Reinel Tabares-Soto

Center of Applied Ecology and Sustainability (CAPES), 8331150, Santiago, Chile

Gonzalo A. Ruz

Data Observatory Foundation, 7941169, Santiago, Chile

Unidad Mixta de Imagen Biomédica FISABIO-CIPF, Fundación para el Fomento de la Investigación Sanitario y Biomédica de la Comunidad Valenciana, 46020, Valencia, Spain

Alejandro Mora-Rubio

Centro de Bioinformática y Biología Computacional (BIOS), 170001, Manizales, Colombia

Mario Alejandro Bravo-Ortiz & Sergio Alejandro Holguin-Garcia

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

MABO contributed to Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing. SAHG contributed to Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review and editing. SQA contributed to Writing—review and editing. EGN contributed to Writing—review and editing. AMR: Writing—review and editing. HBAA contributed to Writing—review and editing. GAR: Writing—review and editing, acquired the funding and provided the resources. RTS contributed to Writing—review and editing, acquired the funding and provided the resources.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mario Alejandro Bravo-Ortiz .

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest.

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics approval

Consent to participate, additional information, publisher's note.

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

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Bravo-Ortiz, M.A., Holguin-Garcia, S.A., Quiñones-Arredondo, S. et al. A systematic review of vision transformers and convolutional neural networks for Alzheimer’s disease classification using 3D MRI images. Neural Comput & Applic (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-024-10420-x

Download citation

Received : 26 April 2024

Accepted : 20 August 2024

Published : 17 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-024-10420-x

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

• Alzheimer’s disease
• Deep learning
• 3D magnetic resonance image
• Convolutional neural networks
• Vision transformer
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

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

A review of data-driven methods in building retrofit and performance optimization: from the perspective of carbon emission reductions.

1. Introduction

1.1. background, 1.2. previous reviews, 1.2.1. a review of building retrofit research, 1.2.2. a review of building cer retrofit research, 1.2.3. a review of the application of data-driven methods in building-performance analyses, 1.3. outline and structure of this review, 2. literature screening and bibliometric analysis, 2.1. literature search and screening.

• To ensure timeliness, articles published within the last 20 years (2003–2023) were selected. Journal articles, known for their rigorous peer-review process [ 36 ], were prioritized for their representation and impact in this field [ 37 ]. Conference papers, dissertations, and non-English language publications were excluded, retaining only English-language journal articles. Additionally, to facilitate the focus on research methodologies and processes, review papers were omitted from consideration.
• The literature reviewed addresses CEs during the operational phase of buildings, covering life-cycle carbon emissions (LCCEs), the GWP, and building environmental effects. Studies focusing solely on energy consumption (EC) without converting it to CE objectives were excluded due to differences in concepts and calculation methodologies. Similarly, the literature exclusively discussing CEs during building construction or other phases was also omitted from consideration.
• The research must incorporate one or more data-driven methods, such as statistical analyses, optimization algorithms, or machine learning (ML) to optimize building performance. Studies that merely listed and compared retrofit plans without employing these methods were excluded.
• The literature must address the impacts of envelope retrofit measures on the overall building performance. Studies exclusively focusing on the operations of building mechanical systems, energy structure predictions, and similar topics were excluded. Additionally, articles concentrating solely on specific local building components like curtain wall retrofits and structural seismic performance optimizations were also excluded.

2.2. Literature Statistics and Bibliometric Analysis

2.3. general process of bpo based on data-driven methods, 3. the construction bpo models, 3.1. optimization model based on physical simulation methods, 3.1.1. bps tools, 3.1.2. model calibration, 3.2. surrogate and mathematical models.

• The samples of input data are selected using sampling methods, and output data are computed through physical model simulations. Typically, the sample size should range from 10 to 100 times the number of input parameters [ 113 ], although this can vary depending on the model’s complexity [ 114 ].
• Continuous and discrete variables are distinguished, and both input and output variables are standardized and normalized to ensure a comparability of the data. Typically, the correctly formatted data are divided into training and testing sets in an 80%-to-20% ratio [ 115 ], after which an appropriate mathematical model is selected [ 116 ].
• The model is trained, and to prevent overfitting (where the model performs well on the training datasets but struggles with out-of-sample data), hyperparameter optimization is needed to balance variances and biases. When choosing hyperparameters, strategies like a grid search can be employed [ 117 ], with cross-validations serving as the scoring method [ 118 ].
• The model is validated, and various metrics are chosen to assess its accuracy. Common evaluation indicators include the mean absolute percent error (MAPE), mean absolute error (MAE), and CV (RMSE) [ 119 ], with CV (RMSE) being particularly favored, due to its ability to provide a unitless measurement, which facilitates straightforward comparisons of indicators [ 120 ].

3.3. Optimization Objectives and Parameters

3.3.1. building-performance indicators, 3.3.2. optimization parameters and variables, 3.3.3. constraints on optimization objectives and parameters, 4. optimization and decision-making process, 4.1. optimization process based on data-driven methods, 4.2. solution set evaluation and decision-making methods, 5. discussions, 5.1. the research status quo, 5.2. optimization and surrogate models, 5.3. optimization methods and tools, 5.4. future work, 6. conclusions.

• There are usually two workflows to optimize the building performance. One is the workflow of the optimization of the physical simulation (model surrogate) performance: Using the combined input of a building site and energy-carbon-related retrofit variables, a BPO process based on a physical simulation is established. The generated datasets can be either iteratively processed with optimization algorithms directly or trained as a surrogate model, validated, and then processed using the MOO method. The other is the workflow of mathematical modeling-optimization analyses: with sufficient actual field-measured empirical data available, data-driven methods, such as regression or machine learning, are used to develop mathematical models, and multiple objectives are comprehensively optimized from the perspective of building CERs.
• A building retrofit aims to maximize its benefits by integrating environmental, economic, and social considerations. Therefore, alongside CE objectives, factors like costs and thermal comfort should also be taken into account. There are 27 relevant studies in Table 2 related to the comprehensive optimization of three or more objectives, accounting for 60% of the total. Discussions on retrofit parameters should extensively cover aspects such as the thermal performance of the building envelope, building equipment and energy systems, and the utilization of renewable energy sources.
• Data-driven methods applied in optimization enable the sampling, screening, and iterative refinement of retrofit plans using computational tools, facilitating the determination of optimal solutions. The advancement and deployment of surrogate models make simplified mathematical calculations replace complex physical simulations, which further enhance optimization efficiency while ensuring accuracy.
• In the reviewed studies, only 2.2% (1 article) and 6.7% (3 articles) of the total focus on the impacts of human behaviors and climate change on building retrofits, respectively. Future research should delve deeper into the application of data-driven methods in building CER retrofits and BPO, considering user behaviors and variations in retrofit conditions amid long-term climate change scenarios. In addition, more work is needed to improve the accuracy of surrogate models and enhance generalizations and transfer capabilities.

Author Contributions

Data availability statement, conflicts of interest, abbreviations.

• Gan, V.J.L.; Deng, M.; Tse, K.T.; Chan, C.M.; Lo, I.M.C.; Cheng, J.C.P. Holistic BIM Framework for Sustainable Low Carbon Design of High-Rise Buildings. J. Clean. Prod. 2018 , 195 , 1091–1104. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Qian, D.; Li, Y.; Niu, F.; O’Neill, Z. Nationwide Savings Analysis of Energy Conservation Measures in Buildings. Energy Convers. Manag. 2019 , 188 , 1–18. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• CO 2 and Greenhouse Gas Emissions. Available online: https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions (accessed on 5 March 2024).
• Mata, É.; Korpal, A.K.; Cheng, S.H.; Jiménez Navarro, J.P.; Filippidou, F.; Reyna, J.; Wang, R. A Map of Roadmaps for Zero and Low Energy and Carbon Buildings Worldwide. Environ. Res. Lett. 2020 , 15 , 113003. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wei, Y.; Zhang, X.; Shi, Y.; Xia, L.; Pan, S.; Wu, J.; Han, M.; Zhao, X. A Review of Data-Driven Approaches for Prediction and Classification of Building Energy Consumption. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018 , 82 , 1027–1047. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Love, P.; Arthur Bullen, P. Toward the Sustainable Adaptation of Existing Facilities. Facilities 2009 , 27 , 357–367. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Deb, C.; Schlueter, A. Review of Data-Driven Energy Modelling Techniques for Building Retrofit. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021 , 144 , 110990. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ma, Z.; Cooper, P.; Daly, D.; Ledo, L. Existing Building Retrofits: Methodology and State-of-the-Art. Energy Build. 2012 , 55 , 889–902. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jensen, P.A.; Maslesa, E.; Berg, J.B.; Thuesen, C. 10 Questions Concerning Sustainable Building Renovation. Build. Environ. 2018 , 143 , 130–137. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Huang, J.; Wang, S.; Teng, F.; Feng, W. Thermal Performance Optimization of Envelope in the Energy-Saving Renovation of Existing Residential Buildings. Energy Build. 2021 , 247 , 111103. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vilches, A.; Garcia-Martinez, A.; Sanchez-Montañes, B. Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Building Refurbishment: A Literature Review. Energy Build. 2017 , 135 , 286–301. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ji, Y.; Xu, P.; Ye, Y. HVAC Terminal Hourly End-Use Disaggregation in Commercial Buildings with Fourier Series Model. Energy Build. 2015 , 97 , 33–46. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jagarajan, R.; Abdullah Mohd Asmoni, M.N.; Mohammed, A.H.; Jaafar, M.N.; Lee Yim Mei, J.; Baba, M. Green Retrofitting—A Review of Current Status, Implementations and Challenges. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017 , 67 , 1360–1368. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nielsen, A.N.; Jensen, R.L.; Larsen, T.S.; Nissen, S.B. Early Stage Decision Support for Sustainable Building Renovation—A Review. Build. Environ. 2016 , 103 , 165–181. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• De Wilde, P. Ten Questions Concerning Building Performance Analysis. Build. Environ. 2019 , 153 , 110–117. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Roman, N.D.; Bre, F.; Fachinotti, V.D.; Lamberts, R. Application and Characterization of Metamodels Based on Artificial Neural Networks for Building Performance Simulation: A Systematic Review. Energy Build. 2020 , 217 , 109972. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wu, Z.; Xia, X.; Wang, B. Improving Building Energy Efficiency by Multiobjective Neighborhood Field Optimization. Energy Build. 2015 , 87 , 45–56. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hong, T.; Langevin, J.; Sun, K. Building Simulation: Ten Challenges. Build. Simul. 2018 , 11 , 871–898. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Attia, S.; Hamdy, M.; O’Brien, W.; Carlucci, S. Assessing Gaps and Needs for Integrating Building Performance Optimization Tools in Net Zero Energy Buildings Design. Energy Build. 2013 , 60 , 110–124. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Di Biccari, C.; Calcerano, F.; D’Uffizi, F.; Esposito, A.; Campari, M.; Gigliarelli, E. Building Information Modeling and Building Performance Simulation Interoperability: State-of-the-Art and Trends in Current Literature. Adv. Eng. Inform. 2022 , 54 , 101753. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shi, X.; Tian, Z.; Chen, W.; Si, B.; Jin, X. A Review on Building Energy Efficient Design Optimization Rom the Perspective of Architects. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016 , 65 , 872–884. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Westermann, P.; Evins, R. Surrogate Modelling for Sustainable Building Design—A Review. Energy Build. 2019 , 198 , 170–186. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Luo, X.J.; Oyedele, L.O. A Data-Driven Life-Cycle Optimisation Approach for Building Retrofitting: A Comprehensive Assessment on Economy, Energy and Environment. J. Build. Eng. 2021 , 43 , 102934. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Thrampoulidis, E.; Mavromatidis, G.; Lucchi, A.; Orehounig, K. A Machine Learning-Based Surrogate Model to Approximate Optimal Building Retrofit Solutions. Appl. Energy 2021 , 281 , 116024. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ascione, F.; Bianco, N.; Mauro, G.; Napolitano, D.; Vanoli, G. A Multi-Criteria Approach to Achieve Constrained Cost-Optimal Energy Retrofits of Buildings by Mitigating Climate Change and Urban Overheating. Climate 2018 , 6 , 37. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, Z.; Yu, C.; Qian, Q.K.; Huang, R.; You, K.; Visscher, H.; Zhang, G. Incentive Initiatives on Energy-Efficient Renovation of Existing Buildings towards Carbon–Neutral Blueprints in China: Advancements, Challenges and Prospects. Energy Build. 2023 , 296 , 113343. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, Y.; Du, H.; Kumaraswamy, S.B. Case-Based Reasoning Approach for Decision-Making in Building Retrofit: A Review. Build. Environ. 2024 , 248 , 111030. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mostafavi, F.; Tahsildoost, M.; Zomorodian, Z. Energy Efficiency and Carbon Emission in High-Rise Buildings: A Review (2005–2020). Build. Environ. 2021 , 206 , 108329. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pombo, O.; Rivela, B.; Neila, J. The Challenge of Sustainable Building Renovation: Assessment of Current Criteria and Future Outlook. J. Clean. Prod. 2016 , 123 , 88–100. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, J.; Ng, S.T.; Skitmore, M. Review of Low-Carbon Refurbishment Solutions for Residential Buildings with Particular Reference to Multi-Story Buildings in Hong Kong. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2017 , 73 , 393–407. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Aghamolaei, R.; Fallahpour, M. Strategies towards Reducing Carbon Emission in University Campuses: A Comprehensive Review of Both Global and Local Scales. J. Build. Eng. 2023 , 76 , 107183. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sun, Y.; Haghighat, F.; Fung, B.C.M. A Review of The-State-of-the-Art in Data-Driven Approaches for Building Energy Prediction. Energy Build. 2020 , 221 , 110022. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews. Syst. Rev. 2021 , 10 , 89. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Son, T.H.; Weedon, Z.; Yigitcanlar, T.; Sanchez, T.; Corchado, J.M.; Mehmood, R. Algorithmic Urban Planning for Smart and Sustainable Development: Systematic Review of the Literature. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2023 , 94 , 104562. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mongeon, P.; Paul-Hus, A. The Journal Coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: A Comparative Analysis. Scientometrics 2016 , 106 , 213–228. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Olawumi, T.O.; Chan, D.W.M. A Scientometric Review of Global Research on Sustainability and Sustainable Development. J. Clean. Prod. 2018 , 183 , 231–250. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Santos, R.; Costa, A.A.; Grilo, A. Bibliometric Analysis and Review of Building Information Modelling Literature Published between 2005 and 2015. Autom. Constr. 2017 , 80 , 118–136. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Luo, X.J. An Integrated Passive and Active Retrofitting Approach toward Minimum Whole-Life Carbon Footprint. Energy Build. 2023 , 295 , 113337. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Luo, X.J.; Oyedele, L.O. Assessment and Optimisation of Life Cycle Environment, Economy and Energy for Building Retrofitting. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2021 , 65 , 77–100. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liang, Y.; Pan, Y.; Yuan, X.; Yang, Y.; Fu, L.; Li, J.; Sun, T.; Huang, Z.; Kosonen, R. Assessment of Operational Carbon Emission Reduction of Energy Conservation Measures for Commercial Buildings: Model Development. Energy Build. 2022 , 268 , 112189. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Aghamolaei, R.; Ghaani, M.R. Balancing the Impacts of Energy Efficiency Strategies on Comfort Quality of Interior Places: Application of Optimization Algorithms in Domestic Housing. J. Build. Eng. 2020 , 29 , 101174. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Charles, A.; Maref, W.; Ouellet-Plamondon, C.M. Case Study of the Upgrade of an Existing Office Building for Low Energy Consumption and Low Carbon Emissions. Energy Build. 2019 , 183 , 151–160. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Niemelä, T.; Levy, K.; Kosonen, R.; Jokisalo, J. Cost-Optimal Renovation Solutions to Maximize Environmental Performance, Indoor Thermal Conditions and Productivity of Office Buildings in Cold Climate. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2017 , 32 , 417–434. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Amani, N.; Kiaee, E. Developing a Two-Criteria Framework to Rank Thermal Insulation Materials in Nearly Zero Energy Buildings Using Multi-Objective Optimization Approach. J. Clean. Prod. 2020 , 276 , 122592. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sharif, S.A.; Hammad, A. Developing Surrogate ANN for Selecting Near-Optimal Building Energy Renovation Methods Considering Energy Consumption, LCC and LCA. J. Build. Eng. 2019 , 25 , 100790. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jeong, K.; Hong, T.; Kim, J.; Cho, K. Development of a Multi-Objective Optimization Model for Determining the Optimal CO 2 Emissions Reduction Strategies for a Multi-Family Housing Complex. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2019 , 110 , 118–131. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chantrelle, F.P.; Lahmidi, H.; Keilholz, W.; Mankibi, M.E.; Michel, P. Development of a Multicriteria Tool for Optimizing the Renovation of Buildings. Appl. Energy 2011 , 88 , 1386–1394. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Salata, F.; Ciancio, V.; Dell’Olmo, J.; Golasi, I.; Palusci, O.; Coppi, M. Effects of Local Conditions on the Multi-Variable and Multi-Objective Energy Optimization of Residential Buildings Using Genetic Algorithms. Appl. Energy 2020 , 260 , 114289. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Niemelä, T.; Kosonen, R.; Jokisalo, J. Energy Performance and Environmental Impact Analysis of Cost-Optimal Renovation Solutions of Large Panel Apartment Buildings in Finland. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2017 , 32 , 9–30. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mostafazadeh, F.; Eirdmousa, S.J.; Tavakolan, M. Energy, Economic and Comfort Optimization of Building Retrofits Considering Climate Change: A Simulation-Based NSGA-III Approach. Energy Build. 2023 , 280 , 112721. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gao, Y.; Luo, S.; Jiang, J.; Rong, Y. Environmental-Thermal-Economic Performance Trade-off for Rural Residence Retrofitting in the Beijing–Tianjin–Hebei Region, Northern China: A Multi-Objective Optimisation Framework under Different Scenarios. Energy Build. 2023 , 286 , 112910. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, Q.; Hu, H.; Ma, L.; Wang, Z.; Arıcı, M.; Li, D.; Luo, D.; Jia, J.; Jiang, W.; Qi, H. Evaluation of Energy-Saving Retrofits for Sunspace of Rural Residential Buildings Based on Orthogonal Experiment and Entropy Weight Method. Energy Sustain. Dev. 2022 , 70 , 569–580. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kertsmik, K.-A.; Kuusk, K.; Lylykangas, K.; Kalamees, T. Evaluation of Renovation Strategies: Cost-Optimal, CO 2 e Optimal, or Total Energy Optimal? Energy Build. 2023 , 287 , 112995. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Son, H.; Kim, C. Evolutionary Many-Objective Optimization for Retrofit Planning in Public Buildings: A Comparative Study. J. Clean. Prod. 2018 , 190 , 403–410. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Song, J.; Wang, W.; Ni, P.; Zheng, H.; Zhang, Z.; Zhou, Y. Framework on Low-Carbon Retrofit of Rural Residential Buildings in Arid Areas of Northwest China: A Case Study of Turpan Residential Buildings. Build. Simul. 2023 , 16 , 279–297. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, S.; Wang, Y.; Liu, X.; Yang, L.; Zhang, Y.; He, J. How Does Future Climatic Uncertainty Affect Multi-Objective Building Energy Retrofit Decisions? Evidence from Residential Buildings in Subtropical Hong Kong. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2023 , 92 , 104482. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Schwartz, Y.; Raslan, R.; Mumovic, D. Implementing Multi Objective Genetic Algorithm for Life Cycle Carbon Footprint and Life Cycle Cost Minimisation: A Building Refurbishment Case Study. Energy 2016 , 97 , 58–68. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shadram, F.; Mukkavaara, J. Improving Life Cycle Sustainability and Profitability of Buildings through Optimization: A Case Study. Buildings 2022 , 12 , 497. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Miglani, S.; Orehounig, K.; Carmeliet, J. Integrating a Thermal Model of Ground Source Heat Pumps and Solar Regeneration within Building Energy System Optimization. Appl. Energy 2018 , 218 , 78–94. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, H.; Hewage, K.; Prabatha, T.; Sadiq, R. Life Cycle Thinking-Based Energy Retrofits Evaluation Framework for Canadian Residences: A Pareto Optimization Approach. Build. Environ. 2021 , 204 , 108115. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Seyedzadeh, S.; Pour Rahimian, F.; Oliver, S.; Rodriguez, S.; Glesk, I. Machine Learning Modelling for Predicting Non-Domestic Buildings Energy Performance: A Model to Support Deep Energy Retrofit Decision-Making. Appl. Energy 2020 , 279 , 115908. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ciardiello, A.; Rosso, F.; Dell’Olmo, J.; Ciancio, V.; Ferrero, M.; Salata, F. Multi-Objective Approach to the Optimization of Shape and Envelope in Building Energy Design. Appl. Energy 2020 , 280 , 115984. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, B.; Pouramini, S. Multi-Objective Optimization for Thermal Comfort Enhancement and Greenhouse Gas Emission Reduction in Residential Buildings Applying Retrofitting Measures by an Enhanced Water Strider Optimization Algorithm: A Case Study. Energy Rep. 2021 , 7 , 1915–1929. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Montana, F.; Kanafani, K.; Wittchen, K.; Birgisdottir, H.; Longo, S.; Cellura, M.; Riva Sanseverino, E. Multi-Objective Optimization of Building Life Cycle Performance. A Housing Renovation Case Study in Northern Europe. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 7807. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rosso, F.; Ciancio, V.; Dell’Olmo, J.; Salata, F. Multi-Objective Optimization of Building Retrofit in the Mediterranean Climate by Means of Genetic Algorithm Application. Energy Build. 2020 , 216 , 109945. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kadrić, D.; Aganović, A.; Kadrić, E. Multi-Objective Optimization of Energy-Efficient Retrofitting Strategies for Single-Family Residential Homes: Minimizing Energy Consumption, CO 2 Emissions and Retrofit Costs. Energy Rep. 2023 , 10 , 1968–1981. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gao, B.; Zhu, X.; Ren, J.; Ran, J.; Kim, M.K.; Liu, J. Multi-Objective Optimization of Energy-Saving Measures and Operation Parameters for a Newly Retrofitted Building in Future Climate Conditions: A Case Study of an Office Building in Chengdu. Energy Rep. 2023 , 9 , 2269–2285. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wu, R.; Mavromatidis, G.; Orehounig, K.; Carmeliet, J. Multiobjective Optimisation of Energy Systems and Building Envelope Retrofit in a Residential Community. Appl. Energy 2017 , 190 , 634–649. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Schütz, T.; Schiffer, L.; Harb, H.; Fuchs, M.; Müller, D. Optimal Design of Energy Conversion Units and Envelopes for Residential Building Retrofits Using a Comprehensive MILP Model. Appl. Energy 2017 , 185 , 1–15. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Huang, H.; Wang, H.; Hu, Y.-J.; Li, C.; Wang, X. Optimal Plan for Energy Conservation and CO2 Emissions Reduction of Public Buildings Considering Users’ Behavior: Case of China. Energy 2022 , 261 , 125037. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Panagiotidou, M.; Aye, L.; Rismanchi, B. Optimisation of Multi-Residential Building Retrofit, Cost-Optimal and Net-Zero Emission Targets. Energy Build. 2021 , 252 , 111385. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dou, Z.; Jin, L.; Chen, Y.; Huang, Z. Optimization of Cost–Carbon Reduction–Technology Solution for Existing Office Parks Based on Genetic Algorithm. Processes 2023 , 11 , 2452. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xu, Y.; Yan, C.; Wang, G.; Shi, J.; Sheng, K.; Li, J.; Jiang, Y. Optimization Research on Energy-Saving and Life-Cycle Decarbonization Retrofitting of Existing School Buildings: A Case Study of a School in Nanjing. Sol. Energy 2023 , 254 , 54–66. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Karatas, A.; El-Rayes, K. Optimizing Tradeoffs among Housing Sustainability Objectives. Autom. Constr. 2015 , 53 , 83–94. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Schwartz, Y.; Raslan, R.; Mumovic, D. Refurbish or Replace? The Life Cycle Carbon Footprint and Life Cycle Cost of Refurbished and New Residential Archetype Buildings in London. Energy 2022 , 248 , 123585. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sharif, S.A.; Hammad, A. Simulation-Based Multi-Objective Optimization of Institutional Building Renovation Considering Energy Consumption, Life-Cycle Cost and Life-Cycle Assessment. J. Build. Eng. 2019 , 21 , 429–445. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Saad, M.M.; Menon, R.P.; Eicker, U. Supporting Decision Making for Building Decarbonization: Developing Surrogate Models for Multi-Criteria Building Retrofitting Analysis. Energies 2023 , 16 , 6030. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, P.; Gong, G.; Wang, Y.; Li, L. Thermodynamic Investigation of Building Integrated Energy Efficiency for Building Retrofit. Energy Build. 2014 , 77 , 139–148. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Galimshina, A.; Moustapha, M.; Hollberg, A.; Padey, P.; Lasvaux, S.; Sudret, B.; Habert, G. What Is the Optimal Robust Environmental and Cost-Effective Solution for Building Renovation? Not the Usual One. Energy Build. 2021 , 251 , 111329. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mei, J.; Xu, G.; Ahmad, W.; Khan, K.; Amin, M.N.; Aslam, F.; Alaskar, A. Promoting Sustainable Materials Using Recycled Rubber in Concrete: A Review. J. Clean. Prod. 2022 , 373 , 133927. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• De Boeck, L.; Verbeke, S.; Audenaert, A.; De Mesmaeker, L. Improving the Energy Performance of Residential Buildings: A Literature Review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015 , 52 , 960–975. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shaamala, A.; Yigitcanlar, T.; Nili, A.; Nyandega, D. Algorithmic Green Infrastructure Optimisation: Review of Artificial Intelligence Driven Approaches for Tackling Climate Change. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2024 , 101 , 105182. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ellegaard, O.; Wallin, J.A. The Bibliometric Analysis of Scholarly Production: How Great Is the Impact? Scientometrics 2015 , 105 , 1809–1831. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Cobo, M.J.; López-Herrera, A.G.; Herrera-Viedma, E.; Herrera, F. Science Mapping Software Tools: Review, Analysis, and Cooperative Study among Tools. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2011 , 62 , 1382–1402. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, C. CiteSpace II: Detecting and Visualizing Emerging Trends and Transient Patterns in Scientific Literature. J. Am. Soc. Inf. Sci. Technol. 2006 , 57 , 359–377. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tetteh, M.O.; Darko, A.; Chan, A.P.C.; Jafari, A.; Brilakis, I.; Chen, W.; Nani, G.; Kwame Yevu, S. Scientometric Mapping of Global Research on Green Retrofitting of Existing Buildings (GREB): Pathway towards a Holistic GREB Framework. Energy Build. 2022 , 277 , 112532. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, N.; Yang, C.; Wang, S. Research Progress and Prospect of Environmental, Social and Governance: A Systematic Literature Review and Bibliometric Analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 2024 , 447 , 141489. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Debrah, C.; Chan, A.P.C.; Darko, A. Artificial Intelligence in Green Building. Autom. Constr. 2022 , 137 , 104192. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhao, H.; Magoulès, F. A Review on the Prediction of Building Energy Consumption. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012 , 16 , 3586–3592. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shen, J.; Krietemeyer, B.; Bartosh, A.; Gao, Z.; Zhang, J. Green Design Studio: A Modular-Based Approach for High-Performance Building Design. Build. Simul. 2021 , 14 , 241–268. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• DesignBuilder Software Ltd-Home. Available online: https://designbuilder.co.uk/ (accessed on 21 February 2024).
• OpenStudio. Available online: https://openstudio.net/ (accessed on 21 February 2024).
• 3D Design Software|3D Modeling on the Web. Available online: http://www.sketchup.com/page/homepage (accessed on 21 February 2024).
• Ladybug Tools|Honeybee. Available online: https://www.ladybug.tools/honeybee.html (accessed on 11 March 2024).
• Network, S.D. Created This N. Grasshopper. Available online: https://www.grasshopper3d.com/ (accessed on 21 February 2024).
• Li, C.Z.; Zhang, L.; Liang, X.; Xiao, B.; Tam, V.W.Y.; Lai, X.; Chen, Z. Advances in the Research of Building Energy Saving. Energy Build. 2022 , 254 , 111556. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pan, Y.; Zhu, M.; Lv, Y.; Yang, Y.; Liang, Y.; Yin, R.; Yang, Y.; Jia, X.; Wang, X.; Zeng, F.; et al. Building Energy Simulation and Its Application for Building Performance Optimization: A Review of Methods, Tools, and Case Studies. Adv. Appl. Energy 2023 , 10 , 100135. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Guo, J.; Liu, R.; Xia, T.; Pouramini, S. Energy Model Calibration in an Office Building by an Optimization-Based Method. Energy Rep. 2021 , 7 , 4397–4411. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• ASHRAE. Guideline 14, Measurement of Energy and Demand Savings ; American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air Conditioning Engineers: Atlanta, GA, USA, 2002. [ Google Scholar ]
• EVO. International Performance Measurement and Verification Protocol: Concepts and Options for Determining Energy and Water Savings ; Efficiency Valuation Organization: Washington, DC, USA, 2002; Volume 1. [ Google Scholar ]
• US DOE FEMP. M&V Guidelines: Measurement and Verification for Performance-Based Contracts, Version 4.0 ; Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy; US DOE FEMP: Washington, DC, USA, 2015.
• Hong, T.; Kim, J.; Koo, C. LCC and LCCO 2 Analysis of Green Roofs in Elementary Schools with Energy Saving Measures. Energy Build. 2012 , 45 , 229–239. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Coakley, D.; Raftery, P.; Keane, M. A Review of Methods to Match Building Energy Simulation Models to Measured Data. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014 , 37 , 123–141. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nguyen, A.-T.; Reiter, S.; Rigo, P. A Review on Simulation-Based Optimization Methods Applied to Building Performance Analysis. Appl. Energy 2014 , 113 , 1043–1058. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tian, W. A Review of Sensitivity Analysis Methods in Building Energy Analysis. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013 , 20 , 411–419. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hou, D.; Hassan, I.G.; Wang, L. Review on Building Energy Model Calibration by Bayesian Inference. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021 , 143 , 110930. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Huang, H.; Wang, H.; Hu, Y.-J.; Li, C.; Wang, X. The Development Trends of Existing Building Energy Conservation and Emission Reduction—A Comprehensive Review. Energy Rep. 2022 , 8 , 13170–13188. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Torabi Moghadam, S.; Toniolo, J.; Mutani, G.; Lombardi, P. A GIS-Statistical Approach for Assessing Built Environment Energy Use at Urban Scale. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2018 , 37 , 70–84. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Yussuf, R.O.; Asfour, O.S. Applications of Artificial Intelligence for Energy Efficiency throughout the Building Lifecycle: An Overview. Energy Build. 2024 , 305 , 113903. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Seyedzadeh, S.; Rahimian, F.P.; Oliver, S.; Glesk, I.; Kumar, B. Data Driven Model Improved by Multi-Objective Optimisation for Prediction of Building Energy Loads. Autom. Constr. 2020 , 116 , 103188. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Grillone, B.; Danov, S.; Sumper, A.; Cipriano, J.; Mor, G. A Review of Deterministic and Data-Driven Methods to Quantify Energy Efficiency Savings and to Predict Retrofitting Scenarios in Buildings. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2020 , 131 , 110027. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Seyedzadeh, S.; Pour Rahimian, F.; Rastogi, P.; Glesk, I. Tuning Machine Learning Models for Prediction of Building Energy Loads. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019 , 47 , 101484. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Magnier, L.; Haghighat, F. Multiobjective Optimization of Building Design Using TRNSYS Simulations, Genetic Algorithm, and Artificial Neural Network. Build. Environ. 2010 , 45 , 739–746. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alwosheel, A.; Van Cranenburgh, S.; Chorus, C.G. Is Your Dataset Big Enough? Sample Size Requirements When Using Artificial Neural Networks for Discrete Choice Analysis. J. Choice Model. 2018 , 28 , 167–182. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, C.; Sun, B.; Zhang, C.; Li, F. A Hybrid Prediction Model for Residential Electricity Consumption Using Holt-Winters and Extreme Learning Machine. Appl. Energy 2020 , 275 , 115383. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Van Gelder, L.; Das, P.; Janssen, H.; Roels, S. Comparative Study of Metamodelling Techniques in Building Energy Simulation: Guidelines for Practitioners. Simul. Model. Pract. Theory 2014 , 49 , 245–257. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Claesen, M.; De Moor, B. Hyperparameter Search in Machine Learning. arXiv 2015 , arXiv:1502.02127. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rätz, M.; Javadi, A.P.; Baranski, M.; Finkbeiner, K.; Müller, D. Automated Data-Driven Modeling of Building Energy Systems via Machine Learning Algorithms. Energy Build. 2019 , 202 , 109384. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, Z.; Chen, Y.; Xiao, T.; Wang, H.; Hou, P. A Novel Short-Term Load Forecasting Framework Based on Time-Series Clustering and Early Classification Algorithm. Energy Build. 2021 , 251 , 111375. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Amasyali, K.; El-Gohary, N.M. A Review of Data-Driven Building Energy Consumption Prediction Studies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018 , 81 , 1192–1205. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Al-Shargabi, A.A.; Almhafdy, A.; Ibrahim, D.M.; Alghieth, M.; Chiclana, F. Buildings’ Energy Consumption Prediction Models Based on Buildings’ Characteristics: Research Trends, Taxonomy, and Performance Measures. J. Build. Eng. 2022 , 54 , 104577. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Abbasabadi, N.; Ashayeri, M.; Azari, R.; Stephens, B.; Heidarinejad, M. An Integrated Data-Driven Framework for Urban Energy Use Modeling (UEUM). Appl. Energy 2019 , 253 , 113550. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, Y.; Guo, M.; Chen, Z.; Chen, Z.; Ji, Y. Physical Energy and Data-Driven Models in Building Energy Prediction: A Review. Energy Rep. 2022 , 8 , 2656–2671. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Venkatraj, V.; Dixit, M.K. Challenges in Implementing Data-Driven Approaches for Building Life Cycle Energy Assessment: A Review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022 , 160 , 112327. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fenner, A.E.; Kibert, C.J.; Li, J.; Razkenari, M.A.; Hakim, H.; Lu, X.; Kouhirostami, M.; Sam, M. Embodied, Operation, and Commuting Emissions: A Case Study Comparing the Carbon Hotspots of an Educational Building. J. Clean. Prod. 2020 , 268 , 122081. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, T.Y.; Burnett, J.; Chau, C.K. Analysis of Embodied Energy Use in the Residential Building of Hong Kong. Energy 2001 , 26 , 323–340. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Elaouzy, Y.; El Fadar, A. Energy, Economic and Environmental Benefits of Integrating Passive Design Strategies into Buildings: A Review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022 , 167 , 112828. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lin, M.; Ali, A.; Andargie, M.S.; Azar, E. Multidomain Drivers of Occupant Comfort, Productivity, and Well-Being in Buildings: Insights from an Exploratory and Explanatory Analysis. J. Manag. Eng. 2021 , 37 , 04021020. [ 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 ]
• Evins, R. A Review of Computational Optimisation Methods Applied to Sustainable Building Design. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013 , 22 , 230–245. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hashempour, N.; Taherkhani, R.; Mahdikhani, M. Energy Performance Optimization of Existing Buildings: A Literature Review. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020 , 54 , 101967. [ Google Scholar ]
• Urbikain, M.K. Energy Efficient Solutions for Retrofitting a Residential Multi-Storey Building with Vacuum Insulation Panels and Low-E Windows in Two European Climates. J. Clean. Prod. 2020 , 269 , 121459. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, C.; Sharples, S.; Mohammadpourkarbasi, H. A Review of Building Energy Retrofit Measures, Passive Design Strategies and Building Regulation for the Low Carbon Development of Existing Dwellings in the Hot Summer–Cold Winter Region of China. Energies 2023 , 16 , 4115. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hamby, D.M. A Review of Techniques for Parameter Sensitivity Analysis of Environmental Models. Environ. Monit. Assess. 1994 , 32 , 135–154. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kheiri, F. A Review on Optimization Methods Applied in Energy-Efficient Building Geometry and Envelope Design. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018 , 92 , 897–920. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Heiselberg, P.; Brohus, H.; Hesselholt, A.; Rasmussen, H.; Seinre, E.; Thomas, S. Application of Sensitivity Analysis in Design of Sustainable Buildings. Renew. Energy 2009 , 34 , 2030–2036. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tian, Z.; Zhang, X.; Jin, X.; Zhou, X.; Si, B.; Shi, X. Towards Adoption of Building Energy Simulation and Optimization for Passive Building Design: A Survey and a Review. Energy Build. 2018 , 158 , 1306–1316. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Asadi, E.; Silva, M.G.D.; Antunes, C.H.; Dias, L.; Glicksman, L. Multi-Objective Optimization for Building Retrofit: A Model Using Genetic Algorithm and Artificial Neural Network and an Application. Energy Build. 2014 , 81 , 444–456. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tian, W.; Heo, Y.; De Wilde, P.; Li, Z.; Yan, D.; Park, C.S.; Feng, X.; Augenbroe, G. A Review of Uncertainty Analysis in Building Energy Assessment. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2018 , 93 , 285–301. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kim, Y.-J.; Ahn, K.-U.; Park, C.-S. Decision Making of HVAC System Using Bayesian Markov Chain Monte Carlo Method. Energy Build. 2014 , 72 , 112–121. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Longo, S.; Montana, F.; Riva Sanseverino, E. A Review on Optimization and Cost-Optimal Methodologies in Low-Energy Buildings Design and Environmental Considerations. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2019 , 45 , 87–104. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Huang, Y.; Niu, J. Optimal Building Envelope Design Based on Simulated Performance: History, Current Status and New Potentials. Energy Build. 2016 , 117 , 387–398. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Deb, K.; Pratap, A.; Agarwal, S.; Meyarivan, T. A Fast and Elitist Multiobjective Genetic Algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 2002 , 6 , 182–197. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, Y.; Heuvelink, G.B.M.; Bai, Z.; He, P.; Xu, X.; Ding, W.; Huang, S. Analysis of Spatio-Temporal Variation of Crop Yield in China Using Stepwise Multiple Linear Regression. Field Crops Res. 2021 , 264 , 108098. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ali, A.; Jayaraman, R.; Azar, E.; Maalouf, M. A Comparative Analysis of Machine Learning and Statistical Methods for Evaluating Building Performance: A Systematic Review and Future Benchmarking Framework. Build. Environ. 2024 , 252 , 111268. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Amini Toosi, H.; Lavagna, M.; Leonforte, F.; Del Pero, C.; Aste, N. Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment in Building Energy Retrofitting; A Review. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2020 , 60 , 102248. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mousavi, S.; Villarreal-Marroquín, M.G.; Hajiaghaei-Keshteli, M.; Smith, N.R. Data-Driven Prediction and Optimization toward Net-Zero and Positive-Energy Buildings: A Systematic Review. Build. Environ. 2023 , 242 , 110578. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Machairas, V.; Tsangrassoulis, A.; Axarli, K. Algorithms for Optimization of Building Design: A Review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2014 , 31 , 101–112. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Congradac, V.; Kulic, F. HVAC System Optimization with CO 2 Concentration Control Using Genetic Algorithms. Energy Build. 2009 , 41 , 571–577. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Delgarm, N.; Sajadi, B.; Delgarm, S.; Kowsary, F. A Novel Approach for the Simulation-Based Optimization of the Buildings Energy Consumption Using NSGA-II: Case Study in Iran. Energy Build. 2016 , 127 , 552–560. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Deb, K.; Thiele, L.; Laumanns, M.; Zitzler, E. Scalable Test Problems for Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization. In Evolutionary Multiobjective Optimization ; Abraham, A., Jain, L., Goldberg, R., Eds.; Advanced Information and Knowledge Processing; Springer: London, UK, 2005; pp. 105–145. ISBN 978-1-85233-787-2. [ Google Scholar ]
• Deb, K.; Jain, H. An Evolutionary Many-Objective Optimization Algorithm Using Reference-Point-Based Nondominated Sorting Approach, Part I: Solving Problems with Box Constraints. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 2014 , 18 , 577–601. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Emmerich, M.T.M.; Deutz, A.H. A Tutorial on Multiobjective Optimization: Fundamentals and Evolutionary Methods. Nat. Comput. 2018 , 17 , 585–609. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Mendoza, F.; Bernal-Agustin, J.L.; Dominguez-Navarro, J.A. NSGA and SPEA Applied to Multiobjective Design of Power Distribution Systems. IEEE Trans. Power Syst. 2006 , 21 , 1938–1945. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zitzler, E.; Laumanns, M.; Thiele, L. SPEA2: Improving the Strength Pareto Evolutionary Algorithm ; ETH Zurich: Zürich, Switzerland, 2001; p. 21. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu, S.; Tao, R.; Tam, C.M. Optimizing Cost and CO 2 Emission for Construction Projects Using Particle Swarm Optimization. Habitat Int. 2013 , 37 , 155–162. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gan, V.J.L.; Lo, I.M.C.; Ma, J.; Tse, K.T.; Cheng, J.C.P.; Chan, C.M. Simulation Optimisation towards Energy Efficient Green Buildings: Current Status and Future Trends. J. Clean. Prod. 2020 , 254 , 120012. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Raschka, S.; Patterson, J.; Nolet, C. Machine Learning in Python: Main Developments and Technology Trends in Data Science, Machine Learning, and Artificial Intelligence. Information 2020 , 11 , 193. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• MATLAB. Available online: https://www.mathworks.com/products/matlab.html (accessed on 7 April 2024).
• Start [Jeplus.Org]. Available online: http://www.jeplus.org/wiki/doku.php?id=start (accessed on 7 April 2024).
• Multiobjective Optimization-MATLAB & Simulink. Available online: https://www.mathworks.com/help/gads/multiobjective-optimization.html (accessed on 7 April 2024).
• Cui, Y.; Geng, Z.; Zhu, Q.; Han, Y. Review: Multi-Objective Optimization Methods and Application in Energy Saving. Energy 2017 , 125 , 681–704. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Veldhuizen, D.A.V.; Lamont, G.B. Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithm Research: A History and Analysis ; TR-98e03; Air Force Institute of Technology: Dayton, OH, USA, 1998. [ Google Scholar ]
• Zitzler, E.; Thiele, L.; Laumanns, M.; Fonseca, C.M.; Da Fonseca, V.G. Performance Assessment of Multiobjective Optimizers: An Analysis and Review. IEEE Trans. Evol. Comput. 2003 , 7 , 117–132. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pinzon Amorocho, J.A.; Hartmann, T. A Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Framework for Residential Building Renovation Using Pairwise Comparison and TOPSIS Methods. J. Build. Eng. 2022 , 53 , 104596. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chauhan, A.; Vaish, R. A Comparative Study on Decision Making Methods with Interval Data. J. Comput. Eng. 2014 , 2014 , 93074. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rokbani, N.; Neji, B.; Slim, M.; Mirjalili, S.; Ghandour, R. A Multi-Objective Modified PSO for Inverse Kinematics of a 5-DOF Robotic Arm. Appl. Sci. 2022 , 12 , 7091. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Francart, N.; Malmqvist, T.; Hagbert, P. Climate Target Fulfilment in Scenarios for a Sustainable Swedish Built Environment beyond Growth. Futures 2018 , 98 , 1–18. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ahmad, M.W.; Mourshed, M.; Rezgui, Y. Trees vs Neurons: Comparison between Random Forest and ANN for High-Resolution Prediction of Building Energy Consumption. Energy Build. 2017 , 147 , 77–89. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wang, Z.; Liu, J.; Zhang, Y.; Yuan, H.; Zhang, R.; Srinivasan, R.S. Practical Issues in Implementing Machine-Learning Models for Building Energy Efficiency: Moving beyond Obstacles. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2021 , 143 , 110929. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Singaravel, S.; Suykens, J.; Geyer, P. Deep-Learning Neural-Network Architectures and Methods: Using Component-Based Models in Building-Design Energy Prediction. Adv. Eng. Inform. 2018 , 38 , 81–90. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Khalil, M.; McGough, A.S.; Pourmirza, Z.; Pazhoohesh, M.; Walker, S. Machine Learning, Deep Learning and Statistical Analysis for Forecasting Building Energy Consumption—A Systematic Review. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 2022 , 115 , 105287. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Qian, F.; Gao, W.; Yang, Y.; Yu, D. Potential Analysis of the Transfer Learning Model in Short and Medium-Term Forecasting of Building HVAC Energy Consumption. Energy 2020 , 193 , 116724. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lu, C.; Li, S.; Lu, Z. Building Energy Prediction Using Artificial Neural Networks: A Literature Survey. Energy Build. 2022 , 262 , 111718. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Man, Q.; Yu, H.; Feng, K.; Olofsson, T.; Lu, W. Transfer of Building Retrofitting Evaluations for Data-Scarce Conditions: An Empirical Study for Sweden to China. Energy Build. 2024 , 310 , 114041. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fahlstedt, O.; Temeljotov-Salaj, A.; Lohne, J.; Bohne, R.A. Holistic Assessment of Carbon Abatement Strategies in Building Refurbishment Literature—A Scoping Review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022 , 167 , 112636. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bian, Y.; Chen, Y.; Sun, Y.; Ma, Y.; Yu, D.; Leng, T. Simulation of Daylight Availability, Visual Comfort and View Clarity for a Novel Window System with Switchable Blinds in Classrooms. Build. Environ. 2023 , 235 , 110243. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xu, S.; Li, C.; He, W.; Chu, W.; Hu, Z.; Lu, B. Experimental Study of Bifacial Photovoltaic Wall System Incorporating Thermochromic Material. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2024 , 106 , 105372. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bui, D.-K.; Nguyen, T.N.; Ghazlan, A.; Ngo, T.D. Biomimetic Adaptive Electrochromic Windows for Enhancing Building Energy Efficiency. Appl. Energy 2021 , 300 , 117341. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cheng, Y.; Chen, X.; Xu, B.; Pei, G.; Jiao, D. Experimental Analysis of Building Envelope Integrating Phase Change Material and Cool Paint under a Real Environment in Autumn. J. Clean. Prod. 2024 , 461 , 142674. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Quan, S.J.; Wu, J.; Wang, Y.; Shi, Z.; Yang, T.; Yang, P.P.-J. Urban Form and Building Energy Performance in Shanghai Neighborhoods. Energy Procedia 2016 , 88 , 126–132. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ekici, B.; Cubukcuoglu, C.; Turrin, M.; Sariyildiz, I.S. Performative Computational Architecture Using Swarm and Evolutionary Optimisation: A Review. Build. Environ. 2019 , 147 , 356–371. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Octopus. Available online: https://www.grasshopper3d.com/groups/group/show?groupUrl=octopus (accessed on 7 April 2024).
• Fan, Z.; Liu, M.; Tang, S. A Multi-Objective Optimization Design Method for Gymnasium Facade Shading Ratio Integrating Energy Load and Daylight Comfort. Build. Environ. 2022 , 207 , 108527. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nasrollahzadeh, N. Comprehensive Building Envelope Optimization: Improving Energy, Daylight, and Thermal Comfort Performance of the Dwelling Unit. J. Build. Eng. 2021 , 44 , 103418. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ji, Y.; Wang, W.; He, Y.; Li, L.; Zhang, H.; Zhang, T. Performance in Generation: An Automatic Generalizable Generative-Design-Based Performance Optimization Framework for Sustainable Building Design. Energy Build. 2023 , 298 , 113512. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, R.; Samuelson, H.; Zou, Y.; Zheng, X.; Cao, Y. Improving Building Resilience in the Face of Future Climate Uncertainty: A Comprehensive Framework for Enhancing Building Life Cycle Performance. Energy Build. 2024 , 302 , 113761. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Madushika, U.G.D.; Lu, W. Green Retrofitting Application in Developing Economies: State of the Art and Future Research Directions. Energy Build. 2023 , 301 , 113712. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tian, Z.; Zhang, X.; Wei, S.; Du, S.; Shi, X. A Review of Data-Driven Building Performance Analysis and Design on Big on-Site Building Performance Data. J. Build. Eng. 2021 , 41 , 102706. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Singh, M.K.; Attia, S.; Mahapatra, S.; Teller, J. Assessment of Thermal Comfort in Existing Pre-1945 Residential Building Stock. Energy 2016 , 98 , 122–134. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alonso, A.; Patricio, J.; Suárez, R.; Escandón, R. Acoustical Retrofit of Existing Residential Buildings: Requirements and Recommendations for Sound Insulation between Dwellings in Europe and Other Countries Worldwide. Build. Environ. 2020 , 174 , 106771. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Aftab, M.; Chen, C.; Chau, C.-K.; Rahwan, T. Automatic HVAC Control with Real-Time Occupancy Recognition and Simulation-Guided Model Predictive Control in Low-Cost Embedded System. Energy Build. 2017 , 154 , 141–156. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hong, Y.; Ezeh, C.I.; Deng, W.; Hong, S.-H.; Peng, Z. Building Energy Retrofit Measures in Hot-Summer–Cold-Winter Climates: A Case Study in Shanghai. Energies 2019 , 12 , 3393. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, L.; Ma, Q.; Gao, W.; Wei, X. Incorporating Users’ Adaptive Behaviors into Multi-Objective Optimization of Shading Devices: A Case Study of an Office Room in Qingdao. Energy Build. 2023 , 301 , 113683. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• De Wilde, P.; Coley, D. The Implications of a Changing Climate for Buildings. Build. Environ. 2012 , 55 , 1–7. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Daly, D.; Cooper, P.; Ma, Z. Implications of Global Warming for Commercial Building Retrofitting in Australian Cities. Build. Environ. 2014 , 74 , 86–95. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Balezentis, T.; Siksnelyte-Butkiene, I.; Streimikiene, D. Stakeholder Involvement for Sustainable Energy Development Based on Uncertain Group Decision Making: Prioritizing the Renewable Energy Heating Technologies and the BWM-WASPAS-IN Approach. Sustain. Cities Soc. 2021 , 73 , 103114. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Beccali, M.; Cellura, M.; Fontana, M.; Longo, S.; Mistretta, M. Energy Retrofit of a Single-Family House: Life Cycle Net Energy Saving and Environmental Benefits. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2013 , 27 , 283–293. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Allegrini, J.; Dorer, V.; Carmeliet, J. Influence of the Urban Microclimate in Street Canyons on the Energy Demand for Space Cooling and Heating of Buildings. Energy Build. 2012 , 55 , 823–832. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Santamouris, M.; Papanikolaou, N.; Livada, I.; Koronakis, I.; Georgakis, C.; Argiriou, A.; Assimakopoulos, D.N. On the Impact of Urban Climate on the Energy Consumption of Buildings. Sol. Energy 2001 , 70 , 201–216. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Reitberger, R.; Palm, N.; Palm, H.; Lang, W. Urban Systems Exploration: A Generic Process for Multi-Objective Urban Planning to Support Decision Making in Early Design Phases. Build. Environ. 2024 , 254 , 111360. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Luo, S.-L.; Shi, X.; Yang, F. A Review of Data-Driven Methods in Building Retrofit and Performance Optimization: From the Perspective of Carbon Emission Reductions. Energies 2024 , 17 , 4641. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17184641

Luo S-L, Shi X, Yang F. A Review of Data-Driven Methods in Building Retrofit and Performance Optimization: From the Perspective of Carbon Emission Reductions. Energies . 2024; 17(18):4641. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17184641

Luo, Shu-Long, Xing Shi, and Feng Yang. 2024. "A Review of Data-Driven Methods in Building Retrofit and Performance Optimization: From the Perspective of Carbon Emission Reductions" Energies 17, no. 18: 4641. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17184641

Article Metrics

Further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

KOMPETENSI DATA LIBRARIAN DALAM RESEARCH DATA MANAGEMENT: SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW

Article sidebar, main article content.

This paper investigates the Data Librarian (DL) competencies in Research Data Management (RDM). Using the systematic literature review of paper published over the last ten years from 2010 to 2020 through databases subscribed by Brawijaya University Library. A total of 243 research articles yielded that meet the selection criteria and finally 15 studies were included in this study. The results obtained show that: (1) many articles discussing the competence of DL in the field of RDM are still written from and about librarians in academic libraries; (2) the  most used methods  of research are survey, case studies, and mixed-method; (3) the competence of DL presented varies each paper, however, the most common competencies are technical skills, followed by knowledge, non-technical skills, and abilities. This study provides an overview of libraries in Indonesia to be able to prepare and develop librarian competencies in their roles in the field of RDM.

Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License .