By Shashikant Nishant Sharma
A literature review is a critical component of any research study. It helps in understanding existing knowledge, identifying research gaps, and building a theoretical foundation for new investigations. Over time, various methods and frameworks have been developed to conduct literature reviews more systematically and transparently. Here are some of the key techniques:
1. Traditional Literature Survey (Narrative Review)
Overview:
- Also called narrative review, this is the most conventional and flexible approach.
- Involves summarizing and synthesizing existing literature based on the author’s subjective selection.
Key Features:
- Broad overview of a topic.
- Thematic or chronological organization.
- Focuses on theoretical perspectives, concepts, and debates.
Strengths:
- Useful for conceptual exploration or theoretical discussions.
- Allows interpretation and critical thinking.
Limitations:
- No formal methodology, making it prone to bias.
- Less reproducible and transparent compared to systematic reviews.
2. Systematic Literature Review (SLR)
Overview:
- A rigorous and structured method to review literature.
- Seeks to identify, evaluate, and synthesize all relevant studies on a specific topic or question.
Steps Involved:
- Define a research question.
- Develop inclusion/exclusion criteria.
- Conduct systematic searches in databases.
- Screen titles, abstracts, and full texts.
- Extract data and analyze findings.
Strengths:
- Reproducible and transparent.
- Minimizes bias.
- Suitable for evidence-based research.
Limitations:
- Time-consuming and complex.
- May exclude qualitative insights.
Use Cases:
- Medicine, education, social sciences, and policy-making.
3. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses)
Overview:
- PRISMA is a reporting framework, not a review method per se.
- It provides a checklist and flow diagram to enhance the transparency and quality of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
Key Components:
- 27-item checklist covering title, abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, and funding.
- Flowchart showing study selection: Identification → Screening → Eligibility → Included.
Strengths:
- Ensures high-quality reporting.
- Promotes clarity, transparency, and replicability.
Limitations:
- Requires strict adherence to guidelines.
- More suitable for systematic reviews and meta-analyses than general narrative reviews.
Use Cases:
- Frequently used in health sciences, psychology, education, and social policy.
4. SALSA Framework (Search, Appraisal, Synthesis, Analysis)
Overview:
- A structured model for literature reviews introduced by Booth et al.
- Balances systematic rigor with flexibility.
Components:
- Search: Identify literature using keywords, databases, and grey literature.
- Appraisal: Evaluate the quality, relevance, and rigor of each study.
- Synthesis: Group, compare, and contrast findings.
- Analysis: Interpret results, identify gaps, and derive implications.
Strengths:
- Allows a structured yet adaptable approach.
- Suitable for both qualitative and quantitative studies.
Limitations:
- Still requires researcher judgment for synthesis and analysis.
Use Cases:
- Useful for interdisciplinary research, education, and social sciences.
5. Scoping Review
Overview:
- Explores the extent, range, and nature of research on a topic.
- Often used to map evidence and identify gaps.
Key Features:
- Broad focus.
- No detailed quality appraisal (unlike systematic reviews).
- May include grey literature.
Strengths:
- Great for exploratory purposes.
- Helps formulate precise research questions.
Limitations:
- May lack depth in synthesis.
- Does not usually assess study quality.
Use Cases:
- Preliminary stage of large projects or policy development.
6. Meta-Analysis
Overview:
- A quantitative extension of a systematic review.
- Combines statistical data from multiple studies to calculate a pooled effect size.
Key Features:
- Requires studies with similar designs and measurable outcomes.
- Provides numerical summary of evidence.
Strengths:
- Increases statistical power.
- Helps in confirming patterns.
Limitations:
- Not suitable for qualitative data.
- Requires statistical expertise.
7. Meta-Synthesis
Overview:
- A technique to integrate and interpret qualitative research findings.
- Focuses on themes and conceptual models.
Strengths:
- Deepens understanding of human experiences and perceptions.
- Useful in social sciences and humanities.
Limitations:
- Subjective interpretation.
- Cannot be generalized statistically.
8. Rapid Review
Overview:
- A time-efficient alternative to systematic reviews.
- Uses streamlined methods for quick evidence synthesis.
Strengths:
- Faster and less resource-intensive.
- Useful for policy or urgent decision-making.
Limitations:
- May compromise rigor and comprehensiveness.
9. Integrative Review
Overview:
- Integrates data from both experimental and non-experimental studies.
- Synthesizes past empirical and theoretical literature.
Strengths:
- Offers a comprehensive understanding of complex phenomena.
- Flexible and inclusive.
Limitations:
- Requires careful organization and strong justification.
🔍 Comparison of Major Review Techniques
| Technique | Scope | Rigor | Time Needed | Suitable For |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Narrative Review | Broad | Low | Short | General understanding |
| Systematic Review | Focused | High | Long | Evidence-based studies |
| PRISMA | Focused | Very High | Long | Medical/social science reviews |
| SALSA | Moderate | Medium | Moderate | Thematic reviews, education |
| Scoping Review | Broad | Medium | Moderate | Mapping literature |
| Meta-Analysis | Narrow | Very High | Long | Quantitative studies |
| Meta-Synthesis | Narrow | Medium | Long | Qualitative research |
| Rapid Review | Focused | Medium | Short | Time-sensitive topics |
| Integrative Review | Moderate | Medium | Moderate | Mixed-methods synthesis |
✍️ Conclusion
Choosing the right literature review technique depends on your research objectives, available time, field of study, and type of data. For a basic understanding, a narrative review may suffice, while a systematic or PRISMA-guided review is essential for evidence-based disciplines. Methods like SALSA, scoping reviews, and meta-syntheses offer flexible and in-depth alternatives for complex or interdisciplinary topics.
Each technique, when used properly, strengthens the foundation of your research and enhances the quality and credibility of your academic work.
References
- Dehalwar, K., & Sharma, S. N. (2023). Fundamentals of research writing and uses of research methodologies. Edupedia Publications Pvt Ltd.
- Sharma, S. N., & Dehalwar, K. (2025). A Systematic Literature Review of Transit-Oriented Development to Assess Its Role in Economic Development of City. Transportation in Developing Economies, 11(2), 23.
- Sharma, S. N., & Dehalwar, K. (2024). Review of Evergreen ILS: Highly-Scalable Open Source Library Management Solution. Available at SSRN 4853757.
- Sharma, S. N., & Dehalwar, K. (2025). Assessing the Transit-Oriented Development and Travel Behavior of the Residents in Developing Countries: A Case of Delhi, India. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 151(3), 05025018.
- Sharma, S. N. (2024). Understanding Scientometric Analysis: Applications and Implications.Track2Training
- Sharma, S. N. (2018). Review of National Urban Policy Framework 2018. Think India Journal, 21(3), 74-81.
- Sharma, S. N., Singh, D., & Dehalwar, K. (2024). Surrogate safety analysis-leveraging advanced technologies for safer roads. Suranaree Journal of Science and Technology, 31(4), 010320.
- Dehalwar, K., & Sharma, S. N. (2024). Social Injustice Inflicted by Spatial Changes in Vernacular Settings: An Analysis of Published Literature.
Track2Training 
You must be logged in to post a comment.