how to write local study in research

Review of Related Literature: Format, Example, & How to Make RRL

A review of related literature is a separate paper or a part of an article that collects and synthesizes discussion on a topic. Its purpose is to show the current state of research on the issue and highlight gaps in existing knowledge. A literature review can be included in a research paper or scholarly article, typically following the introduction and before the research methods section.

This article will clarify the definition, significance, and structure of a review of related literature. You’ll also learn how to organize your literature review and discover ideas for an RRL in different subjects.

🔤 What Is RRL?

• ❗ Significance of Literature Review
• 🔎 How to Search for Literature
• 🧩 Literature Review Structure
• 📋 Format of RRL — APA, MLA, & Others
• ✍️ How to Write an RRL
• 📚 Examples of RRL

🔗 References

A review of related literature (RRL) is a part of the research report that examines significant studies, theories, and concepts published in scholarly sources on a particular topic. An RRL includes 3 main components:

• A short overview and critique of the previous research.
• Similarities and differences between past studies and the current one.
• An explanation of the theoretical frameworks underpinning the research.

❗ Significance of Review of Related Literature

Although the goal of a review of related literature differs depending on the discipline and its intended use, its significance cannot be overstated. Here are some examples of how a review might be beneficial:

• It helps determine knowledge gaps .
• It saves from duplicating research that has already been conducted.
• It provides an overview of various research areas within the discipline.
• It demonstrates the researcher’s familiarity with the topic.

🔎 How to Perform a Literature Search

Including a description of your search strategy in the literature review section can significantly increase your grade. You can search sources with the following steps:

🧩 Literature Review Structure Example

The majority of literature reviews follow a standard introduction-body-conclusion structure. Let’s look at the RRL structure in detail.

Introduction of Review of Related Literature: Sample

An introduction should clarify the study topic and the depth of the information to be delivered. It should also explain the types of sources used. If your lit. review is part of a larger research proposal or project, you can combine its introductory paragraph with the introduction of your paper.

Here is a sample introduction to an RRL about cyberbullying:

Bullying has troubled people since the beginning of time. However, with modern technological advancements, especially social media, bullying has evolved into cyberbullying. As a result, nowadays, teenagers and adults cannot flee their bullies, which makes them feel lonely and helpless. This literature review will examine recent studies on cyberbullying.

Sample Review of Related Literature Thesis

A thesis statement should include the central idea of your literature review and the primary supporting elements you discovered in the literature. Thesis statements are typically put at the end of the introductory paragraph.

Look at a sample thesis of a review of related literature:

This literature review shows that scholars have recently covered the issues of bullies’ motivation, the impact of bullying on victims and aggressors, common cyberbullying techniques, and victims’ coping strategies. However, there is still no agreement on the best practices to address cyberbullying.

Literature Review Body Paragraph Example

The main body of a literature review should provide an overview of the existing research on the issue. Body paragraphs should not just summarize each source but analyze them. You can organize your paragraphs with these 3 elements:

• Claim . Start with a topic sentence linked to your literature review purpose.
• Evidence . Cite relevant information from your chosen sources.
• Discussion . Explain how the cited data supports your claim.

Here’s a literature review body paragraph example:

Scholars have examined the link between the aggressor and the victim. Beran et al. (2007) state that students bullied online often become cyberbullies themselves. Faucher et al. (2014) confirm this with their findings: they discovered that male and female students began engaging in cyberbullying after being subject to bullying. Hence, one can conclude that being a victim of bullying increases one’s likelihood of becoming a cyberbully.

Review of Related Literature: Conclusion

A conclusion presents a general consensus on the topic. Depending on your literature review purpose, it might include the following:

• Introduction to further research . If you write a literature review as part of a larger research project, you can present your research question in your conclusion .
• Overview of theories . You can summarize critical theories and concepts to help your reader understand the topic better.
• Discussion of the gap . If you identified a research gap in the reviewed literature, your conclusion could explain why that gap is significant.

Check out a conclusion example that discusses a research gap:

There is extensive research into bullies’ motivation, the consequences of bullying for victims and aggressors, strategies for bullying, and coping with it. Yet, scholars still have not reached a consensus on what to consider the best practices to combat cyberbullying. This question is of great importance because of the significant adverse effects of cyberbullying on victims and bullies.

📋 Format of RRL — APA, MLA, & Others

In this section, we will discuss how to format an RRL according to the most common citation styles: APA, Chicago, MLA, and Harvard.

Writing a literature review using the APA7 style requires the following text formatting:

• When using APA in-text citations , include the author’s last name and the year of publication in parentheses.
• For direct quotations , you must also add the page number. If you use sources without page numbers, such as websites or e-books, include a paragraph number instead.
• When referring to the author’s name in a sentence , you do not need to repeat it at the end of the sentence. Instead, include the year of publication inside the parentheses after their name.
• The reference list should be included at the end of your literature review. It is always alphabetized by the last name of the author (from A to Z), and the lines are indented one-half inch from the left margin of your paper. Do not forget to invert authors’ names (the last name should come first) and include the full titles of journals instead of their abbreviations. If you use an online source, add its URL.

The RRL format in the Chicago style is as follows:

• Author-date . You place your citations in brackets within the text, indicating the name of the author and the year of publication.
• Notes and bibliography . You place your citations in numbered footnotes or endnotes to connect the citation back to the source in the bibliography.
• The reference list, or bibliography , in Chicago style, is at the end of a literature review. The sources are arranged alphabetically and single-spaced. Each bibliography entry begins with the author’s name and the source’s title, followed by publication information, such as the city of publication, the publisher, and the year of publication.

Writing a literature review using the MLA style requires the following text formatting:

• In the MLA format, you can cite a source in the text by indicating the author’s last name and the page number in parentheses at the end of the citation. If the cited information takes several pages, you need to include all the page numbers.
• The reference list in MLA style is titled “ Works Cited .” In this section, all sources used in the paper should be listed in alphabetical order. Each entry should contain the author, title of the source, title of the journal or a larger volume, other contributors, version, number, publisher, and publication date.

The Harvard style requires you to use the following text formatting for your RRL:

• In-text citations in the Harvard style include the author’s last name and the year of publication. If you are using a direct quote in your literature review, you need to add the page number as well.
• Arrange your list of references alphabetically. Each entry should contain the author’s last name, their initials, the year of publication, the title of the source, and other publication information, like the journal title and issue number or the publisher.

✍️ How to Write Review of Related Literature – Sample

Literature reviews can be organized in many ways depending on what you want to achieve with them. In this section, we will look at 3 examples of how you can write your RRL.

Thematic Literature Review

A thematic literature review is arranged around central themes or issues discussed in the sources. If you have identified some recurring themes in the literature, you can divide your RRL into sections that address various aspects of the topic. For example, if you examine studies on e-learning, you can distinguish such themes as the cost-effectiveness of online learning, the technologies used, and its effectiveness compared to traditional education.

Chronological Literature Review

A chronological literature review is a way to track the development of the topic over time. If you use this method, avoid merely listing and summarizing sources in chronological order. Instead, try to analyze the trends, turning moments, and critical debates that have shaped the field’s path. Also, you can give your interpretation of how and why specific advances occurred.

Methodological Literature Review

A methodological literature review differs from the preceding ones in that it usually doesn’t focus on the sources’ content. Instead, it is concerned with the research methods . So, if your references come from several disciplines or fields employing various research techniques, you can compare the findings and conclusions of different methodologies, for instance:

• empirical vs. theoretical studies;
• qualitative vs. quantitative research.

📚 Examples of Review of Related Literature and Studies

We have prepared a short example of RRL on climate change for you to see how everything works in practice!

Climate change is one of the most important issues nowadays. Based on a variety of facts, it is now clearer than ever that humans are altering the Earth's climate. The atmosphere and oceans have warmed, causing sea level rise, a significant loss of Arctic ice, and other climate-related changes. This literature review provides a thorough summary of research on climate change, focusing on climate change fingerprints and evidence of human influence on the Earth's climate system.

Physical Mechanisms and Evidence of Human Influence

Scientists are convinced that climate change is directly influenced by the emission of greenhouse gases. They have carefully analyzed various climate data and evidence, concluding that the majority of the observed global warming over the past 50 years cannot be explained by natural factors alone. Instead, there is compelling evidence pointing to a significant contribution of human activities, primarily the emission of greenhouse gases (Walker, 2014). For example, based on simple physics calculations, doubled carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere can lead to a global temperature increase of approximately 1 degree Celsius. (Elderfield, 2022). In order to determine the human influence on climate, scientists still have to analyze a lot of natural changes that affect temperature, precipitation, and other components of climate on timeframes ranging from days to decades and beyond.

Fingerprinting Climate Change

Fingerprinting climate change is a useful tool to identify the causes of global warming because different factors leave unique marks on climate records. This is evident when scientists look beyond overall temperature changes and examine how warming is distributed geographically and over time (Watson, 2022). By investigating these climate patterns, scientists can obtain a more complex understanding of the connections between natural climate variability and climate variability caused by human activity.

Modeling Climate Change and Feedback

To accurately predict the consequences of feedback mechanisms, the rate of warming, and regional climate change, scientists can employ sophisticated mathematical models of the atmosphere, ocean, land, and ice (the cryosphere). These models are grounded in well-established physical laws and incorporate the latest scientific understanding of climate-related processes (Shuckburgh, 2013). Although different climate models produce slightly varying projections for future warming, they all will agree that feedback mechanisms play a significant role in amplifying the initial warming caused by greenhouse gas emissions. (Meehl, 2019).

In conclusion, the literature on global warming indicates that there are well-understood physical processes that link variations in greenhouse gas concentrations to climate change. In addition, it covers the scientific proof that the rates of these gases in the atmosphere have increased and continue to rise fast. According to the sources, the majority of this recent change is almost definitely caused by greenhouse gas emissions produced by human activities. Citizens and governments can alter their energy production methods and consumption patterns to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and, thus, the magnitude of climate change. By acting now, society can prevent the worst consequences of climate change and build a more resilient and sustainable future for generations to come.

Have you ever struggled with finding the topic for an RRL in different subjects? Read the following paragraphs to get some ideas!

Nursing Literature Review Example

Many topics in the nursing field require research. For example, you can write a review of literature related to dengue fever . Give a general overview of dengue virus infections, including its clinical symptoms, diagnosis, prevention, and therapy.

Another good idea is to review related literature and studies about teenage pregnancy . This review can describe the effectiveness of specific programs for adolescent mothers and their children and summarize recommendations for preventing early pregnancy.

📝 Check out some more valuable examples below:

• Hospital Readmissions: Literature Review .
• Literature Review: Lower Sepsis Mortality Rates .
• Breast Cancer: Literature Review .
• Sexually Transmitted Diseases: Literature Review .
• PICO for Pressure Ulcers: Literature Review .
• COVID-19 Spread Prevention: Literature Review .
• Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Literature Review .
• Hypertension Treatment Adherence: Literature Review .
• Neonatal Sepsis Prevention: Literature Review .
• Healthcare-Associated Infections: Literature Review .
• Understaffing in Nursing: Literature Review .

Psychology Literature Review Example

If you look for an RRL topic in psychology , you can write a review of related literature about stress . Summarize scientific evidence about stress stages, side effects, types, or reduction strategies. Or you can write a review of related literature about computer game addiction . In this case, you may concentrate on the neural mechanisms underlying the internet gaming disorder, compare it to other addictions, or evaluate treatment strategies.

A review of related literature about cyberbullying is another interesting option. You can highlight the impact of cyberbullying on undergraduate students’ academic, social, and emotional development.

📝 Look at the examples that we have prepared for you to come up with some more ideas:

• Mindfulness in Counseling: A Literature Review .
• Team-Building Across Cultures: Literature Review .
• Anxiety and Decision Making: Literature Review .
• Literature Review on Depression .
• Literature Review on Narcissism .
• Effects of Depression Among Adolescents .
• Causes and Effects of Anxiety in Children .

Literature Review — Sociology Example

Sociological research poses critical questions about social structures and phenomena. For example, you can write a review of related literature about child labor , exploring cultural beliefs and social norms that normalize the exploitation of children. Or you can create a review of related literature about social media . It can investigate the impact of social media on relationships between adolescents or the role of social networks on immigrants’ acculturation .

📝 You can find some more ideas below!

• Single Mothers’ Experiences of Relationships with Their Adolescent Sons .
• Teachers and Students’ Gender-Based Interactions .
• Gender Identity: Biological Perspective and Social Cognitive Theory .
• Gender: Culturally-Prescribed Role or Biological Sex .
• The Influence of Opioid Misuse on Academic Achievement of Veteran Students .
• The Importance of Ethics in Research .
• The Role of Family and Social Network Support in Mental Health .

Education Literature Review Example

For your education studies , you can write a review of related literature about academic performance to determine factors that affect student achievement and highlight research gaps. One more idea is to create a review of related literature on study habits , considering their role in the student’s life and academic outcomes.

You can also evaluate a computerized grading system in a review of related literature to single out its advantages and barriers to implementation. Or you can complete a review of related literature on instructional materials to identify their most common types and effects on student achievement.

📝 Find some inspiration in the examples below:

• Literature Review on Online Learning Challenges From COVID-19 .
• Education, Leadership, and Management: Literature Review .
• Literature Review: Standardized Testing Bias .
• Bullying of Disabled Children in School .
• Interventions and Letter & Sound Recognition: A Literature Review .
• Social-Emotional Skills Program for Preschoolers .
• Effectiveness of Educational Leadership Management Skills .

Business Research Literature Review

If you’re a business student, you can focus on customer satisfaction in your review of related literature. Discuss specific customer satisfaction features and how it is affected by service quality and prices. You can also create a theoretical literature review about consumer buying behavior to evaluate theories that have significantly contributed to understanding how consumers make purchasing decisions.

📝 Look at the examples to get more exciting ideas:

• Leadership and Communication: Literature Review .
• Human Resource Development: Literature Review .
• Project Management. Literature Review .
• Strategic HRM: A Literature Review .
• Customer Relationship Management: Literature Review .
• Literature Review on International Financial Reporting Standards .
• Cultures of Management: Literature Review .

To conclude, a review of related literature is a significant genre of scholarly works that can be applied in various disciplines and for multiple goals. The sources examined in an RRL provide theoretical frameworks for future studies and help create original research questions and hypotheses.

When you finish your outstanding literature review, don’t forget to check whether it sounds logical and coherent. Our text-to-speech tool can help you with that!

• Literature Reviews | University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
• Writing a Literature Review | Purdue Online Writing Lab
• Learn How to Write a Review of Literature | University of Wisconsin-Madison
• The Literature Review: A Few Tips on Conducting It | University of Toronto
• Writing a Literature Review | UC San Diego
• Conduct a Literature Review | The University of Arizona
• Methods for Literature Reviews | National Library of Medicine
• Literature Reviews: 5. Write the Review | Georgia State University

How to Write an Animal Testing Essay: Tips for Argumentative & Persuasive Papers

Descriptive essay topics: examples, outline, & more.

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

How to Write Review of Related Literature (RRL) in Research

A review of related literature (a.k.a RRL in research) is a comprehensive review of the existing literature pertaining to a specific topic or research question. An effective review provides the reader with an organized analysis and synthesis of the existing knowledge about a subject. With the increasing amount of new information being disseminated every day, conducting a review of related literature is becoming more difficult and the purpose of review of related literature is clearer than ever.  

All new knowledge is necessarily based on previously known information, and every new scientific study must be conducted and reported in the context of previous studies. This makes a review of related literature essential for research, and although it may be tedious work at times , most researchers will complete many such reviews of varying depths during their career. So, why exactly is a review of related literature important?    

Table of Contents

Why a review of related literature in research is important  

Before thinking how to do reviews of related literature , it is necessary to understand its importance. Although the purpose of a review of related literature varies depending on the discipline and how it will be used, its importance is never in question. Here are some ways in which a review can be crucial.  

• Identify gaps in the knowledge – This is the primary purpose of a review of related literature (often called RRL in research ). To create new knowledge, you must first determine what knowledge may be missing. This also helps to identify the scope of your study.  
• Avoid duplication of research efforts – Not only will a review of related literature indicate gaps in the existing research, but it will also lead you away from duplicating research that has already been done and thus save precious resources.  
• Provide an overview of disparate and interdisciplinary research areas – Researchers cannot possibly know everything related to their disciplines. Therefore, it is very helpful to have access to a review of related literature already written and published.  
• Highlight researcher’s familiarity with their topic 1  – A strong review of related literature in a study strengthens readers’ confidence in that study and that researcher.

Tips on how to write a review of related literature in research

Given that you will probably need to produce a number of these at some point, here are a few general tips on how to write an effective review of related literature 2 .

• Define your topic, audience, and purpose: You will be spending a lot of time with this review, so choose a topic that is interesting to you. While deciding what to write in a review of related literature , think about who you expect to read the review – researchers in your discipline, other scientists, the general public – and tailor the language to the audience. Also, think about the purpose of your review of related literature .  
• Conduct a comprehensive literature search: While writing your review of related literature , emphasize more recent works but don’t forget to include some older publications as well. Cast a wide net, as you may find some interesting and relevant literature in unexpected databases or library corners. Don’t forget to search for recent conference papers.
• Review the identified articles and take notes: It is a good idea to take notes in a way such that individual items in your notes can be moved around when you organize them. For example, index cards are great tools for this. Write each individual idea on a separate card along with the source. The cards can then be easily grouped and organized.  
• Determine how to organize your review: A review of related literature should not be merely a listing of descriptions. It should be organized by some criterion, such as chronologically or thematically.  
• Be critical and objective: Don’t just report the findings of other studies in your review of related literature . Challenge the methodology, find errors in the analysis, question the conclusions. Use what you find to improve your research. However, do not insert your opinions into the review of related literature. Remain objective and open-minded.  
• Structure your review logically: Guide the reader through the information. The structure will depend on the function of the review of related literature. Creating an outline prior to writing the RRL in research is a good way to ensure the presented information flows well.  

As you read more extensively in your discipline, you will notice that the review of related literature appears in various forms in different places. For example, when you read an article about an experimental study, you will typically see a literature review or a RRL in research , in the introduction that includes brief descriptions of similar studies. In longer research studies and dissertations, especially in the social sciences, the review of related literature will typically be a separate chapter and include more information on methodologies and theory building. In addition, stand-alone review articles will be published that are extremely useful to researchers.  

The review of relevant literature or often abbreviated as, RRL in research , is an important communication tool that can be used in many forms for many purposes. It is a tool that all researchers should befriend.  

• University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Writing Center. Literature Reviews.  https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/literature-reviews/  [Accessed September 8, 2022]
• Pautasso M. Ten simple rules for writing a literature review. PLoS Comput Biol. 2013, 9. doi: 10.1371/journal.pcbi.1003149.

Q:  Is research complete without a review of related literature?

A research project is usually considered incomplete without a proper review of related literature. The review of related literature is a crucial component of any research project as it provides context for the research question, identifies gaps in existing literature, and ensures novelty by avoiding duplication. It also helps inform research design and supports arguments, highlights the significance of a study, and demonstrates your knowledge an expertise.

Q: What is difference between RRL and RRS?

The key difference between an RRL and an RRS lies in their focus and scope. An RRL or review of related literature examines a broad range of literature, including theoretical frameworks, concepts, and empirical studies, to establish the context and significance of the research topic. On the other hand, an RRS or review of research studies specifically focuses on analyzing and summarizing previous research studies within a specific research domain to gain insights into methodologies, findings, and gaps in the existing body of knowledge. While there may be some overlap between the two, they serve distinct purposes and cover different aspects of the research process.

Q: Does review of related literature improve accuracy and validity of research?

Yes, a comprehensive review of related literature (RRL) plays a vital role in improving the accuracy and validity of research. It helps authors gain a deeper understanding and offers different perspectives on the research topic. RRL can help you identify research gaps, dictate the selection of appropriate research methodologies, enhance theoretical frameworks, avoid biases and errors, and even provide support for research design and interpretation. By building upon and critically engaging with existing related literature, researchers can ensure their work is rigorous, reliable, and contributes meaningfully to their field of study.

R Discovery is a literature search and research reading platform that accelerates your research discovery journey by keeping you updated on the latest, most relevant scholarly content. With 250M+ research articles sourced from trusted aggregators like CrossRef, Unpaywall, PubMed, PubMed Central, Open Alex and top publishing houses like Springer Nature, JAMA, IOP, Taylor & Francis, NEJM, BMJ, Karger, SAGE, Emerald Publishing and more, R Discovery puts a world of research at your fingertips.  

Try R Discovery Prime FREE for 1 week or upgrade at just US$72 a year to access premium features that let you listen to research on the go, read in your language, collaborate with peers, auto sync with reference managers, and much more. Choose a simpler, smarter way to find and read research – Download the app and start your free 7-day trial today !  

Related Posts

What is Research Impact: Types and Tips for Academics

Research in Shorts: R Discovery’s New Feature Helps Academics Assess Relevant Papers in 2mins 

How to Write a Literature Review: Six Steps to Get You from Start to Finish

Writing-a-literature-review-six-steps-to-get-you-from-start-to-finish.

Tanya Golash-Boza, Associate Professor of Sociology, University of California

February 03, 2022

Writing a literature review is often the most daunting part of writing an article, book, thesis, or dissertation. “The literature” seems (and often is) massive. I have found it helpful to be as systematic as possible when completing this gargantuan task.

Sonja Foss and William Walters* describe an efficient and effective way of writing a literature review. Their system provides an excellent guide for getting through the massive amounts of literature for any purpose: in a dissertation, an M.A. thesis, or preparing a research article for publication  in any field of study. Below is a  summary of the steps they outline as well as a step-by-step method for writing a literature review.

How to Write a Literature Review

Step One: Decide on your areas of research:

Before you begin to search for articles or books, decide beforehand what areas you are going to research. Make sure that you only get articles and books in those areas, even if you come across fascinating books in other areas. A literature review I am currently working on, for example, explores barriers to higher education for undocumented students.

Step Two: Search for the literature:

Conduct a comprehensive bibliographic search of books and articles in your area. Read the abstracts online and download and/or print those articles that pertain to your area of research. Find books in the library that are relevant and check them out. Set a specific time frame for how long you will search. It should not take more than two or three dedicated sessions.

Step Three: Find relevant excerpts in your books and articles:

Skim the contents of each book and article and look specifically for these five things:

1. Claims, conclusions, and findings about the constructs you are investigating

2. Definitions of terms

3. Calls for follow-up studies relevant to your project

4. Gaps you notice in the literature

5. Disagreement about the constructs you are investigating

When you find any of these five things, type the relevant excerpt directly into a Word document. Don’t summarize, as summarizing takes longer than simply typing the excerpt. Make sure to note the name of the author and the page number following each excerpt. Do this for each article and book that you have in your stack of literature. When you are done, print out your excerpts.

Step Four: Code the literature:

Get out a pair of scissors and cut each excerpt out. Now, sort the pieces of paper into similar topics. Figure out what the main themes are. Place each excerpt into a themed pile. Make sure each note goes into a pile. If there are excerpts that you can’t figure out where they belong, separate those and go over them again at the end to see if you need new categories. When you finish, place each stack of notes into an envelope labeled with the name of the theme.

Step Five: Create Your Conceptual Schema:

Type, in large font, the name of each of your coded themes. Print this out, and cut the titles into individual slips of paper. Take the slips of paper to a table or large workspace and figure out the best way to organize them. Are there ideas that go together or that are in dialogue with each other? Are there ideas that contradict each other? Move around the slips of paper until you come up with a way of organizing the codes that makes sense. Write the conceptual schema down before you forget or someone cleans up your slips of paper.

Step Six: Begin to Write Your Literature Review:

Choose any section of your conceptual schema to begin with. You can begin anywhere, because you already know the order. Find the envelope with the excerpts in them and lay them on the table in front of you. Figure out a mini-conceptual schema based on that theme by grouping together those excerpts that say the same thing. Use that mini-conceptual schema to write up your literature review based on the excerpts that you have in front of you. Don’t forget to include the citations as you write, so as not to lose track of who said what. Repeat this for each section of your literature review.

Once you complete these six steps, you will have a complete draft of your literature review. The great thing about this process is that it breaks down into manageable steps something that seems enormous: writing a literature review.

I think that Foss and Walter’s system for writing the literature review is ideal for a dissertation, because a Ph.D. candidate has already read widely in his or her field through graduate seminars and comprehensive exams.

It may be more challenging for M.A. students, unless you are already familiar with the literature. It is always hard to figure out how much you need to read for deep meaning, and how much you just need to know what others have said. That balance will depend on how much you already know.

For people writing literature reviews for articles or books, this system also could work, especially when you are writing in a field with which you are already familiar. The mere fact of having a system can make the literature review seem much less daunting, so I recommend this system for anyone who feels overwhelmed by the prospect of writing a literature review.

*Destination Dissertation: A Traveler's Guide to a Done Dissertation

Image Credit/Source: Goldmund Lukic/Getty Images

Watch our Webinar to help you get published

Please enter your Email Address

Please enter valid email address

Please Enter your First Name

Please enter your Last Name

Please enter your Questions or Comments.

Please enter the Privacy

Please enter the Terms & Conditions

Leveraging user research to improve author guidelines at the Council of Science Editors Annual Meeting

How research content supports academic integrity

Finding time to publish as a medical student: 6 tips for Success

Software to Improve Reliability of Research Image Data: Wiley, Lumina, and Researchers at Harvard Medical School Work Together on Solutions

Driving Research Outcomes: Wiley Partners with CiteAb

ISBN, ISSN, DOI: what they are and how to find them

Image Collections for Medical Practitioners with TDS Health

How do you Discover Content?

Writing for Publication for Nurses (Mandarin Edition)

Get Published - Your How to Webinar

Related articles.

User Experience (UX) Research is the process of discovering and understanding user requirements, motivations, and behaviours 

Learn how Wiley partners with plagiarism detection services to support academic integrity around the world

Medical student Nicole Foley shares her top tips for writing and getting your work published.

Wiley and Lumina are working together to support the efforts of researchers at Harvard Medical School to develop and test new machine learning tools and artificial intelligence (AI) software that can

Learn more about our relationship with a company that helps scientists identify the right products to use in their research

What is ISBN? ISSN? DOI? Learn about some of the unique identifiers for book and journal content.

Learn how medical practitioners can easily access and search visual assets from our article portfolio

Explore free-to-use services that can help you discover new content

Watch this webinar to help you learn how to get published.

Finding time to publish as a medical student: 6 tips for success

How to Easily Access the Most Relevant Research: A Q&A With the Creator of Scitrus

Atypon launches Scitrus, a personalized web app that allows users to create a customized feed of the latest research.

FOR INDIVIDUALS

FOR INSTITUTIONS & BUSINESSES

WILEY NETWORK

ABOUT WILEY

Corporate Responsibility

Corporate Governance

Leadership Team

Cookie Preferences

Copyright @ 2000-2024  by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., or related companies. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies.

Rights & Permissions

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

14 Writing your literature review

Chapter outline.

• Writing from an outline (10 minute read plus an 8 minute video, and then a 15 minute video)
• Writing your literature review (30 minute read)

Content warning: TBA

6.1: Writing from an outline

Learning objectives.

Learners will be able to…

• Integrate facts from the literature into scholarly writing
• Experiment with different approaches to integrating information that do not involve direct quotations from other authors

Congratulations! By now, you should have discovered, retrieved, evaluated, synthesized, and organized the information you need for your literature review. It’s now time to turn that stack of articles, papers, and notes into a literature review–it’s time to start writing!

The first step in research writing is outlining. In Chapter 4, we reviewed how to build a topical outline using quotations and facts from other authors. Use that outline (or one you write now) as a way to organize your thoughts.

Watch this video from Nicholas Cifuentes-Goodbody on Outlining . As he highlights, outlining is like building a mise en place before a meal–arranging your ingredients in an orderly way so you can create your masterpiece.

From quotations to original writing

Much like combining ingredients on a kitchen countertop, you will need to mix your ingredients together. That means you will not be relying extensively on quotations from other authors in your literature review. In moving from an outline to a literature review, the key intellectual move is relying on your own ideas about the literature, rather than quoting extensively from other sources.

Integrating ideas from other authors

Watch this video from Nicholas Cifuentes-Goodbody on using quotations in academic writing . In the video, he reviews a few different techniques to integrate quotations or ideas from other authors into your writing. All literature reviews use the ideas from other authors, but it’s important not to overuse others’ words. Your literature review is evaluated by your professor based on how well it shows  you are able to make connections between different facts in the scientific literature. The examples in this section should highlight how to get other people’s words out of the way of your own. Use these strategies to diversify your writing and show your readers how your sources contributed to your work.

1. Make a claim without a quote

Claim ( Citation )

Some view cities as the storehouse of culture and creativity, and propose that urbanization is a consequence of the attractiveness of these social benefits ( Mumford, 1961 ).

More information

Oftentimes you do not need to directly quote a source to convey its conclusions or arguments – and some disciplines discourage quoting directly! Rather you can paraphrase the main point of a paper in your own words and provide an in-text citation. A benefit of using this strategy is that you can offer support for a claim without using a whole paragraph to introduce and frame a quote. You should make sure that you fully understand the paper’s argument and that you are following university citation guidelines before attempting to paraphrase something from a paper.

2. Make a claim that is supported by two or more sources:

Claim ( Citation 1 ; Citation 2 ).

Reviews of this literature concede difficulty in making direct comparisons of emission levels across different sets of analysis ( Bader and Bleischwitz, 2009 ; Kennedy et al., 2009 ; Ramaswami et al., 2012 ).

Sometimes multiple sources support your claim, or there are two major publications that deserve credit for providing evidence on a topic. This is a perfect time to use multiple citations. You can cite two, three, or more sources in a single sentence!

Make a claim that has been supported in multiple contexts:

Context 1 ( Citation ), Context 2 ( Citation ), Context 3 ( Citation ).

These results are supported by more recent research on transportation energy consumption ( Liddle, 2014 ), electricity consumption in buildings ( Lariviere and Lafrance, 1999 ), and overall urban GHG emissions ( Marcotullio et al., 2013b ).

More information:

Use this citation strategy when you want to show that a body of research has found support for some claim across several different contexts. This can show the robustness of an effect or phenomenon and can give your claim some added validity

3. Quote important or unique terms

Claim “ Term ” ( Citation ).

The spatial implications of this thinking are manifest in the “ concentric ring model ” of urban expansion and its variants ( Harris and Ullman, 1945 ).

While block or even whole-sentence citations are rare in most research papers in the science and social science disciplines, there is often a need to quote specific terms or phrases that were first coined by a certain source or that were well-explained in a specific paper.

4. Quoting definitions

Contextualize quote , “ important word or phrase .”

Role conflict is defined as “A situation in which contradictory, competing, or incompatible expectations are placed on an individual by two or more roles held at the same time” (Open Sociology Dictionary, 2023); whereas, role strain is defined as “a situation caused by higher-than-expected demands placed on an individual performing a specific role that leads to difficulty or stress” (Open Sociology Dictionary, 2023). In our study, we hypothesize that caregivers who reenter higher education experience role conflict between school work, paid work, and care work. Further, we hypothesize that this conflict is greater in individuals who had experienced role strain in employment or caregiving prior to entering college.

A direct quotation can bring attention to specific language in your source. When someone puts something perfectly, you can use a quotation to convey the identical meaning in your work. Definitions are an excellent example of when to use a quotation. In other cases, there may be quotations from important thinkers, clients or community members, and others whose specific wording is important.

I encourage you to use few, if any, direct quotations in your literature review. Personally, I think most students are scared of looking stupid and would rather use a good quotation than risk not getting it right. If you are a student who considers themselves a strong writer, this may not sound relevant to you. However, I’m willing to bet that there are many of your peers for whom this describes a particular bit of research anxiety.

When using quotations, make sure to only include the parts of the quotation that are necessary. You do not need to use quotation marks for statistics you use. And I encourage you to find ways to put others’ statistics in  your sentences.

Why share information from other sources?

Now that you know some different sentence structures using APA citations, let’s examine the purpose behind why you are sharing information from another source. Cited evidence can serve a wide range of purposes in academic papers. These examples will give you an idea of the different ways that you can use citations in your paper.

1. Summarize your source

The studies of Newman and Kenworthy ( 1989, 1999 ) demonstrate a negative relationship between population density and transportation fuel use .

You will help your reader understand your points better if you summarize the key points of a study. Describe the strengths or weaknesses a specific source that has been pivotal in your field. Describe the source’s specific methodology, theory, or approach. Be sure to still include a citation. If you mention the name of the author in your text, you still need to provide the date of the study in a parenthetical citation.

2. Cite a method

Despite the popularity of the WUP indicators , they have been routinely criticized because the methodology relies on local- and country-specific definitions of bounding urban areas, resulting in of ten incomparable and widely divergent definitions of the population, density thresholds, or administrative/political units designated ( Satterthwaite, 2007 ).

This is an easy way to give credit to a source that has provided some evidence for the validity of a method or questionnaire. Readers can reference your citation if they are interested in knowing more about the method and its standing in the current literature.

3. Compare sources

Some evidence for this scaling relationship suggests that urban areas with larger population sizes have proportionally smaller energy infrastructures than smaller cities ( Bettencourt et al., 2007 ; Fragkias et al., 2013 ). Other evidence suggests that GHG emissions may increase more than proportionally to population size, such that larger cities exhibit proportionally higher energy demand as they grow than do smaller cities ( Marcotullio et al., 2013 ).

This is one of the most important techniques for creating an effective literature review. This allows you and your readers to consider controversies and discrepancies among the current literature, revealing gaps in the literature or points of contention for further study.

The examples in this guide come from:

Marcotullio, P. J., Hughes, S., Sarzynski, A., Pincetl, S., Sanchez Peña, L., Romero-Lankao, P., Runfola, D. and Seto, K. C. (2014), Urbanization and the carbon cycle: Contributions from social science. Earth’s Future, 2: 496–514. doi:10.1002/2014EF000257

Avoiding plagiarism

The most difficult thing about avoiding plagiarism is that reading so much of other people’s ideas can make them seem like your own after a while. We recommend you work through this interactive activity on determining how and when to cite other authors.

Key Takeaways

• Research writing requires outlining, which helps you arrange your facts neatly before writing. It’s similar to arranging all of your ingredients before you start cooking.
• Eliminate quotations from your writing as much as possible. Your literature review needs to be your analysis of the literature, not just a summary of other people’s good ideas.
• Experiment with the prompts in this chapter as you begin to write your research question. 

6.2 Writing your literature review

• Describe the components of a literature review
• Begin to write your literature review
• Identify the purpose of a problem statement
• Apply the components of a formal argument to your topic
• Use elements of formal writing style, including signposting and transitions
• Recognize commons errors in literature reviews

Writing about research is different than other types of writing. Research writing is not like a journal entry or opinion paper. The goal here is not to apply your research question to your life or growth as a practitioner. Research writing is about the provision and interpretation of facts. The tone should be objective and unbiased, and personal experiences and opinions are excluded. Particularly for students who are used to writing case notes, research writing can be a challenge. That’s why its important to normalize getting help! If your professor has not built in peer review, consider setting up a peer review group among your peers. You should also reach out to your academic advisor to see if there are writing services on your campus available to graduate students. No one should feel bad for needing help with something they haven’t done before, haven’t done in a while, or were never taught how to do. 

If you’ve followed the steps in this chapter, you likely have an outline, summary table, and concept map from which you can begin the writing process. But what do you need to include in your literature review? We’ve mentioned it before, but to summarize, a literature review should:

• Introduce the topic and define its key terms.
• Establish the importance of the topic.
• Provide an overview of the important literature related to the concepts found in the research question.
• Identify gaps or controversies in the literature.
• Point out consistent findings across studies.
• Synthesize that which is known about a topic, rather than just provide a summary of the articles you read.
• Discuss possible implications and directions for future research.

Do you have enough facts and sources to accomplish these tasks? It’s a good time to consult your outlines and notes on each article you plan to include in your literature review. You may also want to consult with your professor on what is expected of you. If there is something you are missing, you may want to jump back to section 2.3 where we discussed how to search for literature. While you can always fill in material, there is the danger that you will start writing without really knowing what you are talking about or what you want to say. For example, if you don’t have a solid definition of your key concepts or a sense of how the literature has developed over time, it will be difficult to make coherent scholarly claims about your topic.

There is no magical point at which one is ready to write. As you consider whether you are ready, it may be useful to ask yourself these questions:

• How will my literature review be organized?
• What section headings will I be using?
• How do the various studies relate to each other?
• What contributions do they make to the field?
• Where are the gaps or limitations in existing research?
• And finally, but most importantly, how does my own research fit into what has already been done?

The problem statement

Scholarly works often begin with a problem statement, which serves two functions. First, it establishes why your topic is a social problem worth studying. Second, it pulls your reader into the literature review. Who would want to read about something unimportant?

A problem statement generally answers the following questions, though these are far from exhaustive:

• Why is this an important problem to study?
• How many people are affected by this problem?
• How does this problem impact other social issues relevant to social work?
• Why is your target population an important one to study?

A strong problem statement, like the rest of your literature review, should be filled with empirical results, theory, and arguments based on the extant literature. A research proposal differs significantly from other more reflective essays you’ve likely completed during your social work studies. If your topic were domestic violence in rural Appalachia, I’m sure you could come up with answers to the above questions without looking at a single source. However, the purpose of the literature review is not to test your intuition, personal experience, or empathy. Instead, research methods are about gaining specific and articulable knowledge to inform action. With a problem statement, you can take a “boring” topic like the color of rooms used in an inpatient psychiatric facility, transportation patterns in major cities, or the materials used to manufacture baby bottles, and help others see the topic as you see it—an important part of the social world that impacts social work practice.

The structure of a literature review

In general, the problem statement belongs at the beginning of the literature review. We usually advise students to spend no more than a paragraph or two for a problem statement. For the rest of your literature review, there is no set formula by which it needs to be organized. However, a literature review generally follows the format of any other essay—Introduction, Body, and Conclusion.

The introduction to the literature review contains a statement or statements about the overall topic. At a minimum, the introduction should define or identify the general topic, issue, or area of concern. You might consider presenting historical background, mentioning the results of a seminal study, and providing definitions of important terms. The introduction may also point to overall trends in what has been previously published on the topic or on conflicts in theory, methodology, evidence, conclusions, or gaps in research and scholarship. We also suggest putting in a few sentences that walk the reader through the rest of the literature review. Highlight your main arguments from the body of the literature review and preview your conclusion. An introduction should let the reader know what to expect from the rest of your review.

The body of your literature review is where you demonstrate your synthesis and analysis of the literature. Again, do not just summarize the literature. We would also caution against organizing your literature review by source—that is, one paragraph for source A, one paragraph for source B, etc. That structure will likely provide an adequate summary of the literature you’ve found, but it would give you almost no synthesis of the literature. That approach doesn’t tell your reader how to put those facts together, it doesn’t highlight points of agreement or contention, or how each study builds on the work of others. In short, it does not demonstrate critical thinking.

Organize your review by argument

Instead, use your outlines and notes as a guide what you have to say about the important topics you need to cover. Literature reviews are written from the perspective of an expert in that field. After an exhaustive literature review, you should feel as though you are able to make strong claims about what is true—so make them! There is no need to hide behind “I believe” or “I think.” Put your voice out in front, loud and proud! But make sure you have facts and sources that back up your claims.

I’ve used the term “ argument ” here in a specific way. An argument in writing means more than simply disagreeing with what someone else said, as this classic Monty Python sketch demonstrates. Toulman, Rieke, and Janik (1984) identify six elements of an argument:

• Claim: the thesis statement—what you are trying to prove
• Grounds: theoretical or empirical evidence that supports your claim
• Warrant: your reasoning (rule or principle) connecting the claim and its grounds
• Backing: further facts used to support or legitimize the warrant
• Qualifier: acknowledging that the argument may not be true for all cases
• Rebuttal: considering both sides (as cited in Burnette, 2012) [1]

Let’s walk through an example. If I were writing a literature review on a negative income tax, a policy in which people in poverty receive an unconditional cash stipend from the government each month equal to the federal poverty level, I would want to lay out the following:

• Claim: the negative income tax is superior to other forms of anti-poverty assistance.
• Grounds: data comparing negative income tax recipients to people receiving anti-poverty assistance in existing programs, theory supporting a negative income tax, data from evaluations of existing anti-poverty programs, etc.
• Warrant: cash-based programs like the negative income tax are superior to existing anti-poverty programs because they allow the recipient greater self-determination over how to spend their money.
• Backing: data demonstrating the beneficial effects of self-determination on people in poverty.
• Qualifier: the negative income tax does not provide taxpayers and voters with enough control to make sure people in poverty are not wasting financial assistance on frivolous items.
• Rebuttal: policy should be about empowering the oppressed, not protecting the taxpayer, and there are ways of addressing taxpayer spending concerns through policy design.

Like any effective argument, your literature review must have some kind of structure. For example, it might begin by describing a phenomenon in a general way along with several studies that provide some detail, then describing two or more competing theories of the phenomenon, and finally presenting a hypothesis to test one or more of the theories. Or, it might describe one phenomenon, then describe another that seems inconsistent with the first, then propose a theory that resolves the inconsistency, and finally present a hypothesis to test that theory. In applied research, it might describe a phenomenon or theory, then describe how that phenomenon or theory applies to some important real-world situation, and finally, may suggest a way to test whether it does, in fact, apply to that situation.

Use signposts

Another important issue is  signposting . It may not be a term you are familiar with, but you are likely familiar with the concept. Signposting refers to the words used to identify the organization and structure of your literature review to your reader. The most basic form of signposting is using a topic sentence at the beginning of each paragraph. A topic sentence introduces the argument you plan to make in that paragraph. For example, you might start a paragraph stating, “There is strong disagreement in the literature as to whether psychedelic drugs cause people to develop psychotic disorders, or whether psychotic disorders cause people to use psychedelic drugs.” Within that paragraph, your reader would likely assume you will present evidence for both arguments. The concluding sentence of your paragraph should address the topic sentence, discussing how the facts and arguments from the paragraph you’ve written support a specific conclusion. To continue with our example, I might say, “There is likely a reciprocal effect in which both the use of psychedelic drugs worsens pre-psychotic symptoms and worsening psychosis increases the desire to use psychedelic drugs.”

Signposting also involves using headings and subheadings. Your literature review will use APA formatting, which means you need to follow their rules for bolding, capitalization, italicization, and indentation of headings. Headings help your reader understand the structure of your literature review. They can also help if the reader gets lost and needs to re-orient themselves within the document. We often tell our students to assume we know nothing (they don’t mind) and need to be shown exactly where they are addressing each part of the literature review. It’s like walking a small child around, telling them “First we’ll do this, then we’ll do that, and when we’re done, we’ll know this!”

Another way to use signposting is to open each paragraph with a sentence that links the topic of the paragraph with the one before it. Alternatively, one could end each paragraph with a sentence that links it with the next paragraph. For example, imagine we wanted to link a paragraph about barriers to accessing healthcare with one about the relationship between the patient and physician. We could use a transition sentence like this: “Even if patients overcome these barriers to accessing care, the physician-patient relationship can create new barriers to positive health outcomes.” A transition sentence like this builds a connection between two distinct topics. Transition sentences are also useful within paragraphs. They tell the reader how to consider one piece of information in light of previous information. Even simple transitional words like ‘however’ and ‘similarly’ can help demonstrate critical thinking and link each building block of your argument together.

Many beginning researchers have difficulty incorporating transitions into their writing. Let’s look at an example. Instead of beginning a sentence or paragraph by launching into a description of a study, such as “Williams (2004) found that…,” it is better to start by indicating something about why you are describing this particular study. Here are some simple examples:

• Another example of this phenomenon comes from the work of Williams (2004)…
• Williams (2004) offers one explanation of this phenomenon…
• An alternative perspective has been provided by Williams (2004)…

Now that we know to use signposts, the natural question is “What goes on the signposts?” First, it is important to start with an outline of the main points that you want to make, organized in the order you want to make them. The basic structure of your argument should then be apparent from the outline itself. Unfortunately, there is no formula we can give you that will work for everyone, but we can provide some general pointers on structuring your literature review.

The literature review tends to move from general to more specific ideas. You can build a review by identifying areas of consensus and areas of disagreement. You may choose to present historical studies—preferably seminal studies that are of significant importance—and close with the most recent research. Another approach is to start with the most distantly related facts and literature and then report on those most closely related to your research question. You could also compare and contrast valid approaches, features, characteristics, theories – that is, one approach, then a second approach, followed by a third approach.

Here are some additional tips for writing the body of your literature review:

• Start broad and then narrow down to more specific information.
• When appropriate, cite two or more sources for a single point, but avoid long strings of references for a single idea.
• Use quotes sparingly. Quotations for definitions are okay, but reserve quotes for when something is said so well you couldn’t possible phrase it differently. Never use quotes for statistics.
• Paraphrase when you need to relay the specific details within an article
• Include only the aspects of the study that are relevant to your literature review. Don’t insert extra facts about a study just to take up space.
• Avoid reflective, personal writing. It is traditional to avoid using first-person language (I, we, us, etc.).
• Avoid informal language like contractions, idioms, and rhetorical questions.
• Note any sections of your review that lack citations from the literature. Your arguments need to be based in empirical or theoretical facts. Do not approach this like a reflective journal entry.
• Point out consistent findings and emphasize stronger studies over weaker ones.
• Point out important strengths and weaknesses of research studies, as well as contradictions and inconsistent findings.
• Implications and suggestions for further research (where there are gaps in the current literature) should be specific.

The conclusion should summarize your literature review, discuss implications, and create a space for further research needed in this area. Your conclusion, like the rest of your literature review, should make a point. What are the important implications of your literature review? How do they inform the question you are trying to answer?

You should consult with your professor and the course syllabus about the final structure your literature review should take. Here is an example of one possible structure:

• Establish the importance of the topic
• Number and type of people affected
• Seriousness of the impact
• Physical, psychological, economic, social, or spiritual consequences of the problem
• Definitions of key terms
• Supporting evidence
• Common findings across studies, gaps in the literature
• Research question(s) and hypothesis(es)

Editing your literature review

Literature reviews are more than a summary of the publications you find on a topic. As you have seen in this brief introduction, literature reviews represent a very specific type of research, analysis, and writing. We will explore these topics further in upcoming chapters. As you begin your literature review, here are some common errors to avoid:

• Accepting a researcher’s finding as valid without evaluating methodology and data
• Ignoring contrary findings and alternative interpretations
• Using findings that are not clearly related to your own study or using findings that are too general
• Dedicating insufficient time to literature searching
• Reporting statistical results from a single study, rather than synthesizing the results of multiple studies to provide a comprehensive view of the literature on a topic
• Relying too heavily on secondary sources
• Overusing quotations
• Not justifying arguments using specific facts or theories from the literature

For your literature review, remember that your goal is to construct an argument for the importance of your research question. As you start editing your literature review, make sure it is balanced. Accurately report common findings, areas where studies contradict each other, new theories or perspectives, and how studies cause us to reaffirm or challenge our understanding of your topic.

It is acceptable to argue that the balance of the research supports the existence of a phenomenon or is consistent with a theory (and that is usually the best that researchers in social work can hope for), but it is not acceptable to ignore contradictory evidence. A large part of what makes a research question interesting is uncertainty about its answer (University of Minnesota, 2016). [2]

In addition to subjectivity and bias, writer’s block can obstruct the completion of your literature review. Often times, writer’s block can stem from confusing the creating and editing parts of the writing process. Many writers often start by simply trying to type out what they want to say, regardless of how good it is. Author Anne Lamott (1995) [3] terms these “shitty first drafts,” and we all write them. They are a natural and important part of the writing process.

Even if you have a detailed outline from which to work, the words are not going to fall into place perfectly the first time you start writing. You should consider turning off the editing and critiquing part of your brain for a while and allow your thoughts to flow. Don’t worry about putting a correctly formatted internal citation (as long as  you know which source you used there) when you first write. Just get the information out. Only after you’ve reached a natural stopping point might you go back and edit your draft for grammar, APA style, organization, flow, and more. Divorcing the writing and editing process can go a long way to addressing writer’s block—as can picking a topic about which you have something to say!

As you are editing, keep in mind these questions adapted from Green (2012): [4]

• Content: Have I clearly stated the main idea or purpose of the paper? Is the thesis or focus clearly presented and appropriate for the reader?
• Organization: How well is it structured? Is the organization spelled out and easy to follow for the reader ?
• Flow: Is there a logical flow from section to section, paragraph to paragraph, sentence to sentence? Are there transitions between and within paragraphs that link ideas together?
• Development: Have I validated the main idea with supporting material? Are supporting data sufficient? Does the conclusion match the introduction?
• Form: Are there any APA style issues, redundancy, problematic wording and terminology (always know the definition of any word you use!), flawed sentence constructions and selection, spelling, and punctuation?

Social workers use the APA style guide to format and structure their literature reviews. Most students know APA style only as it relates to internal and external citations. If you are confused about them, consult this amazing APA style guide from the University of Texas-Arlington library. Your university’s library likely has resources they created to help you with APA style, and you can meet with a librarian or your professor to talk about formatting questions you have. Make sure you budget in a few hours at the end of each project to build a correctly formatted references page and check your internal citations. The highest quality online source of information on APA style is the APA style blog, where you can search questions and answers from the

Of course, APA style is about much more than knowing there is a period after “et al.” or citing the location a book was published. APA style is also about what the profession considers to be good writing. If you haven’t picked up an APA publication manual because you use citation generators, know that I did the same thing when I was in school. Purchasing the APA manual can help you with a common problem we hear about from students. Every professor (and every website about APA style) seems to have their own peculiar idea of “correct” APA style that you can, if needed, demonstrate is not accurate.

• A literature review is not a book report. Do not organize it by article, with one paragraph for each source in your references. Instead, organize it based on the key ideas and arguments.
• The problem statement draws the reader into your topic by highlighting the importance of the topic to social work and to society overall.
• Signposting is an important component of academic writing that helps your reader follow the structure of your argument and of your literature review.
• Transitions demonstrate critical thinking and help guide your reader through your arguments.
• Editing and writing are separate processes.
• Consult with an APA style guide or a librarian to help you format your paper.

Look at your professor’s prompt for the literature review component of your research proposal (or if you don’t have one, use the example question provided in this section).

• Write 2-3 facts you would use to address each question or component in the prompt.
• Reflect on which questions you have a lot of information about and which you need to gather more information about in order to answer adequately.

Outline the structure of your literature review using your concept map from Section 5.2 as a guide.

• Identify the key arguments you will make and how they are related to each other.
• Reflect on topic sentences and concluding sentences you would use for each argument.
• Burnett, D. (2012). Inscribing knowledge: Writing research in social work. In W. Green & B. L. Simon (Eds.),  The Columbia guide to social work writing  (pp. 65-82). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. ↵
• University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing. (2016). This is a derivative of  Research Methods in Psychology  by a publisher who has requested that they and the original author not receive attribution, which was originally released and is used under CC BY-NC-SA. This work, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a  Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License ↵
• Lamott, A. (1995). Bird by bird: Some instructions on writing and life . New York, NY: Penguin. ↵
• Green, W. Writing strategies for academic papers. In W. Green & B. L. Simon (Eds.),  The Columbia guide to social work writing  (pp. 25-47). New York, NY: Columbia University Press. ↵

a statement about what you think is true backed up by evidence and critical thinking

the words used to identify the organization and structure of your literature review to your reader

what a researcher hopes to accomplish with their study

Scientific Inquiry in Social Work (2nd Edition) Copyright © 2020 by Matthew DeCarlo, Cory Cummings, and Kate Agnelli is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

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

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

Table of Contents

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

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

Frequently asked questions 

What is a literature review .

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Literature review example 

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

Literature Review on Climate Change Impacts on Biodiversity:  

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

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

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

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

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

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

How to write a good literature review 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Conducting a literature review 

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

Choose a Topic and Define the Research Question:  

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

Decide on the Scope of Your Review:  

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

Select Databases for Searches:  

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

Conduct Searches and Keep Track:  

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

Review the Literature:  

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

Organize and Write Your Literature Review:  

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

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

How to write a literature review faster with Paperpal?  

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

Here’s how to use the Research feature:  

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References 

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

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

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

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

Related Reads:

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

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

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

15 Steps to Good Research

• Define and articulate a research question (formulate a research hypothesis). How to Write a Thesis Statement (Indiana University)
• Identify possible sources of information in many types and formats. Georgetown University Library's Research & Course Guides
• Judge the scope of the project.
• Reevaluate the research question based on the nature and extent of information available and the parameters of the research project.
• Select the most appropriate investigative methods (surveys, interviews, experiments) and research tools (periodical indexes, databases, websites).
• Plan the research project. Writing Anxiety (UNC-Chapel Hill) Strategies for Academic Writing (SUNY Empire State College)
• Retrieve information using a variety of methods (draw on a repertoire of skills).
• Refine the search strategy as necessary.
• Write and organize useful notes and keep track of sources. Taking Notes from Research Reading (University of Toronto) Use a citation manager: Zotero or Refworks
• Evaluate sources using appropriate criteria. Evaluating Internet Sources
• Synthesize, analyze and integrate information sources and prior knowledge. Georgetown University Writing Center
• Revise hypothesis as necessary.
• Use information effectively for a specific purpose.
• Understand such issues as plagiarism, ownership of information (implications of copyright to some extent), and costs of information. Georgetown University Honor Council Copyright Basics (Purdue University) How to Recognize Plagiarism: Tutorials and Tests from Indiana University
• Cite properly and give credit for sources of ideas. MLA Bibliographic Form (7th edition, 2009) MLA Bibliographic Form (8th edition, 2016) Turabian Bibliographic Form: Footnote/Endnote Turabian Bibliographic Form: Parenthetical Reference Use a citation manager: Zotero or Refworks

Adapted from the Association of Colleges and Research Libraries "Objectives for Information Literacy Instruction" , which are more complete and include outcomes. See also the broader "Information Literacy Competency Standards for Higher Education."

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
• PLoS Comput Biol
• v.9(7); 2013 Jul

Ten Simple Rules for Writing a Literature Review

Marco pautasso.

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

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

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

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

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

Rule 1: Define a Topic and Audience

How to choose which topic to review? There are so many issues in contemporary science that you could spend a lifetime of attending conferences and reading the literature just pondering what to review. On the one hand, if you take several years to choose, several other people may have had the same idea in the meantime. On the other hand, only a well-considered topic is likely to lead to a brilliant literature review [8] . The topic must at least be:

• interesting to you (ideally, you should have come across a series of recent papers related to your line of work that call for a critical summary),
• an important aspect of the field (so that many readers will be interested in the review and there will be enough material to write it), and
• a well-defined issue (otherwise you could potentially include thousands of publications, which would make the review unhelpful).

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

Rule 2: Search and Re-search the Literature

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rule 3: Take Notes While Reading

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Rule 6: Be Critical and Consistent

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

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

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

Rule 7: Find a Logical Structure

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

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

Rule 8: Make Use of Feedback

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Acknowledgments

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

Funding Statement

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

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base
• Research paper

Writing a Research Paper Introduction | Step-by-Step Guide

Published on September 24, 2022 by Jack Caulfield . Revised on September 5, 2024.

The introduction to a research paper is where you set up your topic and approach for the reader. It has several key goals:

• Present your topic and get the reader interested
• Provide background or summarize existing research
• Position your own approach
• Detail your specific research problem and problem statement
• Give an overview of the paper’s structure

The introduction looks slightly different depending on whether your paper presents the results of original empirical research or constructs an argument by engaging with a variety of sources.

The five steps in this article will help you put together an effective introduction for either type of research paper.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

Step 1: introduce your topic, step 2: describe the background, step 3: establish your research problem, step 4: specify your objective(s), step 5: map out your paper, research paper introduction examples, frequently asked questions about the research paper introduction.

The first job of the introduction is to tell the reader what your topic is and why it’s interesting or important. This is generally accomplished with a strong opening hook.

The hook is a striking opening sentence that clearly conveys the relevance of your topic. Think of an interesting fact or statistic, a strong statement, a question, or a brief anecdote that will get the reader wondering about your topic.

For example, the following could be an effective hook for an argumentative paper about the environmental impact of cattle farming:

A more empirical paper investigating the relationship of Instagram use with body image issues in adolescent girls might use the following hook:

Don’t feel that your hook necessarily has to be deeply impressive or creative. Clarity and relevance are still more important than catchiness. The key thing is to guide the reader into your topic and situate your ideas.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

This part of the introduction differs depending on what approach your paper is taking.

In a more argumentative paper, you’ll explore some general background here. In a more empirical paper, this is the place to review previous research and establish how yours fits in.

Argumentative paper: Background information

After you’ve caught your reader’s attention, specify a bit more, providing context and narrowing down your topic.

Provide only the most relevant background information. The introduction isn’t the place to get too in-depth; if more background is essential to your paper, it can appear in the body .

Empirical paper: Describing previous research

For a paper describing original research, you’ll instead provide an overview of the most relevant research that has already been conducted. This is a sort of miniature literature review —a sketch of the current state of research into your topic, boiled down to a few sentences.

This should be informed by genuine engagement with the literature. Your search can be less extensive than in a full literature review, but a clear sense of the relevant research is crucial to inform your own work.

Begin by establishing the kinds of research that have been done, and end with limitations or gaps in the research that you intend to respond to.

The next step is to clarify how your own research fits in and what problem it addresses.

Argumentative paper: Emphasize importance

In an argumentative research paper, you can simply state the problem you intend to discuss, and what is original or important about your argument.

Empirical paper: Relate to the literature

In an empirical research paper, try to lead into the problem on the basis of your discussion of the literature. Think in terms of these questions:

• What research gap is your work intended to fill?
• What limitations in previous work does it address?
• What contribution to knowledge does it make?

You can make the connection between your problem and the existing research using phrases like the following.

Now you’ll get into the specifics of what you intend to find out or express in your research paper.

The way you frame your research objectives varies. An argumentative paper presents a thesis statement, while an empirical paper generally poses a research question (sometimes with a hypothesis as to the answer).

Argumentative paper: Thesis statement

The thesis statement expresses the position that the rest of the paper will present evidence and arguments for. It can be presented in one or two sentences, and should state your position clearly and directly, without providing specific arguments for it at this point.

Empirical paper: Research question and hypothesis

The research question is the question you want to answer in an empirical research paper.

Present your research question clearly and directly, with a minimum of discussion at this point. The rest of the paper will be taken up with discussing and investigating this question; here you just need to express it.

A research question can be framed either directly or indirectly.

• This study set out to answer the following question: What effects does daily use of Instagram have on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls?
• We investigated the effects of daily Instagram use on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls.

If your research involved testing hypotheses , these should be stated along with your research question. They are usually presented in the past tense, since the hypothesis will already have been tested by the time you are writing up your paper.

For example, the following hypothesis might respond to the research question above:

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

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

Try for free

The final part of the introduction is often dedicated to a brief overview of the rest of the paper.

In a paper structured using the standard scientific “introduction, methods, results, discussion” format, this isn’t always necessary. But if your paper is structured in a less predictable way, it’s important to describe the shape of it for the reader.

If included, the overview should be concise, direct, and written in the present tense.

• This paper will first discuss several examples of survey-based research into adolescent social media use, then will go on to …
• This paper first discusses several examples of survey-based research into adolescent social media use, then goes on to …

Scribbr’s paraphrasing tool can help you rephrase sentences to give a clear overview of your arguments.

Full examples of research paper introductions are shown in the tabs below: one for an argumentative paper, the other for an empirical paper.

• Argumentative paper
• Empirical paper

Are cows responsible for climate change? A recent study (RIVM, 2019) shows that cattle farmers account for two thirds of agricultural nitrogen emissions in the Netherlands. These emissions result from nitrogen in manure, which can degrade into ammonia and enter the atmosphere. The study’s calculations show that agriculture is the main source of nitrogen pollution, accounting for 46% of the country’s total emissions. By comparison, road traffic and households are responsible for 6.1% each, the industrial sector for 1%. While efforts are being made to mitigate these emissions, policymakers are reluctant to reckon with the scale of the problem. The approach presented here is a radical one, but commensurate with the issue. This paper argues that the Dutch government must stimulate and subsidize livestock farmers, especially cattle farmers, to transition to sustainable vegetable farming. It first establishes the inadequacy of current mitigation measures, then discusses the various advantages of the results proposed, and finally addresses potential objections to the plan on economic grounds.

The rise of social media has been accompanied by a sharp increase in the prevalence of body image issues among women and girls. This correlation has received significant academic attention: Various empirical studies have been conducted into Facebook usage among adolescent girls (Tiggermann & Slater, 2013; Meier & Gray, 2014). These studies have consistently found that the visual and interactive aspects of the platform have the greatest influence on body image issues. Despite this, highly visual social media (HVSM) such as Instagram have yet to be robustly researched. This paper sets out to address this research gap. We investigated the effects of daily Instagram use on the prevalence of body image issues among adolescent girls. It was hypothesized that daily Instagram use would be associated with an increase in body image concerns and a decrease in self-esteem ratings.

The introduction of a research paper includes several key elements:

• A hook to catch the reader’s interest
• Relevant background on the topic
• Details of your research problem

and your problem statement

• A thesis statement or research question
• Sometimes an overview of the paper

Don’t feel that you have to write the introduction first. The introduction is often one of the last parts of the research paper you’ll write, along with the conclusion.

This is because it can be easier to introduce your paper once you’ve already written the body ; you may not have the clearest idea of your arguments until you’ve written them, and things can change during the writing process .

The way you present your research problem in your introduction varies depending on the nature of your research paper . A research paper that presents a sustained argument will usually encapsulate this argument in a thesis statement .

A research paper designed to present the results of empirical research tends to present a research question that it seeks to answer. It may also include a hypothesis —a prediction that will be confirmed or disproved by your research.

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.

Caulfield, J. (2024, September 05). Writing a Research Paper Introduction | Step-by-Step Guide. Scribbr. Retrieved September 16, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/research-paper/research-paper-introduction/

Is this article helpful?

Jack Caulfield

Other students also liked, writing strong research questions | criteria & examples, writing a research paper conclusion | step-by-step guide, research paper format | apa, mla, & chicago templates, what is your plagiarism score.

• Resources Home 🏠
• Try SciSpace Copilot
• Search research papers
• Add Copilot Extension
• Try AI Detector
• Try Paraphraser
• Try Citation Generator
• April Papers
• June Papers
• July Papers

How to Write an Effective Background of the Study: A Comprehensive Guide

Table of Contents

The background of the study in a research paper offers a clear context, highlighting why the research is essential and the problem it aims to address.

As a researcher, this foundational section is essential for you to chart the course of your study, Moreover, it allows readers to understand the importance and path of your research.

Whether in academic communities or to the general public, a well-articulated background aids in communicating the essence of the research effectively.

While it may seem straightforward, crafting an effective background requires a blend of clarity, precision, and relevance. Therefore, this article aims to be your guide, offering insights into:

• Understanding the concept of the background of the study.
• Learning how to craft a compelling background effectively.
• Identifying and sidestepping common pitfalls in writing the background.
• Exploring practical examples that bring the theory to life.
• Enhancing both your writing and reading of academic papers.

Keeping these compelling insights in mind, let's delve deeper into the details of the empirical background of the study, exploring its definition, distinctions, and the art of writing it effectively.

What is the background of the study?

The background of the study is placed at the beginning of a research paper. It provides the context, circumstances, and history that led to the research problem or topic being explored.

It offers readers a snapshot of the existing knowledge on the topic and the reasons that spurred your current research.

When crafting the background of your study, consider the following questions.

• What's the context of your research?
• Which previous research will you refer to?
• Are there any knowledge gaps in the existing relevant literature?
• How will you justify the need for your current research?
• Have you concisely presented the research question or problem?

In a typical research paper structure, after presenting the background, the introduction section follows. The introduction delves deeper into the specific objectives of the research and often outlines the structure or main points that the paper will cover.

Together, they create a cohesive starting point, ensuring readers are well-equipped to understand the subsequent sections of the research paper.

While the background of the study and the introduction section of the research manuscript may seem similar and sometimes even overlap, each serves a unique purpose in the research narrative.

Difference between background and introduction

A well-written background of the study and introduction are preliminary sections of a research paper and serve distinct purposes.

Here’s a detailed tabular comparison between the two of them.

What is the relevance of the background of the study?

It is necessary for you to provide your readers with the background of your research. Without this, readers may grapple with questions such as: Why was this specific research topic chosen? What led to this decision? Why is this study relevant? Is it worth their time?

Such uncertainties can deter them from fully engaging with your study, leading to the rejection of your research paper. Additionally, this can diminish its impact in the academic community, and reduce its potential for real-world application or policy influence .

To address these concerns and offer clarity, the background section plays a pivotal role in research papers.

The background of the study in research is important as it:

• Provides context: It offers readers a clear picture of the existing knowledge, helping them understand where the current research fits in.
• Highlights relevance: By detailing the reasons for the research, it underscores the study's significance and its potential impact.
• Guides the narrative: The background shapes the narrative flow of the paper, ensuring a logical progression from what's known to what the research aims to uncover.
• Enhances engagement: A well-crafted background piques the reader's interest, encouraging them to delve deeper into the research paper.
• Aids in comprehension: By setting the scenario, it aids readers in better grasping the research objectives, methodologies, and findings.

How to write the background of the study in a research paper?

The journey of presenting a compelling argument begins with the background study. This section holds the power to either captivate or lose the reader's interest.

An effectively written background not only provides context but also sets the tone for the entire research paper. It's the bridge that connects a broad topic to a specific research question, guiding readers through the logic behind the study.

But how does one craft a background of the study that resonates, informs, and engages?

Here, we’ll discuss how to write an impactful background study, ensuring your research stands out and captures the attention it deserves.

Identify the research problem

The first step is to start pinpointing the specific issue or gap you're addressing. This should be a significant and relevant problem in your field.

A well-defined problem is specific, relevant, and significant to your field. It should resonate with both experts and readers.

Here’s more on how to write an effective research problem .

Provide context

Here, you need to provide a broader perspective, illustrating how your research aligns with or contributes to the overarching context or the wider field of study. A comprehensive context is grounded in facts, offers multiple perspectives, and is relatable.

In addition to stating facts, you should weave a story that connects key concepts from the past, present, and potential future research. For instance, consider the following approach.

• Offer a brief history of the topic, highlighting major milestones or turning points that have shaped the current landscape.
• Discuss contemporary developments or current trends that provide relevant information to your research problem. This could include technological advancements, policy changes, or shifts in societal attitudes.
• Highlight the views of different stakeholders. For a topic like sustainable agriculture, this could mean discussing the perspectives of farmers, environmentalists, policymakers, and consumers.
• If relevant, compare and contrast global trends with local conditions and circumstances. This can offer readers a more holistic understanding of the topic.

Literature review

For this step, you’ll deep dive into the existing literature on the same topic. It's where you explore what scholars, researchers, and experts have already discovered or discussed about your topic.

Conducting a thorough literature review isn't just a recap of past works. To elevate its efficacy, it's essential to analyze the methods, outcomes, and intricacies of prior research work, demonstrating a thorough engagement with the existing body of knowledge.

• Instead of merely listing past research study, delve into their methodologies, findings, and limitations. Highlight groundbreaking studies and those that had contrasting results.
• Try to identify patterns. Look for recurring themes or trends in the literature. Are there common conclusions or contentious points?
• The next step would be to connect the dots. Show how different pieces of research relate to each other. This can help in understanding the evolution of thought on the topic.

By showcasing what's already known, you can better highlight the background of the study in research.

Highlight the research gap

This step involves identifying the unexplored areas or unanswered questions in the existing literature. Your research seeks to address these gaps, providing new insights or answers.

A clear research gap shows you've thoroughly engaged with existing literature and found an area that needs further exploration.

How can you efficiently highlight the research gap?

• Find the overlooked areas. Point out topics or angles that haven't been adequately addressed.
• Highlight questions that have emerged due to recent developments or changing circumstances.
• Identify areas where insights from other fields might be beneficial but haven't been explored yet.

State your objectives

Here, it’s all about laying out your game plan — What do you hope to achieve with your research? You need to mention a clear objective that’s specific, actionable, and directly tied to the research gap.

How to state your objectives?

• List the primary questions guiding your research.
• If applicable, state any hypotheses or predictions you aim to test.
• Specify what you hope to achieve, whether it's new insights, solutions, or methodologies.

Discuss the significance

This step describes your 'why'. Why is your research important? What broader implications does it have?

The significance of “why” should be both theoretical (adding to the existing literature) and practical (having real-world implications).

How do we effectively discuss the significance?

• Discuss how your research adds to the existing body of knowledge.
• Highlight how your findings could be applied in real-world scenarios, from policy changes to on-ground practices.
• Point out how your research could pave the way for further studies or open up new areas of exploration.

Summarize your points

A concise summary acts as a bridge, smoothly transitioning readers from the background to the main body of the paper. This step is a brief recap, ensuring that readers have grasped the foundational concepts.

How to summarize your study?

• Revisit the key points discussed, from the research problem to its significance.
• Prepare the reader for the subsequent sections, ensuring they understand the research's direction.

Include examples for better understanding

Research and come up with real-world or hypothetical examples to clarify complex concepts or to illustrate the practical applications of your research. Relevant examples make abstract ideas tangible, aiding comprehension.

How to include an effective example of the background of the study?

• Use past events or scenarios to explain concepts.
• Craft potential scenarios to demonstrate the implications of your findings.
• Use comparisons to simplify complex ideas, making them more relatable.

Crafting a compelling background of the study in research is about striking the right balance between providing essential context, showcasing your comprehensive understanding of the existing literature, and highlighting the unique value of your research .

While writing the background of the study, keep your readers at the forefront of your mind. Every piece of information, every example, and every objective should be geared toward helping them understand and appreciate your research.

How to avoid mistakes in the background of the study in research?

To write a well-crafted background of the study, you should be aware of the following potential research pitfalls .

• Stay away from ambiguity. Always assume that your reader might not be familiar with intricate details about your topic.
• Avoid discussing unrelated themes. Stick to what's directly relevant to your research problem.
• Ensure your background is well-organized. Information should flow logically, making it easy for readers to follow.
• While it's vital to provide context, avoid overwhelming the reader with excessive details that might not be directly relevant to your research problem.
• Ensure you've covered the most significant and relevant studies i` n your field. Overlooking key pieces of literature can make your background seem incomplete.
• Aim for a balanced presentation of facts, and avoid showing overt bias or presenting only one side of an argument.
• While academic paper often involves specialized terms, ensure they're adequately explained or use simpler alternatives when possible.
• Every claim or piece of information taken from existing literature should be appropriately cited. Failing to do so can lead to issues of plagiarism.
• Avoid making the background too lengthy. While thoroughness is appreciated, it should not come at the expense of losing the reader's interest. Maybe prefer to keep it to one-two paragraphs long.
• Especially in rapidly evolving fields, it's crucial to ensure that your literature review section is up-to-date and includes the latest research.

Example of an effective background of the study

Let's consider a topic: "The Impact of Online Learning on Student Performance." The ideal background of the study section for this topic would be as follows.

In the last decade, the rise of the internet has revolutionized many sectors, including education. Online learning platforms, once a supplementary educational tool, have now become a primary mode of instruction for many institutions worldwide. With the recent global events, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, there has been a rapid shift from traditional classroom learning to online modes, making it imperative to understand its effects on student performance.

Previous studies have explored various facets of online learning, from its accessibility to its flexibility. However, there is a growing need to assess its direct impact on student outcomes. While some educators advocate for its benefits, citing the convenience and vast resources available, others express concerns about potential drawbacks, such as reduced student engagement and the challenges of self-discipline.

This research aims to delve deeper into this debate, evaluating the true impact of online learning on student performance.

Why is this example considered as an effective background section of a research paper?

This background section example effectively sets the context by highlighting the rise of online learning and its increased relevance due to recent global events. It references prior research on the topic, indicating a foundation built on existing knowledge.

By presenting both the potential advantages and concerns of online learning, it establishes a balanced view, leading to the clear purpose of the study: to evaluate the true impact of online learning on student performance.

As we've explored, writing an effective background of the study in research requires clarity, precision, and a keen understanding of both the broader landscape and the specific details of your topic.

From identifying the research problem, providing context, reviewing existing literature to highlighting research gaps and stating objectives, each step is pivotal in shaping the narrative of your research. And while there are best practices to follow, it's equally crucial to be aware of the pitfalls to avoid.

Remember, writing or refining the background of your study is essential to engage your readers, familiarize them with the research context, and set the ground for the insights your research project will unveil.

Drawing from all the important details, insights and guidance shared, you're now in a strong position to craft a background of the study that not only informs but also engages and resonates with your readers.

Now that you've a clear understanding of what the background of the study aims to achieve, the natural progression is to delve into the next crucial component — write an effective introduction section of a research paper. Read here .

Frequently Asked Questions

The background of the study should include a clear context for the research, references to relevant previous studies, identification of knowledge gaps, justification for the current research, a concise overview of the research problem or question, and an indication of the study's significance or potential impact.

The background of the study is written to provide readers with a clear understanding of the context, significance, and rationale behind the research. It offers a snapshot of existing knowledge on the topic, highlights the relevance of the study, and sets the stage for the research questions and objectives. It ensures that readers can grasp the importance of the research and its place within the broader field of study.

The background of the study is a section in a research paper that provides context, circumstances, and history leading to the research problem or topic being explored. It presents existing knowledge on the topic and outlines the reasons that spurred the current research, helping readers understand the research's foundation and its significance in the broader academic landscape.

The number of paragraphs in the background of the study can vary based on the complexity of the topic and the depth of the context required. Typically, it might range from 3 to 5 paragraphs, but in more detailed or complex research papers, it could be longer. The key is to ensure that all relevant information is presented clearly and concisely, without unnecessary repetition.

You might also like

Papel de la IA en la revisión sistemática de la literatura

Rôle de l'IA dans l'analyse systématique de la littérature

Die Rolle von AI bei der systematischen Literaturrecherche

How to Write a Research Paper: Developing a Research Focus

• Anatomy of a Research Paper
• Developing a Research Focus
• Background Research Tips
• Searching Tips
• Scholarly Journals vs. Popular Journals
• Thesis Statement
• Annotated Bibliography
• Citing Sources
• Evaluating Sources
• Literature Review
• Academic Integrity
• Scholarship as Conversation
• Understanding Fake News
• Data, Information, Knowledge

Developing a Research Question

Developing a Strong Research Topic

Steps for Developing Your Research Focus

The ability to develop a good research topic is an important skill. An instructor may assign you a specific topic, but most often instructors require you to select your own topic of interest. When deciding on a topic, there are a few things you will need to do:

• Brainstorm for ideas.
• Choose a topic that will enable you to read and understand the articles and books you find.
• Ensure that the topic is manageable and that material is available.
• Make a list of key words.
• Be flexible. You may have to broaden or narrow your topic to fit your assignment or the sources you find.

Selecting a good topic may not be easy.  It must be narrow and focused enough to be interesting, yet broad enough to find adequate information. Before selecting your final topic, make sure you know what your final project should look like. Each class or instructor will likely require a different format or style of research project.

1. Brainstorming for a Topic

Choose a topic that interests you. Use the following questions to help generate topic ideas.

• Do you have a strong opinion on a current social or political controversy?
• Did you read or see a news story recently that has piqued your interest or made you angry or anxious?
• Do you have a personal issue, problem, or interest that you would like to know more about?
• Is there an aspect of a class that you are interested in learning more about?

Write down any key words or concepts that may be of interest to you. These terms can be helpful in your searching and used to form a more focused research topic.

Be aware of overused ideas when deciding a topic.  You may wish to avoid topics such as abortion, gun control, teen pregnancy, or suicide unless you feel you have a unique approach to the topic. Ask the instructor for ideas if you feel you are stuck or need additional guidance.

2. Read General Background Information

Read a general encyclopedia article on the top two or three topics you are considering.

Reading a broad summary enables you to get an overview of the topic and see how your idea relates to broader, narrower, and related issues. It also provides a great source for finding words commonly used to describe the topic. These keywords may be very useful to your research later.

If you can't find an article on your topic, try using broader terms and ask for help from a librarian.

The databases here is a good start to find general information. The library's print reference collection can also be useful and is located on the main floor of the library.

3. Focus Your Topic

Keep it manageable and be flexible. If you start doing more research and not finding enough sources that support your thesis, you may need to adjust your topic.

A topic will be very difficult to research if it is too broad or narrow. One way to narrow a broad topic such as "the environment" is to limit your topic.  

Some common ways to limit a topic are by:

• geographic area
• time frame:
• population group

Remember that a topic may be too difficult to research if it is too:

• locally confined - Topics this specific may only be covered in local newspapers and not in scholarly articles.
• recent - If a topic is quite recent, books or journal articles may not be available, but newspaper or magazine articles may. Also, websites related to the topic may or may not be available.
• broadly interdisciplinary - You could be overwhelmed with superficial information.
• popular - You will only find very popular articles about some topics such as sports figures and high-profile celebrities and musicians.

Putting your topic in the form of a question will help you focus on what type of information you want to collect.

If you have any difficulties or questions with focusing your topic, discuss the topic with your instructor or with a librarian.

Tips for Choosing a Topic

Can't think of a topic to research?

Interest : Choose a topic of interest to you and your reader(s); a boring topic translates into a boring paper.

Knowledge : You can be interested in a topic without knowing much about it at the beginning, but it's a good idea to learn a little about it before you begin your research. Read about the issue in a good encyclopedia or a short article to learn more, then go at it in depth. The research process mines new knowledge – you’ll learn as you go!

Breadth of Topic : How broad is the scope of your topic? Too broad a topic is unmanageable -- for example, "The Education of Children" or "The History of Books" or "Computers in Business." A topic that is too narrow and/or trivial, such as "My Favorite Pastime," is uninteresting and extremely difficult to research.

Guidelines : Carefully follow the instructor's guidelines. If none are provided in writing, ask your professor about his or her expectations. Tell your professor what you might write about and ask for feedback and advice. This should help prevent you from selecting an inappropriate topic.

• << Previous: Anatomy of a Research Paper
• Next: Background Research Tips >>
• Last Updated: Apr 4, 2024 5:51 PM
• URL: https://libguide.umary.edu/researchpaper

• Open access
• Published: 02 September 2024

Building a learning health care community in rural and remote areas: a systematic review

• Shabnam Asghari 1 ,
• Jennifer Bent 1 ,
• Ali Modir 1 ,
• Alison MacDonald 1 ,
• Alison Farrell 2 ,
• Cheri Bethune 1 &
• Wendy Graham 1  

BMC Health Services Research volume  24 , Article number:  1013 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

41 Accesses

Metrics details

A Learning Health Care Community (LHCC) is a framework to enhance health care through mutual accountability between the health care system and the community. LHCC components include infrastructure for health-related data capture, care improvement targets, a supportive policy environment, and community engagement. The LHCC involves health care providers, researchers, decision-makers, and community members who work to identify health care needs and address them with evidence-based solutions. The objective of this study was to summarize the barriers and enablers to building an LHCC in rural areas.

A systematic review was conducted by searching electronic databases. Eligibility criteria was determined by the research team. Published literature on LHCCs in rural areas was systematically collected and organized. Screening was completed independently by two authors. Detailed information about rural health care, activities, and barriers and enablers to building an LHCC in rural areas was extracted. Qualitative analysis was used to identify core themes.

Among 8169 identified articles, 25 were eligible. LHCCs aimed to increase collaboration and co-learning between community members and health care providers, integrate community feedback in health care services, and to share information. Main barriers included obtaining adequate funding and participant recruitment. Enablers included meaningful engagement of stakeholders and stakeholder collaboration.

Conclusions

The LHCC is built on a foundation of meaningful use of health data and empowers health care practitioners and community members in informed decision-making. By reducing the gap between knowledge generation and its application to practice, the LHCC has the potential to transform health care delivery in rural areas.

Peer Review reports

Community participation  is known as the collective involvement of people in assessing their needs [ 1 ]. Prior research suggests that community participation in community services and programming is integral to the health of the community and its sustainability, and such participation can yield positive long-term health outcomes [ 2 ]. Community participation in primary and rural health care services has promoted more accessible and relevant services [ 2 , 3 ], and it can result in higher community-member satisfaction with health services [ 4 ]. There is a long tradition of community-member contributions to various health services and preventative health programs [ 5 , 6 , 7 ].

A Learning Health care System (LHS) is a model that ‘draws from the best scientific evidence while tailoring optimal care to a local health care setting to each patient’ [ 8 , 9 ]. As technology advances, so does access to clinical and person-specific data that can inform health care decision making [ 8 ]. An LHS has three core components: (1) foundational elements; (2) care improvement targets; and (3) a supportive policy environment [ 9 ]. Foundational elements include upgrading digital technology to collect data and facilitate data sharing within the health care system. Care improvement targets assist learning and health through clinical decision support tools, patient-centered care, and clinician-community links. A supportive policy environment includes financial incentives that reward high-value care, encourages transparency within the health care system and commitment from leaders. An LHS can lead to many optimal health care characteristics, including engaged patients, appropriate decision supports, aligned governance, and sharing of necessary data; however, adopting an LHS approach has come with an obstacle, to effectively engaging community members to achieve optimum health outcomes.

A Learning Health Care Community (LHCC) model expands on the LHS model by combining the core elements of an LHS with a fourth component: active and continuous stakeholder and community engagement to improve the quality and value of health care within a community [ 9 ]. An LHCC focuses on health care beyond a health care system and extends beyond an LHS, which focuses on collaboration in health care. The LHCC uses the best practices of the LHS model with evidence-based approaches to engage community members.

The aims of an LHCC include increasing collaboration between public health and traditional health care providers and intending to address all areas required to achieve optimal impact on health for the community. Collaboration from multiple community sectors and effort from the community is vital to the success of the LHCC. Previous literature has found that engaging community members in meaningful conversations regarding their health care is associated with improved health outcomes, quality of time, and better health care experiences [ 9 ].

The LHCC should be trusted and valued by all stakeholders and consist of an economically governable system while being responsive to community needs. Past involvement in discriminatory practices committed against vulnerable and minority populations has impacted community-institution relationships [ 10 ]. However, ongoing commitment of investigators and research teams, treating community members as partners, working collaboratively, increasing skills in relationship building, and listening to diverse voices can overcome mistrust by health care providers and researchers [ 10 , 11 ]. Co-development with communities can assure trustworthy and targeted implementation to address community needs [ 9 ].

An LHS model lacks community involvement and fails to consider community-based health care problems [ 9 ]. As a result, these communities lack control and power over their health care. An LHCC places the voices of communities at the center of their health care, empowers community members, and increases opportunities for health-related learning [ 8 , 9 ]. The LHCC framework is relatively new, and, there is limited research on the impact of LHCCs in rural areas. The majority of existing research on LHCCs is completed in urban areas, or it is outcome-focused with less emphasis on the enablers and barriers that enhanced or hindered the implementation process. We sought to address this gap in existing knowledge by summarizing the barriers and enablers across all LHCCs implemented in rural areas. The current review can be used as a guide to develop more targeted and seamless approaches to develop an LHCC and achieve community health outcomes.

Research aim

The current paper aimed to summarize evidence on the facilitators and barriers that are involved in the LHCC implementation process for rural health care providers, researchers, decision-makers, and community members who wish to implement an LHCC.

Question of interest

What are the barriers and enablers to building a learning health care community in rural areas?

Research design and information sources

We conducted a mixed-methods systematic review. The JBI methodology for mixed-methods systematic reviews was used to inform the entire systematic review. Thematic coding was completed according to the  JBI convergent-integrated approach [ 12 ].

Eligibility criteria

A search of English peer-reviewed published articles that were rural-based, health-related, and involved the implementation of an LHCC was undertaken. Inclusion criteria included the following:

Studies must have been conducted in rural areas. For the purpose of this study, areas were considered rural if they were outside cities [ 1 ]. The research team also checked the author’s definition of a rural area used in the included studies.

Community participation took place and it was related to improving the health services, health knowledge, or well-being of community members.

Studies must have included at least one of the following stakeholders (researcher, health care providers, health system leaders, etc.), as well as a community or patient population.

Co-learning took place by community members and stakeholders. Co-learning refers to a bi-directional learning process, where knowledge exchange occurs between those involved [ 13 ]. Health care providers, leaders, researchers or investigators learned from the community (e.g., their feedback) and community members learned about a health-related topic or health service from health care providers, leaders, researchers or investigators.

Articles were excluded if they were the format of a letter to the editor, a systematic review, an audit, or an editorial. Studies focused on an urban area or simply on an LHS rather than an LHCC were also excluded. All included studies in the review and articles deemed eligible were assessed and included in the review.

Search strategy

Rural and primary health care experts were consulted to identify keywords and studies on LHCCs, community engagement and health care practitioners. Then, in consultation with a librarian, the search terms were tested and refined. Next, a Public Services Librarian from Memorial University of Newfoundland searched databases including Medline (Ovid), Embase (Embase.com) and The Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL; Ebsco) to identify potentially relevant articles up until May 2, 2023. See Additional File 1 for the search history for Ovid Medline. Results were imported into Endnote X9 for deduplication and then into Covidence for screening.

Study selection and data collection process

Relevant titles and abstracts by database searches resulted in the identification of 8169 articles. After duplicates were removed, 8096 articles remained. Articles were screened independently by two trained authors using Covidence, an online software that streamlines the production of systematic reviews. If an abstract was deemed relevant, a vote of ‘Yes’ was assigned to the article, and if an abstract was deemed irrelevant a vote of ‘No’ was assigned to the article. If both reviewers assigned a vote of ‘Yes’ the article moved into the full-text phase, and if both reviewers voted ‘No’, the article was excluded. Any abstracts that received conflicting votes or were assigned a vote of ‘Maybe’ were discussed and resolved between authors. After a consensus was reached, full texts of the remaining articles were obtained and this process was repeated. A calibration exercise was administered to portray the validity of the research on 10% of the articles in each stage and our approach was adjusted if it was required. For the abstract, 816 articles (10%) were randomly selected, and a third reviewer examined these abstracts. Reference lists and citations within full text articles were checked for eligibility. No additional articles were added using this approach. The same process was used for screening and data extraction. Next, the research team confirmed the included articles following review and conflict resolution. Weekly meetings were executed to discuss the articles. If there were any conflicts in article decisions, a third reviewer was involved in the resolution.

Data synthesis methods

Included articles were moved to data extraction by both independent reviewers. A data extraction tool was developed using Microsoft Excel and pilot tested on 5 articles. Both reviewers independently entered the data to the tool. Columns were included that summarized key information pertaining to the article (i.e. Geographical Setting, Study Objectives, Community Group, Enablers and Barriers, etc.).

Data from each article was compiled into the Microsoft Excel sheet and reviewed by the research team. The compiled articles ( n  = 25) were reviewed by several team members and discussed during meetings until we reached consensus. Similar text fragments were grouped and categories were identified. Consistent with the JBI mixed-methods systematic review convergent-integrated approach [ 12 ], categories were identified based on assembled data from both qualitative and quantitative studies. Next, categories were aggregated to form themes relating to the barriers and enablers to building an LHCC. A consensus on the final list of themes was reached through group discussions to reduce bias and ensure consensus was reached.

Enablers and barriers were discussed in relation to the four main components of the LHCC. The Stakeholder and Community Engagement component highlights studies that identified effectively engaging community members to be pivotal to an LHCC success. Infrastructure for health related data-capture was relevant to studies that found harnessing contemporary technology, information sharing through in-person and online interventions, development of educational materials, and health-related data sharing to be vital to patient health. Care Improvement Targets were included as various stakeholders aimed to improve health, disease management, and increase awareness and uptake of prevention interventions within the community. Care Improvement Targets were organized according to the Institute of Medicine’s report: “Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century” six aims for success (1) safe; (2) effective; (3) timely; (4) patient-centered; (5) efficient; and (6) equitable [ 14 ]. A Supportive Policy Environment was included as acquiring proper funding, resources and support was deemed essential to the LHCC.

Quality appraisal

The quality of each study was assessed independently by two authors using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) scoring system [ 15 ]. The average of each reviewer's assigned score determined the quality of each article. Studies of 75% and above were considered good quality, 50–74% were considered fair, and 50% and below were considered low quality. All studies that met inclusion criteria were included, despite the quality appraisal score.

A literature search identified 8169 articles to screen and assess for eligibility. Following screening and the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria, 25 articles were included (Fig.  1 ).

Prisma flow diagram

Studies were conducted in the following countries: the United States ( n  = 15), India ( n  = 3), Canada ( n  = 2), Australia ( n  = 2), Guatemala ( n  = 1), Thailand ( n  = 1), and the Republic of Congo ( n  = 1). The characteristics of included studies are summarized in Table 1 . All studies included stakeholder populations (as defined above) that experienced a form of learning health outcome in their community. There were no age-specific studies, and children were not exclusively excluded. Six articles (24% of all articles) were deemed fair, and 19 studies (76% of all articles) were deemed good quality. The studies were a mix of qualitative ( n  = 14), quantitative ( n  = 3), quality improvement ( n  = 2), and mixed methods ( n  = 6).

Defining a learning health care community

Descriptions and definitions of LHCCs were extracted from all included articles (Table  2 ). Most articles did not directly use ‘learning health care community’ terminology; however, all included key LHCC components.

All LHCC projects aimed to improve health outcomes, such as disease monitoring, management and prevention, and knowledge sharing with community members. All involved collaboration between stakeholders, co-learning, integration of community feedback, and discussed the community participation process. Additionally, most articles discussed developing rural health services such as online learning or research health networks, community-based intervention workshops, learning health systems, and evidence-synthesis programs.

Enablers and barriers to building an LHCC

Common themes emerged across articles. Theme descriptions were created based on the content of included articles and were reviewed by the research team. A consensus on theme names was reached at team meetings. Meaningfully Engaging Stakeholders referred to the use of tools, activities, or community-specific or creative strategies to grasp the interest of diverse stakeholders to be involved in the LHCC implementation process or to be active members within the LHCC. Stakeholder Collaboration referred to bringing together diverse stakeholders to work together to implement the LHCC or to achieve a common goal as members of the LHCC. Using a Participatory Approach was used to describe recruitment and participation of people who are impacted by the LHCC. Strong Stakeholder Relationships referred to the creation of strong interpersonal and mutually beneficial partnerships between stakeholders. Knowledge Sharing referred to learning about a health topic from in-person or online interventions, through the use or creation of knowledge-translation tools, health-related activities or training sessions, or through the use of technology. A Multidisciplinary Team referred to teams that included at least two different stakeholders with different levels of expertise, skills or experience. For example, certain teams included community members, clinicians, nurses, specific patient groups, or community health workers.

The barrier Obtaining Adequate Funding or Research Support referred to challenges to obtain sufficient funding, technology, or personnel to support the development of the LHCC or to sustain the LHCC. Participant Recruitment was used to describe challenges to recruit community members, family members, patients, or other stakeholders that could assist with the development of the LHCC or who serve as active members within the LHCC. A Lack of Knowledge referred to challenges regarding a lack of knowledge about a health topic or illiteracy within the community. This barrier also described a lack of knowledge of how to effectively engage or recruit stakeholders. Maintaining Stakeholder Commitment was used to describe challenges relating to sustaining involvement of LHCC stakeholders, or underestimating the ongoing effort required to promote long-term commitment from stakeholders.

Competing Demands of Stakeholders was used to describe situations when stakeholders within the LHCC had conflicting priorities and therefore, hindered the progress of the LHCC. This barrier was also used to describe when stakeholders struggled to determine a shared mission of the LHCC. Time Constraints were identified by stakeholders that were either unable to or struggled to meet specific deadlines during the LHCC development process, or those who underestimated the time required to build relationships and effectively engage stakeholders.

See Table  3 for the most frequently noted enablers and barriers and the corresponding number of articles. See Table  2 for more detailed information on the enablers and barriers reported in each article.

The most frequently noted enabler that facilitated LHCC implementation included meaningfully engaging stakeholders ( n  = 15). This finding ‘Stakeholder and Community Engagement’ is one of the four main components of the LHCC framework. One LHCC described by Curtis et al. [ 26 ] integrated patient engagement at all stages of their program by ensuring participant voices were heard and incorporated into strategy development. They developed a multidisciplinary team of specialists, Indigenous care providers, patient partners, and policymakers who collectively contributed in the development and implementation process of the LHCC. The LHCC involved shared decision making at all stages and community-member knowledge was leveraged to enhance culturally-safe care.

Other enablers mentioned in four or less articles included having a shared mission, incorporating incremental improvements, demonstrating the value of stakeholder involvement, having strong leadership, prolonging engagement throughout the project, using culturally appropriate research methods, conducting a needs assessment, getting continuous feedback from the community, and providing stakeholders access to their health data.

Allowing patients to engage with their own health data to facilitate participation relates to the ‘Infrastructure for Health-Related Data Capture and Knowledge Sharing’ component of the LHCC model. For example, Arcia et al. [ 16 ] used a participatory-design approach where participants completed health surveys on their self-reported health outcomes and anthropometric measures. Data was returned to participants through clinical infographics and all participants effectively provided helpful feedback during design sessions. As a result, the LHCC led to tailored infographic designs that were more engaging, informative, and comprehensible according to participants. See Fig. 2  for quotes from included articles mapped to each enabler.

Mapping article quotes to LHCC enablers

The most frequently mentioned barrier that hindered the success of LHCC implementation included obtaining adequate funding and resources ( n  = 12). This barrier relates to the ‘Supportive Policy Environment’ component of the LHCC framework. Having adequate funding (i.e. compensation for participants or stakeholders), or needed resources (i.e. technology, supplies, tools, or personnel) to meet LHCC deadlines was deemed essential for specific LHCCs.

Other barriers mentioned in one or two articles included mistrust from the community, achieving effective stakeholder collaboration, a need for flexibility in the research plan, resistance to change, stakeholder burnout, maintaining stakeholder connections, knowledge, and resource dissemination, having limited staff, and time commitment. See Fig.  3  for quotes from included articles mapped to each barrier.

Mapping article quotes to LHCC barriers

Care Improvement Targets involve increased learning through clinician-community links, the use of clinical decision support, patient-centered care and optimizing delivery of health care and community-based resources [ 9 ]. Twenty studies ( n  = 20) reported on care improvement targets. Murray et al. [ 24 ] reported on the ‘Autism Speaks Autism Treatment Network’. This network leveraged community-partnerships to transition to an LHCC. The LHCC incorporated a model of co-production of knowledge between families and clinicians that promoted learning of each other’s expertise and values. They provided opportunities to take part in remote and in-person meetings, and participation in workgroups and monthly webinars. The LHCC resulted in growth of enrollment by almost 700 members. Among these studies ( n = 20), enablers and barriers were described in alignment with the Institute of Medicine’s six aims of quality care [ 14 ].

Patient-centered care: Seventeen studies ( n  = 17) involved the patient or family member involvement to improve patient health or patient-centered care (i.e. by consulting patients and implementing their feedback).

Safety: Five studies ( n = 5) reported safety of health care or research practices (i.e. the Kidney Check LHCC could increase the use of culturally safe practices in Indigenous communities) [ 26 ].

Timely: Five studies ( n  = 5) reported that the LHCC has potential to led to more timely access to interventions, services, and resulted in faster decision-making by health care providers, and decreased wait times for patients.

Efficient: It was reported in eleven studies ( n = 11) that the LHCC could lead to greater efficiency (i.e. one study connected individuals who frequently use emergency services for non-urgent conditions to more appropriate care, resulting in fewer 911 calls) [ 18 ].

Effective: Twenty studies ( n = 20) reported on the effectiveness of the LHCC (i.e. one study developed a program that led to increased health knowledge and disease management strategies amongst affected populations) [ 34 ].

Equitable: Seventeen studies ( n = 17) reported on the equity of the LHCC. For example, one LHCC offered free health knowledge or exercise classes to vulnerable populations [ 33 ].

The current review aimed to summarize available evidence on the enablers and barriers of rural LHCC implementation. The review of LHCC studies suggests that LHCC implementation can increase community participation in planning health services and health-related activities. Health-related organizations implemented the LHCC to increase collaboration between community members and stakeholders, integrate community feedback in planning, and increase co-learning to expand knowledge sharing and improve health and services within the community.

Stakeholder engagement and collaboration were crucial enablers to LHCC success. It is unsurprising that stakeholder engagement was identified by multiple authors as active and continuous stakeholder and community engagement is a core component of an LHCC. Osborn & Squires [ 40 ] investigated perspectives on patient engagement using a survey in 11 countries: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America. They found that across countries patients who were more engaged with their health services, received greater quality care, and reported more positive views on the health care system. When stakeholders understand the value of the project, their involvement are provided with clear direction, and can interact with their data, they are more likely to be engaged. Also, the importance of stakeholder collaboration in health care is reiterated by Mullins et al [ 9 ] and supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Culture Health Framework [ 41 ]. According to this framework, achieving healthy equitable communities involves collaboration from multiple sectors to have the greatest impact on public and community health [ 9 , 41 ]. Methods noted to facilitate collaboration include staying connected through various platforms (i.e. online networks, email or text-message), maintaining this contact on a regular basis, and meeting regularly as a group.

Although funding agencies have recognized the value of the LHS and LHCC models, obtaining adequate funding and resources was the greatest barrier identified in included studies [ 9 ]. Authors emphasized the challenge to receive robust investments from partner organizations and funding agencies to meet project staffing requirements, compensate participants for their time, and to purchase equipment and materials needed for the LHCC. In order to attract investors, it is important to document the benefits of the LHCC and present this information to organizational leaders and stakeholders. Furthermore, developing a feasible plan and demonstrating how you can sustain innovation can be influential for investors. Participant recruitment was also commonly documented as an obstacle. Particular solutions to address this issue have been noted in the included studies, such as participants being invited by a trusted and recognized expert in the field, putting effort into building relationships with participants, collaborating with them to determine clear goals, determine meeting frequency in advance, and have a clear decision-making process.

LHCCs aimed to either increase learning by community members about health topics (i.e. increase health literacy, interest in preventative health care) from experts within the field, researchers or health care providers, or they aimed to increase learning by stakeholders from the community or a particular community group (i.e. consulting midwives on how to retain them).

The current review outlines some overlap in enablers and barriers to urban or larger scale LHCCs. Similar to rural LHCCs, urban LHCCs also identify stakeholder collaboration, inclusion of multi-disciplinary teams, and knowledge sharing as enablers [ 42 , 43 , 44 ]. A lack of knowledge, and competing demands of stakeholders were also identified as barriers to implementation of urban LHCC implementation [ 42 , 43 ]. Enablers specific to urban LHCCs include having access to population health data, access to technology that can analyze large-scale data, and conducting research to make comparisons and pinpoint trends in data [ 42 , 44 , 45 ].

Barriers identified in urban LHCCs included concerns around legal, ethical and policy challenges regarding patient health information and challenges relating to developing technological safeguards to protect the safety and security of patient health information. In addition, language barriers were also identified as a barriers to urban LHCCs [ 43 ]. Differences in enablers and barriers between urban–rural areas are related to the differences between rural–urban communities. For example, urban communities consist of much larger more diverse populations with greater access to patient health data and advanced technology.

Additionally, although having a multidisciplinary team is identified in both rural and urban LHCCs as an enabler, this term is defined differently between the communities. Rural LHCCs face challenges to recruit and retain their workforce. For example, only 8% of physicians in Canada work in rural areas [ 46 , 47 ]. Therefore, rural ‘multidisciplinary teams’ are less likely to include specialists, epidemiologists, data-analysts, health-system leaders or policy-makers compared to urban LHCCs. Further, urban LHCCs place less importance on sustained community engagement. One reason for this may be due to challenges relating to the effort and time required to effectively engage larger populations. The small population size of rural communities may be more practical to engage for longer-periods of time.

Rural populations experience unique challenges compared to their urban counterparts. Rural-areas differ in terms of their geographic location, population size, weather, size of their workforce, and access to financial resources and health care services [ 48 , 49 ]. Rural communities often have a greater proportion of elderly residents with chronic conditions [ 50 ], have limited access to health-information [ 51 ], and health care providers [ 52 ]. Despite these challenges, rural LHCCs provide an opportunity to address rural health needs. Driven by evidence, rural LHCCs place considerable effort into engaging the community in the LHCC implementation process. Shared-decision-making and co-production of knowledge are priorities of rural LHCCs. Due to workforce shortages, health-related education and training for community members appear to be pivotal in LHCC success. As evidenced by the current review, acquiring adequate funding to support LHCC implementation, meaningfully engaging stakeholders, and fostering collaboration are key components of successful rural LHCCs. Furthermore, LHCCs strive to increase health system transparency and accountability of participating entities to make improvements to health care [ 9 ]. By increasing awareness of community health problems, and clinical and financial support, the LHCC has potential to have a positive impact on community health.

The role of the LHCC is to improve the quality and efficiency of health care, therefore the LHCC must not overlook the impact of the social determinants of health (SDOH). Extensive research has emphasized the role of the SDOH on patient and community wellness, despite the quality of health care available [ 53 ]. For example, the United States spends an extensive amount of money on health care but is ranked last compared to other developed nations for a multitude of health outcomes, likely due to a lack of public health and social programs [ 54 ]. Despite the significance of the SDOH on patient health outcomes, the majority of included articles did not report on the SDOH. Future research should investigate the role an LHCC can play in addressing community and patient social risk factors. In addition, there was a lack of studies that focused on specific patient outcomes following LHCC implementation, and the impact of patient outcomes on the success of the LHCC. There is a need for greater research on LHCCs related to patient groups facing certain health diseases and evaluation of the impact of the LHCC on these health outcomes. Also, included studies did not report on the use of pragmatic clinical trials. Future research should investigate the role of clinical trials on LHCCs in rural areas.

Overall, there was repetition of several enablers and barriers mentioned in the included studies (i.e. effectively engaging stakeholders was mentioned in 15 studies and acquiring adequate funding was mentioned in 12 studies). However, there was also variability in barriers and enablers noted by authors mentioned in only one or two articles. For example, having strong leadership was mentioned as an enabler in two articles, and having limited staff was mentioned as a barrier in one article. One explanation for this could be that certain enablers and barriers were very specific to the LHCC being implemented. Therefore, enablers and barriers can vary based on the approach that is taken by implementers. Further, certain LHCCs may not have had one strong leader helping with implementation, and instead used a committee that struggled to make decisions. In this case, a strong leader would not be noted as an enabler. Nevertheless, this variation indicates that there is a lack of knowledge on the enablers and barriers that facilitate LHCC implementation in rural areas and this is an area for future research.

There were several strengths to the current study. First, this study expands on prior research by collecting the most common enablers and barriers that result from LHCC development and informs implementers of the most common obstacles that may be faced. Second, the approach taken to conduct the current review was closely aligned with recommendations [ 55 ]. Third, given the current circumstances of rural medicine and patient engagement, our research team deemed it imperative to conduct a deeper review of how to encourage stakeholders and patients to be involved in a collaborative partnership. This study is the fundamental step to a more thorough environmental scan.

The present study must be considered with limitations in mind. Although a minimum of two researchers and a librarian completed an exhaustive search for articles that met the inclusion criteria, there is a chance that some studies were missed or potentially miscategorized. Additionally, included studies differed across cultural, geographic, sociological, and geo-political boundaries across countries and this may impact the generalizability of our findings in different settings. Searches were limited to those in the English language and published articles. Articles published following the completion of the literature search were not included in this review. Therefore, this review may be subject to publication bias. Further, two studies noted that their findings may have been impacted by selection bias, as despite participation being encouraged in their respective LHCC, some participants did not choose to attend [ 23 , 28 ]. Additionally, Golden et al. [ 28 ] recruited participants based on convenience, subjecting their findings to sampling bias and Gierisch et al. [ 23 ] opted to not record their interviews, acknowledging the potential for introducing social desirability bias and confirmatory bias. Although some articles assessed the effect of the LHCC following using pre- and post-implementation assessments, the chosen metrics varied across the studies and approximately half of included studies did not evaluate the impact of the LHCC. Therefore, the current study lacked a systemic approach and analysis of LHCC outcomes.

Ample evidence has shown that rural areas face poorer health outcomes than urban areas, due to a lack of infrastructure, health care providers, screening and medical equipments, and accessibility. The current study can be particularly useful to health care providers, researchers, health-related organizations, policymakers and leaders living in rural areas who want to reduce this health outcome gap, improve health-knowledge, patient engagement in health services planning, and research in their community. The current review summarizes the available evidence on the enablers and barriers to implementing an LHCC in rural communities and it is useful for anyone looking to implement an LHCC. Our findings highlight a clear lack of studies on rural LHCC implementation, as well as a lack of studies that evaluate the effect of the LHCC post-implementation, preventing the opportunity to conduct a meta-analysis. The LHCC model is relatively new, therefore, this review can increase awareness of the many benefits of this model and help to inform approaches to transition to this model.

The LHCC is built collaboratively on a foundation of meaningful use of health data and empowers health care practitioners and patients in informed decision-making. Despite the number of barriers to implementing an LHCC, all studies that did implement LHCCs reported potential for positive outcomes. Although there are a variety of commentary, and perspective papers on LHCC development, this study adds to existing literature by summarizing the essential enablers and experienced barriers to facilitate LHCC implementation. Taken as a whole, an LHCC can be a potential solution to increase community engagement and collaboration between health care providers, researchers, decision makers and community members, and to mobilize resources in rural areas, and thereby lead to improved health services, health-knowledge, and health outcomes in these regions. Further research is needed on evidence-based approaches to effectively engage communities to be involved with their health care as well as the long-term outcomes of LHCC implementation in rural areas.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Abbreviations

• Learning health system
• Learning health care community

Preston R, Waugh H, Larkins S, Taylor J. Community participation in rural primary health care: intervention or approach? Aust J Prim Health. 2010;16(1):4. https://doi.org/10.1071/py09053 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Taylor J, Wilkinson D, Cheers B. Working with Communities in Health and Human Services. South Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press; 2008. https://researchonline.jcu.edu.au/29462/ . Accessed 10 Apr 2023.

National Rural Health Alliance. Healthy Horizons Outlook 2003–2007. 2003. https://www.ruralhealth.org.au/content/healthy-horizons-outlook-2003-2007 . Accessed 3 Apr 2023.

‌4. Kilpatrick S. Multi-level rural community engagement in health. Australian Journal of Rural Health. 2009;17(1):39–44. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1584.2008.01035.x .

Collins Y. The more things change, the more they stay the same: health care in regional Victoria. In: Lockie S, Bourke L, editors. Rurality bites, the social and environmental transformation of rural Australia. Annandale, Australia: Pluto Press; 2001.

Google Scholar  

Brady M, Byrne J, Henderson G. “Which bloke would stand up for Yalata?” The struggle of an Aboriginal community to control the availability of alcohol. Australian Aboriginal Studies. 2003;2003(2):62–62. https://go.gale.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA123582158&sid=googleScholar&v=2.1&it=r&linkaccess=abs&issn=07294352&p=AONE&sw=w&userGroupName=anon%7E6fa8ff7e .

Taylor J, Wilkinson D, Cheers B. Community participation in organising rural general practice: Is it sustainable? Aust J Rural Health. 2006;14(4):144–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1440-1584.2006.00790.x .

Olsen L, Aisner D, McGinnis JM, eds. Roundtable on Evidence-Based Medicine. The Learning Healthcare System: Workshop Summary. National Academies Press, US: Institute of Medicine; 2007. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK53494/ . Accessed 15 Apr 2023.

‌Mullins CD, Wingate LT, Edwards HA, Tofade T, Wutoh A. Transitioning from learning healthcare systems to learning health care communities. J Comp Eff Res. 2018;7(6):603–614. https://doi.org/10.2217/cer-2017-0105 .

Irby MB, Moore KR, Mann-Jackson L, Hamlin D, Randall I, Summers P, et al. Community-engaged research: common themes and needs identified by investigators and research teams at an emerging academic learning health system. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(8):3893. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18083893 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Rhodes SD. Authentic engagement and community-based participatory research for public health and medicine. In: Rhodes SD, Aronson RL, editors. Innovations in HIV prevention research and practice through community engagement. New York: Springer; 2014. p. 1–10.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI eBooks. https://synthesismanual.jbi.global/ . Accessed 15 July 2022.

Redko C, Bessong P, Burt D, Luna M, Maling S, Moore C, et al. Exploring the significance of bidirectional learning for global health education. Ann Glob Health. 2017;82(6):955. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aogh.2016.11.008 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Institute of Medicine. Crossing the Quality Chasm: A New Health System for the 21st Century. Washington, D.C: National Academy Press; 2001. https://www.med.unc.edu/neurosurgery/wp-content/uploads/sites/460/2018/10/Crossing-the-Quality-Chasm.pdf . Accessed Jan 2023.

Hong QN, Fàbregues S, Bartlett G, Boardman F, Cargo M, Dagenais P, et al. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers. Educ Inf. 2018;34(4):285–91. https://doi.org/10.3233/EFI-180221 .

Arcia A, Suero-Tejeda N, Bales ME, Merrill JA, Yoon S, Woollen J, et al. Sometimes more is more: iterative participatory design of infographics for engagement of community members with varying levels of health literacy. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2016;23(1):174–83. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocv079 .

Kunz S, Ingram M, Piper R, Wu T, Litton N, Brady J, et al. Rural collaborative model for diabetes prevention and management: a case study. Health Promot Pract. 2017;18(6):798–805. https://doi.org/10.1177/1524839917712730 .

Carpenter D, Hassell S, Mardon R, Fair S, Johnson M, Siegel S, et al. Using Learning Communities to Support Adoption of Health Care Innovations. The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety. 2018;44(10):566–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcjq.2018.03.010 .

Chhabra R, Rivera A, Sharma N, Ghosh S, Bauman L. Engaging community members as health advocates in a peer driven intervention—a cervical cancer prevention pilot in Punjab, India. Glob J Health Educ Promot. 2018;18(1):s37–53.

Fung-Kee-Fung M, Maziak DE, Pantarotto JR, Smylie J, Taylor L, Timlin T, et al. Regional process redesign of lung cancer care: a learning health system pilot project. Curr Oncol. 2018;25(1):59–66. https://doi.org/10.3747/co.25.3719 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Key KD, Lewis EY. Sustainable community engagement in a constantly changing health system. Learn Health Syst. 2018;2(3):e10053. https://doi.org/10.1002/lrh2.10053 .

Myers RE, DiCarlo M, Romney M, Fleisher L, Sifri R, Soleiman J, et al. Using a health system learning community strategy to address cancer disparities. Learn Health Syst. 2018;2(4):e10067. https://doi.org/10.1002/lrh2.10067 .

‌Gierisch JM, Hughes JM, Williams JW, Gordon AM, Goldstein KM. Qualitative Exploration of Engaging Patients as Advisors in a Program of Evidence Synthesis. Medical Care. 2019;57(10 Suppl 3):S246–52. https://doi.org/10.1097/MLR.0000000000001174 .

Murray DS, Anixt JS, Coury DL, Kuhlthau K, Seide J, Kelly A, et al. Transforming an Autism Pediatric Research Network into a Learning Health System: Lessons Learned. Pediatric Quality & Safety [Internet]. 2019;4(2):e152. Available from:  https://doi.org/10.1097/pq9.0000000000000152

Baba A, Martineau T, Theobald S, Sabuni P, Nobabo MM, Alitimango A, et al. Developing strategies to attract, retain and support midwives in rural fragile settings: participatory workshops with health system stakeholders in Ituri Province, Democratic Republic of Congo. Health Res Policy Syst. 2020;18(1):133. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-020-00631-8 .

Curtis S, Martin H, DiNella M, Lavallee B, Chartrand C, McLeod L, et al. Kidney Check Point-of-Care Testing—Furthering Patient Engagement and Patient-Centered Care in Canada’s Rural and Remote Indigenous Communities: Program Report. Can J Kidney Health Dis. 2021;8:205435812110037. https://doi.org/10.1177/20543581211003744 .

Donahue MA, Herman ST, Dass D, Farrell K, Kukla A, Abend NS, et al. Establishing a learning healthcare system to improve health outcomes for people with epilepsy. Epilepsy Behav. 2021;117:107805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yebeh.2021.107805 .

Golden RE, Klap R, Carney DV, Yano EM, Hamilton AB, Taylor SL, et al. Promoting learning health system feedback loops: Experience with a VA practice-based research network card study. Healthcare. 2021;8:100484. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hjdsi.2020.100484 .

Keck C, Hartley DM, Havens M, Margolis PA, Seid M. Getting what is needed, when it's needed: sharing information, knowledge, and know-how in a Collaborative Learning Health System. Learn Health Syst. 2021;5(3):e10268. https://doi.org/10.1002/lrh2.10268 .

Beks H, Amos T, Bell J, Ryan J, Hayward J, Brown A, et al. Participatory research with a rural Aboriginal Community Controlled Health Organisation: lessons learned using the CONSIDER statement. Rural Remote Health. 2022;22(1):6740. https://doi.org/10.22605/RRH6740 .

Lindeman MA, Togni SJ. Improving services for Aboriginal women experiencing sexual violence: working at the knowledge interface. Aust Soc Work. 2022;75(3):372–84.

Marsh Z, Teegala Y, Cotter V. Improving diabetes care of community-dwelling underserved older adults. J Am Assoc Nurse Pract. 2022;34(10):1156–66. https://doi.org/10.1097/JXX.0000000000000773 .

Mishra A, Singh AK, Parida SP, Pradhan S, Nair J. Understanding Community Participation in Rural Health Care: A Participatory learning and Action approach. Frontiers in Public Health. 2022;10. Available from:  https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2022.860792

Oser TK, Zittleman L, Curcija K, Kwan B, Burke S, Gonzalez S, Huss K, Johnson M, Sanchez N, Neuberger J, Iacob E, Simonetti J, Litchman M. Informing a Randomized Control Trial in Rural Populations: Adaptation of a Diabetes Self-Management Education and Support Intervention. JMIR Diabetes. 2022;7(2): e35664. https://doi.org/10.2196/35664 .

Pitchalard K, Moonpanane K, Wimolphan P, Singkhorn O, Wongsuraprakit S. Implementation and evaluation of the peer-training program for village health volunteers to improve chronic disease management among older adults in rural Thailand. Int J Nurs Sci. 2022;9(3):328–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnss.2022.06.011 .

Pullyblank K, Brunner W, Wyckoff L, Krupa N, Scribani M, Strogatz D. Implementation of evidence-based disease self-management programs in a rural region: leveraging and linking community and health care system assets. Health Educ Behav. 2022:10901981221078516. https://doi.org/10.1177/10901981221078516 . Epub ahead of print.

Quraishi S, Quraishi H, Yadav H, Singh A, Fasih I, Vasquez NA, et al. Digital storytelling and community engagement to find missing TB cases in rural Nuh, India. Trop Med Infect Dis. 2022;7(3):49. https://doi.org/10.3390/tropicalmed7030049 .

Gregg C, Valdez M, Stollak I, Martin S, Story WT, Perry HB. Reducing inequities in maternal and child health in rural Guatemala through the CBIO+ Approach of Curamericas: 7. The empowering effect of Care Groups. Int J Equity Health. 2023;21(Suppl 2):199. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-022-01759-5 .

Niranjan SJ, Opoku-Agyeman W, Hardy CM, Bowman T, Vedre-Kyanam A, Hearld KR, et al. Using community health advisors to increase lung cancer screening awareness in the black belt: a pilot study. J Cancer Educ. 2023;38(4):1286–95. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13187-022-02261-w .

Osborn R, Squires D. International Perspectives on Patient Engagement. J Ambul Care Manage. 2012;35(2):118–28. https://doi.org/10.1097/jac.0b013e31824a579b .

‌24. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Building a culture of health. https://www.cultureofhealth.org/en/taking-action.html (Date unknown). Accessed 20 Apr 2023.

Bernstein JA, Friedman C, Jacobson P, Rubin JC. Ensuring public health’s future in a national-scale learning health system. Am J Prev Med. 2015;48(4):480–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2014.11.013 .

McCall DS, Rootman I, Bayley D. International School Health Network: an informal network for advocacy and knowledge exchange. Promot Educ. 2005;12(3–4):173–7. https://doi.org/10.1177/10253823050120030121 .

Edwards EM, Ehret DEY, Soll RF, Horbar JD. Vermont Oxford Network: a worldwide learning community. Transl Pediatr. 2019;8(3):182–92. https://doi.org/10.21037/tp.2019.07.01 .

Corrigan D, Munnelly G, Kazienko P, Kajdanowicz T, Soler JK, Mahmoud S, Porat T, Kostopoulou O, Curcin V, Delaney B. Requirements and validation of a prototype learning health system for clinical diagnosis. Learn Health Syst. 2017;1(4): e10026. https://doi.org/10.1002/lrh2.10026 .

Canadian Institute for Health Information. Supply, distribution and migration of physicians in Canada 2015—data tables. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Institute for Health Information; 2016.

Bosco C, Oandasan I. Review of family medicine within rural and remote Canada: education, practice, and policy. Mississauga, ON: College of Family Physicians of Canada; 2016.

Chen X, Orom H, Hay JL, Waters EA, Schofield E, Li Y, Kiviniemi MT. Differences in Rural and Urban Health Information Access and Use. J Rural Health. 2019;35(3):405–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/jrh.12335 .

McIlhenny C, Guzic B, Knee D, Demuth B, Roberts J. Using technology to deliver healthcare education to rural patients. Rural & Remote Health . 2011;11(4). https://www.rrh.org.au/journal/article/1798

Rural Health Information Hub. (2024). Rural Public Health Agencies. https://www.ruralhealthinfo.org/topics/public-health . Accessed 10 Feb 2024.

Lustria ML, Smith SA, Hinnant CC. Exploring digital divides: an examination of eHealth technology use in health information seeking, communication and personal health information management in the USA. Health Informatics J. 2011;17(3):224–243. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/21937464

Learmonth YC, Adamson BC, Balto JM, Chiu CY, Molina-Guzman I, Finlayson M, Riskin BJ, Motl RW. Multiple sclerosis patients need and want information on exercise promotion from healthcare providers: a qualitative study. Health Expect. 2017;20(4):574–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12482 .

Palakshappa D, Miller DP, Rosenthal GE. Advancing the learning health system by incorporating social determinants. Am J Manag Care. 2020;26(1):e4–6. https://doi.org/10.37765/ajmc.2020.42146 .

Papanicolas I, Woskie LR, Jha AK. Health Care Spending in the United States and Other High-Income Countries. JAMA. 2018;319(10):1024–39. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2018.1150 .

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Syst Rev. 2021;10(89). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01626-4 .

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Rural360 team is supported by the use of Memorial University of Newfoundland facilities.

The Rural360 team is funded by the International Grenfell Association and the Mitacs Accelerate Program.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Family Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Newfoundland and Labrador, Centre for Rural Health Studies, Memorial University of Newfoundland, 300 Prince Philip Dr, St. John’s, NL, A1B 3V6, Canada

Shabnam Asghari, Jennifer Bent, Ali Modir, Alison MacDonald, Cheri Bethune & Wendy Graham

Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Newfoundland and Labrador, St. John’s, Canada

Alison Farrell

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

S.A. helped to determine the research question, objectives, and inclusion and exclusion criteria, provided guidance on article screening, the study design, and data analysis, and contributed to article development and the quality appraisal. J.B. and A.M. completed abstract, and article screening, the quality appraisal, data analysis and interpretation, article writing and table and figure development. J.B. implemented all feedback from the research team to the article. A.M. helped develop the research question and objectives, assisted with the development of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, abstract and article screening, and table, and figure development. A.M. and S.A. provided feedback throughout the course of the project. A.F. conducted the literature search and provided feedback on article screening. C.B. and W.G. provided constructive feedback to the research team, assisted in the development of the research question, provided guidance on the research methods, and feedback on the article and supporting documentation. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shabnam Asghari .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

The need for ethics approval was waived for the current study, as it is a systematic review.

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

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

Supplementary Information

Supplementary material 1. search strategy, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Asghari, S., Bent, J., Modir, A. et al. Building a learning health care community in rural and remote areas: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res 24 , 1013 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11194-7

Download citation

Received : 02 November 2023

Accepted : 11 June 2024

Published : 02 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-024-11194-7

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

• Rural health
• Community engagement
• Community participation

BMC Health Services Research

ISSN: 1472-6963

• General enquiries: [email protected]

• Search Menu
• Sign in through your institution
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access Options
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Reasons to Submit
• About Journal of Surgical Protocols and Research Methodologies
• Editorial Board
• Advertising & Corporate Services
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

Article Contents

Introduction, contents of a research study protocol, conflict of interest statement, how to write a research study protocol.

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Julien Al Shakarchi, How to write a research study protocol, Journal of Surgical Protocols and Research Methodologies , Volume 2022, Issue 1, January 2022, snab008, https://doi.org/10.1093/jsprm/snab008

• Permissions Icon Permissions

A study protocol is an important document that specifies the research plan for a clinical study. Many funders such as the NHS Health Research Authority encourage researchers to publish their study protocols to create a record of the methodology and reduce duplication of research effort. In this paper, we will describe how to write a research study protocol.

A study protocol is an essential part of a research project. It describes the study in detail to allow all members of the team to know and adhere to the steps of the methodology. Most funders, such as the NHS Health Research Authority in the United Kingdom, encourage researchers to publish their study protocols to create a record of the methodology, help with publication of the study and reduce duplication of research effort. In this paper, we will explain how to write a research protocol by describing what should be included.

Introduction

The introduction is vital in setting the need for the planned research and the context of the current evidence. It should be supported by a background to the topic with appropriate references to the literature. A thorough review of the available evidence is expected to document the need for the planned research. This should be followed by a brief description of the study and the target population. A clear explanation for the rationale of the project is also expected to describe the research question and justify the need of the study.

Methods and analysis

A suitable study design and methodology should be chosen to reflect the aims of the research. This section should explain the study design: single centre or multicentre, retrospective or prospective, controlled or uncontrolled, randomised or not, and observational or experimental. Efforts should be made to explain why that particular design has been chosen. The studied population should be clearly defined with inclusion and exclusion criteria. These criteria will define the characteristics of the population the study is proposing to investigate and therefore outline the applicability to the reader. The size of the sample should be calculated with a power calculation if possible.

The protocol should describe the screening process about how, when and where patients will be recruited in the process. In the setting of a multicentre study, each participating unit should adhere to the same recruiting model or the differences should be described in the protocol. Informed consent must be obtained prior to any individual participating in the study. The protocol should fully describe the process of gaining informed consent that should include a patient information sheet and assessment of his or her capacity.

The intervention should be described in sufficient detail to allow an external individual or group to replicate the study. The differences in any changes of routine care should be explained. The primary and secondary outcomes should be clearly defined and an explanation of their clinical relevance is recommended. Data collection methods should be described in detail as well as where the data will be kept secured. Analysis of the data should be explained with clear statistical methods. There should also be plans on how any reported adverse events and other unintended effects of trial interventions or trial conduct will be reported, collected and managed.

Ethics and dissemination

A clear explanation of the risk and benefits to the participants should be included as well as addressing any specific ethical considerations. The protocol should clearly state the approvals the research has gained and the minimum expected would be ethical and local research approvals. For multicentre studies, the protocol should also include a statement of how the protocol is in line with requirements to gain approval to conduct the study at each proposed sites.

It is essential to comment on how personal information about potential and enrolled participants will be collected, shared and maintained in order to protect confidentiality. This part of the protocol should also state who owns the data arising from the study and for how long the data will be stored. It should explain that on completion of the study, the data will be analysed and a final study report will be written. We would advise to explain if there are any plans to notify the participants of the outcome of the study, either by provision of the publication or via another form of communication.

The authorship of any publication should have transparent and fair criteria, which should be described in this section of the protocol. By doing so, it will resolve any issues arising at the publication stage.

Funding statement

It is important to explain who are the sponsors and funders of the study. It should clarify the involvement and potential influence of any party. The sponsor is defined as the institution or organisation assuming overall responsibility for the study. Identification of the study sponsor provides transparency and accountability. The protocol should explicitly outline the roles and responsibilities of any funder(s) in study design, data analysis and interpretation, manuscript writing and dissemination of results. Any competing interests of the investigators should also be stated in this section.

A study protocol is an important document that specifies the research plan for a clinical study. It should be written in detail and researchers should aim to publish their study protocols as it is encouraged by many funders. The spirit 2013 statement provides a useful checklist on what should be included in a research protocol [ 1 ]. In this paper, we have explained a straightforward approach to writing a research study protocol.

None declared.

Chan   A-W , Tetzlaff   JM , Gøtzsche   PC , Altman   DG , Mann   H , Berlin   J , et al.    SPIRIT 2013 explanation and elaboration: guidance for protocols of clinical trials . BMJ   2013 ; 346 : e7586 .

Google Scholar

• conflict of interest
• national health service (uk)

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals Career Network
• JSPRM Twitter

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 2752-616X
• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press and JSCR Publishing Ltd
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Institutional account management
• Rights and permissions
• Get help with access
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Skip to Guides Search
• Skip to breadcrumb
• Skip to main content
• Skip to footer
• Skip to chat link
• Report accessibility issues and get help
• Go to Penn Libraries Home
• Go to Franklin catalog

Critical Writing: Endangered Language and Language Death 2024-25: Researching the White Paper

• Getting started
• News and Opinion Sites
• Academic Sources
• Grey Literature
• Substantive News Sources
• What to Do When You Are Stuck
• Understanding a citation
• Examples of Quotation
• Examples of Paraphrase
• Chicago Manual of Style: Citing Images
• Researching the Op-Ed
• Researching Prospective Employers
• Resume Resources
• Cover Letter Resources

Research the White Paper

Researching the white paper:.

The process of researching and composing a white paper shares some similarities with the kind of research and writing one does for a high school or college research paper. What’s important for writers of white papers to grasp, however, is how much this genre differs from a research paper.  First, the author of a white paper already recognizes that there is a problem to be solved, a decision to be made, and the job of the author is to provide readers with substantive information to help them make some kind of decision--which may include a decision to do more research because major gaps remain. 

Thus, a white paper author would not “brainstorm” a topic. Instead, the white paper author would get busy figuring out how the problem is defined by those who are experiencing it as a problem. Typically that research begins in popular culture--social media, surveys, interviews, newspapers. Once the author has a handle on how the problem is being defined and experienced, its history and its impact, what people in the trenches believe might be the best or worst ways of addressing it, the author then will turn to academic scholarship as well as “grey” literature (more about that later).  Unlike a school research paper, the author does not set out to argue for or against a particular position, and then devote the majority of effort to finding sources to support the selected position.  Instead, the author sets out in good faith to do as much fact-finding as possible, and thus research is likely to present multiple, conflicting, and overlapping perspectives. When people research out of a genuine desire to understand and solve a problem, they listen to every source that may offer helpful information. They will thus have to do much more analysis, synthesis, and sorting of that information, which will often not fall neatly into a “pro” or “con” camp:  Solution A may, for example, solve one part of the problem but exacerbate another part of the problem. Solution C may sound like what everyone wants, but what if it’s built on a set of data that have been criticized by another reliable source?  And so it goes. 

For example, if you are trying to write a white paper on the opioid crisis, you may focus on the value of  providing free, sterilized needles--which do indeed reduce disease, and also provide an opportunity for the health care provider distributing them to offer addiction treatment to the user. However, the free needles are sometimes discarded on the ground, posing a danger to others; or they may be shared; or they may encourage more drug usage. All of those things can be true at once; a reader will want to know about all of these considerations in order to make an informed decision. That is the challenging job of the white paper author.     
 The research you do for your white paper will require that you identify a specific problem, seek popular culture sources to help define the problem, its history, its significance and impact for people affected by it.  You will then delve into academic and grey literature to learn about the way scholars and others with professional expertise answer these same questions. In this way, you will create creating a layered, complex portrait that provides readers with a substantive exploration useful for deliberating and decision-making. You will also likely need to find or create images, including tables, figures, illustrations or photographs, and you will document all of your sources. 

Slavic and East European Studies Librarian

Connect to a Librarian Live Chat or "Ask a Question"

• Librarians staff live chat from 9-5 Monday through Friday . You can also text to chat: 215-543-7674
• You can submit a question 24 hours a day and we aim to respond within 24 hours 
• You can click the "Schedule Appointment" button above in librarian's profile box (to the left), to schedule a consultation with her in person or by video conference.  
• You can also make an appointment with a  Librarian by subject specialization . 
• Connect by email with a subject librarian

Find more easy contacts at our Quick Start Guide

• Next: Getting started >>
• Last Updated: Sep 16, 2024 4:38 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.upenn.edu/cwp_endangered2024

Internships are linked to better employment outcomes for college graduates – but there aren’t enough for students who want them

Associate Professor of Adult and Higher Education, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Project Assistant at the Center for Research on College-Workforce Transitions, University of Wisconsin-Madison

Disclosure statement

Matthew T. Hora receives funding for conducting research on work-based learning from the Strada Education Foundation.

Hee Song receives funding for assisting with research on internship studies from the Strada Education Foundation.

University of Wisconsin–Madison provides funding as a member of The Conversation US.

View all partners

Internships can play a vital role for students looking to break into a career, but they aren’t always available for all the students who want them. And even when they are, they may not be high quality. Here, Matthew T. Hora , founder of the Center for Research on College-Workforce Transitions at the University of Wisconsin-Madison , and Hee Song , a project assistant at the center, discuss the difficulties that students face in securing quality internships. Their insights are based on findings from the center’s latest National Survey of College Internships . The survey drew from data collected from a nationally representative sample of 2,824 students attending four-year colleges and 2,531 students attending two-year colleges. The survey was done in partnership with the Strada Education Foundation .

Are there enough paid internships?

No. Only two out of three internships offer compensation for students at four-year colleges. The situation is worse for students at two-year institutions, where 50% of internships are unpaid.

Given the rising cost of college tuition , growing income inequality and the cost-of-living crisis in big cities where many internships are located, we contend that reliance on unpaid internships is untenable.

Paid internships are crucial. They help students pay for costs such as transportation and housing. They also provide legal rights and protections for students as paid employees.

Our data indicates that with only 41% of college seniors having had any internship at all, there are simply not enough positions available in the U.S. labor market to satisfy demand from the nation’s college students. This supply-demand imbalance is evident because of those seniors who did not have an internship: 63% of them had in fact wanted to take one but could not due to a lack of positions, intense competition and personal factors such as a heavy course load.

What difference do internships make?

A well-designed internship can make a big difference in students’ academic development. It can also help determine future career outcomes.

Our data shows that over 70% of the students who completed an internship reported gains in key transferable skills . These include communication, problem-solving and teamwork skills that are valued in both college and the workplace. Additionally, over 80% of these former interns say that the experience helped to expand their professional and social networks, which can lead to new job opportunities and connections.

Other studies have documented that students taking an internship were three times more likely than non-interns to enroll in graduate school. A study in Spain found that former interns were 6.5% more likely to find a job after graduation than classmates who hadn’t had an internship.

Our data also reveals that internships help to clarify students’ career goals and boost their confidence in professional abilities. This is notable given that 80% of students in a recent Inside Higher Ed survey also stated that a college education should prepare them for a career that they truly enjoy.

Isn’t student hustle the real difference-maker?

While growing numbers of empirical studies on internships are showing the positive impacts of an internship on future earnings and other outcomes after graduation, it is better to think of this relationship in terms of correlation and not causation. This is because whether a student can acquire a particular job and thrive in our society is dependent on a complex intersection of personal, sociocultural and structural factors.

For instance, discrimination continues to afflict the hiring process – white applicants are 36% more likely to receive a callback than Black candidates. Studies also show that outcomes such as college attendance, future earnings and even marriage rates are strongly affected by whether one grows up in a wealthy or a poor neighborhood . This underscores the considerable impact of structural forces beyond an individual’s control.

However, research shows that once a student is at college, experiences such as study abroad, an internship or undergraduate research – also known as “high-impact practices” – significantly increase a student’s likelihood of obtaining a degree . The problem is that these experiences are not equally distributed or available to all students, making equitable access to robust and authentic learning experiences a critical national issue. This is one reason why educators and researchers are increasingly focusing on work-integrated learning, where real-world and hands-on activities are embedded in college courses, as a more equitable and impactful approach than off-campus experiences, such as internships or study abroad.

What percentage of internships are high quality?

Determining the quality of an internship can be highly subjective and depends on many different factors. But based on our Internship Scorecard , approximately 67% and 62% of the internships taken by students at four-year and two-year institutions, respectively, can be considered “high quality.” The research and metrics behind this conclusion include the presence of a learning plan for student interns, on-the-job tasks that involve high-level skills and autonomous work, and supportive supervisors.

But a student’s reasons for pursuing an internship can vary. Some may want to gain experience in a chosen profession, while others may simply want to explore a variety of career options. This all makes “quality” largely dependent on the students’ goals and intentions.

Further, since some majors are more directly aligned with specific occupations, such as nursing and engineering, in contrast to majors where students are prepared to enter a broader range of careers, such as arts, humanities or social sciences, finding that perfect internship may depend on the student’s field and local labor market conditions.

• Higher education
• Internships
• Work Integrated Learning
• US higher education
• Career path
• Unpaid internships
• Education outcomes
• Higher ed attainment
• student internships

Professor of Indigenous Cultural and Creative Industries (Identified)

Communications Director

Associate Director, Post-Award, RGCF

University Relations Manager

2024 Vice-Chancellor's Research Fellowships

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Findings – Types Examples and Writing Guide

Research Findings – Types Examples and Writing Guide

Table of Contents

Research Findings

Definition:

Research findings refer to the results obtained from a study or investigation conducted through a systematic and scientific approach. These findings are the outcomes of the data analysis, interpretation, and evaluation carried out during the research process.

Types of Research Findings

There are two main types of research findings:

Qualitative Findings

Qualitative research is an exploratory research method used to understand the complexities of human behavior and experiences. Qualitative findings are non-numerical and descriptive data that describe the meaning and interpretation of the data collected. Examples of qualitative findings include quotes from participants, themes that emerge from the data, and descriptions of experiences and phenomena.

Quantitative Findings

Quantitative research is a research method that uses numerical data and statistical analysis to measure and quantify a phenomenon or behavior. Quantitative findings include numerical data such as mean, median, and mode, as well as statistical analyses such as t-tests, ANOVA, and regression analysis. These findings are often presented in tables, graphs, or charts.

Both qualitative and quantitative findings are important in research and can provide different insights into a research question or problem. Combining both types of findings can provide a more comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon and improve the validity and reliability of research results.

Parts of Research Findings

Research findings typically consist of several parts, including:

• Introduction: This section provides an overview of the research topic and the purpose of the study.
• Literature Review: This section summarizes previous research studies and findings that are relevant to the current study.
• Methodology : This section describes the research design, methods, and procedures used in the study, including details on the sample, data collection, and data analysis.
• Results : This section presents the findings of the study, including statistical analyses and data visualizations.
• Discussion : This section interprets the results and explains what they mean in relation to the research question(s) and hypotheses. It may also compare and contrast the current findings with previous research studies and explore any implications or limitations of the study.
• Conclusion : This section provides a summary of the key findings and the main conclusions of the study.
• Recommendations: This section suggests areas for further research and potential applications or implications of the study’s findings.

How to Write Research Findings

Writing research findings requires careful planning and attention to detail. Here are some general steps to follow when writing research findings:

• Organize your findings: Before you begin writing, it’s essential to organize your findings logically. Consider creating an outline or a flowchart that outlines the main points you want to make and how they relate to one another.
• Use clear and concise language : When presenting your findings, be sure to use clear and concise language that is easy to understand. Avoid using jargon or technical terms unless they are necessary to convey your meaning.
• Use visual aids : Visual aids such as tables, charts, and graphs can be helpful in presenting your findings. Be sure to label and title your visual aids clearly, and make sure they are easy to read.
• Use headings and subheadings: Using headings and subheadings can help organize your findings and make them easier to read. Make sure your headings and subheadings are clear and descriptive.
• Interpret your findings : When presenting your findings, it’s important to provide some interpretation of what the results mean. This can include discussing how your findings relate to the existing literature, identifying any limitations of your study, and suggesting areas for future research.
• Be precise and accurate : When presenting your findings, be sure to use precise and accurate language. Avoid making generalizations or overstatements and be careful not to misrepresent your data.
• Edit and revise: Once you have written your research findings, be sure to edit and revise them carefully. Check for grammar and spelling errors, make sure your formatting is consistent, and ensure that your writing is clear and concise.

Research Findings Example

Following is a Research Findings Example sample for students:

Title: The Effects of Exercise on Mental Health

Sample : 500 participants, both men and women, between the ages of 18-45.

Methodology : Participants were divided into two groups. The first group engaged in 30 minutes of moderate intensity exercise five times a week for eight weeks. The second group did not exercise during the study period. Participants in both groups completed a questionnaire that assessed their mental health before and after the study period.

Findings : The group that engaged in regular exercise reported a significant improvement in mental health compared to the control group. Specifically, they reported lower levels of anxiety and depression, improved mood, and increased self-esteem.

Conclusion : Regular exercise can have a positive impact on mental health and may be an effective intervention for individuals experiencing symptoms of anxiety or depression.

Applications of Research Findings

Research findings can be applied in various fields to improve processes, products, services, and outcomes. Here are some examples:

• Healthcare : Research findings in medicine and healthcare can be applied to improve patient outcomes, reduce morbidity and mortality rates, and develop new treatments for various diseases.
• Education : Research findings in education can be used to develop effective teaching methods, improve learning outcomes, and design new educational programs.
• Technology : Research findings in technology can be applied to develop new products, improve existing products, and enhance user experiences.
• Business : Research findings in business can be applied to develop new strategies, improve operations, and increase profitability.
• Public Policy: Research findings can be used to inform public policy decisions on issues such as environmental protection, social welfare, and economic development.
• Social Sciences: Research findings in social sciences can be used to improve understanding of human behavior and social phenomena, inform public policy decisions, and develop interventions to address social issues.
• Agriculture: Research findings in agriculture can be applied to improve crop yields, develop new farming techniques, and enhance food security.
• Sports : Research findings in sports can be applied to improve athlete performance, reduce injuries, and develop new training programs.

When to use Research Findings

Research findings can be used in a variety of situations, depending on the context and the purpose. Here are some examples of when research findings may be useful:

• Decision-making : Research findings can be used to inform decisions in various fields, such as business, education, healthcare, and public policy. For example, a business may use market research findings to make decisions about new product development or marketing strategies.
• Problem-solving : Research findings can be used to solve problems or challenges in various fields, such as healthcare, engineering, and social sciences. For example, medical researchers may use findings from clinical trials to develop new treatments for diseases.
• Policy development : Research findings can be used to inform the development of policies in various fields, such as environmental protection, social welfare, and economic development. For example, policymakers may use research findings to develop policies aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
• Program evaluation: Research findings can be used to evaluate the effectiveness of programs or interventions in various fields, such as education, healthcare, and social services. For example, educational researchers may use findings from evaluations of educational programs to improve teaching and learning outcomes.
• Innovation: Research findings can be used to inspire or guide innovation in various fields, such as technology and engineering. For example, engineers may use research findings on materials science to develop new and innovative products.

Purpose of Research Findings

The purpose of research findings is to contribute to the knowledge and understanding of a particular topic or issue. Research findings are the result of a systematic and rigorous investigation of a research question or hypothesis, using appropriate research methods and techniques.

The main purposes of research findings are:

• To generate new knowledge : Research findings contribute to the body of knowledge on a particular topic, by adding new information, insights, and understanding to the existing knowledge base.
• To test hypotheses or theories : Research findings can be used to test hypotheses or theories that have been proposed in a particular field or discipline. This helps to determine the validity and reliability of the hypotheses or theories, and to refine or develop new ones.
• To inform practice: Research findings can be used to inform practice in various fields, such as healthcare, education, and business. By identifying best practices and evidence-based interventions, research findings can help practitioners to make informed decisions and improve outcomes.
• To identify gaps in knowledge: Research findings can help to identify gaps in knowledge and understanding of a particular topic, which can then be addressed by further research.
• To contribute to policy development: Research findings can be used to inform policy development in various fields, such as environmental protection, social welfare, and economic development. By providing evidence-based recommendations, research findings can help policymakers to develop effective policies that address societal challenges.

Characteristics of Research Findings

Research findings have several key characteristics that distinguish them from other types of information or knowledge. Here are some of the main characteristics of research findings:

• Objective : Research findings are based on a systematic and rigorous investigation of a research question or hypothesis, using appropriate research methods and techniques. As such, they are generally considered to be more objective and reliable than other types of information.
• Empirical : Research findings are based on empirical evidence, which means that they are derived from observations or measurements of the real world. This gives them a high degree of credibility and validity.
• Generalizable : Research findings are often intended to be generalizable to a larger population or context beyond the specific study. This means that the findings can be applied to other situations or populations with similar characteristics.
• Transparent : Research findings are typically reported in a transparent manner, with a clear description of the research methods and data analysis techniques used. This allows others to assess the credibility and reliability of the findings.
• Peer-reviewed: Research findings are often subject to a rigorous peer-review process, in which experts in the field review the research methods, data analysis, and conclusions of the study. This helps to ensure the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Reproducible : Research findings are often designed to be reproducible, meaning that other researchers can replicate the study using the same methods and obtain similar results. This helps to ensure the validity and reliability of the findings.

Advantages of Research Findings

Research findings have many advantages, which make them valuable sources of knowledge and information. Here are some of the main advantages of research findings:

• Evidence-based: Research findings are based on empirical evidence, which means that they are grounded in data and observations from the real world. This makes them a reliable and credible source of information.
• Inform decision-making: Research findings can be used to inform decision-making in various fields, such as healthcare, education, and business. By identifying best practices and evidence-based interventions, research findings can help practitioners and policymakers to make informed decisions and improve outcomes.
• Identify gaps in knowledge: Research findings can help to identify gaps in knowledge and understanding of a particular topic, which can then be addressed by further research. This contributes to the ongoing development of knowledge in various fields.
• Improve outcomes : Research findings can be used to develop and implement evidence-based practices and interventions, which have been shown to improve outcomes in various fields, such as healthcare, education, and social services.
• Foster innovation: Research findings can inspire or guide innovation in various fields, such as technology and engineering. By providing new information and understanding of a particular topic, research findings can stimulate new ideas and approaches to problem-solving.
• Enhance credibility: Research findings are generally considered to be more credible and reliable than other types of information, as they are based on rigorous research methods and are subject to peer-review processes.

Limitations of Research Findings

While research findings have many advantages, they also have some limitations. Here are some of the main limitations of research findings:

• Limited scope: Research findings are typically based on a particular study or set of studies, which may have a limited scope or focus. This means that they may not be applicable to other contexts or populations.
• Potential for bias : Research findings can be influenced by various sources of bias, such as researcher bias, selection bias, or measurement bias. This can affect the validity and reliability of the findings.
• Ethical considerations: Research findings can raise ethical considerations, particularly in studies involving human subjects. Researchers must ensure that their studies are conducted in an ethical and responsible manner, with appropriate measures to protect the welfare and privacy of participants.
• Time and resource constraints : Research studies can be time-consuming and require significant resources, which can limit the number and scope of studies that are conducted. This can lead to gaps in knowledge or a lack of research on certain topics.
• Complexity: Some research findings can be complex and difficult to interpret, particularly in fields such as science or medicine. This can make it challenging for practitioners and policymakers to apply the findings to their work.
• Lack of generalizability : While research findings are intended to be generalizable to larger populations or contexts, there may be factors that limit their generalizability. For example, cultural or environmental factors may influence how a particular intervention or treatment works in different populations or contexts.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

APA Table of Contents – Format and Example

Literature Review – Types Writing Guide and...

Research Methodology – Types, Examples and...

Significance of the Study – Examples and Writing...

Figures in Research Paper – Examples and Guide

Theoretical Framework – Types, Examples and...

Studies on pigeon-guided missiles, swimming abilities of dead fish among Ig Nobels winners in Cambridge

Held less than a month before the actual nobel prizes are announced, the 34th annual ig nobel prize ceremony at mit was organized by the annals of improbable research magazine’s website to make people laugh and think..

By MICHAEL CASEY, Associated Press

BOSTON (AP) — A study that explores the feasibility of using pigeons to guide missiles and one that looks at the swimming abilities of dead fish were among the winners Thursday of this year’s Ig Nobels, the prize for comical scientific achievement.

Held less than a month before the actual Nobel Prizes are announced, the 34th annual Ig Nobel prize ceremony at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology was organized by the Annals of Improbable Research magazine’s website to make people laugh and think. Winners received a transparent box containing historic items related to Murphy’s Law — the theme of the night — and a nearly worthless Zimbabwean $10 trillion bill. Actual Nobel laureates handed the winners their prizes.

“While some politicians were trying to make sensible things sound crazy, scientists discovered some crazy-sounding things that make a lot of sense,” Marc Abrahams, master of ceremonies and editor of the magazine, said in an e-mail interview.

The ceremony started with Kees Moliker, winner of 2003 Ig Noble for biology, giving out safety instructions. His prize was for a study that documented the existence of homosexual necrophilia in mallard ducks.

“This is the duck,” he said, holding up a duck. “This is the dead one.”

After that, someone came on stage wearing a yellow target on their chest and a plastic face mask. Soon, they were inundated with people in the audience throwing paper airplanes at them.

Then, the awards began — several dry presentations which were interrupted by a girl coming on stage and repeatedly yelling “Please stop. I’m bored.” The awards ceremony was also was broken up by an international song competition inspired by Murphy’s Law, including one about coleslaw and another about the legal system.

The winners were honored in 10 categories, including for peace and anatomy. Among them were scientists who showed a vine from Chile imitates the shapes of artificial plants nearby and another study that examined whether the hair on people’s heads in the Northern Hemisphere swirled in the same direction as someone’s hair in the Southern Hemisphere.

Other winners include a group of scientists who showed that fake medicine that causes side effects can be more effective than fake medicine that doesn’t cause side effects and one showing that some mammals are cable of breathing through their anus — winners who came on stage wearing a fish-inspired hats.

Julie Skinner Vargas accepted the peace prize on behalf of her late father B.F. Skinner, who wrote the pigeon-missile study. Skinner Vargas is also the head of the B.F. Skinner Foundation.

“I want to thank you for finally acknowledging his most important contribution,” she said. “Thank you for putting the record straight.”

James Liao, a biology professor at the University of Florida, accepted the physics prize for his study demonstrating and explaining the swimming abilities of a dead trout.

“I discovered that a live fish moved more than a dead fish but not by much,” Liao said, holding up a fake fish. “A dead trout towed behind a stick also flaps its tail to the beat of the current like a live fish surfing on swirling eddies, recapturing the energy in its environment. A dead fish does live fish things.”

Extra News Alerts

Get breaking updates as they happen.

Conversation

This discussion has ended. please join elsewhere on boston.com, most popular.

5 things to know about the apparent assassination attempt on Trump at one of his golf courses

NH Libertarians appear to endorse the assassination of VP Harris

John Krasinski’s brother settles defamation suit against 8 women

Trump was golfing taking a breather from the campaign. Then the Secret Service saw a rifle.

3 reasons why the Seahawks spoiled the Patriots' home opener

In Related News

MIT scientist among trio to win Nobel Prize in chemistry for their work on tiny quantum dots

Lexington native among winners of Nobel in medicine for work that enabled creation of mRNA vaccines against COVID-19

Mass. native among 3 chemists to win Nobel Prize for making molecules 'click'

Boston.com newsletter signup boston.com logo.

Stay up to date with everything Boston. Receive the latest news and breaking updates, straight from our newsroom to your inbox.

Enter your email address

How Big Oil’s big money influences climate research

A new study offers the first comprehensive look at the ties between fossil fuel companies and universities..

For more than a decade, students have been begging their universities to stop investing in oil and gas companies. In 2019, protesters stormed the field of a Harvard-Yale football game at halftime, yelling , “Hey hey, ho ho! Fossil fuels have got to go!” Hundreds of schools have now taken steps to divest (including Harvard and, at least in part, Yale), and many campus climate activists are moving onto the next phase : calling on schools to end their ties with fossil fuel money altogether, rejecting grants and other funding.

According to a new study published on Thursday in the peer-reviewed journal WIREs Climate Change, these activists have good reason to suspect that oil money might influence academic research. It’s the first comprehensive look at the extensive ties between Big Oil and universities, uncovering hundreds of instances in which fossil fuel funding may have led to conflict of interests for researchers in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and Australia.

The scale of influence is huge, involving thousands of partnerships at hundreds of universities, according to Jennie Stephens, a co-author of the paper and a professor of climate justice at Maynooth University in Ireland. “We think of universities as for the public good, advancing knowledge for better futures for all of us,” Stephens said. “Whereas I think the scale and scope of influence of the fossil fuel industry on higher education shows that some of that is being distorted toward private sector interests, and away from the public interest.”

The problem goes beyond funding university research centers and academic posts. Fossil fuel industry executives sit on schools’ governing boards, sponsor scholarships and conferences, and seek to influence courses and curricula. By forging partnerships with universities, oil companies gain credibility, chances to recruit future employees, and a way to subtly guide the conversation about how to address climate change toward their preferred solutions, the study shows.

Grist thanks its sponsors. Become one .

To support our nonprofit environmental journalism, please consider disabling your ad-blocker to allow ads on Grist. Here's How

Though the full extent of this funding remains unknown, since universities are reluctant to disclose that information, an analysis from the think tank Data for Progress last year found that Exxon Mobil, BP, Chevron, Shell Oil, ConocoPhillips, and Koch Industries donated at least $677 million to 27 U.S. universities from 2010 to 2020. The largest recipients identified were the University of California, Berkeley; the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; and George Mason University. 

There’s already evidence that such relationships can sway the direction of academic studies. Reports published in 2009 and 2010 from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Harvard University, and Stanford University — all of which received significant funding from oil companies — were biased in favor of natural gas compared to independent research, one study published in the journal Nature in 2022 found. Some research contracts allow oil companies to restrict what research gets published and provide them control over academic governing boards. 

One case outlined in the new study was the pipeline company Enbridge’s funding of the University of Calgary’s business school (called the Enbridge Centre for Corporate Sustainability before it was renamed in 2014). Enbridge held the right to stop funding the Canadian research center at any time if it was dissatisfied, and the company sought to have a say in staffing and who sat on the center’s board, as well as create opportunities for its executives and clients to meet with researchers.

The study in WIREs Climate Change makes the case that the relationships oil companies have forged with universities are part of a broader effort to delay political action on global warming, a tactic that complements the industry’s history of sowing doubt about the science and lobbying to prevent climate-friendly legislation . Fossil fuel funding also tends to skew research toward the industry’s preferred technological solutions, such as carbon capture and storage , and away from phasing out oil and gas, according to Stephens. 

“The industry research is not necessarily directly impacting the integrity of specific research studies,” she said. “It’s more orienting academic research towards certain kinds of responses to the climate crisis, which are really not transformative at all, and they’re actually reinforcing the status quo.”

Funding universities has long been a strategy for unpopular industries, such as pharmaceutical and junk food companies, to improve their reputation and help generate research that casts their products in a more favorable light. In the late 1970s, a manual for industries hoping to avoid regulation advised “co-opting” academics, either by hiring them or giving them “grants and the like.” It warned that the effort “must not be too blatant, for the experts themselves must not recognize that they have lost their objectivity.” 

Oil companies have been using the strategy for decades. An internal memo from the American Petroleum Institute in 1998, for example, advised building relationships with scientists whose research aligned with the trade group’s position to build a case against climate action. The oil company BP has funded Princeton University’s Carbon Mitigation Initiative for two decades, often funneling more than $2 million into the program each year. In May, an email uncovered in a congressional investigation showed a BP executive in 2020 celebrating the “Princeton relationship” as “becoming increasingly synergistic (as of course we had planned!).”

While anecdotes are rampant, prying more funding information out of universities can require intense effort. One of the authors of the new study, Emily Eaton, ran into resistance when she asked the University of Regina, where she works, to disclose its funders, and eventually ended up winning a lawsuit against the Canadian university .

“It’s surprising to me how fossil industry funding of universities remains shrouded from public view,” said Douglas Almond, a professor of economics at Columbia University who has studied how this money can warp academic research , in an email. 

There are growing efforts to fight the fossil fuel industry’s influence at universities. Nearly 1,000 researchers have signed a letter asking universities in the U.S. and U.K. to stop accepting funding from oil and gas companies. And at least some universities are responding. In 2022, Princeton voted to “dissociate” from 90 fossil fuel companies , ending a relationship with Exxon (though BP continues to fund some of its climate work). 

“We really need more public funding that focuses on research for the public good when it comes to climate, not research that is clearly aligned with the interests of a private sector, extractive industry,” Stephens said.

All donations matched for a limited time!

Grist is the only award-winning newsroom focused on exploring equitable solutions to climate change. It’s vital reporting made entirely possible by loyal readers like you. At Grist, we don’t believe in paywalls. Instead, we rely on our readers to pitch in what they can so that we can continue bringing you our solution-based climate news. Donate now, and your gift has twice the impact. All donations matched for a limited time.

Grist is the only award-winning newsroom focused on exploring equitable solutions to climate change. It’s vital reporting made entirely possible by loyal readers like you. At Grist, we don’t believe in paywalls. Instead, we rely on our readers to pitch in what they can so that we can continue bringing you our solution-based climate news. All donations matched for a limited time. 

They settled in Houston after Katrina — and then faced a political storm

Accountability, how schools, hospitals, and prisons in 15 states profit from land and resources on 79 tribal nations, shein is officially the biggest polluter in fast fashion. ai is making things worse., mississippi officials saw the jackson water crisis coming — and did nothing, an invisible, toxic chemical has been poisoning residents in puerto rico for decades, top 5 takeaways of our investigation into state trust lands on reservations, food is a huge source of methane emissions. fixing that is no easy feat., in coal-rich kentucky, a new green aluminum plant could bring jobs and clean energy, ‘weather whiplash’ helped drive this year’s california wildfires, modal gallery.

• About English Wizard Online
• Parts of Speech, Phrases, Sentences
• Spelling/ Vocabulary
• Research/ Thesis Writing
• Lesson Plans
• Worksheets, eBooks, Workbooks, Printables
• Poems (Text and Video)
• Speech/ Pronunciation Lessons
• Classroom Ideas/ Materials
• Teacher's Comments
• Creative and Technical Writing
• Teaching Articles/ Teaching Strategies
• Essays/ Book and Movie Reviews
• Yearbook/ Student Publication/ Magazine/ Newsletter

Sample Local Studies of Chapter 2 (Thesis Writing)

No comments:

Post a comment.