9.7 KiB
[Literature Review Title]
Authors: [Author Names] Date: [Date] Review Type: [Narrative / Systematic / Scoping / Meta-Analysis]
Abstract
[150-250 word summary of the literature review including:
- Background and context
- Objective of the review
- Methods (databases searched, selection criteria)
- Key findings and themes
- Conclusions and implications]
Keywords: [5-8 relevant keywords]
1. Introduction
1.1 Background and Context
[Provide background information on the topic. Establish why this literature review is important and timely. Discuss the broader context and current state of knowledge.]
1.2 Scope and Objectives
[Clearly define the scope of the review and state the specific objectives. What questions will this review address?]
Primary Research Questions:
- [Research question 1]
- [Research question 2]
- [Research question 3]
1.3 Significance
[Explain the significance of this review. Why is it important to synthesize this literature now? What gaps does it fill?]
2. Methodology
2.1 Search Strategy
Databases Searched:
- [Database 1] (e.g., PubMed)
- [Database 2] (e.g., bioRxiv/medRxiv)
- [Database 3] (e.g., Semantic Scholar)
- [Additional databases as needed]
Search Terms:
[Document exact search strings used]
Example:
("CRISPR"[Title] OR "Cas9"[Title] OR "gene editing"[Title/Abstract])
AND ("disease name"[MeSH] OR "related term"[Title/Abstract])
AND 2015:2024[Publication Date]
Search Date: [Date range: YYYY-MM-DD to YYYY-MM-DD] Date of Search: [Date when search was conducted]
2.2 Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
- [Criterion 1: e.g., Published between 2015-2024]
- [Criterion 2: e.g., Peer-reviewed articles and preprints]
- [Criterion 3: e.g., English language]
- [Criterion 4: e.g., Human or animal studies]
- [Criterion 5: e.g., Original research or systematic reviews]
Exclusion Criteria:
- [Criterion 1: e.g., Case reports with n<5]
- [Criterion 2: e.g., Conference abstracts without full text]
- [Criterion 3: e.g., Editorials and commentaries]
- [Criterion 4: e.g., Duplicate publications]
- [Criterion 5: e.g., Retracted articles]
2.3 Study Selection Process
PRISMA Flow Diagram:
Initial database search: n = [X]
├─ After deduplication: n = [Y]
├─ Title screening
│ ├─ Included: n = [Z]
│ └─ Excluded: n = [Y-Z]
├─ Abstract screening
│ ├─ Included: n = [A]
│ └─ Excluded: n = [Z-A]
└─ Full-text screening
├─ Included in review: n = [B]
└─ Excluded: n = [A-B]
Reasons for Exclusion at Full-Text Stage:
- [Reason 1]: n = [X]
- [Reason 2]: n = [Y]
- [Reason 3]: n = [Z]
2.4 Data Extraction
[Describe what data was extracted from each study: study design, sample size, methods, key findings, limitations, etc.]
2.5 Quality Assessment
[Describe quality assessment methods used:]
- Tool used: [e.g., Cochrane Risk of Bias, Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, AMSTAR 2]
- Quality ratings: [Describe how studies were rated]
- Quality distribution: [Summary of quality across included studies]
3. Results
3.1 Search Results Overview
- Total studies identified: [n]
- Studies included in review: [n]
- Study types: [Breakdown by study type]
- Publication years: [Distribution]
- Countries/regions: [Geographic distribution if relevant]
3.2 Study Characteristics
[Table summarizing key characteristics of included studies]
| Study | Year | Design | Sample Size | Key Methods | Main Findings | Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First Author et al. | 2023 | [Type] | n=[X] | [Methods] | [Brief findings] | [High/Moderate/Low] |
| [Add rows for each study] |
3.3 Thematic Analysis
[Organize findings by themes or research questions. Do NOT simply summarize each paper sequentially. Instead, synthesize across studies.]
3.3.1 Theme 1: [Major Theme or Research Question]
[Synthesize findings across multiple studies related to this theme. Compare and contrast different approaches and results. Identify consensus and controversies.]
Key Findings:
- [Finding 1 supported by Studies X, Y, Z]
- [Finding 2 with contradictory evidence from Studies A vs. B]
- [Finding 3 with emerging evidence from Studies C, D]
Example Studies:
Study A (First Author et al., Year): [Brief description of methods and findings relevant to this theme]^1^
Study B (Second Author et al., Year): [Brief description showing contrast or support]^2^
[Continue for each relevant study]
3.3.2 Theme 2: [Second Major Theme]
[Follow same structure as Theme 1]
3.3.3 Theme 3: [Third Major Theme]
[Continue for all major themes identified]
3.4 Methodological Approaches
[Summarize the methods used across studies. What techniques are most common? What novel approaches have emerged?]
Common Methods:
- [Method 1]: Used in [n] studies [cite relevant studies]
- [Method 2]: Used in [n] studies [cite relevant studies]
Emerging Techniques:
- [New technique 1]: [Description and studies using it]
- [New technique 2]: [Description and studies using it]
3.5 Gaps in Current Knowledge
[Identify what's missing from the current literature based on your analysis:]
- Gap 1: [Description of knowledge gap]
- Gap 2: [Description of methodological gap]
- Gap 3: [Description of translational gap]
4. Discussion
4.1 Summary of Main Findings
[Provide a high-level synthesis of the most important findings from your review. What are the key takeaways?]
4.2 Interpretation and Implications
[Interpret the findings in context. What do they mean for the field? How do they advance our understanding?]
Clinical/Practical Implications: [How might these findings impact practice or application?]
Research Implications: [What do these findings mean for future research directions?]
4.3 Strengths and Limitations
Strengths of This Review:
- [Strength 1: e.g., Comprehensive multi-database search]
- [Strength 2: e.g., Rigorous quality assessment]
- [Strength 3: e.g., Large number of included studies]
Limitations:
- [Limitation 1: e.g., Publication bias may be present]
- [Limitation 2: e.g., Heterogeneity in study designs]
- [Limitation 3: e.g., Limited to English-language publications]
- [Limitation 4: e.g., Rapid field evolution; recent work may be missed]
4.4 Comparison with Previous Reviews
[If relevant, compare your findings with previous literature reviews on similar topics. What's new or different?]
4.5 Future Research Directions
[Based on identified gaps and your analysis, propose specific future research directions:]
- Direction 1: [Specific research direction with rationale]
- Direction 2: [Specific research direction with rationale]
- Direction 3: [Specific research direction with rationale]
5. Conclusions
[Provide clear, concise conclusions that directly address your research questions. Summarize the state of knowledge and emphasize the most important insights from your review.]
Key Conclusions:
- [Conclusion 1]
- [Conclusion 2]
- [Conclusion 3]
6. References
[List all references cited in the review. Use consistent formatting throughout. All DOIs should be verified using the verify_citations.py script before final submission.]
Format Options:
APA Style:
- First Author, A. A., Second Author, B. B., & Third Author, C. C. (Year). Title of article. Journal Name, volume(issue), pages. https://doi.org/xx.xxxx/yyyyy
Nature Style:
- First Author, A. A., Second Author, B. B. & Third Author, C. C. Title of article. J. Name volume, pages (year).
Vancouver Style:
- First Author AA, Second Author BB, Third Author CC. Title of article. Abbreviated Journal Name. Year;volume(issue):pages.
Appendices
Appendix A: Detailed Search Strings
[Provide complete, reproducible search strings for each database]
Database: PubMed
[Exact search string with all operators and filters]
Database: bioRxiv
[Exact search string]
[Continue for all databases]
Appendix B: Excluded Studies
[Optional: List studies excluded at full-text stage with reasons]
| Study | Year | Reason for Exclusion |
|---|---|---|
| Author et al. | Year | [Reason] |
Appendix C: Quality Assessment Details
[Optional: Detailed quality assessment scores for each included study]
| Study | Criterion 1 | Criterion 2 | Criterion 3 | Overall Quality |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Study 1 | [Score] | [Score] | [Score] | [High/Moderate/Low] |
Appendix D: Data Extraction Form
[Optional: Template or example of data extraction form used]
Supplementary Materials
[If applicable, list supplementary files:]
- Supplementary Table 1: [Description]
- Supplementary Figure 1: [Description]
- Supplementary Data: [Description]
Citation Verification Status: [✓ All citations verified with verify_citations.py]
Review Completion Date: [Date]
Last Updated: [Date]
Notes for Using This Template
- Remove all bracketed placeholders and replace with your content
- Verify all DOIs using the verify_citations.py script
- Follow PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews when applicable
- Maintain consistent citation style throughout (choose one: APA, Nature, Vancouver, etc.)
- Use the thematic organization approach rather than study-by-study summaries
- Include specific numbers in your methodology and results sections
- Be objective and critical in your analysis
- Document everything for reproducibility
- Generate PDF using generate_pdf.py when complete
- Delete this Notes section from your final review