sample review research paper

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

Published on January 2, 2023 by Shona McCombes . Revised on September 11, 2023.

What is a literature review? A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research that you can later apply to your paper, thesis, or dissertation topic .

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

• Search for relevant literature
• Evaluate sources
• Identify themes, debates, and gaps
• Outline the structure
• Write your literature review

A good literature review doesn’t just summarize sources—it analyzes, synthesizes , and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

What is the purpose of a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1 – search for relevant literature, step 2 – evaluate and select sources, step 3 – identify themes, debates, and gaps, step 4 – outline your literature review’s structure, step 5 – write your literature review, free lecture slides, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions, introduction.

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

When you write a thesis , dissertation , or research paper , you will likely have to conduct a literature review to situate your research within existing knowledge. The literature review gives you a chance to:

• Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and its scholarly context
• Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
• Position your work in relation to other researchers and theorists
• Show how your research addresses a gap or contributes to a debate
• Evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of the scholarly debates around your topic.

Writing literature reviews is a particularly important skill if you want to apply for graduate school or pursue a career in research. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

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

Writing literature reviews can be quite challenging! A good starting point could be to look at some examples, depending on what kind of literature review you’d like to write.

• Example literature review #1: “Why Do People Migrate? A Review of the Theoretical Literature” ( Theoretical literature review about the development of economic migration theory from the 1950s to today.)
• Example literature review #2: “Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines” ( Methodological literature review about interdisciplinary knowledge acquisition and production.)
• Example literature review #3: “The Use of Technology in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Thematic literature review about the effects of technology on language acquisition.)
• Example literature review #4: “Learners’ Listening Comprehension Difficulties in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Chronological literature review about how the concept of listening skills has changed over time.)

You can also check out our templates with literature review examples and sample outlines at the links below.

Download Word doc Download Google doc

Before you begin searching for literature, you need a clearly defined topic .

If you are writing the literature review section of a dissertation or research paper, you will search for literature related to your research problem and questions .

Make a list of keywords

Start by creating a list of keywords related to your research question. Include each of the key concepts or variables you’re interested in, and list any synonyms and related terms. You can add to this list as you discover new keywords in the process of your literature search.

• Social media, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, TikTok
• Body image, self-perception, self-esteem, mental health
• Generation Z, teenagers, adolescents, youth

Search for relevant sources

Use your keywords to begin searching for sources. Some useful databases to search for journals and articles include:

• Your university’s library catalogue
• Google Scholar
• Project Muse (humanities and social sciences)
• Medline (life sciences and biomedicine)
• EconLit (economics)
• Inspec (physics, engineering and computer science)

You can also use boolean operators to help narrow down your search.

Make sure to read the abstract to find out whether an article is relevant to your question. When you find a useful book or article, you can check the bibliography to find other relevant sources.

You likely won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on your topic, so it will be necessary to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your research question.

For each publication, ask yourself:

• What question or problem is the author addressing?
• What are the key concepts and how are they defined?
• What are the key theories, models, and methods?
• Does the research use established frameworks or take an innovative approach?
• What are the results and conclusions of the study?
• How does the publication relate to other literature in the field? Does it confirm, add to, or challenge established knowledge?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research?

Make sure the sources you use are credible , and make sure you read any landmark studies and major theories in your field of research.

You can use our template to summarize and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using. Click on either button below to download.

Take notes and cite your sources

As you read, you should also begin the writing process. Take notes that you can later incorporate into the text of your literature review.

It is important to keep track of your sources with citations to avoid plagiarism . It can be helpful to make an annotated bibliography , where you compile full citation information and write a paragraph of summary and analysis for each source. This helps you remember what you read and saves time later in the process.

To begin organizing your literature review’s argument and structure, be sure you understand the connections and relationships between the sources you’ve read. Based on your reading and notes, you can look for:

• Trends and patterns (in theory, method or results): do certain approaches become more or less popular over time?
• Themes: what questions or concepts recur across the literature?
• Debates, conflicts and contradictions: where do sources disagree?
• Pivotal publications: are there any influential theories or studies that changed the direction of the field?
• Gaps: what is missing from the literature? Are there weaknesses that need to be addressed?

This step will help you work out the structure of your literature review and (if applicable) show how your own research will contribute to existing knowledge.

• Most research has focused on young women.
• There is an increasing interest in the visual aspects of social media.
• But there is still a lack of robust research on highly visual platforms like Instagram and Snapchat—this is a gap that you could address in your own research.

There are various approaches to organizing the body of a literature review. Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time. However, if you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order.

Try to analyze patterns, turning points and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred.

If you have found some recurring central themes, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic.

For example, if you are reviewing literature about inequalities in migrant health outcomes, key themes might include healthcare policy, language barriers, cultural attitudes, legal status, and economic access.

Methodological

If you draw your sources from different disciplines or fields that use a variety of research methods , you might want to compare the results and conclusions that emerge from different approaches. For example:

• Look at what results have emerged in qualitative versus quantitative research
• Discuss how the topic has been approached by empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the literature into sociological, historical, and cultural sources

Theoretical

A literature review is often the foundation for a theoretical framework . You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts.

You might argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach, or combine various theoretical concepts to create a framework for your research.

Like any other academic text , your literature review should have an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion . What you include in each depends on the objective of your literature review.

The introduction should clearly establish the focus and purpose of the literature review.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you might want to divide the body into subsections. You can use a subheading for each theme, time period, or methodological approach.

As you write, you can follow these tips:

• Summarize and synthesize: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
• Analyze and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers — add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
• Critically evaluate: mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
• Write in well-structured paragraphs: use transition words and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts

In the conclusion, you should summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance.

When you’ve finished writing and revising your literature review, don’t forget to proofread thoroughly before submitting. Not a language expert? Check out Scribbr’s professional proofreading services !

This article has been adapted into lecture slides that you can use to teach your students about writing a literature review.

Scribbr slides are free to use, customize, and distribute for educational purposes.

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

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

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources (such as books, journal articles, and theses) related to a specific topic or research question .

It is often written as part of a thesis, dissertation , or research paper , in order to situate your work in relation to existing knowledge.

There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:

• To familiarize yourself with the current state of knowledge on your topic
• To ensure that you’re not just repeating what others have already done
• To identify gaps in knowledge and unresolved problems that your research can address
• To develop your theoretical framework and methodology
• To provide an overview of the key findings and debates on the topic

Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.

The literature review usually comes near the beginning of your thesis or dissertation . After the introduction , it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology .

A literature review is a survey of credible sources on a topic, often used in dissertations , theses, and research papers . Literature reviews give an overview of knowledge on a subject, helping you identify relevant theories and methods, as well as gaps in existing research. Literature reviews are set up similarly to other  academic texts , with an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion .

An  annotated bibliography is a list of  source references that has a short description (called an annotation ) for each of the sources. It is often assigned as part of the research process for a  paper .  

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.

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved September 9, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels and plays). When we say “literature review” or refer to “the literature,” we are talking about the research ( scholarship ) in a given field. You will often see the terms “the research,” “the scholarship,” and “the literature” used mostly interchangeably.

Where, when, and why would I write a lit review?

There are a number of different situations where you might write a literature review, each with slightly different expectations; different disciplines, too, have field-specific expectations for what a literature review is and does. For instance, in the humanities, authors might include more overt argumentation and interpretation of source material in their literature reviews, whereas in the sciences, authors are more likely to report study designs and results in their literature reviews; these differences reflect these disciplines’ purposes and conventions in scholarship. You should always look at examples from your own discipline and talk to professors or mentors in your field to be sure you understand your discipline’s conventions, for literature reviews as well as for any other genre.

A literature review can be a part of a research paper or scholarly article, usually falling after the introduction and before the research methods sections. In these cases, the lit review just needs to cover scholarship that is important to the issue you are writing about; sometimes it will also cover key sources that informed your research methodology.

Lit reviews can also be standalone pieces, either as assignments in a class or as publications. In a class, a lit review may be assigned to help students familiarize themselves with a topic and with scholarship in their field, get an idea of the other researchers working on the topic they’re interested in, find gaps in existing research in order to propose new projects, and/or develop a theoretical framework and methodology for later research. As a publication, a lit review usually is meant to help make other scholars’ lives easier by collecting and summarizing, synthesizing, and analyzing existing research on a topic. This can be especially helpful for students or scholars getting into a new research area, or for directing an entire community of scholars toward questions that have not yet been answered.

What are the parts of a lit review?

Most lit reviews use a basic introduction-body-conclusion structure; if your lit review is part of a larger paper, the introduction and conclusion pieces may be just a few sentences while you focus most of your attention on the body. If your lit review is a standalone piece, the introduction and conclusion take up more space and give you a place to discuss your goals, research methods, and conclusions separately from where you discuss the literature itself.

Introduction:

• An introductory paragraph that explains what your working topic and thesis is
• A forecast of key topics or texts that will appear in the review
• Potentially, a description of how you found sources and how you analyzed them for inclusion and discussion in the review (more often found in published, standalone literature reviews than in lit review sections in an article or research paper)
• Summarize and synthesize: Give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
• Analyze and interpret: Don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
• Critically Evaluate: Mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
• Write in well-structured paragraphs: Use transition words and topic sentence to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.

Conclusion:

• Summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance
• Connect it back to your primary research question

How should I organize my lit review?

Lit reviews can take many different organizational patterns depending on what you are trying to accomplish with the review. Here are some examples:

• Chronological : The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time, which helps familiarize the audience with the topic (for instance if you are introducing something that is not commonly known in your field). If you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. Try to analyze the patterns, turning points, and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred (as mentioned previously, this may not be appropriate in your discipline — check with a teacher or mentor if you’re unsure).
• Thematic : If you have found some recurring central themes that you will continue working with throughout your piece, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic. For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women.
• Qualitative versus quantitative research
• Empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the research by sociological, historical, or cultural sources
• Theoretical : In many humanities articles, the literature review is the foundation for the theoretical framework. You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts. You can argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach or combine various theorical concepts to create a framework for your research.

What are some strategies or tips I can use while writing my lit review?

Any lit review is only as good as the research it discusses; make sure your sources are well-chosen and your research is thorough. Don’t be afraid to do more research if you discover a new thread as you’re writing. More info on the research process is available in our "Conducting Research" resources .

As you’re doing your research, create an annotated bibliography ( see our page on the this type of document ). Much of the information used in an annotated bibliography can be used also in a literature review, so you’ll be not only partially drafting your lit review as you research, but also developing your sense of the larger conversation going on among scholars, professionals, and any other stakeholders in your topic.

Usually you will need to synthesize research rather than just summarizing it. This means drawing connections between sources to create a picture of the scholarly conversation on a topic over time. Many student writers struggle to synthesize because they feel they don’t have anything to add to the scholars they are citing; here are some strategies to help you:

• It often helps to remember that the point of these kinds of syntheses is to show your readers how you understand your research, to help them read the rest of your paper.
• Writing teachers often say synthesis is like hosting a dinner party: imagine all your sources are together in a room, discussing your topic. What are they saying to each other?
• Look at the in-text citations in each paragraph. Are you citing just one source for each paragraph? This usually indicates summary only. When you have multiple sources cited in a paragraph, you are more likely to be synthesizing them (not always, but often
• Read more about synthesis here.

The most interesting literature reviews are often written as arguments (again, as mentioned at the beginning of the page, this is discipline-specific and doesn’t work for all situations). Often, the literature review is where you can establish your research as filling a particular gap or as relevant in a particular way. You have some chance to do this in your introduction in an article, but the literature review section gives a more extended opportunity to establish the conversation in the way you would like your readers to see it. You can choose the intellectual lineage you would like to be part of and whose definitions matter most to your thinking (mostly humanities-specific, but this goes for sciences as well). In addressing these points, you argue for your place in the conversation, which tends to make the lit review more compelling than a simple reporting of other sources.

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).

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• CAREER FEATURE
• 04 December 2020
• Correction 09 December 2020

How to write a superb literature review

Andy Tay is a freelance writer based in Singapore.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Literature reviews are important resources for scientists. They provide historical context for a field while offering opinions on its future trajectory. Creating them can provide inspiration for one’s own research, as well as some practice in writing. But few scientists are trained in how to write a review — or in what constitutes an excellent one. Even picking the appropriate software to use can be an involved decision (see ‘Tools and techniques’). So Nature asked editors and working scientists with well-cited reviews for their tips.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03422-x

Interviews have been edited for length and clarity.

Updates & Corrections

Correction 09 December 2020 : An earlier version of the tables in this article included some incorrect details about the programs Zotero, Endnote and Manubot. These have now been corrected.

Hsing, I.-M., Xu, Y. & Zhao, W. Electroanalysis 19 , 755–768 (2007).

Article   Google Scholar  

Ledesma, H. A. et al. Nature Nanotechnol. 14 , 645–657 (2019).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Brahlek, M., Koirala, N., Bansal, N. & Oh, S. Solid State Commun. 215–216 , 54–62 (2015).

Choi, Y. & Lee, S. Y. Nature Rev. Chem . https://doi.org/10.1038/s41570-020-00221-w (2020).

Download references

Related Articles

• Research management

The grassroots organizations continuing the fight for Ukrainian science

Career Feature 11 SEP 24

How a struggling biotech company became a university ‘spin-in’

Career Q&A 10 SEP 24

The human costs of the research-assessment culture

Career Feature 09 SEP 24

Why I’m committed to breaking the bias in large language models

Career Guide 04 SEP 24

Binning out-of-date chemicals? Somebody think about the carbon!

Correspondence 27 AUG 24

Publishing nightmare: a researcher’s quest to keep his own work from being plagiarized

News 04 SEP 24

Intellectual property and data privacy: the hidden risks of AI

Faculty Positions at SUSTech School of Medicine

SUSTech School of Medicine offers equal opportunities and welcome applicants from the world with all ethnic backgrounds.

Shenzhen, Guangdong, China

Southern University of Science and Technology, School of Medicine

Postdoctoral Fellowships Worldwide

IBSA Foundation for scientific research offers 6 fellowships offers of € 32.000 to young researchers under 40 years.

The call is open to people from research institutes and universities from all over the world.

IBSA Foundation for scientific research

Staff Scientist - Immunology

Staff Scientist- Immunology

Houston, Texas (US)

Baylor College of Medicine (BCM)

Institute for Systems Genetics, Tenure Track Faculty Positions

The Institute for Systems Genetics at NYU Langone Health has tenure track faculty positions (assistant professor level) at the new SynBioMed Center.

New York City, New York (US)

NYU Langone Health

Faculty Position

The Institute of Cellular and Organismic Biology (ICOB), Academia Sinica, Taiwan, is seeking candidates to fill multiple tenure-track faculty position

Taipei (TW)

Institute of Cellular and Organismic Biology, Academia Sinica

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Review Paper Format: How To Write A Review Article Fast

This guide aims to demystify the review paper format, presenting practical tips to help you accelerate the writing process. 

From understanding the structure to synthesising literature effectively, we’ll explore how to create a compelling review article swiftly, ensuring your work is both impactful and timely.

Whether you’re a seasoned researcher or a budding scholar, these info on review paper format and style will streamline your writing journey.

Research Paper, Review Paper Format

What Is A Review Paper?

Diving into the realm of scholarly communication, you might have stumbled upon a research review article.

This unique genre serves to synthesise existing data, offering a panoramic view of the current state of knowledge on a particular topic. 

Unlike a standard research article that presents original experiments, a review paper delves into published literature, aiming to: 

• clarify, and
• evaluate previous findings.

Imagine you’re tasked to write a review article. The starting point is often a burning research question. Your mission? To scour various journals, piecing together a well-structured narrative that not only summarises key findings but also identifies gaps in existing literature.

This is where the magic of review writing shines – it’s about creating a roadmap for future research, highlighting areas ripe for exploration.

Review articles come in different flavours, with systematic reviews and meta-analyses being the gold standards. The methodology here is meticulous, with a clear protocol for selecting and evaluating studies.

This rigorous approach ensures that your review is more than just an overview; it’s a critical analysis that adds depth to the understanding of the subject.

Crafting a good review requires mastering the art of citation. Every claim or observation you make needs to be backed by relevant literature. This not only lends credibility to your work but also provides a treasure trove of information for readers eager to delve deeper.

Types Of Review Paper

Not all review articles are created equal. Each type has its methodology, purpose, and format, catering to different research needs and questions. Here’s a couple of types of review paper for you to look at:

Systematic Review Paper

First up is the systematic review, the crème de la crème of review types. It’s known for its rigorous methodology, involving a detailed plan for:

• identifying,
• selecting, and
• critically appraising relevant research. 

The aim? To answer a specific research question. Systematic reviews often include meta-analyses , where data from multiple studies are statistically combined to provide more robust conclusions.

This review type is a cornerstone in evidence-based fields like healthcare.

Literature Review Paper

Then there’s the literature review, a broader type you might encounter.

Here, the goal is to give an overview of the main points and debates on a topic, without the stringent methodological framework of a systematic review.

Literature reviews are great for getting a grasp of the field and identifying where future research might head. Often reading literature review papers can help you to learn about a topic rather quickly.

Narrative Reviews

Narrative reviews allow for a more flexible approach. Authors of narrative reviews draw on existing literature to provide insights or critique a certain area of research.

This is generally done with a less formal structure than systematic reviews. This type is particularly useful for areas where it’s difficult to quantify findings across studies.

Scoping Reviews

Scoping reviews are gaining traction for their ability to map out the existing literature on a broad topic, identifying:

• key concepts,
• theories, and

Unlike systematic reviews, scoping reviews have a more exploratory approach, which can be particularly useful in emerging fields or for topics that haven’t been comprehensively reviewed before.

Each type of review serves a unique purpose and requires a specific skill set. Whether you’re looking to summarise existing findings, synthesise data for evidence-based practice, or explore new research territories, there’s a review type that fits the bill. 

Knowing how to write, read, and interpret these reviews can significantly enhance your understanding of any research area.

What Are The Parts In A Review Paper

A review paper format has a pretty set structure, with minor changes here and there to suit the topic covered. The review paper format not only organises your thoughts but also guides your readers through the complexities of your topic.

Title & Abstract

Starting with the title and abstract, you set the stage. The title should be a concise indicator of the content, making it easier for others to quickly tell what your article content is about.

As for the abstract, it should act as a descriptive summary, offering a snapshot of your review’s scope and findings. 

Introduction

The introduction lays the groundwork, presenting the research question that drives your review. It’s here you:

• justify the importance of your review,
• delineating the current state of knowledge and
• highlighting gaps.

This section aims to articulate the significance of the topic and your objective in exploring it.

Methodology

The methodology section is the backbone of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, detailing the research methods employed to select, assess, and synthesise studies. 

This transparency allows readers to gauge the rigour and reproducibility of your review. It’s a testament to the integrity of your work, showing how you’ve minimised bias.

The heart of your review lies in the body, where you:

• analyse, and
• critique existing literature .

This is where you synthesise evidence, draw connections, and present both sides of any argument. Well-structured paragraphs and clear subheadings guide readers through your analysis, offering insights and fostering a deeper understanding of the subject.

Discussion & Conclusion

The discussion or conclusion section is where you weave together the main points, reflecting on what your findings mean for the field.

It’s about connecting the dots, offering a synthesis of evidence that answers your initial research question. This part often hints at future research directions, suggesting areas that need further exploration due to gaps in existing knowledge.

Review paper format usually includes the citation list – it is your nod to the scholarly community, acknowledging the contributions of others.

Each citation is a thread in the larger tapestry of academic discourse, enabling readers to delve deeper into the research that has shaped your review.

Tips To Write An Review Article Fast

Writing a review article quickly without sacrificing quality might seem like a tall order, but with the right approach, it’s entirely achievable. 

Clearly Define Your Research Question

Clearly define your research question. A focused question not only narrows down the scope of your literature search but also keeps your review concise and on track.

By honing in on a specific aspect of a broader topic, you can avoid the common pitfall of becoming overwhelmed by the vast expanse of available literature. This specificity allows you to zero in on the most relevant studies, making your review more impactful.

Efficient Literature Searching

Utilise databases specific to your field and employ advanced search techniques like Boolean operators. This can drastically reduce the time you spend sifting through irrelevant articles.

Additionally, leveraging citation chains—looking at who has cited a pivotal paper in your area and who it cites—can uncover valuable sources you might otherwise miss.

Organise Your Findings Systematically

Developing a robust organisation strategy is key. As you gather sources, categorize them based on themes or methodologies.

This not only aids in structuring your review but also in identifying areas where research is lacking or abundant. Organize your findings based on the review paper format.

Tools like citation management software can be invaluable here, helping you keep track of your sources and their key points. We list out some of the best AI tools for academic research here. 

Build An Outline Before Writing

Don’t underestimate the power of a well-structured outline. A clear blueprint of your article can guide your writing process, ensuring that each section flows logically into the next.

This roadmap not only speeds up the writing process by providing a clear direction but also helps maintain coherence, ensuring your review article delivers a compelling narrative that advances understanding in your field.

Start Writing With The Easiest Sections

When it’s time to write, start with sections you find easiest. This might be the methodology or a particular thematic section where you feel most confident.

Getting words on the page can build momentum, making it easier to tackle more challenging sections later.

Remember, your first draft doesn’t have to be perfect; the goal is to start articulating your synthesis of the literature.

Learn How To Write An Article Review

Mastering the review paper format is a crucial step towards efficient academic writing. By adhering to the structured components outlined, you can streamline the creation of a compelling review article.

Embracing these guidelines not only speeds up the writing process but also enhances the clarity and impact of your work, ensuring your contributions to scholarly discourse are both valuable and timely.

A review paper serves to synthesise existing data, offering a panoramic view of the current state of knowledge on a particular topic

A Review Paper Format Usually Contains What Sections?

You usually will see sections like introduction, literature review, methodology, analysis and findings, discussions, citation and conclusion.

How To Write A Review Paper Fast?

The key is to organize, pre-plan things out before writing it.

Dr Andrew Stapleton has a Masters and PhD in Chemistry from the UK and Australia. He has many years of research experience and has worked as a Postdoctoral Fellow and Associate at a number of Universities. Although having secured funding for his own research, he left academia to help others with his YouTube channel all about the inner workings of academia and how to make it work for you.

Thank you for visiting Academia Insider.

We are here to help you navigate Academia as painlessly as possible. We are supported by our readers and by visiting you are helping us earn a small amount through ads and affiliate revenue - Thank you!

2024 © Academia Insider

Literature Review Example/Sample

Detailed Walkthrough + Free Literature Review Template

If you’re working on a dissertation or thesis and are looking for an example of a strong literature review chapter , you’ve come to the right place.

In this video, we walk you through an A-grade literature review from a dissertation that earned full distinction . We start off by discussing the five core sections of a literature review chapter by unpacking our free literature review template . This includes:

• The literature review opening/ introduction section
• The theoretical framework (or foundation of theory)
• The empirical research
• The research gap
• The closing section

We then progress to the sample literature review (from an A-grade Master’s-level dissertation) to show how these concepts are applied in the literature review chapter. You can access the free resources mentioned in this video below.

PS – If you’re working on a dissertation, be sure to also check out our collection of dissertation and thesis examples here .

FAQ: Literature Review Example

Literature review example: frequently asked questions, is the sample literature review real.

Yes. The literature review example is an extract from a Master’s-level dissertation for an MBA program. It has not been edited in any way.

Can I replicate this literature review for my dissertation?

As we discuss in the video, every literature review will be slightly different, depending on the university’s unique requirements, as well as the nature of the research itself. Therefore, you’ll need to tailor your literature review to suit your specific context.

You can learn more about the basics of writing a literature review here .

Where can I find more examples of literature reviews?

The best place to find more examples of literature review chapters would be within dissertation/thesis databases. These databases include dissertations, theses and research projects that have successfully passed the assessment criteria for the respective university, meaning that you have at least some sort of quality assurance. 

The Open Access Thesis Database (OATD) is a good starting point. 

How do I get the literature review template?

You can access our free literature review chapter template here .

Is the template really free?

Yes. There is no cost for the template and you are free to use it as you wish. 

Psst… there’s more!

This post is an extract from our bestselling short course, Literature Review Bootcamp . If you want to work smart, you don't want to miss this .

What will it take for you to guide me in my Ph.D research work?

Thank you so much for all this information. I am unable to download the literature review template and the excel worksheet. When I click the button it takes me to the top of the page. I would really love to use this template, thank you again!

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

Sample Papers

This page contains sample papers formatted in seventh edition APA Style. The sample papers show the format that authors should use to submit a manuscript for publication in a professional journal and that students should use to submit a paper to an instructor for a course assignment. You can download the Word files to use as templates and edit them as needed for the purposes of your own papers.

Most guidelines in the Publication Manual apply to both professional manuscripts and student papers. However, there are specific guidelines for professional papers versus student papers, including professional and student title page formats. All authors should check with the person or entity to whom they are submitting their paper (e.g., publisher or instructor) for guidelines that are different from or in addition to those specified by APA Style.

Sample papers from the Publication Manual

The following two sample papers were published in annotated form in the Publication Manual and are reproduced here as PDFs for your ease of use. The annotations draw attention to content and formatting and provide the relevant sections of the Publication Manual (7th ed.) to consult for more information.

• Student sample paper with annotations (PDF, 5MB)
• Professional sample paper with annotations (PDF, 2.7MB)

We also offer these sample papers in Microsoft Word (.docx) format with the annotations as comments to the text.

• Student sample paper with annotations as comments (DOCX, 42KB)
• Professional sample paper with annotations as comments (DOCX, 103KB)

Finally, we offer these sample papers in Microsoft Word (.docx) format without the annotations.

• Student sample paper without annotations (DOCX, 36KB)
• Professional sample paper without annotations (DOCX, 96KB)

Sample professional paper templates by paper type

These sample papers demonstrate APA Style formatting standards for different professional paper types. Professional papers can contain many different elements depending on the nature of the work. Authors seeking publication should refer to the journal’s instructions for authors or manuscript submission guidelines for specific requirements and/or sections to include.

• Literature review professional paper template (DOCX, 47KB)
• Mixed methods professional paper template (DOCX, 68KB)
• Qualitative professional paper template (DOCX, 72KB)
• Quantitative professional paper template (DOCX, 77KB)
• Review professional paper template (DOCX, 112KB)

Sample papers are covered in the seventh edition APA Style manuals in the Publication Manual Chapter 2 and the Concise Guide Chapter 1

Related handouts

• Heading Levels Template: Student Paper (PDF, 257KB)
• Heading Levels Template: Professional Paper (PDF, 213KB)

Other instructional aids

• Journal Article Reporting Standards (JARS)
• APA Style Tutorials and Webinars
• Handouts and Guides
• Paper Format

View all instructional aids

Sample student paper templates by paper type

These sample papers demonstrate APA Style formatting standards for different student paper types. Students may write the same types of papers as professional authors (e.g., quantitative studies, literature reviews) or other types of papers for course assignments (e.g., reaction or response papers, discussion posts), dissertations, and theses.

APA does not set formal requirements for the nature or contents of an APA Style student paper. Students should follow the guidelines and requirements of their instructor, department, and/or institution when writing papers. For instance, an abstract and keywords are not required for APA Style student papers, although an instructor may request them in student papers that are longer or more complex. Specific questions about a paper being written for a course assignment should be directed to the instructor or institution assigning the paper.

• Discussion post student paper template (DOCX, 31KB)
• Literature review student paper template (DOCX, 37KB)
• Quantitative study student paper template (DOCX, 53KB)

Sample papers in real life

Although published articles differ in format from manuscripts submitted for publication or student papers (e.g., different line spacing, font, margins, and column format), articles published in APA journals provide excellent demonstrations of APA Style in action.

APA journals began publishing papers in seventh edition APA Style in 2020. Professional authors should check the author submission guidelines for the journal to which they want to submit their paper for any journal-specific style requirements.

Credits for sample professional paper templates

Quantitative professional paper template: Adapted from “Fake News, Fast and Slow: Deliberation Reduces Belief in False (but Not True) News Headlines,” by B. Bago, D. G. Rand, and G. Pennycook, 2020, Journal of Experimental Psychology: General , 149 (8), pp. 1608–1613 ( https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000729 ). Copyright 2020 by the American Psychological Association.

Qualitative professional paper template: Adapted from “‘My Smartphone Is an Extension of Myself’: A Holistic Qualitative Exploration of the Impact of Using a Smartphone,” by L. J. Harkin and D. Kuss, 2020, Psychology of Popular Media , 10 (1), pp. 28–38 ( https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000278 ). Copyright 2020 by the American Psychological Association.

Mixed methods professional paper template: Adapted from “‘I Am a Change Agent’: A Mixed Methods Analysis of Students’ Social Justice Value Orientation in an Undergraduate Community Psychology Course,” by D. X. Henderson, A. T. Majors, and M. Wright, 2019,  Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology , 7 (1), 68–80. ( https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000171 ). Copyright 2019 by the American Psychological Association.

Literature review professional paper template: Adapted from “Rethinking Emotions in the Context of Infants’ Prosocial Behavior: The Role of Interest and Positive Emotions,” by S. I. Hammond and J. K. Drummond, 2019, Developmental Psychology , 55 (9), pp. 1882–1888 ( https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000685 ). Copyright 2019 by the American Psychological Association.

Review professional paper template: Adapted from “Joining the Conversation: Teaching Students to Think and Communicate Like Scholars,” by E. L. Parks, 2022, Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in Psychology , 8 (1), pp. 70–78 ( https://doi.org/10.1037/stl0000193 ). Copyright 2020 by the American Psychological Association.

Credits for sample student paper templates

These papers came from real students who gave their permission to have them edited and posted by APA.

15 Literature Review Examples

Chris Drew (PhD)

Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]

Learn about our Editorial Process

Literature reviews are a necessary step in a research process and often required when writing your research proposal . They involve gathering, analyzing, and evaluating existing knowledge about a topic in order to find gaps in the literature where future studies will be needed.

Ideally, once you have completed your literature review, you will be able to identify how your research project can build upon and extend existing knowledge in your area of study.

Generally, for my undergraduate research students, I recommend a narrative review, where themes can be generated in order for the students to develop sufficient understanding of the topic so they can build upon the themes using unique methods or novel research questions.

If you’re in the process of writing a literature review, I have developed a literature review template for you to use – it’s a huge time-saver and walks you through how to write a literature review step-by-step:

Get your time-saving templates here to write your own literature review.

Literature Review Examples

For the following types of literature review, I present an explanation and overview of the type, followed by links to some real-life literature reviews on the topics.

1. Narrative Review Examples

Also known as a traditional literature review, the narrative review provides a broad overview of the studies done on a particular topic.

It often includes both qualitative and quantitative studies and may cover a wide range of years.

The narrative review’s purpose is to identify commonalities, gaps, and contradictions in the literature .

I recommend to my students that they should gather their studies together, take notes on each study, then try to group them by themes that form the basis for the review (see my step-by-step instructions at the end of the article).

Example Study

Title: Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations

Citation: Vermeir, P., Vandijck, D., Degroote, S., Peleman, R., Verhaeghe, R., Mortier, E., … & Vogelaers, D. (2015). Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations. International journal of clinical practice , 69 (11), 1257-1267.

Source: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/ijcp.12686  

Overview: This narrative review analyzed themes emerging from 69 articles about communication in healthcare contexts. Five key themes were found in the literature: poor communication can lead to various negative outcomes, discontinuity of care, compromise of patient safety, patient dissatisfaction, and inefficient use of resources. After presenting the key themes, the authors recommend that practitioners need to approach healthcare communication in a more structured way, such as by ensuring there is a clear understanding of who is in charge of ensuring effective communication in clinical settings.

Other Examples

• Burnout in United States Healthcare Professionals: A Narrative Review (Reith, 2018) – read here
• Examining the Presence, Consequences, and Reduction of Implicit Bias in Health Care: A Narrative Review (Zestcott, Blair & Stone, 2016) – read here
• A Narrative Review of School-Based Physical Activity for Enhancing Cognition and Learning (Mavilidi et al., 2018) – read here
• A narrative review on burnout experienced by medical students and residents (Dyrbye & Shanafelt, 2015) – read here

2. Systematic Review Examples

This type of literature review is more structured and rigorous than a narrative review. It involves a detailed and comprehensive plan and search strategy derived from a set of specified research questions.

The key way you’d know a systematic review compared to a narrative review is in the methodology: the systematic review will likely have a very clear criteria for how the studies were collected, and clear explanations of exclusion/inclusion criteria. 

The goal is to gather the maximum amount of valid literature on the topic, filter out invalid or low-quality reviews, and minimize bias. Ideally, this will provide more reliable findings, leading to higher-quality conclusions and recommendations for further research.

You may note from the examples below that the ‘method’ sections in systematic reviews tend to be much more explicit, often noting rigid inclusion/exclusion criteria and exact keywords used in searches.

Title: The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review  

Citation: Roman, S., Sánchez-Siles, L. M., & Siegrist, M. (2017). The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review. Trends in food science & technology , 67 , 44-57.

Source: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092422441730122X  

Overview: This systematic review included 72 studies of food naturalness to explore trends in the literature about its importance for consumers. Keywords used in the data search included: food, naturalness, natural content, and natural ingredients. Studies were included if they examined consumers’ preference for food naturalness and contained empirical data. The authors found that the literature lacks clarity about how naturalness is defined and measured, but also found that food consumption is significantly influenced by perceived naturalness of goods.

• A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018 (Martin, Sun & Westine, 2020) – read here
• Where Is Current Research on Blockchain Technology? (Yli-Huumo et al., 2016) – read here
• Universities—industry collaboration: A systematic review (Ankrah & Al-Tabbaa, 2015) – read here
• Internet of Things Applications: A Systematic Review (Asghari, Rahmani & Javadi, 2019) – read here

3. Meta-analysis

This is a type of systematic review that uses statistical methods to combine and summarize the results of several studies.

Due to its robust methodology, a meta-analysis is often considered the ‘gold standard’ of secondary research , as it provides a more precise estimate of a treatment effect than any individual study contributing to the pooled analysis.

Furthermore, by aggregating data from a range of studies, a meta-analysis can identify patterns, disagreements, or other interesting relationships that may have been hidden in individual studies.

This helps to enhance the generalizability of findings, making the conclusions drawn from a meta-analysis particularly powerful and informative for policy and practice.

Title: Cholesterol and Alzheimer’s Disease Risk: A Meta-Meta-Analysis

Citation: Sáiz-Vazquez, O., Puente-Martínez, A., Ubillos-Landa, S., Pacheco-Bonrostro, J., & Santabárbara, J. (2020). Cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease risk: a meta-meta-analysis. Brain sciences, 10(6), 386.

Source: https://doi.org/10.3390/brainsci10060386  

O verview: This study examines the relationship between cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Researchers conducted a systematic search of meta-analyses and reviewed several databases, collecting 100 primary studies and five meta-analyses to analyze the connection between cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease. They find that the literature compellingly demonstrates that low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels significantly influence the development of Alzheimer’s disease.

• The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research (Wisniewski, Zierer & Hattie, 2020) – read here
• How Much Does Education Improve Intelligence? A Meta-Analysis (Ritchie & Tucker-Drob, 2018) – read here
• A meta-analysis of factors related to recycling (Geiger et al., 2019) – read here
• Stress management interventions for police officers and recruits (Patterson, Chung & Swan, 2014) – read here

Other Types of Reviews

• Scoping Review: This type of review is used to map the key concepts underpinning a research area and the main sources and types of evidence available. It can be undertaken as stand-alone projects in their own right, or as a precursor to a systematic review.
• Rapid Review: This type of review accelerates the systematic review process in order to produce information in a timely manner. This is achieved by simplifying or omitting stages of the systematic review process.
• Integrative Review: This review method is more inclusive than others, allowing for the simultaneous inclusion of experimental and non-experimental research. The goal is to more comprehensively understand a particular phenomenon.
• Critical Review: This is similar to a narrative review but requires a robust understanding of both the subject and the existing literature. In a critical review, the reviewer not only summarizes the existing literature, but also evaluates its strengths and weaknesses. This is common in the social sciences and humanities .
• State-of-the-Art Review: This considers the current level of advancement in a field or topic and makes recommendations for future research directions. This type of review is common in technological and scientific fields but can be applied to any discipline.

How to Write a Narrative Review (Tips for Undergrad Students)

Most undergraduate students conducting a capstone research project will be writing narrative reviews. Below is a five-step process for conducting a simple review of the literature for your project.

• Search for Relevant Literature: Use scholarly databases related to your field of study, provided by your university library, along with appropriate search terms to identify key scholarly articles that have been published on your topic.
• Evaluate and Select Sources: Filter the source list by selecting studies that are directly relevant and of sufficient quality, considering factors like credibility , objectivity, accuracy, and validity.
• Analyze and Synthesize: Review each source and summarize the main arguments  in one paragraph (or more, for postgrad). Keep these summaries in a table.
• Identify Themes: With all studies summarized, group studies that share common themes, such as studies that have similar findings or methodologies.
• Write the Review: Write your review based upon the themes or subtopics you have identified. Give a thorough overview of each theme, integrating source data, and conclude with a summary of the current state of knowledge then suggestions for future research based upon your evaluation of what is lacking in the literature.

Literature reviews don’t have to be as scary as they seem. Yes, they are difficult and require a strong degree of comprehension of academic studies. But it can be feasibly done through following a structured approach to data collection and analysis. With my undergraduate research students (who tend to conduct small-scale qualitative studies ), I encourage them to conduct a narrative literature review whereby they can identify key themes in the literature. Within each theme, students can critique key studies and their strengths and limitations , in order to get a lay of the land and come to a point where they can identify ways to contribute new insights to the existing academic conversation on their topic.

Ankrah, S., & Omar, A. T. (2015). Universities–industry collaboration: A systematic review. Scandinavian Journal of Management, 31(3), 387-408.

Asghari, P., Rahmani, A. M., & Javadi, H. H. S. (2019). Internet of Things applications: A systematic review. Computer Networks , 148 , 241-261.

Dyrbye, L., & Shanafelt, T. (2016). A narrative review on burnout experienced by medical students and residents. Medical education , 50 (1), 132-149.

Geiger, J. L., Steg, L., Van Der Werff, E., & Ünal, A. B. (2019). A meta-analysis of factors related to recycling. Journal of environmental psychology , 64 , 78-97.

Martin, F., Sun, T., & Westine, C. D. (2020). A systematic review of research on online teaching and learning from 2009 to 2018. Computers & education , 159 , 104009.

Mavilidi, M. F., Ruiter, M., Schmidt, M., Okely, A. D., Loyens, S., Chandler, P., & Paas, F. (2018). A narrative review of school-based physical activity for enhancing cognition and learning: The importance of relevancy and integration. Frontiers in psychology , 2079.

Patterson, G. T., Chung, I. W., & Swan, P. W. (2014). Stress management interventions for police officers and recruits: A meta-analysis. Journal of experimental criminology , 10 , 487-513.

Reith, T. P. (2018). Burnout in United States healthcare professionals: a narrative review. Cureus , 10 (12).

Ritchie, S. J., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2018). How much does education improve intelligence? A meta-analysis. Psychological science , 29 (8), 1358-1369.

Roman, S., Sánchez-Siles, L. M., & Siegrist, M. (2017). The importance of food naturalness for consumers: Results of a systematic review. Trends in food science & technology , 67 , 44-57.

Sáiz-Vazquez, O., Puente-Martínez, A., Ubillos-Landa, S., Pacheco-Bonrostro, J., & Santabárbara, J. (2020). Cholesterol and Alzheimer’s disease risk: a meta-meta-analysis. Brain sciences, 10(6), 386.

Vermeir, P., Vandijck, D., Degroote, S., Peleman, R., Verhaeghe, R., Mortier, E., … & Vogelaers, D. (2015). Communication in healthcare: a narrative review of the literature and practical recommendations. International journal of clinical practice , 69 (11), 1257-1267.

Wisniewski, B., Zierer, K., & Hattie, J. (2020). The power of feedback revisited: A meta-analysis of educational feedback research. Frontiers in Psychology , 10 , 3087.

Yli-Huumo, J., Ko, D., Choi, S., Park, S., & Smolander, K. (2016). Where is current research on blockchain technology?—a systematic review. PloS one , 11 (10), e0163477.

Zestcott, C. A., Blair, I. V., & Stone, J. (2016). Examining the presence, consequences, and reduction of implicit bias in health care: a narrative review. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations , 19 (4), 528-542

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 10 Reasons you’re Perpetually Single
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 20 Montessori Toddler Bedrooms (Design Inspiration)
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 21 Montessori Homeschool Setups
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 101 Hidden Talents Examples

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

• UWF Libraries

Literature Review: Conducting & Writing

• Sample Literature Reviews
• Steps for Conducting a Lit Review
• Finding "The Literature"
• Organizing/Writing
• APA Style This link opens in a new window
• Chicago: Notes Bibliography This link opens in a new window
• MLA Style This link opens in a new window

Sample Lit Reviews from Communication Arts

Have an exemplary literature review.

Note: These are sample literature reviews from a class that were given to us by an instructor when APA 6th edition was still in effect. These were excellent papers from her class, but it does not mean they are perfect or contain no errors. Thanks to the students who let us post!

• Literature Review Sample 1
• Literature Review Sample 2
• Literature Review Sample 3

Have you written a stellar literature review you care to share for teaching purposes?

Are you an instructor who has received an exemplary literature review and have permission from the student to post?

Please contact Britt McGowan at [email protected] for inclusion in this guide. All disciplines welcome and encouraged.

• << Previous: MLA Style
• Next: Get Help! >>
• Last Updated: Sep 11, 2024 1:37 PM
• URL: https://libguides.uwf.edu/litreview

WTO / Education / 39 Best Literature Review Examples (Guide with Samples)

39 Best Literature Review Examples (Guide with Samples)

A literature review is a compilation of current knowledge on a particular topic derived from the critical evaluation of different scholarly sources such as books, articles, and publications, which is then presented in an organized manner to relate to a specific research problem being investigated.

It highlights the methods, relevant theories, and gaps in existing research on a particular subject. It can be both a summary and synthesis of information on a specific topic. A summary reiterates key information from scholarly sources, while synthesis is a new interpretation or combination of new and old material. 

As a synthesis, it can outline the intellectual progression of knowledge in a particular field or topic, which might involve stating key debates throughout the advancement period.  

Literature Review Examples

Purpose of Literature Review

Literature reviews have different purposes in scholarly articles, research papers , and books, depending on the discipline at hand. First and foremost, reviews are generally meant to showcase the extensive research carried out by an author on a particular topic and their findings, which will form the foundation of the research. It then summarizes the information to show the author’s familiarity with the topic in question.

The review also demonstrates the relationship between the topic being investigated and other topics that were under consideration. Finally, it outlines the gaps in the previous works of other scholars, which create areas of research.

Literature reviews provide a new interpretation of previous scholarly publications and aim to resolve conflicting studies done in the past. In addition, identifying existing gaps in a particular research area illustrates the starting point of the research.

Literature Review vs. Academic Research Paper

A research paper presents new ideas, arguments, and approaches toward a particular topic. The conclusions of a research paper will be based on the analysis and interpretation of raw data collected by the author and an original study. On the other hand, a literature review is based on the findings of other publications. Thus, the review highlights the author’s understanding of a topic based on the previously conducted research. It is part of a research paper.

Where, When, and Why

The need for a literature review in a publication will vary from one situation to the other and the field/discipline of research. These two factors determine what is expected from the lit review. For example, a scientific review will be more analytical on the methods and results of previous research. In contrast, a philosophical review will be more argumentative, highlighting the discrepancies and correspondences between scholars.

It can either be part of a publication or a stand-alone document. As part of a research publication, it is often placed after the introduction to the topic outlining knowledge about a particular topic and critical sources that formed the foundation of the research. As an individual document, it is prepared by students as part of course study to aid the students in familiarizing themselves with different topics in their field of study.

Lit reviews also guide students to help them synthesize theoretical methodologies and frameworks to adopt in academic research . As a publication, literature reviews are used to document existing information about a topic for readers (other scholars) to go through for whatever reasons they may have. Published studies are essentially helpful to new scholars getting into any field of research.

Types of Literature Review

Before looking into how to write a literature review, it is vital to understand the different types. The type will usually depend on the objective approach of the author.

Common types are:  

Argumentative review

An argumentative review is adopted when the research paper or publication is meant to take a contrarian viewpoint on a particular subject. The review analyses an existing argument, philosophical problem, assumption, or conclusion outlined in different studies with an objective to either support or oppose the argument. 

Integrative review

An integrative review integrates secondary data to develop new perspectives and frameworks on a topic. This is more prevalent in research that does not involve primary data. In addition, integrative reviews are more familiar with social sciences.       

Historical review

Historical reviews are used when scholars or authors place a particular idea, concept, theory, or research in a historical context. It examines the idea, theory, or issue from the first time it was discussed and outlines its evolution throughout a given period.  

Methodological review

Methodological reviews look at how a specific theory, concept, results, or findings were developed. Therefore, methodological reviews will analyze the different methods used by different scholars to arrive at conclusions or knowledge about the topic being investigated.

Some of the methods scholars use in different disciplines to obtain information are interviewing, sampling, practical experiments/data collection, research approaches, critical thinking, social experiments, etc.

Methodological reviews are hence used to discuss tested methods of research and ethics that a researcher should be aware of before undertaking their investigations.  

Systematic review

A systematic review is a more detailed and comprehensive review compared to other types of lit reviews. It highlights any existing research evidence associated with a clearly defined research problem or question. The evidence is collected, analyzed, and reported in a summarized but detailed manner. Systematic reviews are popularly presented as a cause-and-effect structure.

Theoretical review

A theoretical review delves into the different theories regarding a particular issue, challenge, concept, or theory. It identifies their inadequacy in explaining the issue or concept at hand. The review then identifies the relationships between the identified theories, and the degree of research done and poses novel hypotheses to be investigated.

Organization of a Literature Review

How an author organizes a literature review will depend on what they aim to achieve. As a consequence, there are multiple ways of organizing it which are discussed below:

Chronological 

A chronological format outlines knowledge on a particular topic based on when the scholarly source of information was published. Starting with the earliest followed up to the most recent chronological order. This format should be used if there is a clear chronological order in the development of the information; therefore, it will not be applicable in some cases. Instead, key turning points, patterns, and events that impacted the direction of the knowledge should be outlined.  

By publication

It can be organized in the scholarly publications reviewed by the author, scholar, or student. The by-publication format should only improve the review and facilitate what the author aims to accomplish. 

Scholars or students can adopt a dominant trend in research, such as history, developmental stages, steps involved in a process, etc.

Methodological

A methodological format is based on the methods used by the researcher. Thus, the order of contents in the lit review will depend on the method they will use to carry out their research, knowledge obtained from the first method appears first, and the rest of the information follows in the same order according to the methods used by the author.  

Literature reviews organized in a thematic format revolve around the subject being investigated in no order. It is, therefore, ordinarily up to the researcher or author to determine how they intend to outline the information. A thematic format will crossover from one period and publication to another, but can sometimes incorporate a chronological order.

Theoretical

Literature reviews organized in a theoretical format have their contents organized in an abstract framework established by the author to discuss different concepts, theories, and concepts and how they relate to the research at hand.

Additional sections

Depending on the objective, other sections do not fit under conventional lit review formats that one may need to add. Below are some of the sections that authors or students can include in the lit review:

• Current situation: The review can have information about the current state of things regarding the topic at hand to facilitate further understanding.
• History: Researchers can summarize the subject under investigation, literature, or concept if the review is not already in chronological format.
• Selection methods: Lit reviews are known to outline the methods or criteria used in selecting the way to present information and scholarly sources referenced in the review.
• Standards: it can also include the standards used in choosing the format to present information in the review and the scholarly literature used in the research.
• Further questions for research: The review can include questions emanating from the review and how the researcher will further explore their research to address the queries raised.

Literature Review Samples

Considerations Before Writing a Literature Review

Preparation is essential when it comes to writing. The objective should be to come up with a review that satisfactorily explores the topic being discussed. The following considerations are steps towards that if incorporated into the writing process:

Authors should seek clarification from mentors or supervisors before commencing the writing process. First, determine what is expected from the lit review. The type and number of sources to be used, the assignment (summarize, synthesize, or critique), and the type of information provided should be clear.

Find models

You should review literature from other authors in the same discipline and evaluate how those authors presented their lit reviews. Previous lit reviews can be used as guides that point authors in the right direction when writing their lit reviews.

Narrow your topic

It is always advantageous to narrow down the research topic to a specific area of research; that way, the number of sources can also be reduced. Even though conducting research will usually involve extensive research on all available materials about a particular topic, having a well-defined topic simplifies the task at hand.

Current sources

Determine if the research project or discipline ought to be based on the most recent findings or information. It is common for knowledge to become obsolete, especially in disciplines where discoveries and new inventions are made fast. If the lit review should be based on current knowledge, limit the sources to the most recent literature. Some disciplines will typically have a limit on how old the sources should be.  

How to Write a Literature Review (Expert Guide)

Once all pre-writing considerations have been taken into account, it is time to write the document. At this point, you should already be aware of what you wish to accomplish with the literature review, and the steps to writing an exemplary lit review are mentioned below:

Problem formulation

First and foremost, clearly define the topic (research area) to be investigated. For students, this will sometimes be given as an assignment. However, the research could be an academic project, which means that the author has to come up with the problem and define it themselves.

Search for relevant studies

Once the problem is clearly expressed, you should search for studies related to the topic, concept, theory, or idea and questions surrounding the topic. Most stand-alone lit reviews will generally attempt to answer a more concentrated question. On the internet, literature can be searched using keywords related to the research area. In addition to keywords, include vital variables such as synonyms and associated terms. The inclusion of Boolean operators and, or not, is also used to narrow down results to more specific publications.

Familiar sources for publications are:

• Google Scholar
• Library catalogue
• Econ lit (economics)
• Project Muse (humanities and social sciences)
• Inspec (physics, engineering, and computer science )
• Medline (life sciences and biomedicine)

Before selecting relevant studies, go through their abstract and determine if they fit the scope needed in the investigation. Use a list to note down any chosen works. Select landmark sources in the discipline.

Evaluation of sources/data

The next step is the evaluation stage . Evaluation involves a lot of reading. Evaluation can be done in two stages; overall skimming and thorough reading. During the second stage of this step, be critical, ask questions, and take many notes.

Some of the questions authors or researchers should ask themselves are:

• What is the author’s objective? What problem, concept, or theory are they putting across?
• What are the main concepts?
• What are the methodologies used by the author to arrive at the results and conclusions?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the results and conclusions?

Use credible sources. Most cited sources are preferred as they indicate their influence in the field. Also, keep track of the citations to be later incorporated.

Identify themes, debates, and gaps

While reading the sources, identify key patterns, themes, debates/arguments, and gaps in each literature. These elements help tie the literature to the topic under investigation. Look for consistent patterns, themes, questions, challenges, methods, and inconsistencies in the same. Consistencies present critical information for consideration, while inconsistencies present opportunities for research areas.

Outline the structure

Formatting is part and parcel of a well-written work. Selecting the structure should start by creating an outline with all the information that will go into the lit review, then consider the different types of structures and select the most suitable. Next, take the basic structure of the introduction, body, and conclusion into consideration and start work from there. 

Analysis and interpretation 

Lastly, perform an in-depth analysis and interpretation of the information obtained from the scholarly research and put it into writing. The summarized, synthesized, and critically evaluated information is then written down in well-structured paragraphs that follow the chosen structure. Transition words are used to draw comparisons, connections, and contrasts.

Format 

Ordinarily, a literature review will have three key components: introduction, body, and conclusion. These components should appear in the document in the following order:

Introduction

An introduction should inform the reader which topic is being studied. It gives the reader an overall idea of the purpose and focus of the document. The introduction lets the reader know beforehand the key things that will be highlighted in the document. Therefore, the introduction should be brief and precise.

The next item is the body, where the primary purpose of the lit review is fulfilled. The body should take critical information from all the sources used and comprehensively present them. This is where the author reports the extensive analysis and interpretation results that they gathered from all the sources they reviewed. The body should be categorized into themes, ideas, and concepts within the main topic.

Lastly, a summary of what the lit review entails should be provided as a conclusion. The critical points obtained from examining the sources should be written down and linked to the primary subject of the review. Key points are those that have the most outstanding contribution to the research.

Studies used should be screened based on provenance (author’s credentials or credibility), methodology, objectivity, persuasiveness, and value related to the topic at hand.

Guidelines for Writing a Literature Review

To improve the delivery of information, there are certain elements that authors can incorporate. They are:

Use evidence

The lit review’s findings, interpretations, and general contents should be based on actual evidence or credible literature. Using citations is evidence of authentic information.

Be selective

There will always be a lot of information available from the reviewed sources. Authors should therefore be selective and discuss the key points that focus on the topic. Not all information must be included in the review.  

Word-for-word quotes are acceptable . This is even more so if a critical point or author-specific terminology or knowledge cannot be paraphrased. Quotes should, however, be used sparingly.

Summarize and synthesize

The information obtained from the sources should be summarized, and the author should use it to synthesize new arguments, concepts, or ideas related to their research.

Keep your voice

The literature review should reflect the author’s voice as it is a review of other people’s works. This can be done by starting and ending the paragraphs with an original voice, ideas, and wordings.

Use caution while paraphrasing

Any paraphrased information should be conveyed accurately and in the author’s words. A citation must always be done, even when paraphrasing has been done.

Proofread before submitting or publishing. Go through the document a few times and make the necessary changes. The review should be within the applicable guidelines. Check for language and any other errors and edit accordingly.

Do’s and Don’ts for a Literature Review 

Every researcher wants to introduce their readers to a particular topic in an informative and engaging manner. Below are tips that can be used to this effect.

The following things should be opted by the researcher when writing a lit review:

• Find a focus: Authors should take a direction, idea, concept, or argument and stick to it. The information conveyed should then be made to align with the chosen point of focus. Thus, the review is not simply a list of analyzed sources, but a detailed summary of how different sources have a focal point (intertwined).
• Well-chosen sources: The quality of the information will, to a great extent, be determined by the quality of sources used. Therefore, take time to select suitable sources and more value will be added to the review.
• Create an annotated bibliography: Creating an annotated bibliography is recommended as one reads their sources. The bibliography keeps track of sources and takes notes. This information can be used when writing the final lit review.
• Synthesize research: Information obtained from the relevant studies should be combined to come up with new or original ideas. You should present a new domain based on previous sources’ knowledge, not just restating the information.
• Argumentative approach: Well-written literature reviews will often argue to support an author’s stance on a particular topic. The author can choose to address how the author’s work is filling a particular gap or support one of the scholar’s arguments and perception towards a particular topic. However, this argumentative approach will not work in all situations; it is usually discipline-specific. 
• Convey it to the reader: It should let the reader know the document’s main idea, concept, or argument. This can be done by including a simple statement that compels the reader to think precisely and know what to expect.
• Break out your disciplinary box: The research will often be multi-disciplinary. Literature reviews should then collect interdisciplinary information from multiple sources as they add novel dynamics to the topic under investigation. It should be noted that this does not imply that the researcher should substitute the literature from the topic’s discipline with that from other disciplines. This is usually an improvement strategy that adds substance to the review.
• Look for repeated patterns: Be attentive to pick out repeated ideas, findings, and concepts from different scholars as they will often illustrate agreed research dead-end or a scholarly conclusion.
• Don’t just review for content: When reviewing the literature, examine the content and other writing and presentation techniques. Look out for unique ways information has been presented, methods used, consistent citations, and non-textual elements such as graphs, and figures used to present information. In addition, the researcher identifies theories used to predict, explain, or understand phenomena within the discipline.
• Search Web of Science and Google Scholar: Conduct citation tracking about the leading scholars already identified in the search process. Scholars cited by multiple scholars outside the principal discipline will generally indicate that there are no new publications on the topic.

The following don’ts should be avoided:

• Do not select studies that are not directly related to the topic being investigated.
• Avoid rushing when identifying and selecting sources to use to research the problem.
• Avoid the use of secondary analytical sources. Instead, opt to use sources with primary research studies or data. Secondary analytical sources will often cite primary analytical sources; research should refer to them instead.
• Do not accept other scholarly findings, theories, or interpretations without critically examining and critiquing them.
• Researchers should not outline the search procedures used to identify scholarly sources for reviewing purposes.
• Avoid including isolated statistical findings without illustrating how they were arrived at using chi-squared or meta-analytic methods.
• Do not review studies that only validate the assumptions, stances, and concepts of your thesis; consider contradicting works with alternative and conflicting stances.

Frequently Asked Questions

It is written by researchers, authors, and students who must study literature to gather knowledge on a particular topic they are interested in.

It should be placed right after the introduction of the dissertation. It places the research in a scholarly context by summarizing existing knowledge on the particular topic.

Researchers and authors are not limited in terms of how many sources they can review. Students will usually have a given number of sources to review as an assignment. However, the number of sources referenced in a lit review will vary from one topic or discipline to the other. Some topics have a vast catalog of available sources, while others have minimal sources, especially emerging issues. It is, however, advised that each key point discussed should have at least 2-3 references/sources. For example, a 10-page lit review will have an average of 30 references.

About This Article

Was this helpful?

Great! Tell us more about your experience

Not up to par help us fix it, keep reading.

11 Perfect Academic Research Statement Examples (with Guide)

Charts , Family , Personal

22 free reward charts for kids (word, pdf, illustrator).

Printable General Color Charts (Word | PDF)

Thank you for your feedback.

Your Voice, Our Progress. Your feedback matters a lot to us.

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

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• ScientificWorldJournal
• v.2024; 2024
• PMC10807936

Writing a Scientific Review Article: Comprehensive Insights for Beginners

Ayodeji amobonye.

1 Department of Biotechnology and Food Science, Faculty of Applied Sciences, Durban University of Technology, P.O. Box 1334, KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4000, South Africa

2 Writing Centre, Durban University of Technology, P.O. Box 1334 KwaZulu-Natal, Durban 4000, South Africa

Japareng Lalung

3 School of Industrial Technology, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Gelugor 11800, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia

Santhosh Pillai

Associated data.

The data and materials that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

Review articles present comprehensive overview of relevant literature on specific themes and synthesise the studies related to these themes, with the aim of strengthening the foundation of knowledge and facilitating theory development. The significance of review articles in science is immeasurable as both students and researchers rely on these articles as the starting point for their research. Interestingly, many postgraduate students are expected to write review articles for journal publications as a way of demonstrating their ability to contribute to new knowledge in their respective fields. However, there is no comprehensive instructional framework to guide them on how to analyse and synthesise the literature in their niches into publishable review articles. The dearth of ample guidance or explicit training results in students having to learn all by themselves, usually by trial and error, which often leads to high rejection rates from publishing houses. Therefore, this article seeks to identify these challenges from a beginner's perspective and strives to plug the identified gaps and discrepancies. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to serve as a systematic guide for emerging scientists and to summarise the most important information on how to write and structure a publishable review article.

1. Introduction

Early scientists, spanning from the Ancient Egyptian civilization to the Scientific Revolution of the 16 th /17 th century, based their research on intuitions, personal observations, and personal insights. Thus, less time was spent on background reading as there was not much literature to refer to. This is well illustrated in the case of Sir Isaac Newton's apple tree and the theory of gravity, as well as Gregor Mendel's pea plants and the theory of inheritance. However, with the astronomical expansion in scientific knowledge and the emergence of the information age in the last century, new ideas are now being built on previously published works, thus the periodic need to appraise the huge amount of already published literature [ 1 ]. According to Birkle et al. [ 2 ], the Web of Science—an authoritative database of research publications and citations—covered more than 80 million scholarly materials. Hence, a critical review of prior and relevant literature is indispensable for any research endeavour as it provides the necessary framework needed for synthesising new knowledge and for highlighting new insights and perspectives [ 3 ].

Review papers are generally considered secondary research publications that sum up already existing works on a particular research topic or question and relate them to the current status of the topic. This makes review articles distinctly different from scientific research papers. While the primary aim of the latter is to develop new arguments by reporting original research, the former is focused on summarising and synthesising previous ideas, studies, and arguments, without adding new experimental contributions. Review articles basically describe the content and quality of knowledge that are currently available, with a special focus on the significance of the previous works. To this end, a review article cannot simply reiterate a subject matter, but it must contribute to the field of knowledge by synthesising available materials and offering a scholarly critique of theory [ 4 ]. Typically, these articles critically analyse both quantitative and qualitative studies by scrutinising experimental results, the discussion of the experimental data, and in some instances, previous review articles to propose new working theories. Thus, a review article is more than a mere exhaustive compilation of all that has been published on a topic; it must be a balanced, informative, perspective, and unbiased compendium of previous studies which may also include contrasting findings, inconsistencies, and conventional and current views on the subject [ 5 ].

Hence, the essence of a review article is measured by what is achieved, what is discovered, and how information is communicated to the reader [ 6 ]. According to Steward [ 7 ], a good literature review should be analytical, critical, comprehensive, selective, relevant, synthetic, and fully referenced. On the other hand, a review article is considered to be inadequate if it is lacking in focus or outcome, overgeneralised, opinionated, unbalanced, and uncritical [ 7 ]. Most review papers fail to meet these standards and thus can be viewed as mere summaries of previous works in a particular field of study. In one of the few studies that assessed the quality of review articles, none of the 50 papers that were analysed met the predefined criteria for a good review [ 8 ]. However, beginners must also realise that there is no bad writing in the true sense; there is only writing in evolution and under refinement. Literally, every piece of writing can be improved upon, right from the first draft until the final published manuscript. Hence, a paper can only be referred to as bad and unfixable when the author is not open to corrections or when the writer gives up on it.

According to Peat et al. [ 9 ], “everything is easy when you know how,” a maxim which applies to scientific writing in general and review writing in particular. In this regard, the authors emphasized that the writer should be open to learning and should also follow established rules instead of following a blind trial-and-error approach. In contrast to the popular belief that review articles should only be written by experienced scientists and researchers, recent trends have shown that many early-career scientists, especially postgraduate students, are currently expected to write review articles during the course of their studies. However, these scholars have little or no access to formal training on how to analyse and synthesise the research literature in their respective fields [ 10 ]. Consequently, students seeking guidance on how to write or improve their literature reviews are less likely to find published works on the subject, particularly in the science fields. Although various publications have dealt with the challenges of searching for literature, or writing literature reviews for dissertation/thesis purposes, there is little or no information on how to write a comprehensive review article for publication. In addition to the paucity of published information to guide the potential author, the lack of understanding of what constitutes a review paper compounds their challenges. Thus, the purpose of this paper is to serve as a guide for writing review papers for journal publishing. This work draws on the experience of the authors to assist early-career scientists/researchers in the “hard skill” of authoring review articles. Even though there is no single path to writing scientifically, or to writing reviews in particular, this paper attempts to simplify the process by looking at this subject from a beginner's perspective. Hence, this paper highlights the differences between the types of review articles in the sciences while also explaining the needs and purpose of writing review articles. Furthermore, it presents details on how to search for the literature as well as how to structure the manuscript to produce logical and coherent outputs. It is hoped that this work will ease prospective scientific writers into the challenging but rewarding art of writing review articles.

2. Benefits of Review Articles to the Author

Analysing literature gives an overview of the “WHs”: WHat has been reported in a particular field or topic, WHo the key writers are, WHat are the prevailing theories and hypotheses, WHat questions are being asked (and answered), and WHat methods and methodologies are appropriate and useful [ 11 ]. For new or aspiring researchers in a particular field, it can be quite challenging to get a comprehensive overview of their respective fields, especially the historical trends and what has been studied previously. As such, the importance of review articles to knowledge appraisal and contribution cannot be overemphasised, which is reflected in the constant demand for such articles in the research community. However, it is also important for the author, especially the first-time author, to recognise the importance of his/her investing time and effort into writing a quality review article.

Generally, literature reviews are undertaken for many reasons, mainly for publication and for dissertation purposes. The major purpose of literature reviews is to provide direction and information for the improvement of scientific knowledge. They also form a significant component in the research process and in academic assessment [ 12 ]. There may be, however, a thin line between a dissertation literature review and a published review article, given that with some modifications, a literature review can be transformed into a legitimate and publishable scholarly document. According to Gülpınar and Güçlü [ 6 ], the basic motivation for writing a review article is to make a comprehensive synthesis of the most appropriate literature on a specific research inquiry or topic. Thus, conducting a literature review assists in demonstrating the author's knowledge about a particular field of study, which may include but not be limited to its history, theories, key variables, vocabulary, phenomena, and methodologies [ 10 ]. Furthermore, publishing reviews is beneficial as it permits the researchers to examine different questions and, as a result, enhances the depth and diversity of their scientific reasoning [ 1 ]. In addition, writing review articles allows researchers to share insights with the scientific community while identifying knowledge gaps to be addressed in future research. The review writing process can also be a useful tool in training early-career scientists in leadership, coordination, project management, and other important soft skills necessary for success in the research world [ 13 ]. Another important reason for authoring reviews is that such publications have been observed to be remarkably influential, extending the reach of an author in multiple folds of what can be achieved by primary research papers [ 1 ]. The trend in science is for authors to receive more citations from their review articles than from their original research articles. According to Miranda and Garcia-Carpintero [ 14 ], review articles are, on average, three times more frequently cited than original research articles; they also asserted that a 20% increase in review authorship could result in a 40–80% increase in citations of the author. As a result, writing reviews can significantly impact a researcher's citation output and serve as a valuable channel to reach a wider scientific audience. In addition, the references cited in a review article also provide the reader with an opportunity to dig deeper into the topic of interest. Thus, review articles can serve as a valuable repository for consultation, increasing the visibility of the authors and resulting in more citations.

3. Types of Review Articles

The first step in writing a good literature review is to decide on the particular type of review to be written; hence, it is important to distinguish and understand the various types of review articles. Although scientific review articles have been classified according to various schemes, however, they are broadly categorised into narrative reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses [ 15 ]. It was observed that more authors—as well as publishers—were leaning towards systematic reviews and meta-analysis while downplaying narrative reviews; however, the three serve different aims and should all be considered equally important in science [ 1 ]. Bibliometric reviews and patent reviews, which are closely related to meta-analysis, have also gained significant attention recently. However, from another angle, a review could also be of two types. In the first class, authors could deal with a widely studied topic where there is already an accumulated body of knowledge that requires analysis and synthesis [ 3 ]. At the other end of the spectrum, the authors may have to address an emerging issue that would benefit from exposure to potential theoretical foundations; hence, their contribution would arise from the fresh theoretical foundations proposed in developing a conceptual model [ 3 ].

3.1. Narrative Reviews

Narrative reviewers are mainly focused on providing clarification and critical analysis on a particular topic or body of literature through interpretative synthesis, creativity, and expert judgement. According to Green et al. [ 16 ], a narrative review can be in the form of editorials, commentaries, and narrative overviews. However, editorials and commentaries are usually expert opinions; hence, a beginner is more likely to write a narrative overview, which is more general and is also referred to as an unsystematic narrative review. Similarly, the literature review section of most dissertations and empirical papers is typically narrative in nature. Typically, narrative reviews combine results from studies that may have different methodologies to address different questions or to formulate a broad theoretical formulation [ 1 ]. They are largely integrative as strong focus is placed on the assimilation and synthesis of various aspects in the review, which may involve comparing and contrasting research findings or deriving structured implications [ 17 ]. In addition, they are also qualitative studies because they do not follow strict selection processes; hence, choosing publications is relatively more subjective and unsystematic [ 18 ]. However, despite their popularity, there are concerns about their inherent subjectivity. In many instances, when the supporting data for narrative reviews are examined more closely, the evaluations provided by the author(s) become quite questionable [ 19 ]. Nevertheless, if the goal of the author is to formulate a new theory that connects diverse strands of research, a narrative method is most appropriate.

3.2. Systematic Reviews

In contrast to narrative reviews, which are generally descriptive, systematic reviews employ a systematic approach to summarise evidence on research questions. Hence, systematic reviews make use of precise and rigorous criteria to identify, evaluate, and subsequently synthesise all relevant literature on a particular topic [ 12 , 20 ]. As a result, systematic reviews are more likely to inspire research ideas by identifying knowledge gaps or inconsistencies, thus helping the researcher to clearly define the research hypotheses or questions [ 21 ]. Furthermore, systematic reviews may serve as independent research projects in their own right, as they follow a defined methodology to search and combine reliable results to synthesise a new database that can be used for a variety of purposes [ 22 ]. Typically, the peculiarities of the individual reviewer, different search engines, and information databases used all ensure that no two searches will yield the same systematic results even if the searches are conducted simultaneously and under identical criteria [ 11 ]. Hence, attempts are made at standardising the exercise via specific methods that would limit bias and chance effects, prevent duplications, and provide more accurate results upon which conclusions and decisions can be made.

The most established of these methods is the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines which objectively defined statements, guidelines, reporting checklists, and flowcharts for undertaking systematic reviews as well as meta-analysis [ 23 ]. Though mainly designed for research in medical sciences, the PRISMA approach has gained wide acceptance in other fields of science and is based on eight fundamental propositions. These include the explicit definition of the review question, an unambiguous outline of the study protocol, an objective and exhaustive systematic review of reputable literature, and an unambiguous identification of included literature based on defined selection criteria [ 24 ]. Other considerations include an unbiased appraisal of the quality of the selected studies (literature), organic synthesis of the evidence of the study, preparation of the manuscript based on the reporting guidelines, and periodic update of the review as new data emerge [ 24 ]. Other methods such as PRISMA-P (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis Protocols), MOOSE (Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology), and ROSES (Reporting Standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses) have since been developed for systematic reviews (and meta-analysis), with most of them being derived from PRISMA.

Consequently, systematic reviews—unlike narrative reviews—must contain a methodology section which in addition to all that was highlighted above must fully describe the precise criteria used in formulating the research question and setting the inclusion or exclusion criteria used in selecting/accessing the literature. Similarly, the criteria for evaluating the quality of the literature included in the review as well as for analysing, synthesising, and disseminating the findings must be fully described in the methodology section.

3.3. Meta-Analysis

Meta-analyses are considered as more specialised forms of systematic reviews. Generally, they combine the results of many studies that use similar or closely related methods to address the same question or share a common quantitative evaluation method [ 25 ]. However, meta-analyses are also a step higher than other systematic reviews as they are focused on numerical data and involve the use of statistics in evaluating different studies and synthesising new knowledge. The major advantage of this type of review is the increased statistical power leading to more reliable results for inferring modest associations and a more comprehensive understanding of the true impact of a research study [ 26 ]. Unlike in traditional systematic reviews, research topics covered in meta-analyses must be mature enough to allow the inclusion of sufficient homogeneous empirical research in terms of subjects, interventions, and outcomes [ 27 , 28 ].

Being an advanced form of systematic review, meta-analyses must also have a distinct methodology section; hence, the standard procedures involved in the traditional systematic review (especially PRISMA) also apply in meta-analyses [ 23 ]. In addition to the common steps in formulating systematic reviews, meta-analyses are required to describe how nested and missing data are handled, the effect observed in each study, the confidence interval associated with each synthesised effect, and any potential for bias presented within the sample(s) [ 17 ]. According to Paul and Barari [ 28 ], a meta-analysis must also detail the final sample, the meta-analytic model, and the overall analysis, moderator analysis, and software employed. While the overall analysis involves the statistical characterization of the relationships between variables in the meta-analytic framework and their significance, the moderator analysis defines the different variables that may affect variations in the original studies [ 28 , 29 ]. It must also be noted that the accuracy and reliability of meta-analyses have both been significantly enhanced by the incorporation of statistical approaches such as Bayesian analysis [ 30 ], network analysis [ 31 ], and more recently, machine learning [ 32 ].

3.4. Bibliometric Review

A bibliometric review, commonly referred to as bibliometric analysis, is a systematic evaluation of published works within a specific field or discipline [ 33 ]. This bibliometric methodology involves the use of quantitative methods to analyse bibliometric data such as the characteristics and numbers of publications, units of citations, authorship, co-authorship, and journal impact factors [ 34 ]. Academics use bibliometric analysis with different objectives in mind, which includes uncovering emerging trends in article and journal performance, elaborating collaboration patterns and research constituents, evaluating the impact and influence of particular authors, publications, or research groups, and highlighting the intellectual framework of a certain field [ 35 ]. It is also used to inform policy and decision-making. Similarly to meta-analysis, bibliometric reviews rely upon quantitative techniques, thus avoiding the interpretation bias that could arise from the qualitative techniques of other types of reviews [ 36 ]. However, while bibliometric analysis synthesises the bibliometric and intellectual structure of a field by examining the social and structural linkages between various research parts, meta-analysis focuses on summarising empirical evidence by probing the direction and strength of effects and relationships among variables, especially in open research questions [ 37 , 38 ]. However, similarly to systematic review and meta-analysis, a bibliometric review also requires a well-detailed methodology section. The amount of data to be analysed in bibliometric analysis is quite massive, running to hundreds and tens of thousands in some cases. Although the data are objective in nature (e.g., number of citations and publications and occurrences of keywords and topics), the interpretation is usually carried out through both objective (e.g., performance analysis) and subjective (e.g., thematic analysis) evaluations [ 35 ]. However, the invention and availability of bibliometric software such as BibExcel, Gephi, Leximancer, and VOSviewer and scientific databases such as Dimensions, Web of Science, and Scopus have made this type of analysis more feasible.

3.5. Patent Review

Patent reviews provide a comprehensive analysis and critique of a specific patent or a group of related patents, thus presenting a concise understanding of the technology or innovation that is covered by the patent [ 39 ]. This type of article is useful for researchers as it also enhances their understanding of the legal, technical, and commercial aspects of an intellectual property/innovation; in addition, it is also important for stakeholders outside the research community including IP (intellectual property) specialists, legal professionals, and technology-transfer officers [ 40 ]. Typically, patent reviews encompass the scope, background, claims, legal implications, technical specifications, and potential commercial applications of the patent(s). The article may also include a discussion of the patent's strengths and weaknesses, as well as its potential impact on the industry or field in which it operates. Most times, reviews are time specified, they may be regionalised, and the data are usually retrieved via patent searches on databases such as that of the European Patent Office ( https://www.epo.org/searching.html ), United States Patent and Trademark Office ( https://patft.uspto.gov/ ), the World Intellectual Property Organization's PATENTSCOPE ( https://patentscope.wipo.int/search/en/structuredSearch.jsf ), Google Patent ( https://www.google.com/?tbm=pts ), and China National Intellectual Property Administration ( https://pss-system.cponline.cnipa.gov.cn/conventionalSearch ). According to Cerimi et al. [ 41 ], the retrieved data and analysed may include the patent number, patent status, filing date, application date, grant dates, inventor, assignee, and pending applications. While data analysis is usually carried out by general data software such as Microsoft Excel, an intelligence software solely dedicated to patent research and analysis, Orbit Intelligence has been found to be more efficient [ 39 ]. It is also mandatory to include a methodology section in a patent review, and this should be explicit, thorough, and precise to allow a clear understanding of how the analysis was carried out and how the conclusions were arrived at.

4. Searching Literature

One of the most challenging tasks in writing a review article on a subject is the search for relevant literature to populate the manuscript as the author is required to garner information from an endless number of sources. This is even more challenging as research outputs have been increasing astronomically, especially in the last decade, with thousands of new articles published annually in various fields. It is therefore imperative that the author must not only be aware of the overall trajectory in a field of investigation but must also be cognizant of recent studies so as not to publish outdated research or review articles. Basically, the search for the literature involves a coherent conceptual structuring of the topic itself and a thorough collation of evidence under the common themes which might reflect the histories, conflicts, standoffs, revolutions, and/or evolutions in the field [ 7 ]. To start the search process, the author must carefully identify and select broad keywords relevant to the subject; subsequently, the keywords should be developed to refine the search into specific subheadings that would facilitate the structure of the review.

Two main tactics have been identified for searching the literature, namely, systematic and snowballing [ 42 ]. The systematic approach involves searching literature with specific keywords (for example, cancer, antioxidant, and nanoparticles), which leads to an almost unmanageable and overwhelming list of possible sources [ 43 ]. The snowballing approach, however, involves the identification of a particular publication, followed by the compilation of a bibliography of articles based on the reference list of the identified publication [ 44 ]. Many times, it might be necessary to combine both approaches, but irrespective, the author must keep an accurate track and record of papers cited in the search. A simple and efficient strategy for populating the bibliography of review articles is to go through the abstract (and sometimes the conclusion) of a paper; if the abstract is related to the topic of discourse, the author might go ahead and read the entire article; otherwise, he/she is advised to move on [ 45 ]. Winchester and Salji [ 5 ] noted that to learn the background of the subject/topic to be reviewed, starting literature searches with academic textbooks or published review articles is imperative, especially for beginners. Furthermore, it would also assist in compiling the list of keywords, identifying areas of further exploration, and providing a glimpse of the current state of the research. However, past reviews ideally are not to serve as the foundation of a new review as they are written from someone else's viewpoint, which might have been tainted with some bias. Fortunately, the accessibility and search for the literature have been made relatively easier than they were a few decades ago as the current information age has placed an enormous volume of knowledge right at our fingertips [ 46 ]. Nevertheless, when gathering the literature from the Internet, authors should exercise utmost caution as much of the information may not be verified or peer-reviewed and thus may be unregulated and unreliable. For instance, Wikipedia, despite being a large repository of information with more than 6.7 million articles in the English language alone, is considered unreliable for scientific literature reviews, due to its openness to public editing [ 47 ]. However, in addition to peer-reviewed journal publications—which are most ideal—reviews can also be drawn from a wide range of other sources such as technical documents, in-house reports, conference abstracts, and conference proceedings. Similarly, “Google Scholar”—as against “Google” and other general search engines—is more appropriate as its searches are restricted to only academic articles produced by scholarly societies or/and publishers [ 48 ]. Furthermore, the various electronic databases, such as ScienceDirect, Web of Science, PubMed, and MEDLINE, many of which focus on specific fields of research, are also ideal options [ 49 ]. Advancement in computer indexing has remarkably expanded the ease and ability to search large databases for every potentially relevant article. In addition to searching by topic, literature search can be modified by time; however, there must be a balance between old papers and recent ones. The general consensus in science is that publications less than five years old are considered recent.

It is important, especially in systematic reviews and meta-analyses, that the specific method of running the computer searches be properly documented as there is the need to include this in the method (methodology) section of such papers. Typically, the method details the keywords, databases explored, search terms used, and the inclusion/exclusion criteria applied in the selection of data and any other specific decision/criteria. All of these will ensure the reproducibility and thoroughness of the search and the selection procedure. However, Randolph [ 10 ] noted that Internet searches might not give the exhaustive list of articles needed for a review article; hence, it is advised that authors search through the reference lists of articles that were obtained initially from the Internet search. After determining the relevant articles from the list, the author should read through the references of these articles and repeat the cycle until saturation is reached [ 10 ]. After populating the articles needed for the literature review, the next step is to analyse them individually and in their whole entirety. A systematic approach to this is to identify the key information within the papers, examine them in depth, and synthesise original perspectives by integrating the information and making inferences based on the findings. In this regard, it is imperative to link one source to the other in a logical manner, for instance, taking note of studies with similar methodologies, papers that agree, or results that are contradictory [ 42 ].

5. Structuring the Review Article

The title and abstract are the main selling points of a review article, as most readers will only peruse these two elements and usually go on to read the full paper if they are drawn in by either or both of the two. Tullu [ 50 ] recommends that the title of a scientific paper “should be descriptive, direct, accurate, appropriate, interesting, concise, precise, unique, and not be misleading.” In addition to providing “just enough details” to entice the reader, words in the titles are also used by electronic databases, journal websites, and search engines to index and retrieve a particular paper during a search [ 51 ]. Titles are of different types and must be chosen according to the topic under review. They are generally classified as descriptive, declarative, or interrogative and can also be grouped into compound, nominal, or full-sentence titles [ 50 ]. The subject of these categorisations has been extensively discussed in many articles; however, the reader must also be aware of the compound titles, which usually contain a main title and a subtitle. Typically, subtitles provide additional context—to the main title—and they may specify the geographic scope of the research, research methodology, or sample size [ 52 ].

Just like primary research articles, there are many debates about the optimum length of a review article's title. However, the general consensus is to keep the title as brief as possible while not being too general. A title length between 10 and 15 words is recommended, since longer titles can be more challenging to comprehend. Paiva et al. [ 53 ] observed that articles which contain 95 characters or less get more views and citations. However, emphasis must be placed on conciseness as the audience will be more satisfied if they can understand what exactly the review has contributed to the field, rather than just a hint about the general topic area. Authors should also endeavour to stick to the journal's specific requirements, especially regarding the length of the title and what they should or should not contain [ 9 ]. Thus, avoidance of filler words such as “a review on/of,” “an observation of,” or “a study of” is a very simple way to limit title length. In addition, abbreviations or acronyms should be avoided in the title, except the standard or commonly interpreted ones such as AIDS, DNA, HIV, and RNA. In summary, to write an effective title, the authors should consider the following points. What is the paper about? What was the methodology used? What were the highlights and major conclusions? Subsequently, the author should list all the keywords from these answers, construct a sentence from these keywords, and finally delete all redundant words from the sentence title. It is also possible to gain some ideas by scanning indices and article titles in major journals in the field. It is important to emphasise that a title is not chosen and set in stone, and the title is most likely to be continually revised and adjusted until the end of the writing process.

5.2. Abstract

The abstract, also referred to as the synopsis, is a summary of the full research paper; it is typically independent and can stand alone. For most readers, a publication does not exist beyond the abstract, partly because abstracts are often the only section of a paper that is made available to the readers at no cost, whereas the full paper may attract a payment or subscription [ 54 ]. Thus, the abstract is supposed to set the tone for the few readers who wish to read the rest of the paper. It has also been noted that the abstract gives the first impression of a research work to journal editors, conference scientific committees, or referees, who might outright reject the paper if the abstract is poorly written or inadequate [ 50 ]. Hence, it is imperative that the abstract succinctly represents the entire paper and projects it positively. Just like the title, abstracts have to be balanced, comprehensive, concise, functional, independent, precise, scholarly, and unbiased and not be misleading [ 55 ]. Basically, the abstract should be formulated using keywords from all the sections of the main manuscript. Thus, it is pertinent that the abstract conveys the focus, key message, rationale, and novelty of the paper without any compromise or exaggeration. Furthermore, the abstract must be consistent with the rest of the paper; as basic as this instruction might sound, it is not to be taken for granted. For example, a study by Vrijhoef and Steuten [ 56 ] revealed that 18–68% of 264 abstracts from some scientific journals contained information that was inconsistent with the main body of the publications.

Abstracts can either be structured or unstructured; in addition, they can further be classified as either descriptive or informative. Unstructured abstracts, which are used by many scientific journals, are free flowing with no predefined subheadings, while structured abstracts have specific subheadings/subsections under which the abstract needs to be composed. Structured abstracts have been noted to be more informative and are usually divided into subsections which include the study background/introduction, objectives, methodology design, results, and conclusions [ 57 ]. No matter the style chosen, the author must carefully conform to the instructions provided by the potential journal of submission, which may include but are not limited to the format, font size/style, word limit, and subheadings [ 58 ]. The word limit for abstracts in most scientific journals is typically between 150 and 300 words. It is also a general rule that abstracts do not contain any references whatsoever.

Typically, an abstract should be written in the active voice, and there is no such thing as a perfect abstract as it could always be improved on. It is advised that the author first makes an initial draft which would contain all the essential parts of the paper, which could then be polished subsequently. The draft should begin with a brief background which would lead to the research questions. It might also include a general overview of the methodology used (if applicable) and importantly, the major results/observations/highlights of the review paper. The abstract should end with one or few sentences about any implications, perspectives, or future research that may be developed from the review exercise. Finally, the authors should eliminate redundant words and edit the abstract to the correct word count permitted by the journal [ 59 ]. It is always beneficial to read previous abstracts published in the intended journal, related topics/subjects from other journals, and other reputable sources. Furthermore, the author should endeavour to get feedback on the abstract especially from peers and co-authors. As the abstract is the face of the whole paper, it is best that it is the last section to be finalised, as by this time, the author would have developed a clearer understanding of the findings and conclusions of the entire paper.

5.3. Graphical Abstracts

Since the mid-2000s, an increasing number of journals now require authors to provide a graphical abstract (GA) in addition to the traditional written abstract, to increase the accessibility of scientific publications to readers [ 60 ]. A study showed that publications with GA performed better than those without it, when the abstract views, total citations, and downloads were compared [ 61 ]. However, the GA should provide “a single, concise pictorial, and visual summary of the main findings of an article” [ 62 ]. Although they are meant to be a stand-alone summary of the whole paper, it has been noted that they are not so easily comprehensible without having read through the traditionally written abstract [ 63 ]. It is important to note that, like traditional abstracts, many reputable journals require GAs to adhere to certain specifications such as colour, dimension, quality, file size, and file format (usually JPEG/JPG, PDF, PNG, or TIFF). In addition, it is imperative to use engaging and accurate figures, all of which must be synthesised in order to accurately reflect the key message of the paper. Currently, there are various online or downloadable graphical tools that can be used for creating GAs, such as Microsoft Paint or PowerPoint, Mindthegraph, ChemDraw, CorelDraw, and BioRender.

5.4. Keywords

As a standard practice, journals require authors to select 4–8 keywords (or phrases), which are typically listed below the abstract. A good set of keywords will enable indexers and search engines to find relevant papers more easily and can be considered as a very concise abstract [ 64 ]. According to Dewan and Gupta [ 51 ], the selection of appropriate keywords will significantly enhance the retrieval, accession, and consequently, the citation of the review paper. Ideally, keywords can be variants of the terms/phrases used in the title, the abstract, and the main text, but they should ideally not be the exact words in the main title. Choosing the most appropriate keywords for a review article involves listing down the key terms and phrases in the article, including abbreviations. Subsequently, a quick review of the glossary/vocabulary/term list or indexing standard in the specific discipline will assist in selecting the best and most precise keywords that match those used in the databases from the list drawn. In addition, the keywords should not be broad or general terms (e.g., DNA, biology, and enzymes) but must be specific to the field or subfield of study as well as to the particular paper [ 65 ].

5.5. Introduction

The introduction of an article is the first major section of the manuscript, and it presents basic information to the reader without compelling them to study past publications. In addition, the introduction directs the reader to the main arguments and points developed in the main body of the article while clarifying the current state of knowledge in that particular area of research [ 12 ]. The introduction part of a review article is usually sectionalised into background information, a description of the main topic and finally a statement of the main purpose of the review [ 66 ]. Authors may begin the introduction with brief general statements—which provide background knowledge on the subject matter—that lead to more specific ones [ 67 ]. It is at this point that the reader's attention must be caught as the background knowledge must highlight the importance and justification for the subject being discussed, while also identifying the major problem to be addressed [ 68 ]. In addition, the background should be broad enough to attract even nonspecialists in the field to maximise the impact and widen the reach of the article. All of these should be done in the light of current literature; however, old references may also be used for historical purposes. A very important aspect of the introduction is clearly stating and establishing the research problem(s) and how a review of the particular topic contributes to those problem(s). Thus, the research gap which the paper intends to fill, the limitations of previous works and past reviews, if available, and the new knowledge to be contributed must all be highlighted. Inadequate information and the inability to clarify the problem will keep readers (who have the desire to obtain new information) from reading beyond the introduction [ 69 ]. It is also pertinent that the author establishes the purpose of reviewing the literature and defines the scope as well as the major synthesised point of view. Furthermore, a brief insight into the criteria used to select, evaluate, and analyse the literature, as well as the outline or sequence of the review, should be provided in the introduction. Subsequently, the specific objectives of the review article must be presented. The last part of the “introduction” section should focus on the solution, the way forward, the recommendations, and the further areas of research as deduced from the whole review process. According to DeMaria [ 70 ], clearly expressed or recommended solutions to an explicitly revealed problem are very important for the wholesomeness of the “introduction” section. It is believed that following these steps will give readers the opportunity to track the problems and the corresponding solution from their own perspective in the light of current literature. As against some suggestions that the introduction should be written only in present tenses, it is also believed that it could be done with other tenses in addition to the present tense. In this regard, general facts should be written in the present tense, specific research/work should be in the past tense, while the concluding statement should be in the past perfect or simple past. Furthermore, many of the abbreviations to be used in the rest of the manuscript and their explanations should be defined in this section.

5.6. Methodology

Writing a review article is equivalent to conducting a research study, with the information gathered by the author (reviewer) representing the data. Like all major studies, it involves conceptualisation, planning, implementation, and dissemination [ 71 ], all of which may be detailed in a methodology section, if necessary. Hence, the methodological section of a review paper (which can also be referred to as the review protocol) details how the relevant literature was selected and how it was analysed as well as summarised. The selection details may include, but are not limited to, the database consulted and the specific search terms used together with the inclusion/exclusion criteria. As earlier highlighted in Section 3 , a description of the methodology is required for all types of reviews except for narrative reviews. This is partly because unlike narrative reviews, all other review articles follow systematic approaches which must ensure significant reproducibility [ 72 ]. Therefore, where necessary, the methods of data extraction from the literature and data synthesis must also be highlighted as well. In some cases, it is important to show how data were combined by highlighting the statistical methods used, measures of effect, and tests performed, as well as demonstrating heterogeneity and publication bias [ 73 ].

The methodology should also detail the major databases consulted during the literature search, e.g., Dimensions, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and PubMed. For meta-analysis, it is imperative to highlight the software and/or package used, which could include Comprehensive Meta-Analysis, OpenMEE, Review Manager (RevMan), Stata, SAS, and R Studio. It is also necessary to state the mathematical methods used for the analysis; examples of these include the Bayesian analysis, the Mantel–Haenszel method, and the inverse variance method. The methodology should also state the number of authors that carried out the initial review stage of the study, as it has been recommended that at least two reviews should be done blindly and in parallel, especially when it comes to the acquisition and synthesis of data [ 74 ]. Finally, the quality and validity assessment of the publication used in the review must be stated and well clarified [ 73 ].

5.7. Main Body of the Review

Ideally, the main body of a publishable review should answer these questions: What is new (contribution)? Why so (logic)? So what (impact)? How well it is done (thoroughness)? The flow of the main body of a review article must be well organised to adequately maintain the attention of the readers as well as guide them through the section. It is recommended that the author should consider drawing a conceptual scheme of the main body first, using methods such as mind-mapping. This will help create a logical flow of thought and presentation, while also linking the various sections of the manuscript together. According to Moreira [ 75 ], “reports do not simply yield their findings, rather reviewers make them yield,” and thus, it is the author's responsibility to transform “resistant” texts into “docile” texts. Hence, after the search for the literature, the essential themes and key concepts of the review paper must be identified and synthesised together. This synthesis primarily involves creating hypotheses about the relationships between the concepts with the aim of increasing the understanding of the topic being reviewed. The important information from the various sources should not only be summarised, but the significance of studies must be related back to the initial question(s) posed by the review article. Furthermore, MacLure [ 76 ] stated that data are not just to be plainly “extracted intact” and “used exactly as extracted,” but must be modified, reconfigured, transformed, transposed, converted, tabulated, graphed, or manipulated to enable synthesis, combination, and comparison. Therefore, different pieces of information must be extracted from the reports in which they were previously deposited and then refined into the body of the new article [ 75 ]. To this end, adequate comparison and combination might require that “qualitative data be quantified” or/and “quantitative data may be qualitized” [ 77 ]. In order to accomplish all of these goals, the author may have to transform, paraphrase, generalize, specify, and reorder the text [ 78 ]. For comprehensiveness, the body paragraphs should be arranged in a similar order as it was initially stated in the abstract or/and introduction. Thus, the main body could be divided into thematic areas, each of which could be independently comprehensive and treated as a mini review. Similarly, the sections can also be arranged chronologically depending on the focus of the review. Furthermore, the abstractions should proceed from a wider general view of the literature being reviewed and then be narrowed down to the specifics. In the process, deep insights should also be provided between the topic of the review and the wider subject area, e.g., fungal enzymes and enzymes in general. The abstractions must also be discussed in more detail by presenting more specific information from the identified sources (with proper citations of course!). For example, it is important to identify and highlight contrary findings and rival interpretations as well as to point out areas of agreement or debate among different bodies of literature. Often, there are previous reviews on the same topic/concept; however, this does not prevent a new author from writing one on the same topic, especially if the previous reviews were written many years ago. However, it is important that the body of the new manuscript be written from a new angle that was not adequately covered in the past reviews and should also incorporate new studies that have accumulated since the last review(s). In addition, the new review might also highlight the approaches, limitations, and conclusions of the past studies. But the authors must not be excessively critical of the past reviews as this is regarded by many authors as a sign of poor professionalism [ 3 , 79 ]. Daft [ 79 ] emphasized that it is more important for a reviewer to state how their research builds on previous work instead of outright claiming that previous works are incompetent and inadequate. However, if a series of related papers on one topic have a common error or research flaw that needs rectification, the reviewer must point this out with the aim of moving the field forward [ 3 ]. Like every other scientific paper, the main body of a review article also needs to be consistent in style, for example, in the choice of passive vs. active voice and present vs. past tense. It is also important to note that tables and figures can serve as a powerful tool for highlighting key points in the body of the review, and they are now considered core elements of reviews. For more guidance and insights into what should make up the contents of a good review article, readers are also advised to get familiarised with the Boote and Beile [ 80 ] literature review scoring rubric as well as the review article checklist of Short [ 81 ].

5.8. Tables and Figures

An ideal review article should be logically structured and efficiently utilise illustrations, in the form of tables and figures, to convey the key findings and relationships in the study. According to Tay [ 13 ], illustrations often take a secondary role in review papers when compared to primary research papers which are focused on illustrations. However, illustrations are very important in review articles as they can serve as succinct means of communicating major findings and insights. Franzblau and Chung [ 82 ] pointed out that illustrations serve three major purposes in a scientific article: they simplify complex data and relationships for better understanding, they minimise reading time by summarising and bringing to focus on the key findings (or trends), and last, they help to reduce the overall word count. Hence, inserting and constructing illustrations in a review article is as meticulous as it is important. However, important decisions should be made on whether the charts, figures, or tables to be potentially inserted in the manuscript are indeed needed and how best to design them [ 83 ]. Illustrations should enhance the text while providing necessary information; thus, the information described in illustrations should not contradict that in the main text and should also not be a repetition of texts [ 84 ]. Furthermore, illustrations must be autonomous, meaning they ought to be intelligible without having to read the text portion of the manuscript; thus, the reader does not have to flip back and forth between the illustration and the main text in order to understand it [ 85 ]. It should be noted that tables or figures that directly reiterate the main text or contain extraneous information will only make a mess of the manuscript and discourage readers [ 86 ].

Kotz and Cals [ 87 ] recommend that the layout of tables and figures should be carefully designed in a clear manner with suitable layouts, which will allow them to be referred to logically and chronologically in the text. In addition, illustrations should only contain simple text, as lengthy details would contradict their initial objective, which was to provide simple examples or an overview. Furthermore, the use of abbreviations in illustrations, especially tables, should be avoided if possible. If not, the abbreviations should be defined explicitly in the footnotes or legends of the illustration [ 88 ]. Similarly, numerical values in tables and graphs should also be correctly approximated [ 84 ]. It is recommended that the number of tables and figures in the manuscript should not exceed the target journal's specification. According to Saver [ 89 ], they ideally should not account for more than one-third of the manuscript. Finally, the author(s) must seek permission and give credits for using an already published illustration when necessary. However, none of these are needed if the graphic is originally created by the author, but if it is a reproduced or an adapted illustration, the author must obtain permission from the copyright owner and include the necessary credit. One of the very important tools for designing illustrations is Creative Commons, a platform that provides a wide range of creative works which are available to the public for use and modification.

5.9. Conclusion/Future Perspectives

It has been observed that many reviews end abruptly with a short conclusion; however, a lot more can be included in this section in addition to what has been said in the major sections of the paper. Basically, the conclusion section of a review article should provide a summary of key findings from the main body of the manuscript. In this section, the author needs to revisit the critical points of the paper as well as highlight the accuracy, validity, and relevance of the inferences drawn in the article review. A good conclusion should highlight the relationship between the major points and the author's hypothesis as well as the relationship between the hypothesis and the broader discussion to demonstrate the significance of the review article in a larger context. In addition to giving a concise summary of the important findings that describe current knowledge, the conclusion must also offer a rationale for conducting future research [ 12 ]. Knowledge gaps should be identified, and themes should be logically developed in order to construct conceptual frameworks as well as present a way forward for future research in the field of study [ 11 ].

Furthermore, the author may have to justify the propositions made earlier in the manuscript, demonstrate how the paper extends past research works, and also suggest ways that the expounded theories can be empirically examined [ 3 ]. Unlike experimental studies which can only draw either a positive conclusion or ambiguous failure to reject the null hypothesis, four possible conclusions can be drawn from review articles [ 1 ]. First, the theory/hypothesis propounded may be correct after being proven from current evidence; second, the hypothesis may not be explicitly proven but is most probably the best guess. The third conclusion is that the currently available evidence does not permit a confident conclusion or a best guess, while the last conclusion is that the theory or hypothesis is false [ 1 ]. It is important not to present new information in the conclusion section which has link whatsoever with the rest of the manuscript. According to Harris et al. [ 90 ], the conclusions should, in essence, answer the question: if a reader were to remember one thing about the review, what would it be?

5.10. References

As it has been noted in different parts of this paper, authors must give the required credit to any work or source(s) of information that was included in the review article. This must include the in-text citations in the main body of the paper and the corresponding entries in the reference list. Ideally, this full bibliographical list is the last part of the review article, and it should contain all the books, book chapters, journal articles, reports, and other media, which were utilised in the manuscript. It has been noted that most journals and publishers have their own specific referencing styles which are all derived from the more popular styles such as the American Psychological Association (APA), Chicago, Harvard, Modern Language Association (MLA), and Vancouver styles. However, all these styles may be categorised into either the parenthetical or numerical referencing style. Although a few journals do not have strict referencing rules, it is the responsibility of the author to reference according to the style and instructions of the journal. Omissions and errors must be avoided at all costs, and this can be easily achieved by going over the references many times for due diligence [ 11 ]. According to Cronin et al. [ 12 ], a separate file for references can be created, and any work used in the manuscript can be added to this list immediately after being cited in the text [ 12 ]. In recent times, the emergence of various referencing management software applications such as Endnote, RefWorks, Mendeley, and Zotero has even made referencing easier. The majority of these software applications require little technical expertise, and many of them are free to use, while others may require a subscription. It is imperative, however, that even after using these software packages, the author must manually curate the references during the final draft, in order to avoid any errors, since these programs are not impervious to errors, particularly formatting errors.

6. Concluding Remarks

Writing a review article is a skill that needs to be learned; it is a rigorous but rewarding endeavour as it can provide a useful platform to project the emerging researcher or postgraduate student into the gratifying world of publishing. Thus, the reviewer must develop the ability to think critically, spot patterns in a large volume of information, and must be invested in writing without tiring. The prospective author must also be inspired and dedicated to the successful completion of the article while also ensuring that the review article is not just a mere list or summary of previous research. It is also important that the review process must be focused on the literature and not on the authors; thus, overt criticism of existing research and personal aspersions must be avoided at all costs. All ideas, sentences, words, and illustrations should be constructed in a way to avoid plagiarism; basically, this can be achieved by paraphrasing, summarising, and giving the necessary acknowledgments. Currently, there are many tools to track and detect plagiarism in manuscripts, ensuring that they fall within a reasonable similarity index (which is typically 15% or lower for most journals). Although the more popular of these tools, such as Turnitin and iThenticate, are subscription-based, there are many freely available web-based options as well. An ideal review article is supposed to motivate the research topic and describe its key concepts while delineating the boundaries of research. In this regard, experience-based information on how to methodologically develop acceptable and impactful review articles has been detailed in this paper. Furthermore, for a beginner, this guide has detailed “the why” and “the how” of authoring a good scientific review article. However, the information in this paper may as a whole or in parts be also applicable to other fields of research and to other writing endeavours such as writing literature review in theses, dissertations, and primary research articles. Finally, the intending authors must put all the basic rules of scientific writing and writing in general into cognizance. A comprehensive study of the articles cited within this paper and other related articles focused on scientific writing will further enhance the ability of the motivated beginner to deliver a good review article.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of South Africa under grant number UID 138097. The authors would like to thank the Durban University of Technology for funding the postdoctoral fellowship of the first author, Dr. Ayodeji Amobonye.

Data Availability

Conflicts of interest.

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

COMMUNICATION IN THE BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES Department of Biology

LITERATURE REVIEW PAPER

WHAT IS A REVIEW PAPER?

CHOOSING A TOPIC

RESEARCHING A TOPIC

HOW TO WRITE THE PAPER    

The purpose of a review paper is to succinctly review recent progress in a particular topic. Overall, the paper summarizes the current state of knowledge of the topic. It creates an understanding of the topic for the reader by discussing the findings presented in recent research papers .

A review paper is not a "term paper" or book report . It is not merely a report on some references you found. Instead, a review paper synthesizes the results from several primary literature papers to produce a coherent argument about a topic or focused description of a field.

Examples of scientific reviews can be found in:

                Current Opinion in Cell Biology

                Current Opinion in Genetics & Development

                Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology

                Annual Review of Physiology

                Trends in Ecology & Evolution

You should read articles from one or more of these sources to get examples of how your paper should be organized.

Scientists commonly use reviews to communicate with each other and the general public. There are a wide variety of review styles from ones aimed at a general audience (e.g., Scientific American ) to those directed at biologists within a particular subdiscipline (e.g., Annual Review of Physiology ).

A key aspect of a review paper is that it provides the evidence for a particular point of view in a field. Thus, a large focus of your paper should be a description of the data that support or refute that point of view. In addition, you should inform the reader of the experimental techniques that were used to generate the data.

The emphasis of a review paper is interpreting the primary literature on the subject.  You need to read several original research articles on the same topic and make your own conclusions about the meanings of those papers.

Click here for advice on choosing a topic.  

Click here for advice on doing research on your topic.  

HOW TO WRITE THE PAPER

Overview of the Paper: Your paper should consist of four general sections:

Review articles contain neither a materials and methods section nor an abstract.

Organizing the Paper: Use topic headings. Do not use a topic heading that reads, "Body of the paper." Instead the topic headings should refer to the actual concepts or ideas covered in that section.

Example  

What Goes into Each Section:

Home  

Literature Review

• Steps for Conducting a Lit Review
• Finding "The Literature"
• Organizing/Writing
• Sample Literature Reviews
• FAMU Writing Center

Sample Lit Reviews from Communication Arts

• Literature Review Sample 1
• Literature Review Sample 2
• Literature Review Sample 3
• << Previous: MLA Style
• Next: FAMU Writing Center >>
• Last Updated: Oct 20, 2022 11:24 AM
• URL: https://library.famu.edu/literaturereview

Page Content

Overview of the review report format, the first read-through, first read considerations, spotting potential major flaws, concluding the first reading, rejection after the first reading, before starting the second read-through, doing the second read-through, the second read-through: section by section guidance, how to structure your report, on presentation and style, criticisms & confidential comments to editors, the recommendation, when recommending rejection, additional resources, step by step guide to reviewing a manuscript.

When you receive an invitation to peer review, you should be sent a copy of the paper's abstract to help you decide whether you wish to do the review. Try to respond to invitations promptly - it will prevent delays. It is also important at this stage to declare any potential Conflict of Interest.

The structure of the review report varies between journals. Some follow an informal structure, while others have a more formal approach.

" Number your comments!!! " (Jonathon Halbesleben, former Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Informal Structure

Many journals don't provide criteria for reviews beyond asking for your 'analysis of merits'. In this case, you may wish to familiarize yourself with examples of other reviews done for the journal, which the editor should be able to provide or, as you gain experience, rely on your own evolving style.

Formal Structure

Other journals require a more formal approach. Sometimes they will ask you to address specific questions in your review via a questionnaire. Or they might want you to rate the manuscript on various attributes using a scorecard. Often you can't see these until you log in to submit your review. So when you agree to the work, it's worth checking for any journal-specific guidelines and requirements. If there are formal guidelines, let them direct the structure of your review.

In Both Cases

Whether specifically required by the reporting format or not, you should expect to compile comments to authors and possibly confidential ones to editors only.

Following the invitation to review, when you'll have received the article abstract, you should already understand the aims, key data and conclusions of the manuscript. If you don't, make a note now that you need to feedback on how to improve those sections.

The first read-through is a skim-read. It will help you form an initial impression of the paper and get a sense of whether your eventual recommendation will be to accept or reject the paper.

Keep a pen and paper handy when skim-reading.

Try to bear in mind the following questions - they'll help you form your overall impression:

• What is the main question addressed by the research? Is it relevant and interesting?
• How original is the topic? What does it add to the subject area compared with other published material?
• Is the paper well written? Is the text clear and easy to read?
• Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented? Do they address the main question posed?
• If the author is disagreeing significantly with the current academic consensus, do they have a substantial case? If not, what would be required to make their case credible?
• If the paper includes tables or figures, what do they add to the paper? Do they aid understanding or are they superfluous?

While you should read the whole paper, making the right choice of what to read first can save time by flagging major problems early on.

Editors say, " Specific recommendations for remedying flaws are VERY welcome ."

Examples of possibly major flaws include:

• Drawing a conclusion that is contradicted by the author's own statistical or qualitative evidence
• The use of a discredited method
• Ignoring a process that is known to have a strong influence on the area under study

If experimental design features prominently in the paper, first check that the methodology is sound - if not, this is likely to be a major flaw.

You might examine:

• The sampling in analytical papers
• The sufficient use of control experiments
• The precision of process data
• The regularity of sampling in time-dependent studies
• The validity of questions, the use of a detailed methodology and the data analysis being done systematically (in qualitative research)
• That qualitative research extends beyond the author's opinions, with sufficient descriptive elements and appropriate quotes from interviews or focus groups

Major Flaws in Information

If methodology is less of an issue, it's often a good idea to look at the data tables, figures or images first. Especially in science research, it's all about the information gathered. If there are critical flaws in this, it's very likely the manuscript will need to be rejected. Such issues include:

• Insufficient data
• Unclear data tables
• Contradictory data that either are not self-consistent or disagree with the conclusions
• Confirmatory data that adds little, if anything, to current understanding - unless strong arguments for such repetition are made

If you find a major problem, note your reasoning and clear supporting evidence (including citations).

After the initial read and using your notes, including those of any major flaws you found, draft the first two paragraphs of your review - the first summarizing the research question addressed and the second the contribution of the work. If the journal has a prescribed reporting format, this draft will still help you compose your thoughts.

The First Paragraph

This should state the main question addressed by the research and summarize the goals, approaches, and conclusions of the paper. It should:

• Help the editor properly contextualize the research and add weight to your judgement
• Show the author what key messages are conveyed to the reader, so they can be sure they are achieving what they set out to do
• Focus on successful aspects of the paper so the author gets a sense of what they've done well

The Second Paragraph

This should provide a conceptual overview of the contribution of the research. So consider:

• Is the paper's premise interesting and important?
• Are the methods used appropriate?
• Do the data support the conclusions?

After drafting these two paragraphs, you should be in a position to decide whether this manuscript is seriously flawed and should be rejected (see the next section). Or whether it is publishable in principle and merits a detailed, careful read through.

Even if you are coming to the opinion that an article has serious flaws, make sure you read the whole paper. This is very important because you may find some really positive aspects that can be communicated to the author. This could help them with future submissions.

A full read-through will also make sure that any initial concerns are indeed correct and fair. After all, you need the context of the whole paper before deciding to reject. If you still intend to recommend rejection, see the section "When recommending rejection."

Once the paper has passed your first read and you've decided the article is publishable in principle, one purpose of the second, detailed read-through is to help prepare the manuscript for publication. You may still decide to recommend rejection following a second reading.

" Offer clear suggestions for how the authors can address the concerns raised. In other words, if you're going to raise a problem, provide a solution ." (Jonathon Halbesleben, Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Preparation

To save time and simplify the review:

• Don't rely solely upon inserting comments on the manuscript document - make separate notes
• Try to group similar concerns or praise together
• If using a review program to note directly onto the manuscript, still try grouping the concerns and praise in separate notes - it helps later
• Note line numbers of text upon which your notes are based - this helps you find items again and also aids those reading your review

Now that you have completed your preparations, you're ready to spend an hour or so reading carefully through the manuscript.

As you're reading through the manuscript for a second time, you'll need to keep in mind the argument's construction, the clarity of the language and content.

With regard to the argument’s construction, you should identify:

• Any places where the meaning is unclear or ambiguous
• Any factual errors
• Any invalid arguments

You may also wish to consider:

• Does the title properly reflect the subject of the paper?
• Does the abstract provide an accessible summary of the paper?
• Do the keywords accurately reflect the content?
• Is the paper an appropriate length?
• Are the key messages short, accurate and clear?

Not every submission is well written. Part of your role is to make sure that the text’s meaning is clear.

Editors say, " If a manuscript has many English language and editing issues, please do not try and fix it. If it is too bad, note that in your review and it should be up to the authors to have the manuscript edited ."

If the article is difficult to understand, you should have rejected it already. However, if the language is poor but you understand the core message, see if you can suggest improvements to fix the problem:

• Are there certain aspects that could be communicated better, such as parts of the discussion?
• Should the authors consider resubmitting to the same journal after language improvements?
• Would you consider looking at the paper again once these issues are dealt with?

On Grammar and Punctuation

Your primary role is judging the research content. Don't spend time polishing grammar or spelling. Editors will make sure that the text is at a high standard before publication. However, if you spot grammatical errors that affect clarity of meaning, then it's important to highlight these. Expect to suggest such amendments - it's rare for a manuscript to pass review with no corrections.

A 2010 study of nursing journals found that 79% of recommendations by reviewers were influenced by grammar and writing style (Shattel, et al., 2010).

1. The Introduction

A well-written introduction:

• Sets out the argument
• Summarizes recent research related to the topic
• Highlights gaps in current understanding or conflicts in current knowledge
• Establishes the originality of the research aims by demonstrating the need for investigations in the topic area
• Gives a clear idea of the target readership, why the research was carried out and the novelty and topicality of the manuscript

Originality and Topicality

Originality and topicality can only be established in the light of recent authoritative research. For example, it's impossible to argue that there is a conflict in current understanding by referencing articles that are 10 years old.

Authors may make the case that a topic hasn't been investigated in several years and that new research is required. This point is only valid if researchers can point to recent developments in data gathering techniques or to research in indirectly related fields that suggest the topic needs revisiting. Clearly, authors can only do this by referencing recent literature. Obviously, where older research is seminal or where aspects of the methodology rely upon it, then it is perfectly appropriate for authors to cite some older papers.

Editors say, "Is the report providing new information; is it novel or just confirmatory of well-known outcomes ?"

It's common for the introduction to end by stating the research aims. By this point you should already have a good impression of them - if the explicit aims come as a surprise, then the introduction needs improvement.

2. Materials and Methods

Academic research should be replicable, repeatable and robust - and follow best practice.

Replicable Research

This makes sufficient use of:

• Control experiments
• Repeated analyses
• Repeated experiments

These are used to make sure observed trends are not due to chance and that the same experiment could be repeated by other researchers - and result in the same outcome. Statistical analyses will not be sound if methods are not replicable. Where research is not replicable, the paper should be recommended for rejection.

Repeatable Methods

These give enough detail so that other researchers are able to carry out the same research. For example, equipment used or sampling methods should all be described in detail so that others could follow the same steps. Where methods are not detailed enough, it's usual to ask for the methods section to be revised.

Robust Research

This has enough data points to make sure the data are reliable. If there are insufficient data, it might be appropriate to recommend revision. You should also consider whether there is any in-built bias not nullified by the control experiments.

Best Practice

During these checks you should keep in mind best practice:

• Standard guidelines were followed (e.g. the CONSORT Statement for reporting randomized trials)
• The health and safety of all participants in the study was not compromised
• Ethical standards were maintained

If the research fails to reach relevant best practice standards, it's usual to recommend rejection. What's more, you don't then need to read any further.

3. Results and Discussion

This section should tell a coherent story - What happened? What was discovered or confirmed?

Certain patterns of good reporting need to be followed by the author:

• They should start by describing in simple terms what the data show
• They should make reference to statistical analyses, such as significance or goodness of fit
• Once described, they should evaluate the trends observed and explain the significance of the results to wider understanding. This can only be done by referencing published research
• The outcome should be a critical analysis of the data collected

Discussion should always, at some point, gather all the information together into a single whole. Authors should describe and discuss the overall story formed. If there are gaps or inconsistencies in the story, they should address these and suggest ways future research might confirm the findings or take the research forward.

4. Conclusions

This section is usually no more than a few paragraphs and may be presented as part of the results and discussion, or in a separate section. The conclusions should reflect upon the aims - whether they were achieved or not - and, just like the aims, should not be surprising. If the conclusions are not evidence-based, it's appropriate to ask for them to be re-written.

5. Information Gathered: Images, Graphs and Data Tables

If you find yourself looking at a piece of information from which you cannot discern a story, then you should ask for improvements in presentation. This could be an issue with titles, labels, statistical notation or image quality.

Where information is clear, you should check that:

• The results seem plausible, in case there is an error in data gathering
• The trends you can see support the paper's discussion and conclusions
• There are sufficient data. For example, in studies carried out over time are there sufficient data points to support the trends described by the author?

You should also check whether images have been edited or manipulated to emphasize the story they tell. This may be appropriate but only if authors report on how the image has been edited (e.g. by highlighting certain parts of an image). Where you feel that an image has been edited or manipulated without explanation, you should highlight this in a confidential comment to the editor in your report.

6. List of References

You will need to check referencing for accuracy, adequacy and balance.

Where a cited article is central to the author's argument, you should check the accuracy and format of the reference - and bear in mind different subject areas may use citations differently. Otherwise, it's the editor’s role to exhaustively check the reference section for accuracy and format.

You should consider if the referencing is adequate:

• Are important parts of the argument poorly supported?
• Are there published studies that show similar or dissimilar trends that should be discussed?
• If a manuscript only uses half the citations typical in its field, this may be an indicator that referencing should be improved - but don't be guided solely by quantity
• References should be relevant, recent and readily retrievable

Check for a well-balanced list of references that is:

• Helpful to the reader
• Fair to competing authors
• Not over-reliant on self-citation
• Gives due recognition to the initial discoveries and related work that led to the work under assessment

You should be able to evaluate whether the article meets the criteria for balanced referencing without looking up every reference.

7. Plagiarism

By now you will have a deep understanding of the paper's content - and you may have some concerns about plagiarism.

Identified Concern

If you find - or already knew of - a very similar paper, this may be because the author overlooked it in their own literature search. Or it may be because it is very recent or published in a journal slightly outside their usual field.

You may feel you can advise the author how to emphasize the novel aspects of their own study, so as to better differentiate it from similar research. If so, you may ask the author to discuss their aims and results, or modify their conclusions, in light of the similar article. Of course, the research similarities may be so great that they render the work unoriginal and you have no choice but to recommend rejection.

"It's very helpful when a reviewer can point out recent similar publications on the same topic by other groups, or that the authors have already published some data elsewhere ." (Editor feedback)

Suspected Concern

If you suspect plagiarism, including self-plagiarism, but cannot recall or locate exactly what is being plagiarized, notify the editor of your suspicion and ask for guidance.

Most editors have access to software that can check for plagiarism.

Editors are not out to police every paper, but when plagiarism is discovered during peer review it can be properly addressed ahead of publication. If plagiarism is discovered only after publication, the consequences are worse for both authors and readers, because a retraction may be necessary.

For detailed guidelines see COPE's Ethical guidelines for reviewers and Wiley's Best Practice Guidelines on Publishing Ethics .

8. Search Engine Optimization (SEO)

After the detailed read-through, you will be in a position to advise whether the title, abstract and key words are optimized for search purposes. In order to be effective, good SEO terms will reflect the aims of the research.

A clear title and abstract will improve the paper's search engine rankings and will influence whether the user finds and then decides to navigate to the main article. The title should contain the relevant SEO terms early on. This has a major effect on the impact of a paper, since it helps it appear in search results. A poor abstract can then lose the reader's interest and undo the benefit of an effective title - whilst the paper's abstract may appear in search results, the potential reader may go no further.

So ask yourself, while the abstract may have seemed adequate during earlier checks, does it:

• Do justice to the manuscript in this context?
• Highlight important findings sufficiently?
• Present the most interesting data?

Editors say, " Does the Abstract highlight the important findings of the study ?"

If there is a formal report format, remember to follow it. This will often comprise a range of questions followed by comment sections. Try to answer all the questions. They are there because the editor felt that they are important. If you're following an informal report format you could structure your report in three sections: summary, major issues, minor issues.

• Give positive feedback first. Authors are more likely to read your review if you do so. But don't overdo it if you will be recommending rejection
• Briefly summarize what the paper is about and what the findings are
• Try to put the findings of the paper into the context of the existing literature and current knowledge
• Indicate the significance of the work and if it is novel or mainly confirmatory
• Indicate the work's strengths, its quality and completeness
• State any major flaws or weaknesses and note any special considerations. For example, if previously held theories are being overlooked

Major Issues

• Are there any major flaws? State what they are and what the severity of their impact is on the paper
• Has similar work already been published without the authors acknowledging this?
• Are the authors presenting findings that challenge current thinking? Is the evidence they present strong enough to prove their case? Have they cited all the relevant work that would contradict their thinking and addressed it appropriately?
• If major revisions are required, try to indicate clearly what they are
• Are there any major presentational problems? Are figures & tables, language and manuscript structure all clear enough for you to accurately assess the work?
• Are there any ethical issues? If you are unsure it may be better to disclose these in the confidential comments section

Minor Issues

• Are there places where meaning is ambiguous? How can this be corrected?
• Are the correct references cited? If not, which should be cited instead/also? Are citations excessive, limited, or biased?
• Are there any factual, numerical or unit errors? If so, what are they?
• Are all tables and figures appropriate, sufficient, and correctly labelled? If not, say which are not

Your review should ultimately help the author improve their article. So be polite, honest and clear. You should also try to be objective and constructive, not subjective and destructive.

You should also:

• Write clearly and so you can be understood by people whose first language is not English
• Avoid complex or unusual words, especially ones that would even confuse native speakers
• Number your points and refer to page and line numbers in the manuscript when making specific comments
• If you have been asked to only comment on specific parts or aspects of the manuscript, you should indicate clearly which these are
• Treat the author's work the way you would like your own to be treated

Most journals give reviewers the option to provide some confidential comments to editors. Often this is where editors will want reviewers to state their recommendation - see the next section - but otherwise this area is best reserved for communicating malpractice such as suspected plagiarism, fraud, unattributed work, unethical procedures, duplicate publication, bias or other conflicts of interest.

However, this doesn't give reviewers permission to 'backstab' the author. Authors can't see this feedback and are unable to give their side of the story unless the editor asks them to. So in the spirit of fairness, write comments to editors as though authors might read them too.

Reviewers should check the preferences of individual journals as to where they want review decisions to be stated. In particular, bear in mind that some journals will not want the recommendation included in any comments to authors, as this can cause editors difficulty later - see Section 11 for more advice about working with editors.

You will normally be asked to indicate your recommendation (e.g. accept, reject, revise and resubmit, etc.) from a fixed-choice list and then to enter your comments into a separate text box.

Recommending Acceptance

If you're recommending acceptance, give details outlining why, and if there are any areas that could be improved. Don't just give a short, cursory remark such as 'great, accept'. See Improving the Manuscript

Recommending Revision

Where improvements are needed, a recommendation for major or minor revision is typical. You may also choose to state whether you opt in or out of the post-revision review too. If recommending revision, state specific changes you feel need to be made. The author can then reply to each point in turn.

Some journals offer the option to recommend rejection with the possibility of resubmission – this is most relevant where substantial, major revision is necessary.

What can reviewers do to help? " Be clear in their comments to the author (or editor) which points are absolutely critical if the paper is given an opportunity for revisio n." (Jonathon Halbesleben, Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Recommending Rejection

If recommending rejection or major revision, state this clearly in your review (and see the next section, 'When recommending rejection').

Where manuscripts have serious flaws you should not spend any time polishing the review you've drafted or give detailed advice on presentation.

Editors say, " If a reviewer suggests a rejection, but her/his comments are not detailed or helpful, it does not help the editor in making a decision ."

In your recommendations for the author, you should:

• Give constructive feedback describing ways that they could improve the research
• Keep the focus on the research and not the author. This is an extremely important part of your job as a reviewer
• Avoid making critical confidential comments to the editor while being polite and encouraging to the author - the latter may not understand why their manuscript has been rejected. Also, they won't get feedback on how to improve their research and it could trigger an appeal

Remember to give constructive criticism even if recommending rejection. This helps developing researchers improve their work and explains to the editor why you felt the manuscript should not be published.

" When the comments seem really positive, but the recommendation is rejection…it puts the editor in a tough position of having to reject a paper when the comments make it sound like a great paper ." (Jonathon Halbesleben, Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Visit our Wiley Author Learning and Training Channel for expert advice on peer review.

Watch the video, Ethical considerations of Peer Review

The Writing Process

Making expository writing less stressful, more efficient, and more enlightening

Sample Detailed Outline

“Organize. Organize. Organize.” —U.S. Vice President and Nobel Peace Prize-winner Al Gore

Below is an example of a detailed outline. (It is for a research paper, but the principles and structure apply to any paper.) Notice the hierarchical use of the roman numeral system . Such a hierarchy is key to organizing your thinking and your argument and keeping track of the relationships between your ideas.

Introduction

quote from movie like Independence Day to get readers’ attention SOURCE: IMDB.com

world preparing to welcome with festivities and open arms the aliens coming to Earth from Andromeda galaxy

Thesis (complete sentence!): Although the aliens seem friendly and say they come in peace, Earth’s number one priority should be to build a defense shield before they arrive.

On March 15, 2016, we discovered not alone in universe: irregular but repeating signal discovered from nearby Andromeda. SOURCE: NYTimes , 3/16/16

Different scientists have decoded the message differently

Commonly accepted interpretation friendly:

“Greetings, people of Earth. We have detected and watched your reports (e.g., The Big Bang Theory ) documenting typical life on Earth. We are currently on our way to Earth to begin our friendship and will arrive in Earth year 2020. Prepare yourselves for a glorious future [unclear signals].” (SOURCE: Michaels, “Aliens Are Our Friends,” People )

still parts of the message undecoded (SOURCE?

all scientists agree: Aliens arriving in 2020 (Source: Fredericks, Wall Street Journal )

Argument: there are signs that message is a warning and that aliens are planning to attack

Prof. Alan Guthman, Harvard Center for Astrophysics, makes case (SOURCE: Guthman, “We Do Not Come in Peace”)

With only one message to work with, we have little clue of tone of message

If we interpret three different patterns in signal differently, tone much different: “Attention, Earthlings. We have observed your unusual lives. We are coming to Earth to…[unclear]. Prepare yourselves for life under our control.”

With all the videos we broadcast into space, an alien race would assume that we are hostile and act accordingly

Logic: Even if these aliens are friendly, it is better to be safe than sorry and protect ourselves

FIND: Estimates of the number of intelligent races in the nearby universe and the probability that at least one of them is hostile and technologically advanced

Argument: Estimates show that workable shield surrounding Earth can be constructed by 2020

If nations of Earth collaborate, we can build shield that will block incoming ships and weapons fire (SOURCE. Teller, “Shielding the Earth,” Physics Rev. Letters )

Will cost huge amounts of $$, but:

if spread out among many countries, affordable FIND. Estimates of costs

We can’t afford NOT to build it

Argument: Building shield will both stimulate global economy and result in very useful new technologies

FIND! Evidence on how previous projects—moon landing, the International Space Station, emergency stimulus packages—created

jobs –find stats!

new products & companies

FIND! I don’t have concrete evidence for this, but I remember hearing how the moon landing and international space station resulted in the creation of new, useful technologies

Counterargument: If we build shield and they detect it, it could signal that we are hostile and provoke the aliens to attack

Missile defense shields on Earth have often provoked international tensions. SOURCE: M. Pritchard, “If You Build It, They Will Attack.” ( Boston Globe )

FIND source that shows that

such tensions do not necessarily lead to attack and

any intelligent race will understand need for others to be prepared to defend themselves.

Counterargument: We are probably not able to build shield that would work against such a technologically advanced race

non-sequitor. fact that it may not work does not mean that it won’t and that we should not try to protect ourselves.

Conclusion.

We have no way of knowing the intensions of a group we have never met on the basis of one message.

The only sensible approach is to try to defend ourselves, especially when there will be benefits for trying such as jobs and new technologies.

• As I learned in Las Vegas, “Never risk what you cannot afford to lose.” Can we afford to risk our children’s lives?

Click here to create a detailed outline from your freewrite/brainstorm using GoogleDocs.

• Open access
• Published: 13 September 2024

Relationship between physical exercise, bullying, and being bullied among junior high school students: the multiple mediating effects of emotional management and interpersonal relationship distress

• Qiang Zhang 1 &
• Wenjing Deng 2  

BMC Public Health volume  24 , Article number:  2503 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

This paper investigates the relationships between physical activity (PA), school bullying, emotion regulation self-efficacy (ERS), and interpersonal relationship distress (IRD) among junior high school students. It also examines the underlying mechanisms of school bullying to provide insights into reducing adolescent bullying and to lay the groundwork for preventing and controlling aggressive behaviors.

A survey was conducted on 484 students (240 males, 12.18 ± 0.8 years) from 4 secondary schools using the Physical Activity Rating Scale (PARS), Emotional Management Self-Efficacy Scale (EMSS), Interpersonal Relationship Distress Scale (IRDS), and Campus Bullying Scale (CBS) to examine the effects among the variables. A stratified random sampling method was used to select the sample, and data were collected with a structured questionnaire. The data were analyzed using SPSS 24.0 and AMOS 24.0 statistical software. The analysis included Pearson correlation analysis, structural equation modeling, and bias-corrected percentile Bootstrap methods.

(1) PA negatively predicts IRD, which in turn has an indirect effect on bullying (PA → IRD → Bullying), ES = -0.063. Additionally, EM and IRD act as mediators between PA and school bullying (PA → EM → IRD → Bullying), ES = 0.025. (2) PA negatively predicts IRD, which has an indirect effect on being bullied (PA → IRD → Being bullied), ES = -0.044. EM and IRD serve as chain mediators between PA and being bullied (PA → EM → IRD → Being bullied), ES = -0.071.

PA can positively predict bullying, but it can be mitigated through EM to reduce IRD, thereby decreasing the occurrence of campus bullying and being bullied.

Peer Review reports

School bullying is considered an aggressive, intentional, and repetitive behavior, occurring without clear motivation, inflicted by one or more students on others. It not only causes physical harm to the victims but also negatively affects their mental health [ 1 , 2 ]. School bullying is prevalent in some East Asian countries [ 3 ], having profound and lasting effects on the health and well-being of the victims [ 4 , 5 ]. In children and adolescents, school bullying is closely associated with depression, anxiety, and insomnia [ 6 ]. Severe bullying can lead to self-harm [ 7 ]. Bullying peaks between the ages of 11 and 13, during the transition from primary to secondary school [ 8 ]. Given the potential harm of bullying to mental health, it is necessary to explore the mechanisms of bullying and victimization to provide a theoretical basis for preventing bullying among middle school students.

Physical activity (PA) has demonstrated significant mental health benefits, including strong anti-depressive and anti-anxiety effects, improved self-efficacy, and enhanced mood regulation [ 7 , 9 ]. PA has also proven to be an effective intervention in anti-bullying programs for special populations with mental disorders, overweight, or obesity [ 10 , 11 ]. As a vital component of public health strategies against bullying, PA positively influences the psychological well-being of both perpetrators and victims. Studies abroad have confirmed a close relationship between school bullying, victimization, and the frequency and type of PA. Students who engage in PA at least four times a week show higher aggression scores than those with lower exercise frequencies [ 9 ]. Studies suggest that regularly exercising adolescents are more likely to become bullies and exhibit higher aggression compared to their non-exercising peers [ 12 ]. Nikolaou’s study suggests that individuals who frequently participate in competitive sports are more likely to become bullies but are less likely to be victimized [ 13 ]. It recommends increasing opportunities for adolescents to exercise while enhancing supervision of exercise content and venues. Other studies confirm that physical education classes protect against bullying, with regularly exercising girls showing lower levels of victimization [ 14 ]. Waasdor used binary logistic regression to examine the relationship between health-related behaviors and bullying, finding that PA significantly reduces the likelihood of students becoming victims [ 15 ]. Pacífico et al. systematically reviewed the relationship between bullying victimization, aggressive behavior, and participation in physical activities and sedentary behaviors, finding that victims are associated with reduced PA and increased sedentary time [ 11 ]. Based on these findings, we hypothesize that H1a: PA can increase the likelihood of bullying behavior. H1b: PA can decrease the likelihood of being bullied.

Recent studies have found that emotion regulation self-efficacy (ERS) and interpersonal relationship distress (IRD) are crucial in preventing school bullying. Muris defines ERS as an individual’s perceived ability to manage negative emotions, including the belief in one’s capacity to avoid or recover from such states [ 16 ]. Effective ERS is essential for mental and physical health and is considered a protective factor against negative emotions. For instance, self-talk can help regain a positive attitude or calm oneself during fear and anxiety. Bandura, in his self-efficacy and social cognitive theories [ 17 , 18 ], emphasizes that self-efficacy and self-regulation strategies are crucial for behavior change. Regular PA promotes both physical and psychological health, including a healthy lifestyle, body awareness, and confidence in physical skills. It also enhances safety, responsibility, patience, courage, and psychological balance [ 19 ]. Valois et al. surveyed over 3,800 students and found that PA is related to ERS [ 20 ]. Continuous PA can enhance self-efficacy, which, if not managed, can lead to decreased academic performance, social adaptation disorders, emotional depression, and an increased likelihood of deviant behavior. Moreover, regular physical activity offers multiple psychological benefits, such as enhanced self-control and self-esteem, both of which are closely linked to a decrease in bullying behaviors [ 21 ]. Participation in sports can mitigate the effects of bullying and is an effective strategy for promoting positive peer interactions and emotional regulation among adolescents.

IRD refers to the inability to establish and maintain meaningful relationships, lack of stable personal identity and self-awareness, and the use of avoidance strategies to manage strong emotions [ 22 ]. Méndez et al. found that poor relationships among students can result in bullying [ 9 ]. School bullying, a negative social interaction among adolescents, can be predicted by negative relationships with parents, teachers, and peers [ 23 ]. Gross’s emotion regulation self-efficacy theory emphasizes the impact of emotion management on social interactions and relationships [ 24 ]. PA can serve as an ERS strategy, improving emotion management through stress relief and emotional state enhancement, thereby improving interpersonal relationships.

In recent years, research has increasingly focused on how PA can improve adolescents’ emotion management and interpersonal relationships, thereby reducing bullying and victimization. González’s study confirmed that adolescents’ participation in group sports brings joy, improves poor interpersonal relationships, and promotes harmonious peer relationships [ 25 ]. Further research found that non-competitive physical activities convey values, promote prosocial attitudes, prevent bullying and victimization, and reduce the risk of aggressive incidents [ 26 ].

Based on these findings, we hypothesize H2a: PA can improve individuals’ ERS abilities, thereby reducing the occurrence of school bullying behaviors. H2b: PA can indirectly decrease the likelihood of individuals becoming victims of bullying by enhancing their ERS abilities. H3a: PA can alleviate IRD, thereby reducing the frequency of bullying behaviors. H3b: PA can further lower the risk of students being bullied by mitigating IRD.

According to Sullivan’s interpersonal theory [ 27 ], individuals seek interpersonal interactions during their adolescence. If they cannot effectively control their emotions, it may lead to psychological stress and social interaction difficulties [ 28 ]. Jun et al., in a cross-sectional survey study of 207 medical students, found that appropriate expression of anger can enhance their ERS ability, thereby improving interpersonal interaction skills [ 29 ]. ERS ability is a cognitive variable that influences behavioral and emotional processes [ 30 ]. Individuals with high levels of ERS ability believe they can achieve desired outcomes through their efforts, thus choosing effective coping strategies. Moreover, they exhibit more patience in the process of achieving their goals [ 30 , 31 ]. Therefore, the ability to manage emotions may enhance individuals’ confidence, stimulate motivation for communication with others, and enable them to handle interpersonal relationships more effectively, avoiding disharmony in relationships.

Based on the above, the hypotheses are proposed: H4a: PA can enhance ERS, thereby alleviating IRD and preventing school bullying. H4b: PA can enhance ERS, thereby reducing IRD and decreasing the risk of being bullied.

This study employed PA as the independent variable, school bullying and being bullied as the dependent variables, and ERS and IRD as mediating variables to develop a chain mediation model (Fig.  1 ). The model aims to elucidate how PA reduces IRD through the enhancement of ERS, thereby preventing school bullying. This theoretical framework clarifies the research objectives and provides direction for subsequent analysis.

Multiple mediation model of school bullying

Materials and methods

Participants.

From March to May 2023, we utilized a multi-stage cluster random sampling method to select two key junior high schools and two regular junior high schools in Shandong Province. Within each school, 1–2 classes from grades 6 through 9 were randomly chosen to participate in the survey, which was administered via the Wenjuanxing platform. Ultimately, 15 classes took part, and we issued 529 questionnaires, each taking an average of 8 min to complete. After excluding responses with repetitive patterns or completion times under 3 min, 45 invalid responses were discarded, resulting in 484 valid responses and a response rate of 91.5%. The sample included 240 male and 244 female students; 171 were only children, while 313 had siblings. The breakdown by grade was as follows: 87 students in grade 6, 137 in grade 7, 134 in grade 8, and 126 in grade 9. The average age of the participants was 12.18 years with a standard deviation of 0.8 years. Detailed demographic information is presented in Table  1 .

This study utilized a cross-sectional design and structured questionnaires to collect the necessary data. The questionnaires used in this study were revised in China, widely utilized, and demonstrated high reliability and validity. To further ensure their reliability and validity, we conducted additional reliability analysis and exploratory factor analysis. The study followed these procedures: Approval was first obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committee of Capital University of Physical Education and Sports. Afterward, researchers received consent from the principals of the selected schools and coordinated with grade-level directors to select the participating classes. Class teachers then distributed informed consent forms to students and their parents, explaining that participation was voluntary and confidentiality was assured. They also confirmed the number of participants. Finally, during physical education classes, teachers organized students to complete the questionnaires anonymously using the Wenjuanxing platform in the school information room. Researchers were present on-site to address any participant questions.

Instruments

Physical activity rating scale (pars).

The PARS revised by Liang (1994) [ 32 ], was employed to assess the PA levels of middle school students and investigate their exercise habits. This scale evaluates the intensity (e.g., “light exercise”), duration (e.g., “less than 10 minutes”), and frequency (e.g., “less than once a month”) of PA, with each dimension rated on a 5-point scale from 1 (low) to 5 (high). The amount of PA is calculated using the formula: PA = Intensity × Duration × Frequency. Both intensity and frequency are rated on a scale from 1 to 5, while duration is rated from 0 to 4. The possible scores range from 0 to 100 points. The activity levels are categorized as follows: 0–19 points indicate low activity, 20–42 points indicate moderate activity, and 43–100 points indicate high activity. In this study, Cronbach’s alpha for the scale was 0.807.

Emotion regulation self-efficacy scale (ERSS)

The ERSS, developed by Li [ 33 ], was used. This scale contains 17 items, covering four dimensions: Expressing Positive Emotions (EPM) with 4 items (e.g., “showing joy when something good happens”), Regulating Anger (AM) with 3 items, Regulating Depression (RD) with 4 items (e.g., “not feeling dejected when strongly criticized”), and Regulating Fear (RF) with 6 items (e.g., “not feeling scared in the dark”). In this study, Cronbach’s alpha for the total scale was 0.955, with the four dimensions being 0.911, 0.822, 0.907, and 0.889 respectively. The overall confirmatory factor analysis fit indices for the scale were: χ2/ df  = 5.03, CFI = 0.96, TLI = 0.92, RMSEA = 0.06, and SRMR = 0.05.

Interpersonal relationship distress scale (IRDS)

The IRDS developed by Deng & Zheng [ 34 ] was used. This questionnaire consists of 28 questions, with a binary response format (“Yes” or “No”). Higher scores indicate more severe IRD. The scale includes four dimensions, each with 7 items: Conversation Trouble (CT) (e.g., “finding it difficult to talk about personal troubles”), Interaction Trouble (IT) (e.g., “feeling uncomfortable when meeting strangers”), Trouble Treating Others (TTO) (e.g., “feeling excessive envy and jealousy towards others”), and Exposure to Heterosexual Distress (EHD) (e.g., “feeling unnatural when interacting with the opposite sex”). In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha for the questionnaire was 0.889. The confirmatory factor analysis fit indices were: χ2 /df  = 2.603, CFI = 0.89, TLI = 0.87, RMSEA = 0.05, and SRMR = 0.04.

Campus bullying scale (CBS)

The bullying subscale of the Olweus Bullying Questionnaire [ 35 ], revised by Zhang & Wu [ 36 ], consists of 12 items. It uses a 5-point Likert scale to measure the frequency of bullying behaviors. Six items assess bullying (BULLY) (e.g., “I spread rumors about some classmates to make others dislike them”), and six items assess victimization (VIC) (e.g., “others call me unpleasant nicknames, insult me, or mock me”). The frequency of occurrence is rated from 0 to 4, ranging from “never happened” to “several times a week”. In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha for the questionnaire was 0.843. Confirmatory factor analysis indicated good structural validity, with fit indices as follows: χ2/ df =  2.94, CFI = 0.97, TLI = 0.98, RMSEA = 0.05, and SRMR = 0.03.

Data analysis

The social statistical analysis software SPSS 24.0 was used for internal consistency testing and Pearson correlation analysis of PA, ERS, IRD, and school bullying. The AMOS 24.0 software was used for confirmatory factor analysis, mediation analysis, and Bootstrap analysis for difference testing. A significance level of α = 0.05 was set for statistical significance.

Control and testing for common method bias

All data in this study were self-reported by adolescents, which may be affected by common method bias. Therefore, in the study design and data collection process, measures were taken such as making the questionnaire anonymous, separating different questionnaires, reverse scoring some items, and emphasizing the confidentiality of the data for pre-program control. In addition, confirmatory factor analysis was used to test for common method bias in all self-reported items. The results showed a poor model fit, with χ2/ df  = 29.44, CFI = 0.47, GFI = 0.55, AGFI = 0.39, NFI = 0.46, and RMSEA = 0.24. This indicates that there is no serious common method bias issue in this study.

Means, standard deviations, and correlation analysis of variables

Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis (Table  2 ) reveal significant relationships: gender is significantly related to PA and interpersonal relationships ( r =-0.272, P  < 0.01; r  = 0.107, P  < 0.05). ERS is significantly related to bullying and IRD ( r =-0.134, P <0.01) ( r =-0.316, P <0.01), and ERS is positively correlated with PA ( r  = 0.161, P <0.01). IRD is negatively correlated with PA ( r =-0.132, P <0.01), and positively correlated with bullying and being bullied ( r  = 0.306, P <0.01) ( r  = 0.207, P <0.01). Given that the relationship between gender and bullying was not significant, subsequent analyses did not differentiate between male and female students.

Chain mediating mechanism analysis between PA and school bullying

To effectively control measurement errors, this study used structural equation modeling to test for multiple mediating effects. First, based on the hypothesized model, PA was used as the predictor variable, bullying as the outcome variable, and ERS and IRD as mediating variables for path analysis. Figure  2 presents the data fit results: χ2/ df  = 3.001, CFI = 0.96, GFI = 0.953, RMSEA = 0.064, and SRMR = 0.041. All fit indices fall within acceptable ranges, confirming the validity of the initially proposed model.

Chain mediations between PA and bullying. Note: BULLY = school bullying. Dash lines indicate an insignificant relationship

The path coefficients and significance levels are illustrated in the diagram. PA significantly affects ERS and IRD, with standardized path coefficients of 0.23 and − 0.19, respectively. ERS negatively impacts IRD, with a standardized path coefficient of -0.33. IRD positively affects bullying, with a standardized path coefficient of 0.33. Additionally, PA positively affects bullying, with a standardized path coefficient of 0.16. However, ERS does not significantly impact bullying.

This study used the Bootstrap procedure to test the significance of the mediating effects, drawing 5000 samples with a 95% confidence interval. A mediating effect is considered significant if the 95% confidence interval for the path coefficients does not include 0. According to the results in Table  3 , the path from PA to bullying is significant ( P  = 0.025), supporting hypothesis H1a. In contrast, the path from ERS to bullying is not significant ( P  = 0.103), which does not support hypothesis H2a.

Following Wen et al. [ 37 ], the interpretation of mediating effects depends on the signs of ab and c’. If ab and c’ have the same sign, the mediating effect is considered valid. This study found that both IRD and ERS act as suppressor variables in the relationship between PA and school bullying among adolescents: (1) PA reduces IRD, which indirectly decreases bullying (PA → IRD → Bullying), with a suppressor effect value of -0.063 (95% CI: -0.179, -0.028), supporting hypothesis H3a. (2) ERS and IRD also act as suppressors in the relationship between PA and school bullying (PA → ERS → IRD → Bullying), with a suppressor effect value of 0.025 (95% CI: -0.375, -0.037), supporting hypothesis H4a.

Path analysis of the chain mediation mechanism of PA and school bullying

In this analysis, PA is treated as the predictor variable, and being bullied is the outcome variable. ERS and IRD serve as mediating variables. The model’s fit indices are within acceptable ranges: χ2 /df  = 2.704, CFI = 0.965, GFI = 0.957, RMSEA = 0.059, and SRMR = 0.039, as illustrated in Fig.  3 . These results support the validity of the initially proposed model.

Chain mediations between PA and being bullied. Note: VIC = being bullied. Dash lines indicate an insignificant relationship

The figure illustrates the path coefficients and significance levels. PA significantly impacts ERS and IRD, with standardized path coefficients of 0.22 and − 0.19, respectively. ERS significantly negatively impacts IRD, with a standardized path coefficient of -0.33. IRD significantly positively affects being bullied, with a standardized path coefficient of 0.23. However, the effects of ERS and PA on being bullied are not significant.

Table  4 reveals that the paths from PA and ERS to being bullied are not significant ( P  = 0.054, 0.445), thus hypotheses H1b and H2b are not supported. The lack of a significant direct effect from PA to being bullied indicates that IRD and ERS fully mediate this relationship. This complete mediation consists of two pathways: (1) PA negatively affects IRD, which then indirectly impacts being bullied (PA → IRD → Being bullied), with a mediation effect of -0.044 (95% CI: -0.179, -0.028), supporting hypothesis H3b; (2) ERS and IRD mediate the relationship between PA and being bullied in a chain mediation model (PA → ERS → IRD → Being bullied), with a mediation effect of -0.071 (95% CI: -0.375, -0.037), supporting hypothesis H4b.

This study examines the predictive effects of PA on bullying and victimization, as well as the role of emotional management and interpersonal relationship issues in mediating this relationship. It reveals the mechanism by which PA predicts bullying and victimization through its influence on emotional management and interpersonal relationships.

Direct effects analysis of PA on bullying and being bullied

The study found that PA can positively predict school bullying, but its predictive effect on victimization is not significant. Empirical studies on the relationship between PA and bullying/victimization in China are relatively scarce. The results of this study are consistent with most related studies both domestically and internationally, indicating that higher levels of PA may be associated with the occurrence of school bullying. Upon entering middle school, adolescents face the challenge of re-establishing peer relationships. During this period, active physical activities may lead to more frequent participation in various social activities on campus, thereby increasing the risk of exposure to potential conflicts. Without adequate supervision, these conflicts may escalate into bullying behaviors. However, some studies do not distinguish between bullying and victimization, suggesting that the higher the level of physical participation, the less frequent the occurrence of school bullying. These studies suggest that physical participation can enhance cognitive functions, reduce sensitivity to hostile information, and decrease attention to dangerous behaviors. Haney Aguirre-Loaiza et al. first confirmed through experimental intervention the positive effects of PA on inhibitory control and emotional situation recognition [ 38 ]. Additionally, physical participation can improve the quality of peer relationships, further reducing the occurrence of school bullying. PA may also enhance the cognitive flexibility and emotional regulation abilities of victims, helping them better cope with the negative impacts of bullying experiences. This study found that the direct predictive effect of PA on bullying may be related to the personality changes of adolescents during puberty and the high level of activity brought by PA. In this context, although the positive effects of PA may not be as significant as expected, it still helps in understanding the role of PA in school bullying.

For victimization, this study did not find a significant direct effect between PA and being bullied, which is consistent with the findings of Ortega [ 39 ]. Some studies suggest that regular participation in PA can reduce the likelihood of becoming a victim of bullying. PA is not only an important way to convey values but also enhances communication skills and promotes prosocial attitudes. Therefore, students’ physical activities are considered a health-promoting practice, and physically active students are generally believed to be more capable of protecting themselves. Hermoso and his team explored the relationship between PA, sedentary behavior, and the experience of bullying among children and adolescents [ 40 ]. They found that not meeting PA guidelines and excessive sedentary behavior are risk factors for being bullied, while at least 60 min of moderate-to-vigorous PA per day leads to better health and quality of life. Previous cross-sectional studies have also shown that not meeting these PA guidelines significantly increases the risk of bullying among children and adolescents. Therefore, PA is seen as an effective tool for preventing and reducing the occurrence of bullying. Hermoso et al. believe that students lacking PA are more likely to be bullied due to factors such as insufficient motor skills, poor physical fitness, and lack of confidence in participating in physical activities [ 40 ]. Nevertheless, this study did not find a significant direct effect between PA and being bullied. The occurrence of school bullying is influenced by various factors, including family background, cultural adaptation, bullying experience, and parental educational background. For example, Jang et al. pointed out that long-term bullying victimization is a potential risk factor for the mental health of children from multicultural families, particularly among adolescents whose mothers are from Southeast Asia [ 58 ]. The study by Kim and Fong explored the relationship between the bullying victimization experiences of children from multicultural families and their cultural adaptation and life satisfaction [ 41 ]. They found that entering bullying victimization is associated with reduced emotional cultural adaptation, and both entering and exiting bullying victimization are related to life satisfaction. Park used an asymmetric fixed effects model to evaluate the effects of entering and exiting bullying victimization [ 42 ]. He found that the mother’s college education level enhances the psychological health benefits of exiting bullying victimization but does not mitigate the harmful effects of entering it. The protective effect of the mother’s college education level is particularly significant for girls.

In summary, the direct predictive effects of PA on school bullying and victimization have not yet reached a consensus. Due to the complexity of the direct predictive effects of PA on bullying and victimization, more research is needed to further confirm this relationship and consider other potential influencing factors.

Indirect effects Analysis of ERS and IRD

PA has a significant positive predictive effect on emotional management, consistent with most related studies [ 43 ]. Regular and sustained PA plays a crucial role in regulating emotions. When individuals are in an uncomfortable state, excellent emotional regulation abilities often lead to a reevaluation of existing cognitive elements related to interpersonal perception, memory, and thinking. This approach helps quickly find flexible and effective ways to avoid conflicts and contradictions in interpersonal interactions, aiding individuals in better integrating into groups [ 44 ].

According to the general aggression model, negative emotions such as anxiety, depression, and anger can bring negative experiences to adolescents, who may bully others to vent these unpleasant feelings [ 45 ]. However, this study did not confirm the hypothesis that emotional management negatively predicts bullying and victimization. Additionally, the effects of emotional regulation strategies vary in different contexts, and individuals can flexibly deploy these strategies according to changing situational demands [ 46 ]. Emotional regulation encompasses various strategies, such as cognitive reappraisal and emotional suppression. Individuals may use different strategies to cope with emotions, but this study did not distinguish between them, potentially obscuring the predictive role of emotional regulation self-efficacy on bullying and victimization. Additionally, differences in emotional regulation abilities among individuals and the ways male and female students handle positive and negative emotions may contribute to the non-significant relationship between emotional management and bullying/victimization.

The hypothesis that PA negatively predicts interpersonal relationship issues was confirmed in this study. Regular participation in PA increases opportunities for interaction among students, especially in group activities [ 47 ]. It promotes mutual interactions while reducing the occurrence of some negative emotions. Adolescents usually do not prefer to communicate with guardians such as family and teachers, leading to relatively less social support and help, which weakens their interpersonal communication skills during this period. When conflicts and disputes arise among students, they tend to use simple and rough methods to cope, leading to deteriorating peer relationships and escalating conflicts, which may trigger school bullying. The conclusion that interpersonal relationship issues positively predict school bullying and victimization was also confirmed in this study, consistent with most research results [ 25 , 47 , 48 ]. Negative interpersonal relationships among adolescents can directly predict aggressive behaviors. Previous studies have shown that poor conflict management skills in interpersonal relationships are a risk factor for bullying [ 49 ]. Longitudinal studies also show that reducing negative emotions like anxiety and depression and fostering positive peer perceptions can predict a reduction in victimization [ 50 ]. Adolescents with interpersonal relationship issues often experience frustration in real-life interactions. The widespread use of the internet and the development of mobile media lead them to escape reality, feel alienated from society, and seek fulfillment in the virtual world [ 51 ]. Adolescents during this period may view bullying as a reasonable way to solve problems and may become bullies in certain situations. Meanwhile, the excessive use of mobile phones, the internet, and other media takes up a lot of students’ time, making those who lack PA and are sedentary more likely to become victims of bullying [ 15 ].

This study also found that emotional management negatively predicts interpersonal relationship issues, similar to most domestic and international studies [ 52 , 53 , 54 ]. Liu proposed that emotional self-management ability, psychological resilience, and adolescent PA mutually promote each other, enhancing adolescents’ social communication skills [ 52 ]. With good emotional management strategies, individuals can transform negative emotions, stressful events, and disharmony into conditions that motivate self-development, reduce the experience of negative emotions, and handle interpersonal relationships more rationally, effectively alleviating awkwardness and discomfort in interactions [ 53 ]. Emotional management is closely related to the development of individual social cognitive characteristics and social communication skills [ 54 ]. Adolescents who frequently exhibit negative emotions may experience social withdrawal, lack of activity, and a lack of sports skills, leading to lower acceptance among peers, such as being less talkative or not fitting in. In contrast, good emotional management can help adolescents better handle various issues related to self-development and social interactions.

In summary, this study confirmed the positive predictive effect of PA on emotional management and its negative predictive effect on alleviating interpersonal relationship issues. This provides important guidance for the application of PA in preventing school bullying. By incorporating the challenges and stress of activity into daily physical education classes, students can learn and experience the effectiveness of emotional regulation during physical activities. Some studies have shown that participating in relaxation activities such as yoga [ 55 ] and meditation [ 56 ] can significantly promote emotional stability and enhance self-regulation abilities, helping students better control and adjust their emotions during exercise, thus more effectively coping with school pressures and conflicts. Additionally, encouraging participation in group activities [ 57 ] can significantly enhance students’ social skills, increase peer interactions, and reduce feelings of isolation and interpersonal conflicts. Implementing these strategies can help schools effectively reduce the impact of interpersonal relationship issues on bullying and victimization, and improve students’ social environment. Ultimately, this will help create a positive and healthy living environment for students, promoting their overall well-being and healthy development.

Strengths and limitations

This study, grounded in the theories of self-efficacy and interpersonal relationships, incorporates ERS and IRD as mediating variables. It separately models and explores the relationships and underlying mechanisms between physical activity (PA), bullying behavior, and being bullied. The findings provide empirical evidence and intervention recommendations for addressing school bullying, assisting educators and society in effectively tackling issues that impact students’ physical and mental health.

However, this study has some limitations. Firstly, as a cross-sectional study, it cannot infer causal relationships between variables. Future research could employ longitudinal tracking or experimental intervention designs to better explain the impact of PA on school bullying. Secondly, while this study considered the mediating roles of self-efficacy and IRD, other potential moderating factors such as cultural adaptation [ 41 ] and parental education level [ 58 ] might also influence the research outcomes. Future research could incorporate these factors to achieve a more comprehensive understanding of the complex relationship between bullying victimization and mental health. Additionally, the study’s participants were junior high school students from Eastern China, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. Future research should expand the sample to include students from more countries and regions. Lastly, this study explored the predictive mechanism of bullying based on students’ PA levels, but the practical implications of the findings need further strengthening. Future research should examine the effects of different forms, intensities, and types of PA on school bullying.

In the model predicting school bullying, PA significantly predicts bullying, ERS, and IRD. ERS negatively predicts IRD but does not significantly predict bullying. Additionally, IRD significantly predicts bullying. The prediction of school bullying by PA includes masking effects, with two primary pathways: (1) PA → IRD → bullying, and (2) PA → ERS → IRD → bullying. In the model predicting being bullied at school, PA does not significantly predict this outcome. However, PA significantly positively predicts ERS and negatively predicts IRD. ERS significantly negatively predicts IRD but does not significantly predict being bullied. IRD significantly predicts being bullied. PA fully mediates the prediction of being bullied, with the pathways being: (1) PA → IRD → being bullied, and (2) PA → ERS → IRD → being bullied.

Based on the results of this study, we conclude that PA is an effective way to improve students’ emotional regulation and interpersonal relationships, significantly reducing both bullying and victimization. Given the prevalence of school bullying and its negative impact on mental health, public health policies should prioritize increasing adolescent participation in moderate-to-vigorous physical activity. This not only enhances physical health but also effectively improves emotional regulation and develops students’ social interaction skills. Additionally, it is recommended that structured physical activity be incorporated into school curricula to create a relaxed and enjoyable learning environment, improving peer relationships and maximizing the prevention of school bullying.

Data availability

The datasets of this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Campus Bullying Scale

Comparative Fit Index

Conversation Trouble

Emotional Management Self-Efficacy Scale

Emotion Regulation Self-Efficacy

Expressing Positive Emotions

Exposure to Heterosexual Distress

Goodness of Fit Index

Interpersonal Relationship Distress Scale

Interpersonal Relationship Distress

Interaction Trouble

Moderate-to-Vigorous Physical Activity

Physical Activity

Physical Activity Rating Scale

Root Mean Square Error of Approximation

Regulating Fear

Regulating Stress

Standardized Root Mean Square Residual

Tucker-Lewis Index

Trouble Treating Others

Victimization

Cénat JM, Blais M, Hébert M, Lavoie F, Guerrier M. Correlates of bullying in Quebec high school students: the vulnerability of sexual-minority youth. J Affect Disord. 2015;183:315–21.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Olweus D. School bullying: development and some important challenges. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2013;9:751–80.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Li N, Guo S, Park H. Cyberbullying among adolescents in East Asian societies: explanations based on general strain theory. Int J Bullying Prev. 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42380-023-00204-7 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Eun Jahng K. Factors influencing South Korean early adolescents’ cyber aggression. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2024;158:107483.

Sasaki N, Watanabe K, Kanamori Y, Tabuchi T, Fujiwara T, Nishi D. Effects of expanded adverse childhood experiences including school bullying, childhood poverty, and natural disasters on mental health in adulthood. Sci Rep. 2024;14:12015.

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Zhao Y, Zhao Y, Lee Y-T, Chen L. Cumulative interpersonal relationship risk and resilience models for bullying victimization and depression in adolescents. Pers Individ Dif. 2020;155:109706.

Sibold J, Edwards E, Murray-Close D, Hudziak JJ. Physical activity, sadness, and suicidality in bullied US adolescents. J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2015;54:808–15.

Smith PK, Madsen KC, Moody JC. What causes the age decline in reports of being bullied at school? Towards a developmental analysis of risks of being bullied. Educ Res. 1999;41:267–85.

Méndez I, Ruiz-Esteban C, Ortega E. Impact of the physical activity on bullying. Front Psychol. 2019;10:1520.

Garcia AC, Sousa R, Varela A, Monteiro L. Bullying, physical activity, and body image among Brazilian students. J Health Psychol. 2021;26:1661–73.

Pacífico AB, da Silva MP, Piola TS, Bacil EDA, Campos JG, Fontana F, et al. Bullying victimization and aggression, physical activity and sedentary behaviors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Child Youth Serv Rev. 2024;163:107743.

Zurita Ortega F, Salvador-Pérez F, Knox E, Gámiz-Sánchez V, Chacón Cuberos R, Fernández S et al. Physical activity and health-related quality of life in schoolchildren: structural equations analysis. Anales De Psicol. 2018;34.

Nikolaou D, Crispin LM. Estimating the effects of sports and physical exercise on bullying. Contemp Econ Policy. 2022;40:283–303.

Alfonso-Rosa RM, García-Hermoso A, Sanders T, Parker P, Oriol-Granado X, Arnott H, et al. Lifestyle behaviors predict adolescents bullying victimization in low and middle-income countries. J Affect Disord. 2020;273:364–74.

Waasdorp TE, Mehari KR, Milam AJ, Bradshaw CP. Health-related risks for involvement in bullying among Middle and High School Youth. J Child Fam Stud. 2019;28:2606–17.

Muris P. Relationships between self-efficacy and symptoms of anxiety disorders and depression in a normal adolescent sample. Pers Individ Dif. 2002;32:337–48.

Bandura A. Self-efficacy: the exercise of control. New York, NY, US: W H Freeman/Times Books/ Henry Holt & Co; 1997.

Google Scholar  

Bandura A. Social cognitive theory. Handbook of theories of social psychology. Volume 1. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Ltd; 2012. pp. 349–73.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Kliziene I, Cizauskas G, Sipaviciene S, Aleksandraviciene R, Zaicenkoviene K. Effects of a Physical Education Program on Physical Activity and Emotional Well-Being among Primary School Children. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18:7536.

Valois RF, Umstattd MR, Zullig KJ, Paxton RJ. Physical activity behaviors and emotional self-efficacy: is there a relationship for adolescents? J Sch Health. 2008;78:321–7.

Garcés TE, Cuberos RC, Ortega FZ, Sánchez MC. Victimización en edad escolar desde la perspectiva de la actividad física. Sportis Sci J Sch Sport Phys Educ Psychomotricity. 2016;2:379–89.

Briere J, Runtz M. The inventory of altered self-capacities (IASC): a standardized measure of identity, affect regulation, and relationship disturbance. Assessment. 2002;9:230–9.

Huang H, Hong JS, Espelage DL. Understanding factors Associated with bullying and peer victimization in Chinese schools within ecological contexts. J Child Fam Stud. 2013;22:881–92.

Gross JJ. Emotion regulation: affective, cognitive, and social consequences. Psychophysiology. 2002;39:281–91.

González JIÁ, Ortega FZ, Garófano VV, Martínez AM, Sánchez SG, Díaz ME. Physical activity in adolescents: involvement of harmful substances, and practiced family mode. Psicol Esc Educ. 2016;20:13–22.

Ariño AP, Fernández JG. Academic performance and correspondences with indicators of physical and psychological health. Sportis. 2015;1:164–81.

Evans IIIFB. Harry Stack Sullivan: interpersonal theory and psychotherapy. Florence, KY, US: Taylor & Frances/Routledge; 1996.

Yang S-Y, Fu S-H, Wang P-Y, Lin Y-L, Lin P-H. Are the Self-esteem, Self-efficacy, and Interpersonal Interaction of Junior College Students related to the Solitude Capacity? Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17:8274.

Jun W-H. Anger expression, self-efficacy and interpersonal competency of Korean nursing students. Int Nurs Rev. 2016;63:539–46.

Zulkosky K. Self-Efficacy: a Concept Analysis. Nurs Forum. 2009;44:93–102.

Robb M. Self-efficacy with application to nursing education: a concept analysis. Nurs Forum. 2012;47:166–72.

Liang D. Stress levels of college students and their relationship with physical exercise. Chin Ment Health J. 1994;:5–6.

Li X. Research on emotional regulation self-efficacy and mindfulness intervention among college students. Master’s thesis. Soochow Univ; 2011.

Deng L, Zheng R. Study on the relationship between emotional orientation, expressiveness, and mental health of college students. Psychol Dev Educ. 2003;:69–73.

Olweus D. Bully/victim problems in school: facts and intervention. Eur J Psychol Educ. 1997;12:495–510.

Zhang W, Wu J. Revision of the Chinese version of the Olweus Bully/Victim questionnaire. Psychol Dev Educ. 1999;:8–12, 38.

Wen Z, Ye B. Mediation effect analysis: methods and model development. Adv Psychol Sci. 2014;22:731–45.

Aguirre-Loaiza H, Arenas J, Arias I, Franco-Jímenez A, Barbosa-Granados S, Ramos-Bermúdez S et al. Effect of Acute Physical Exercise on Executive functions and Emotional Recognition: analysis of moderate to high intensity in young adults. Front Psychol. 2019;10.

Zurita-Ortega F, Salvador-Pérez F, Knox E, Gámiz-Sánchez VM, Chacón-Cuberos R, Rodríguez-Fernández S, et al. Physical activity and health-related quality of life in schoolchildren: structural equations analysis. Anales De Psicol. 2018;34:384–9.

García-Hermoso A, Hormazabal-Aguayo I, Oriol-Granado X, Fernández-Vergara O, del Pozo Cruz B. Bullying victimization, physical inactivity and sedentary behavior among children and adolescents: a meta-analysis. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2020;17:114.

Kim J, Fong E. The influence of bullying victimization on acculturation and life satisfaction among children from multicultural families in South Korea. J Ethnic Migr Stud 0:1–20.

Park H, Son H, Jang H, Kim J. Chronic bullying victimization and life satisfaction among children from multicultural families in South Korea: heterogeneity by immigrant mothers’ country of origin. Child Abuse Negl. 2024;151:106718.

Kohl HW, Craig CL, Lambert EV, Inoue S, Alkandari JR, Leetongin G, et al. The pandemic of physical inactivity: global action for public health. Lancet. 2012;380:294–305.

Meeus W, van de Schoot R, Keijsers L, Branje S. Identity statuses as developmental trajectories: a five-wave longitudinal study in early-to-middle and middle-to-late adolescents. J Youth Adolesc. 2012;41:1008–21.

DeWall CN, Anderson CA, Bushman BJ. The general aggression model: theoretical extensions to violence. Psychol Violence. 2011;1:245–58.

Webb TL, Miles E, Sheeran P. Dealing with feeling: a meta-analysis of the effectiveness of strategies derived from the process model of emotion regulation. Psychol Bull. 2012;138:775–808.

Bonell C, Allen E, Warren E, McGowan J, Bevilacqua L, Jamal F, et al. Effects of the Learning together intervention on bullying and aggression in English secondary schools (INCLUSIVE): a cluster randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2018;392:2452–64.

Duan D, Cheng Q, Zhang X, Xia Y. The relationship between negative interpersonal relationships, anxiety, exposure to violent media, and aggressive behavior among middle school students. Chin J Clin Psychol. 2014;22:281–4.

Foshee VA, McNaughton Reyes HL, Chen MS, Ennett ST, Basile KC, DeGue S, et al. Shared Risk factors for the perpetration of physical dating violence, bullying, and sexual harassment among adolescents exposed to domestic violence. J Youth Adolesc. 2016;45:672–86.

Williford A, Boulton A, Noland B, Little TD, Kärnä A, Salmivalli C. Effects of the KiVa anti-bullying program on adolescents’ depression, anxiety, and perception of peers. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2012;40:289–300.

Gentile DA, Lynch PJ, Linder JR, Walsh DA. The effects of violent video game habits on adolescent hostility, aggressive behaviors, and school performance. J Adolesc. 2004;27:5–22.

Liu H. Cognitive reappraisal, interpersonal relationship distress, and adolescent physical exercise: longitudinal data from a cross-school year study. Chin Sport Sci. 2021;57:79–87.

Zhu C, Dong B. Personality traits and exercise motivation among college students: the mediating effect of emotion regulation strategies. J Wuhan Sport Univ. 2016;50:94–100.

Thompson RA. Emotional regulation and emotional development. Educ Psychol Rev. 1991;3:269–307.

McCurdy BH, Bradley T, Matlow R, Rettger JP, Espil FM, Weems CF et al. Program evaluation of a school-based mental health and wellness curriculum featuring yoga and mindfulness. PLoS ONE. 2024;19.

Tang Q, Han J, Zeng X. The impacts of background music on the effects of loving-kindness meditation on positive emotions. Behav Sci. 2024;14:204.

Wang X, Wang Y, Zhang Z. Cultivation model of football training group cohesion from the perspective of group psychology. Entertain Comput. 2024;49:100626.

Jang H, Park H, Son H, Kim J. The Asymmetric effects of the transitions Into and out of bullying victimization on depressive symptoms: the protective role of parental education. J Adolesc Health. 2024;74:828–36.

Download references

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the schools for approving our baseline survey and the intervention study and thank all the students who participated in our study.

This work was supported by the Key Project of Chongqing Academy of Educational Science (Grant No. 2021-16-238). The funding agency had no role in the design of the study, data collection, analysis, interpretation of data, writing of the manuscript, or the decision to publish.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Capital University of Physical Education and Sports, Beijing, China

Qiang Zhang

Chong Qing Yong Chuan Vocational Education Central School, Chong Qing, China

Wenjing Deng

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Z.Q. completed the manuscript, D.W. reviewed the manuscript. All authors reviewed the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wenjing Deng .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Ethics approval for the cross-sectional study was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the Academic Committee of Capital University of Physical Education. Written informed consent was obtained from parents or legal guardians, and participating students also provided verbal assent before participation.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

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.

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/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Zhang, Q., Deng, W. Relationship between physical exercise, bullying, and being bullied among junior high school students: the multiple mediating effects of emotional management and interpersonal relationship distress. BMC Public Health 24 , 2503 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-20012-y

Download citation

Received : 14 March 2024

Accepted : 09 September 2024

Published : 13 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-024-20012-y

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

• Physical activity
• Being bullied
• Emotion regulation self-efficacy
• Interpersonal relationship distress
• Chain mediating effect

BMC Public Health

ISSN: 1471-2458

• General enquiries: [email protected]

• Systematic Review
• Open access
• Published: 14 September 2024

The aetiology and antimicrobial resistance of bacterial maternal infections in Sub-Saharan Africa—a systematic review and meta-analysis

• Chikondi Chapuma 1 , 2 ,
• Hussein H. Twabi 3 ,
• Edward J. M. Monk 2 ,
• James Jafali 1 , 2 ,
• Andrew Weeks 1 ,
• Emily Beales 2 ,
• David Kulapani 3 ,
• Apatsa Selemani 3 ,
• Marriott Nliwasa 3 ,
• Luis Gadama 3 ,
• Tony Nyirenda 3 ,
• Chisomo Msefula 3 ,
• Catherine Dunlop 5 ,
• Samantha Lissauer 1 , 2 ,
• Nicholas Feasey 1 , 4 ,
• Charlotte Van der Veer 1 , 2   na1 &
• David Lissauer 1 , 2   na1  

BMC Infectious Diseases volume  24 , Article number:  978 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

Understanding the aetiological organisms causing maternal infections is crucial to inform antibiotic treatment guidelines, but such data are scarce from Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). We performed this systematic review and meta-analysis to address this gap.

Microbiologically confirmed maternal infection data were collected from PubMed, Embase, and African Journals online databases. The search strategy combined terms related to bacterial infection, pregnancy, postnatal period, observational studies, SSA. Exclusion criteria included colonization, asymptomatic infection, and screening studies. Pooled proportions for bacterial isolates and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) were calculated. Quality and completeness of reporting were assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa and STROBE checklists.

We included 14 papers comprising data from 2,575 women from four sources (blood, urine, surgical wound and endocervical). Mixed-growth was commonly reported at 17% (95% CI: 12%-23%), E. coli  from 11%(CI:10%-12%),  S. aureus  from 5%(CI: 5%-6%), Klebsiella spp .  at 5%(CI: 4%- 5%) and  Streptococcus spp . at 2%(CI: 1%-2%). We observed intra-sample and inter-sample heterogeneity between 88–92% in all meta-analyses. AMR rates were between 19% -77%, the highest with first-line beta-lactam antibiotics. Convenience sampling, and limited reporting of laboratory techniques were areas of concern.

Interpretation

We provide a comprehensive summary of microbial aetiology of maternal infections in SSA and demonstrate the paucity of data available for this region. We flag the need to review the current local and international empirical treatment guidelines for maternal bacterial infections in SSA because there is high prevalence of AMR among common causative bacteria.

This research was supported by the NIHR-Professorship/NIHR300808 and the Wellcome-Strategic-award /206545/Z/17/Z.

Trial registration

Prospero ID CRD42021238515.

Peer Review reports

Evidence before this study

Global frequency for infection-related severe maternal outcomes is 70.4 per 1000 livebirths in Low and Middle-Income Countries (LMIC) and 10.9 per 1000 livebirths in High-Income countries (HIC).

The World Health Organisation (WHO) international empiric clinical treatment guidelines for maternal infection in LMICs recommend ampicillin (a penicillin) and once-daily gentamicin as first-line antibiotics for treating maternal peripartum infections, and a combination of clindamycin and gentamicin for postpartum endometritis. The WHO also recommends amoxicillin for lower urinary tract infections and a medical review for other causes, such as soft tissue infections.

There is still no global data on the microbial aetiology of maternal infections, which is needed to guide management of maternal infections in LMIC, where the burden of disease is the highest

Added value of the study

This study summarizes the available microbial aetiology and the antibiotic susceptibility profiles for the causative bacterial agents for maternal infection in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA). It also estimates the prevalence, diagnostic yield and antimicrobial drug resistance patterns of symptomatic and clinically relevant maternal bacteraemia, bacteriuria, endometritis, and soft tissue infection. This study also demonstrates the limited and scanty evidence available for the microbiology of maternal infection.

Implications of all the available evidence

There is a need for high-quality surveillance of maternal microbiological data in this context.

This study provides the best evidence to inform empirical treatment guidelines for local and international maternal infections.

This study also flags the need to review the current local and international treatment guidelines for maternal bacterial infections in SSA because the results of this study indicate a high prevalence of AMR in common causative events of maternal infections to commonly used antimicrobial drugs in SSA.

Introduction

Over the past 25 years, there has been a 44% decrease in Maternal Mortality Ratio (MMR) globally [ 1 ], which falls well short of the 2015 Millennium Development Goal target of a 75% reduction in MMR [ 2 ]. There is therefore an urgent need to strengthen efforts to reduce maternal mortality if the Sustainable Development Goals target, to reduce MMR to less than 70 per 100,000 live births by 2030 is to be met [ 3 ].

The global burden of maternal deaths is highest in Sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) [ 4 ,  5 ]. Over two-thirds of global maternal deaths occur in SSA, with at least 200,000 deaths per year [ 6 ,  1 ]. Of these deaths, up to 10% are due to infection which is twice the proportion observed in high income countries [ 7 ]. The problem's origins lie in the low quality of care areas, including inconsistent infection prevention, poor infection treatment, delayed sepsis diagnosis, and inadequate sepsis management. In addition, limited availability of validated diagnostics (culture and sensitivity) poses difficulties in prompt identification and management of maternal infection in SSA [ 8 ]. Therefore, prioritizing surveillance in this arena to describe the existing landscape of maternal infections in this region is essential to guide simple strategies to prevent morbidity and mortality from maternal infections. It also has the potential to reduce maternal death rates globally.

Data on the microbiologic causes of bacterial maternal infections can inform policies (programme strategies and treatment guidelines) and identify antimicrobial resistance (AMR) threats in SSA. However, there are challenges in estimating maternal sepsis burden due to differences in its definitions [ 9 , 10 ]. Notably, within obstetrics there are a broad range of clinically relevant infections and infection sources that are associated with maternal sepsis. These include infections from the urogenital tract, but also infections associated with other organ systems, such as pneumonia. The World Health Organization (WHO) has therefore proposed a broad definition for maternal sepsis which we used for this systematic review to describe any “symptomatic maternal bacterial infection”. It spans across the pregnancy period spectrum, including the antenatal, peripartum, postpartum, and post-abortion periods (up to 42 days of pregnancy termination). It also incorporates an extensive host of infectious morbidities, including genital tract infections (e.g., chorioamnionitis and endometritis), extra-genital infections (e.g., surgical site infections), as well as other maternal bacterial infections complicating pregnancy, childbirth, and the puerperium (e.g., sexually transmitted infections (STIs), urinary tract infections (UTIs) [ 10 ].

Despite significantly higher maternal infection-related mortality in SSA, to date there has been no systematic review that summarizes the underlying microbiological agents causing maternal bacterial infection in SSA, nor their resistance patterns. Therefore, using the WHO definition of maternal infection and sepsis, this systematic review will summarise the available data on the main bacterial agents causing maternal infection and their susceptibility to antibiotics to inform the international and local current empiric antibiotic treatment guidelines. It will also assess completeness and quality of the available data.

Registration

This systematic review is registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) on March 2021 (Registration number: CRD42021238515).

Search strategy and selection criteria

We searched PUBMED, Embase and African Journals online databases using a search strategy that combined terms relating to laboratory-confirmed bacterial infection, pregnancy, postnatal period, observational studies, and SSA (Supplementary I). A comprehensive literature search (last search 29th March 2023) was performed through the three databases with the support of a clinical librarian. The search did not contain letters or editorials. We used the “humans”, “female”, and “age” filters. We translated non-English articles. We also searched the systematic review registries for ongoing reviews.

We included any observational study (cohort, case–control, and cross-sectional studies) describing the aetiology and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) patterns of maternal bacterial infection in SSA. This review considered any studies that evaluated symptomatic laboratory-confirmed bacterial infection in keeping with the WHO definition of maternal infection/sepsis among pregnant and postpartum women (up to 42 days after birth). We excluded papers that contained incomplete/internally inconsistent data, that assessed the diagnostic accuracy of any test using only positive samples and that were not in the clinical context of suspected maternal infection. We excluded studies that only described maternal colonization of bacteria rather than infection; for example, maternal colonization of Group B streptococci (GBS) in neonatal infection. Screening studies that did not include women who fulfil the WHO definition were also excluded, for example, studies that evaluated the prevalence of sexually transmitted infections among women attending routine clinical check-ups. Finally, we excluded studies reporting on only one type of bacteria as this may skew proportional estimates.

Two independent authors (CC and CVD) screened titles and abstracts with aid from a librarian (AS) in Rayyan. Duplicates were removed and reviewed individually by CC and CVD. If at least one of the authors approved the study, we obtained the full-text report. In both stages, we compared the results against eligibility criteria. CC and CVD resolved disagreements through discussion; if they could not reach an agreement, a third author (DL) resolved the disagreement.

Data collection and extraction

Using a Microsoft Excel database, CC and CVD extracted the following data from the eligible full-text studies; identification details of the study, including the title, language, authors, year of publication, country, region, setting (urban or rural), study design, study inclusion and exclusion criteria; participant characteristics, including participants’ age (median and range), gestation period, co-morbidities (for example, HIV status) and study sample size; exposure of interest, such as type of bacterial infection (invasive or non-invasive), source of infection, when the invasive bacterial infection occurred (antenatal/postnatal); and outcomes of interest, namely the number and type of samples taken, number of positive samples; the diagnostic method used, antimicrobial susceptibility testing results and the methodology used, and maternal outcomes (if reported).

We contacted the study correspondence authors for further information for studies published only as abstracts. For study reports containing little details on methods and results, we also contacted the authors to obtain additional information on these elements. Disagreements regarding the data extracted were resolved by discussion and, if necessary, by consulting a third review author (DL).

Data analysis

The analysis was conducted in R (R Core Team, 2022), using RStudio [ 11 ]. We applied the metafor package [ 12 ] to perform a meta-analysis of; i prevalence (number of causative agent of interest/total number of samples assessed) and, ii diagnostic yield (number of causative agent of interest/total number of positive isolates; and their 95% confidence intervals) [ 12 ]. Pooled estimates from the eligible studies on each causative agents of maternal bacterial infections were estimated using random-effects models (REM) and the DerSimonian-Laird method [ 13 ]. We also performed sub-group meta-analyses according to the source of infection; and estimated pooled proportions of antimicrobial resistance for the commonest bacteria for the papers that reported on antibiotic susceptibility.

Completeness and quality assessments of the papers

To assess reporting completeness and quality of included studies, two authors (CVD with either EJMM or EB) independently assessed included studies according to Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology [ 14 , 15 , 16 ] and the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale [ 17 , 18 ], respectively. They then independently applied the checklists to each included study. Both checklists were adopted to better serve reporting of microbiological data.

This systematic review and meta-analysis database search identified 3108 papers for abstract screening after removing duplicates (Fig.  1 ). Fifty-eight papers were eligible for full-text review; 12 articles were excluded because of no correspondence from authors in studies that reported little detail on results; three papers were on premature rupture of membranes (PROM) screening, six papers had no microbiological data, two were microbiome papers, 20 articles targeted the wrong population, and one article had incoherent results. Therefore, 14 articles were eligible for data extraction. All 14 articles reported data on aetiology, and ten reported on AMR. Two articles were in French [ 19 , 20 ] and translated by EM and CVD prior to analysis.

PRISMA Flow diagram

The main characteristics of the papers included in this systematic review and meta-analysis are summarised in Table  1 and the geographical distribution in Fig.  2 . Eight studies were from East Africa (five from Ethiopia), two from Southern Africa and three from West Africa (Fig.  2 ). The proportion of study participants with suspected maternal infection who had laboratory confirmed diagnosis ranged from 20.4% to 100%.

Geographical representation of studies reporting aetiological data for laboratory-confirmed bacterial maternal infection in Sub-Sahara Africa

Figure  3 shows a forest plot of the pooled proportion of the reported causative agents of bacterial maternal infection for all sample types combined. Overall, mixed growth was reported most at 17% (CI: 12%—23%), followed by E. coli at 11% (CI:10%—12%), S. aureus at 5% (CI: 5% -6%), S. epidermis at 7% (CI: 2%, 16%), Klebsiella spp . at 5% (CI: 4%-5%), L. lactis at 5% (CI:1%-15%) and Coagulase negative Staphylococci (CONS) was 3% (CI:2%-4%).

Pooled proportion of bacterial aetiological agents isolated from patients with suspected maternal infection in Sub-Saharan Africa

When we stratified the data by sample type (Fig.  4 ); blood culture was rarely positive at 2% (CI: 2%-3%), of which growth for Klebsiella spp . at 4% (CI: 2%-6%), S. aureus at 4% (CI: 2%-5%) and E. coli at 4% (CI: 3%-6%) was most reported. Around 4% (CI: 2% -6%) of endocervical discharge samples yielded positive cultures of which the majority yielded E. coli at 25% (CI:22%-29%), mixed growth at 17% (CI: 12%-23%) and S. aureus at 14% (CI: 11%-17%). The urine cultures were positive in 1% of cases (CI: 1%-2%). The most common pathogens identified were Klebsiella spp at 4% (CI: 3%-5%), S. aureus at 2% (CI: 2%-3%), and E. coli at 9% (CI: 8%-10%). Approximately 8% (CI: 5–12%) of wound samples generated positive cultures of which the majority showed growth for S. aureus at 30% (CI: 24%-37%) followed by Acinetobacter (16%; CI: 7%-28%). Notably, we observed both intra-sample and inter-sample heterogeneity in both meta-analyses ranging from 79–96%.

Pooled prevalence of bacterial causative agents- sub-group analysis by sample type

For samples yielding positive cultures, we pooled the proportion of each causative agent (Fig.  5 ). Overall, the predominant causative agents among positive cultures were E. coli at 36% (CI: 33%-38%), mixed growth at 20% (CI: 14%-27%), Veillonella spp. at 20% (CI: 1%-72%), S. aureus at 18% (CI: 16%-20%), and Klebsiella spp. at 15% (CI: 13%-17%). The forest plot in Fig.  6 shows the pooled proportion stratified by sample type. Positive samples from cervicovaginal and urine most commonly yielded E coli, at 38% (CI: 33%-43%) and 43% (CI:38%-47%), respectively; while wound swabs yielded S aureus at 28% (CI: 22%-34%). We also observed both intra-sample and inter-sample heterogeneity in both meta-analyses ranging from 80–96%. Similarly, Fig.  7 presents a stratified bar graph based on sample sources, namely blood, endocervical discharge, urine, and wound discharge. The graph illustrates the composition of resistant samples for each bacterium. The data reveals that among all resistant bacteria, E. coli is the most frequently isolated bacterium from blood ( n  = 27/ 96, 28%), urine ( n  = 247/ 581, 43%), and endocervical samples ( n  = 163/ 416, 39%). In contrast, S. aureus (61/ 203, 30%) is predominantly isolated from surgical wound sites.

Pooled proportions of bacterial causative agents amongst the positive isolates

Sub-group analysis by sample type of pooled proportions of bacterial causative agents amongst the positive isolates

Stratified resistance sample composition

We summarized pooled antibiotic susceptibility testing (AST) profiles E. coli, Klebsiella spp. and S aureus (reported from the studies) to commonly used WHO classes of antibiotics in SSA; penicillin (amoxicillin and ampicillin), gentamicin, ciprofloxacin, and ceftriaxone (Fig.  8 ) as these were the most common clinically relevant antibiotics retrieved from this meta-analysis. Notably, there was limited data on third-line treatments carbapenems, and co-trimoxazole. The pooled resistance of E. coli to Penicillin (amoxicillin and ampicillin), gentamicin, ciprofloxacin, and ceftriaxone was 65%, 22%, 24% and 36%, respectively. The pooled resistance of Klebsiella spp. to penicillin (amoxicillin and ampicillin), gentamicin, ciprofloxacin, and ceftriaxone was 77%, 33%, 19% and 40%, respectively. The pooled resistance of S. aureus to penicillin (amoxicillin and ampicillin), gentamicin, ciprofloxacin, and ceftriaxone was 68%, 30%, 24%, and 32%, respectively.

Pooled AMR Profiles of the most common causative agents to ceftriaxone, ciprofloxacin, gentamicin and penicillins. *Amoxicillin and Ampicillin, (a-b) gram negative species and (c) gram positive species

The assessment of strength of reporting within each included study, according to the STROBE criteria, is summarized in Fig.  9 . We assessed completeness of reporting using the STROBE checklist, including the title, introduction, methodology, results, discussion, and funding. Of the criteria assessed, bias reporting was the least well-reported methods criteria (only 5/14 [35.7%] addressed bias clearly). Other criteria that should have been reported more comprehensively were the limitations of the studies and funding sources. The main study results of interest for this review, however, were clear and detailed for all included studies.

Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) Checklist

Supplementary II summarises the quality of the 14 papers included in the study using the Newcastle–Ottawa score. We determined the risk of bias in each article by assessing its ability to represent the exposed group, ascertain the exposed group, control for confounding, and make an outcome assessment. Notably, all studies dropped at least three points, spread across 2–3 assessment categories, with 8/14 (57.1%) dropping two points in a single category and at particular risk of introducing bias. The main reasons for introducing bias were use of convenience sampling rather than random sampling of included patients, lack of laboratory facilities to perform anaerobic culture, minimal to no control of confounding (for e.g., antibiotic exposure, HIV status), no or insufficient differentiation in outcome assessment regarding commensal contamination versus pathogen.

Here we performed a systematic review of the literature summarizing available aetiological and antimicrobial resistance data on bacterial maternal infections in SSA. Our study shows that E. coli, S. aureus, and Klebsiella spp. are the most common pathogens associated with maternal infections. Notably, E. coli and Klebsiella spp. are commonly and intrinsically resistant to penicillin, respectively. At least 21.5% of these isolates ( E. coli, S. aureus, and Klebsiella spp. ) exhibited resistance to other first-line and second-line antibiotics, including ciprofloxacin and gentamicin. Additionally, up to 39.6% of these isolates were resistant to ceftriaxone, a second-line treatment.

Our findings are consistent with the 2022 Global Antimicrobial Resistance and use Surveillance System (GLASS) [ 33 ]. In their report, the WHO reported third-generation cephalosporin- resistance for  E. coli at 42%, K. pneumoniae between (59% – 65%) and methicillin-resistant   S. aureus   (MRSA) at 35% causing bloodstream infections [ 33 ]. In addition, resistance rates of  E. coli to first-line antibiotics (penicillins) and second-line drugs (ciprofloxacin) were both > 20% and of great concern. A notable limitation of GLASS data is the lack of stratified data on age and gender, and it did not specifically look at the pregnant/post-partum population to inform the global picture of bacterial infection and AMR. This challenge limits the data interpretation in the context of maternal infections. For this population analysing AMR surveillance data by age groups and infection types are crucial to informing and directing mitigation strategies and interventions to control the mechanisms of the spread of the causative agents and AMR. In addition, some antibiotics used in the general population cannot be used in pregnancy due to adverse effects on the unborn infant. Therefore, these factors need to be accounted for in the surveillance systems.

Our systematic review and meta-analysis provide stratified maternal infection data, but it has some limitations. For example, the reporting AST of K. pneumoniae to co-trimoxazole and carbapenems is of public health relevance because resistance genes in Enterobacterales to these antibiotics are frequently associated with mobile genetic elements that increase the likelihood of pan-drug-resistant and extreme-drug-resistant isolates. Our study could not assess the resistance of carbapenems and co-trimoxazole due to limited data to make such pooled estimates. This likely reflects the local prescribing behaviour as third-generation drugs such as carbapenems are rarely available. Nonetheless, rising ESBL rates may incentivize the use of carbapenems and co-trimoxazole, making urgent surveillance of resistance to these antibiotics essential. Another challenge was that the studies included in our meta-analyses were performed in government and mostly tertiary hospitals and not private or primary healthcare facilities. Therefore, the data presented here may be skewed in the direction of hospital-acquired (resistant) bacterial infection as prior antibiotic exposure was not always reported and/or accounted for. Nonetheless, most patients in SSA with severe maternal infection will attend government hospitals.

Quality assessment of the papers shows some areas of concern. Most studies report convenience sampling of patients with suspected maternal sepsis and no randomized sampling was reported, which may limit the generalizability of the findings to the wider maternal population. This in addition to the lack of information on prior antibiotic exposure means there may be common infectious agents responsive to empiric treatments which were not captured within this review. Limited studies reported anaerobic culturing methods meaning important pathogens could have been missed. Only 3/7 studies reported in their methodology that they accounted for contaminants making data from non-sterile sampling sites such as wounds and cervicovaginal swabs difficult to interpret [ 19 , 20 , 21 , 24 , 27 , 29 , 31 ]. Also, some studies reported resistance to penicillin by Gram-negative causative agents (known to be inherently resistant to penicillin). We would have liked to stratify our analyses by important factors such as HIV status, considering that HIV increases the risk of maternal morbidity and mortality, but HIV-status data was missing for most studies. Majangara et al. [ 27 ] was the only study reviewed here that stratified data according to HIV status and reported increased length of hospitalization stay for HIV positive women with puerperal sepsis but they did not find a specific microbial agent that significantly associated with HIV status.

We expected to see high clinical and statistical heterogeneity, as demonstrated by the results (inter- and intra-study heterogeneity 88–92% in all the meta-analyses performed). This heterogeneity can be explained by our summary table and subgroup analysis by sample type. However, pooled estimates from these papers are still clinically relevant.

In light of these findings, several crucial implications emerge. Firstly, the apparent deficiency in data underscores the pressing need for concerted efforts in systematic data collection, particularly from government laboratories. Such initiatives are essential not only for assessing sensitivities but also for obtaining accurate and comprehensive rates of AMR. The limited availability of robust data poses a significant challenge to achieving the WHO's universal health care ambition. Additionally, the identified low rates of bacterial detection in laboratory settings raise questions about the utility of current practices. It prompts reflection on whether these detection rates are reasonable, considering their potential impact on the quality of treatment. The ability to deliver high-quality treatment is directly influenced by the accuracy and reliability of laboratory results, emphasizing the importance of addressing and rectifying potential limitations in detection methods.

Furthermore, the documented high rates of treatment failure (for invasive and non-invasive bacterial infections), particularly alarming in resource-constrained populations, emphasize the critical need for immediate attention. In economically challenged settings where financial constraints limit the purchase of various antibiotics, and follow-up is challenging in the face of detected resistance, effective treatment becomes a formidable challenge. This warrants a comprehensive re-evaluation of current guidelines and practices, especially in the context of syndromic treatment. The data strongly suggests the necessity for revisions to existing guidance to ensure that the first-line treatment is appropriately targeted and effective.

Our findings highlight the need for high-quality surveillance for maternal microbiological data in SSA, including stratification according to the target demographic population. The results indicate a high prevalence of resistance in common causative agents of maternal infections to essential antimicrobial drugs in empirical treatment guidelines. These include ampicillin (a penicillin) as first-line antibiotics for treating maternal peripartum infection in combination with gentamicin. AMR has also been observed in amoxicillin and ceftriaxone, the highest priority agent among the critically important antimicrobials for human medicine. Our findings also flag the need to review local and international treatment guidelines for maternal bacterial infections in SSA.

Availability of data and materials

Data are available upon reasonable request to the corresponding author.

WHO, UNICEF, UNFPA WBG and the UNPD. WHO | Trends in maternal mortality: 1990 to 2015. WHO. 2016. p. 18–25. Available from: https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/monitoring/maternal-mortality-2015/en/ . Cited 2021 Aug 26.

Chatterjee DK. United Nations Millennium Development Goals. In: Encyclopedia of Global Justice. 2011. p. 1105–1105. Available from: https://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/maternal.shtml . Cited 2021 Aug 26.

UNSD, DESA. SDG Indicators — SDG Indicators. United Nations Statistics Division, Department of Economic and Social Affairs. 2017. Available from: https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/?Text=&Goal=3&Target=3.1 . Cited 2021 Aug 26.

Bonet M, Brizuela V, Abalos E, Cuesta C, Baguiya A, Chamillard M, et al. Frequency and management of maternal infection in health facilities in 52 countries (GLOSS): a 1-week inception cohort study. Lancet Glob Health. 2020;8(5):661–71 Available from: www.thelancet.com/lancetgh . Cited 2021 Jan 4.

Article   Google Scholar  

Chou D, Daelmans B, Jolivet RR, Kinney M, Say L. Ending preventable maternal and newborn mortality and stillbirths. BMJ (Online). 2015;351:19–22 Available from: www.who.int/reproductivehealth . Cited 2021 Aug 26.

Google Scholar  

UNICEF. Maternal mortality rates and statistics - UNICEF DATA. UNICEF Data: Monitoring the situation of children and women. 2019. p. 1–8. Available from: https://data.unicef.org/topic/maternal-health/maternal-mortality/ . Cited 2022 Feb 20.

Say L, Chou D, Gemmill A, Tunçalp Ö, Moller AB, Daniels J, et al. Global causes of maternal death: A WHO systematic analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2014;2(6):e323–33. Available from: http://www.thelancet.com/article/S2214109X1470227X/fulltext . Cited 2024 Sep 9.

Iskandar K, Molinier L, Hallit S, Sartelli M, Hardcastle TC, Haque M, et al. Surveillance of antimicrobial resistance in low- and middle-income countries: a scattered picture. Antimicrob Resist Infect Cont. 2021;10(1):1–19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-021-00931-w . Available from: https://aricjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/ . Cited 2023 Feb 13.

Singer M, Deutschman CS, Seymour C, Shankar-Hari M, Annane D, Bauer M, et al. The third international consensus definitions for sepsis and septic shock (sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016;315:801–10 Available from: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2492881 . Cited 2021 Aug 26.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   CAS   Google Scholar  

Bonet M, Nogueira Pileggi V, Rijken MJ, Coomarasamy A, Lissauer D, Souza JP, et al. Towards a consensus definition of maternal sepsis: results of a systematic review and expert consultation Reproductive Health. BioMed Cent. 2017;14:1–13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12978-017-0321-6 . Available from: https://reproductive-health-journal.biomedcentral.com/articles . Cited 2021 Aug 26.

R Core Team. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Available from: www.R-project.org . 2021. Cited 2023 Feb 21.

Viechtbauer W. Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package. J Stat Softw. 2010;36(3):1–48 Available from: https://www.jstatsoft.org/index.php/jss/article/view/v036i03 . Cited 2023 Apr 27.

DerSimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986;7(3):177–88 Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3802833/ . Cited 2023 Apr 27.

Article   PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

Vandenbroucke JP, Von Elm E, Altman DG, Gøtzsche PC, Mulrow CD, Pocock SJ, et al. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med. 2007;4(10):1628–54.

von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. Int J Surg. 2014;12(12):1495–9.

Cuschieri S. The STROBE guidelines. Saudi J Anaesth. 2019;13(Suppl 1):S31–4 Available from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30930717 . Cited 2023 May 15.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Newcastle-Ottawa Scale: comparing reviewers’ to authors’ assessments - PMC. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4021422/ . Cited 2023 May 15.

Lo CKL, Mertz D, Loeb M. Newcastle-Ottawa Scale: comparing reviewers’ to authors’ assessments. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014;14(1):45 Available from: /pmc/articles/PMC4021422/ . Cited 2023 May 15.

Sawadogo YA, Komboigo E, Kiemtore S, Zamane H, Ouedraogo I, Kain DP, et al. Les suppurations pariétales postcesariennes au Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Yalgado Ouedraogo, Burkina-Faso: aspects epidemiologiques, cliniques, thérapeutiques et pronostiques. Pan Afr Med J. 2019;32:1937–8688. https://doi.org/10.11604/pamj.2019.32.35.17167 . Cited 2024 Jan 8.

Ouédraogo CMR, Ouattara A, Sana A, Ouédraogo A, Kain DP, Komboigo E, et al. Les endométrites obstétricales au CHU-Yalgado Ouédraogo de Ouagadougou (Burkina Faso). À propos de la prise en charge d’une série de 102 cas. Bulletin de la Societe de Pathologie Exotique. 2016;109(5):334–9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13149-016-0514-1 . Available from: https://link.springer.com/article/ . Cited 2023 May 1.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Kiponza R, Balandya B, Majigo MV, Matee M. Laboratory confirmed puerperal sepsis in a national referral hospital in Tanzania: Etiological agents and their susceptibility to commonly prescribed antibiotics. BMC Infect Dis. 2019;19(1):690. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-019-4324-5 . Available from: https://bmcinfectdis.biomedcentral.com/articles/ . Cited 2021 Apr 15.

Biset S, Moges F, Endalamaw D, Eshetie S. Multi-drug resistant and extended-spectrum β-lactamases producing bacterial uropathogens among pregnant women in Northwest Ethiopia. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2020;19(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12941-020-00365-z . Available from: https://ann-clinmicrob.biomedcentral.com/articles/ . Cited 2023 May 1.

Admas A, Gelaw B, Belay T, Worku A, Melese A. Proportion of bacterial isolates, their antimicrobial susceptibility profile and factors associated with puerperal sepsis among post-partum/aborted women at a referral Hospital in Bahir Dar. Northwest Ethiopia Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2020;9(1):1–10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13756-019-0676-2 Available from: https://aricjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/ Cited 2023 May 1.

Bako B, Audu BM, Lawan ZM, Umar JB. Risk factors and microbial isolates of puerperal sepsis at the University of Maiduguri Teaching Hospital, Maiduguri. North-eastern Nigeria Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2012;285(4):913–7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-011-2078-4 . Available from: https://link.springer.com/article . Cited 2023 May 1.

Bebell LM, Ngonzi J, Bazira J, Fajardo Y, Boatin AA, Siedner MJ, et al. Antimicrobial-resistant infections among postpartum women at a Ugandan referral hospital. PLoS One. 2017;12(4):e0175456 Available from: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id= . Cited 2023 May 1.

Belete MA.Bacterial Profile and ESBL Screening of Urinary Tract Infection Among Asymptomatic and Symptomatic Pregnant Women Attending Antenatal Care of Northeastern Ethiopia Region. Infect Drug Resist. 2020;13:2579–92 Available from: https://www.dovepress.com/bacterial-profile-and-esbl-screening-of-urinary-tract-infection-among--peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-IDR . Cited 2023 May 1.

Majangara R, Chirenje ZM, Gidiri MF. The association of puerperal sepsis with HIV infection at two tertiary hospitals in Zimbabwe HHS Public Access. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2019;144(1):67–72.

Gessese YA, Damessa DL, Amare MM, Bahta YH, Shifera AD, Tasew FS, et al. Urinary pathogenic bacterial profile, antibiogram of isolates and associated risk factors among pregnant women in Ambo town, Central Ethiopia: a crosssectional study. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2017;6(1). Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29299306/ . Cited 2024 Jan 8.

Kifilie AB, Dagnew M, Tegenie B, Yeshitela B, Howe R, Abate E. Bacterial Profile, Antibacterial Resistance Pattern, and Associated Factors from Women Attending Postnatal Health Service at University of Gondar Teaching Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia. Int J Microbiol. 2018;2018. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29681942/ . Cited 2024 Jan 8.

Johnson B, Stephen BM, Joseph N, Asiphas O, Musa K, Taseera K. Prevalence and bacteriology of culture-positive urinary tract infection among pregnant women with suspected urinary tract infection at Mbarara regional referral hospital. South-Western Uganda BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021;21(1):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-021-03641-8 . Available from: https://bmcpregnancychildbirth.biomedcentral.com/articles/ . Cited 2023 May 1.

Velin L, Umutesi G, Riviello R, Muwanguzi M, Bebell LM, Yankurije M, et al. Surgical Site Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance After Cesarean Section Delivery in Rural Rwanda. Ann Glob Health. 2021;87(1):77–8. https://doi.org/10.5334/aogh.3413 Available from: https://annalsofglobalhealth.org/articles/ . Cited 2023 May 1.

Kifilie AB, Dagnew M, Tegenie B, Yeshitela B, Howe R, Abate E. Bacterial Profile, Antibacterial Resistance Pattern, and Associated Factors from Women Attending Postnatal Health Service at University of Gondar Teaching Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia. Int J Microbiol. 2018;2018. Available from: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29681942/ . Cited 2024 Jan 8.

Global antimicrobial resistance and use surveillance system (GLASS) report: 2022. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789240062702 . Cited 2023 Feb 13.

Download references

Clinical trial number

Not applicable.

This work was funded by the NIHR Professorship, NIHR300808 (DL). CC was also supported by an institutional training grant awarded as part of the Wellcome Strategic award number 206545/Z/17/Z to The Malawi-Liverpool- Research Programme (MLW), administered under the joint MLW/Kamuzu University of Health Sciences Training Committee. For the purpose of open access, the authors have applied a CC BY public copyright license to any author accepted manuscript version arising from this submission. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not those of the funders.

Author information

Charlotte Van der Veer and David Lissauer shared last authorship.

Authors and Affiliations

Department of Children’s and Women’s Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK

Chikondi Chapuma, James Jafali, Andrew Weeks, Samantha Lissauer, Nicholas Feasey, Charlotte Van der Veer & David Lissauer

Malawi-Liverpool- Research-Programme, Blantyre, Malawi

Chikondi Chapuma, Edward J. M. Monk, James Jafali, Emily Beales, Samantha Lissauer, Charlotte Van der Veer & David Lissauer

Helse Nord Tuberculosis Initiative, Kamuzu University of Health Sciences, Blantyre, Malawi

Hussein H. Twabi, David Kulapani, Apatsa Selemani, Marriott Nliwasa, Luis Gadama, Tony Nyirenda & Chisomo Msefula

Department of Clinical Sciences, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK

Nicholas Feasey

College of Medical and Dental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK

Catherine Dunlop

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

DL is the guarantor of this manuscript. DL, CC and CVD developed the research question. CC, CVD and AS devised the search strategy. CC, CVD, EJMM and EB performed data extraction and quality assessments of the papers. CC, HHT and JF performed the data analysis. AW, NF, SL, DK, LG, MN, CM, TN, CD and MKM made substantial contributions to the study design. CC and CVD drafted the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chikondi Chapuma .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval and consent to participate, 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 1. pubmed search strategy, supplementary 2. microsoft excel workbook of the newcastle ottawa assessment scale, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, 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 you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. 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-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Chapuma, C., Twabi, H.H., Monk, E.J.M. et al. The aetiology and antimicrobial resistance of bacterial maternal infections in Sub-Saharan Africa—a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Infect Dis 24 , 978 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-09855-3

Download citation

Received : 22 January 2024

Accepted : 02 September 2024

Published : 14 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12879-024-09855-3

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

• Maternal infections
• Antimicrobial resistance
• Sub-Saharan Africa

BMC Infectious Diseases

ISSN: 1471-2334

• General enquiries: [email protected]

Peer Reviewed

GPT-fabricated scientific papers on Google Scholar: Key features, spread, and implications for preempting evidence manipulation

Article metrics.

CrossRef Citations

Altmetric Score

PDF Downloads

Academic journals, archives, and repositories are seeing an increasing number of questionable research papers clearly produced using generative AI. They are often created with widely available, general-purpose AI applications, most likely ChatGPT, and mimic scientific writing. Google Scholar easily locates and lists these questionable papers alongside reputable, quality-controlled research. Our analysis of a selection of questionable GPT-fabricated scientific papers found in Google Scholar shows that many are about applied, often controversial topics susceptible to disinformation: the environment, health, and computing. The resulting enhanced potential for malicious manipulation of society’s evidence base, particularly in politically divisive domains, is a growing concern.

Swedish School of Library and Information Science, University of Borås, Sweden

Department of Arts and Cultural Sciences, Lund University, Sweden

Division of Environmental Communication, Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Sweden

Research Questions

• Where are questionable publications produced with generative pre-trained transformers (GPTs) that can be found via Google Scholar published or deposited?
• What are the main characteristics of these publications in relation to predominant subject categories?
• How are these publications spread in the research infrastructure for scholarly communication?
• How is the role of the scholarly communication infrastructure challenged in maintaining public trust in science and evidence through inappropriate use of generative AI?

research note Summary

• A sample of scientific papers with signs of GPT-use found on Google Scholar was retrieved, downloaded, and analyzed using a combination of qualitative coding and descriptive statistics. All papers contained at least one of two common phrases returned by conversational agents that use large language models (LLM) like OpenAI’s ChatGPT. Google Search was then used to determine the extent to which copies of questionable, GPT-fabricated papers were available in various repositories, archives, citation databases, and social media platforms.
• Roughly two-thirds of the retrieved papers were found to have been produced, at least in part, through undisclosed, potentially deceptive use of GPT. The majority (57%) of these questionable papers dealt with policy-relevant subjects (i.e., environment, health, computing), susceptible to influence operations. Most were available in several copies on different domains (e.g., social media, archives, and repositories).
• Two main risks arise from the increasingly common use of GPT to (mass-)produce fake, scientific publications. First, the abundance of fabricated “studies” seeping into all areas of the research infrastructure threatens to overwhelm the scholarly communication system and jeopardize the integrity of the scientific record. A second risk lies in the increased possibility that convincingly scientific-looking content was in fact deceitfully created with AI tools and is also optimized to be retrieved by publicly available academic search engines, particularly Google Scholar. However small, this possibility and awareness of it risks undermining the basis for trust in scientific knowledge and poses serious societal risks.

Implications

The use of ChatGPT to generate text for academic papers has raised concerns about research integrity. Discussion of this phenomenon is ongoing in editorials, commentaries, opinion pieces, and on social media (Bom, 2023; Stokel-Walker, 2024; Thorp, 2023). There are now several lists of papers suspected of GPT misuse, and new papers are constantly being added. 1 See for example Academ-AI, https://www.academ-ai.info/ , and Retraction Watch, https://retractionwatch.com/papers-and-peer-reviews-with-evidence-of-chatgpt-writing/ . While many legitimate uses of GPT for research and academic writing exist (Huang & Tan, 2023; Kitamura, 2023; Lund et al., 2023), its undeclared use—beyond proofreading—has potentially far-reaching implications for both science and society, but especially for their relationship. It, therefore, seems important to extend the discussion to one of the most accessible and well-known intermediaries between science, but also certain types of misinformation, and the public, namely Google Scholar, also in response to the legitimate concerns that the discussion of generative AI and misinformation needs to be more nuanced and empirically substantiated  (Simon et al., 2023).

Google Scholar, https://scholar.google.com , is an easy-to-use academic search engine. It is available for free, and its index is extensive (Gusenbauer & Haddaway, 2020). It is also often touted as a credible source for academic literature and even recommended in library guides, by media and information literacy initiatives, and fact checkers (Tripodi et al., 2023). However, Google Scholar lacks the transparency and adherence to standards that usually characterize citation databases. Instead, Google Scholar uses automated crawlers, like Google’s web search engine (Martín-Martín et al., 2021), and the inclusion criteria are based on primarily technical standards, allowing any individual author—with or without scientific affiliation—to upload papers to be indexed (Google Scholar Help, n.d.). It has been shown that Google Scholar is susceptible to manipulation through citation exploits (Antkare, 2020) and by providing access to fake scientific papers (Dadkhah et al., 2017). A large part of Google Scholar’s index consists of publications from established scientific journals or other forms of quality-controlled, scholarly literature. However, the index also contains a large amount of gray literature, including student papers, working papers, reports, preprint servers, and academic networking sites, as well as material from so-called “questionable” academic journals, including paper mills. The search interface does not offer the possibility to filter the results meaningfully by material type, publication status, or form of quality control, such as limiting the search to peer-reviewed material.

To understand the occurrence of ChatGPT (co-)authored work in Google Scholar’s index, we scraped it for publications, including one of two common ChatGPT responses (see Appendix A) that we encountered on social media and in media reports (DeGeurin, 2024). The results of our descriptive statistical analyses showed that around 62% did not declare the use of GPTs. Most of these GPT-fabricated papers were found in non-indexed journals and working papers, but some cases included research published in mainstream scientific journals and conference proceedings. 2 Indexed journals mean scholarly journals indexed by abstract and citation databases such as Scopus and Web of Science, where the indexation implies journals with high scientific quality. Non-indexed journals are journals that fall outside of this indexation. More than half (57%) of these GPT-fabricated papers concerned policy-relevant subject areas susceptible to influence operations. To avoid increasing the visibility of these publications, we abstained from referencing them in this research note. However, we have made the data available in the Harvard Dataverse repository.

The publications were related to three issue areas—health (14.5%), environment (19.5%) and computing (23%)—with key terms such “healthcare,” “COVID-19,” or “infection”for health-related papers, and “analysis,” “sustainable,” and “global” for environment-related papers. In several cases, the papers had titles that strung together general keywords and buzzwords, thus alluding to very broad and current research. These terms included “biology,” “telehealth,” “climate policy,” “diversity,” and “disrupting,” to name just a few.  While the study’s scope and design did not include a detailed analysis of which parts of the articles included fabricated text, our dataset did contain the surrounding sentences for each occurrence of the suspicious phrases that formed the basis for our search and subsequent selection. Based on that, we can say that the phrases occurred in most sections typically found in scientific publications, including the literature review, methods, conceptual and theoretical frameworks, background, motivation or societal relevance, and even discussion. This was confirmed during the joint coding, where we read and discussed all articles. It became clear that not just the text related to the telltale phrases was created by GPT, but that almost all articles in our sample of questionable articles likely contained traces of GPT-fabricated text everywhere.

Evidence hacking and backfiring effects

Generative pre-trained transformers (GPTs) can be used to produce texts that mimic scientific writing. These texts, when made available online—as we demonstrate—leak into the databases of academic search engines and other parts of the research infrastructure for scholarly communication. This development exacerbates problems that were already present with less sophisticated text generators (Antkare, 2020; Cabanac & Labbé, 2021). Yet, the public release of ChatGPT in 2022, together with the way Google Scholar works, has increased the likelihood of lay people (e.g., media, politicians, patients, students) coming across questionable (or even entirely GPT-fabricated) papers and other problematic research findings. Previous research has emphasized that the ability to determine the value and status of scientific publications for lay people is at stake when misleading articles are passed off as reputable (Haider & Åström, 2017) and that systematic literature reviews risk being compromised (Dadkhah et al., 2017). It has also been highlighted that Google Scholar, in particular, can be and has been exploited for manipulating the evidence base for politically charged issues and to fuel conspiracy narratives (Tripodi et al., 2023). Both concerns are likely to be magnified in the future, increasing the risk of what we suggest calling evidence hacking —the strategic and coordinated malicious manipulation of society’s evidence base.

The authority of quality-controlled research as evidence to support legislation, policy, politics, and other forms of decision-making is undermined by the presence of undeclared GPT-fabricated content in publications professing to be scientific. Due to the large number of archives, repositories, mirror sites, and shadow libraries to which they spread, there is a clear risk that GPT-fabricated, questionable papers will reach audiences even after a possible retraction. There are considerable technical difficulties involved in identifying and tracing computer-fabricated papers (Cabanac & Labbé, 2021; Dadkhah et al., 2023; Jones, 2024), not to mention preventing and curbing their spread and uptake.

However, as the rise of the so-called anti-vaxx movement during the COVID-19 pandemic and the ongoing obstruction and denial of climate change show, retracting erroneous publications often fuels conspiracies and increases the following of these movements rather than stopping them. To illustrate this mechanism, climate deniers frequently question established scientific consensus by pointing to other, supposedly scientific, studies that support their claims. Usually, these are poorly executed, not peer-reviewed, based on obsolete data, or even fraudulent (Dunlap & Brulle, 2020). A similar strategy is successful in the alternative epistemic world of the global anti-vaccination movement (Carrion, 2018) and the persistence of flawed and questionable publications in the scientific record already poses significant problems for health research, policy, and lawmakers, and thus for society as a whole (Littell et al., 2024). Considering that a person’s support for “doing your own research” is associated with increased mistrust in scientific institutions (Chinn & Hasell, 2023), it will be of utmost importance to anticipate and consider such backfiring effects already when designing a technical solution, when suggesting industry or legal regulation, and in the planning of educational measures.

Recommendations

Solutions should be based on simultaneous considerations of technical, educational, and regulatory approaches, as well as incentives, including social ones, across the entire research infrastructure. Paying attention to how these approaches and incentives relate to each other can help identify points and mechanisms for disruption. Recognizing fraudulent academic papers must happen alongside understanding how they reach their audiences and what reasons there might be for some of these papers successfully “sticking around.” A possible way to mitigate some of the risks associated with GPT-fabricated scholarly texts finding their way into academic search engine results would be to provide filtering options for facets such as indexed journals, gray literature, peer-review, and similar on the interface of publicly available academic search engines. Furthermore, evaluation tools for indexed journals 3 Such as LiU Journal CheckUp, https://ep.liu.se/JournalCheckup/default.aspx?lang=eng . could be integrated into the graphical user interfaces and the crawlers of these academic search engines. To enable accountability, it is important that the index (database) of such a search engine is populated according to criteria that are transparent, open to scrutiny, and appropriate to the workings of  science and other forms of academic research. Moreover, considering that Google Scholar has no real competitor, there is a strong case for establishing a freely accessible, non-specialized academic search engine that is not run for commercial reasons but for reasons of public interest. Such measures, together with educational initiatives aimed particularly at policymakers, science communicators, journalists, and other media workers, will be crucial to reducing the possibilities for and effects of malicious manipulation or evidence hacking. It is important not to present this as a technical problem that exists only because of AI text generators but to relate it to the wider concerns in which it is embedded. These range from a largely dysfunctional scholarly publishing system (Haider & Åström, 2017) and academia’s “publish or perish” paradigm to Google’s near-monopoly and ideological battles over the control of information and ultimately knowledge. Any intervention is likely to have systemic effects; these effects need to be considered and assessed in advance and, ideally, followed up on.

Our study focused on a selection of papers that were easily recognizable as fraudulent. We used this relatively small sample as a magnifying glass to examine, delineate, and understand a problem that goes beyond the scope of the sample itself, which however points towards larger concerns that require further investigation. The work of ongoing whistleblowing initiatives 4 Such as Academ-AI, https://www.academ-ai.info/ , and Retraction Watch, https://retractionwatch.com/papers-and-peer-reviews-with-evidence-of-chatgpt-writing/ . , recent media reports of journal closures (Subbaraman, 2024), or GPT-related changes in word use and writing style (Cabanac et al., 2021; Stokel-Walker, 2024) suggest that we only see the tip of the iceberg. There are already more sophisticated cases (Dadkhah et al., 2023) as well as cases involving fabricated images (Gu et al., 2022). Our analysis shows that questionable and potentially manipulative GPT-fabricated papers permeate the research infrastructure and are likely to become a widespread phenomenon. Our findings underline that the risk of fake scientific papers being used to maliciously manipulate evidence (see Dadkhah et al., 2017) must be taken seriously. Manipulation may involve undeclared automatic summaries of texts, inclusion in literature reviews, explicit scientific claims, or the concealment of errors in studies so that they are difficult to detect in peer review. However, the mere possibility of these things happening is a significant risk in its own right that can be strategically exploited and will have ramifications for trust in and perception of science. Society’s methods of evaluating sources and the foundations of media and information literacy are under threat and public trust in science is at risk of further erosion, with far-reaching consequences for society in dealing with information disorders. To address this multifaceted problem, we first need to understand why it exists and proliferates.

Finding 1: 139 GPT-fabricated, questionable papers were found and listed as regular results on the Google Scholar results page. Non-indexed journals dominate.

Most questionable papers we found were in non-indexed journals or were working papers, but we did also find some in established journals, publications, conferences, and repositories. We found a total of 139 papers with a suspected deceptive use of ChatGPT or similar LLM applications (see Table 1). Out of these, 19 were in indexed journals, 89 were in non-indexed journals, 19 were student papers found in university databases, and 12 were working papers (mostly in preprint databases). Table 1 divides these papers into categories. Health and environment papers made up around 34% (47) of the sample. Of these, 66% were present in non-indexed journals.

Finding 2: GPT-fabricated, questionable papers are disseminated online, permeating the research infrastructure for scholarly communication, often in multiple copies. Applied topics with practical implications dominate.

The 20 papers concerning health-related issues are distributed across 20 unique domains, accounting for 46 URLs. The 27 papers dealing with environmental issues can be found across 26 unique domains, accounting for 56 URLs.  Most of the identified papers exist in multiple copies and have already spread to several archives, repositories, and social media. It would be difficult, or impossible, to remove them from the scientific record.

As apparent from Table 2, GPT-fabricated, questionable papers are seeping into most parts of the online research infrastructure for scholarly communication. Platforms on which identified papers have appeared include ResearchGate, ORCiD, Journal of Population Therapeutics and Clinical Pharmacology (JPTCP), Easychair, Frontiers, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineer (IEEE), and X/Twitter. Thus, even if they are retracted from their original source, it will prove very difficult to track, remove, or even just mark them up on other platforms. Moreover, unless regulated, Google Scholar will enable their continued and most likely unlabeled discoverability.

A word rain visualization (Centre for Digital Humanities Uppsala, 2023), which combines word prominences through TF-IDF 5 Term frequency–inverse document frequency , a method for measuring the significance of a word in a document compared to its frequency across all documents in a collection. scores with semantic similarity of the full texts of our sample of GPT-generated articles that fall into the “Environment” and “Health” categories, reflects the two categories in question. However, as can be seen in Figure 1, it also reveals overlap and sub-areas. The y-axis shows word prominences through word positions and font sizes, while the x-axis indicates semantic similarity. In addition to a certain amount of overlap, this reveals sub-areas, which are best described as two distinct events within the word rain. The event on the left bundles terms related to the development and management of health and healthcare with “challenges,” “impact,” and “potential of artificial intelligence”emerging as semantically related terms. Terms related to research infrastructures, environmental, epistemic, and technological concepts are arranged further down in the same event (e.g., “system,” “climate,” “understanding,” “knowledge,” “learning,” “education,” “sustainable”). A second distinct event further to the right bundles terms associated with fish farming and aquatic medicinal plants, highlighting the presence of an aquaculture cluster.  Here, the prominence of groups of terms such as “used,” “model,” “-based,” and “traditional” suggests the presence of applied research on these topics. The two events making up the word rain visualization, are linked by a less dominant but overlapping cluster of terms related to “energy” and “water.”

The bar chart of the terms in the paper subset (see Figure 2) complements the word rain visualization by depicting the most prominent terms in the full texts along the y-axis. Here, word prominences across health and environment papers are arranged descendingly, where values outside parentheses are TF-IDF values (relative frequencies) and values inside parentheses are raw term frequencies (absolute frequencies).

Finding 3: Google Scholar presents results from quality-controlled and non-controlled citation databases on the same interface, providing unfiltered access to GPT-fabricated questionable papers.

Google Scholar’s central position in the publicly accessible scholarly communication infrastructure, as well as its lack of standards, transparency, and accountability in terms of inclusion criteria, has potentially serious implications for public trust in science. This is likely to exacerbate the already-known potential to exploit Google Scholar for evidence hacking (Tripodi et al., 2023) and will have implications for any attempts to retract or remove fraudulent papers from their original publication venues. Any solution must consider the entirety of the research infrastructure for scholarly communication and the interplay of different actors, interests, and incentives.

We searched and scraped Google Scholar using the Python library Scholarly (Cholewiak et al., 2023) for papers that included specific phrases known to be common responses from ChatGPT and similar applications with the same underlying model (GPT3.5 or GPT4): “as of my last knowledge update” and/or “I don’t have access to real-time data” (see Appendix A). This facilitated the identification of papers that likely used generative AI to produce text, resulting in 227 retrieved papers. The papers’ bibliographic information was automatically added to a spreadsheet and downloaded into Zotero. 6 An open-source reference manager, https://zotero.org .

We employed multiple coding (Barbour, 2001) to classify the papers based on their content. First, we jointly assessed whether the paper was suspected of fraudulent use of ChatGPT (or similar) based on how the text was integrated into the papers and whether the paper was presented as original research output or the AI tool’s role was acknowledged. Second, in analyzing the content of the papers, we continued the multiple coding by classifying the fraudulent papers into four categories identified during an initial round of analysis—health, environment, computing, and others—and then determining which subjects were most affected by this issue (see Table 1). Out of the 227 retrieved papers, 88 papers were written with legitimate and/or declared use of GPTs (i.e., false positives, which were excluded from further analysis), and 139 papers were written with undeclared and/or fraudulent use (i.e., true positives, which were included in further analysis). The multiple coding was conducted jointly by all authors of the present article, who collaboratively coded and cross-checked each other’s interpretation of the data simultaneously in a shared spreadsheet file. This was done to single out coding discrepancies and settle coding disagreements, which in turn ensured methodological thoroughness and analytical consensus (see Barbour, 2001). Redoing the category coding later based on our established coding schedule, we achieved an intercoder reliability (Cohen’s kappa) of 0.806 after eradicating obvious differences.

The ranking algorithm of Google Scholar prioritizes highly cited and older publications (Martín-Martín et al., 2016). Therefore, the position of the articles on the search engine results pages was not particularly informative, considering the relatively small number of results in combination with the recency of the publications. Only the query “as of my last knowledge update” had more than two search engine result pages. On those, questionable articles with undeclared use of GPTs were evenly distributed across all result pages (min: 4, max: 9, mode: 8), with the proportion of undeclared use being slightly higher on average on later search result pages.

To understand how the papers making fraudulent use of generative AI were disseminated online, we programmatically searched for the paper titles (with exact string matching) in Google Search from our local IP address (see Appendix B) using the googlesearch – python library(Vikramaditya, 2020). We manually verified each search result to filter out false positives—results that were not related to the paper—and then compiled the most prominent URLs by field. This enabled the identification of other platforms through which the papers had been spread. We did not, however, investigate whether copies had spread into SciHub or other shadow libraries, or if they were referenced in Wikipedia.

We used descriptive statistics to count the prevalence of the number of GPT-fabricated papers across topics and venues and top domains by subject. The pandas software library for the Python programming language (The pandas development team, 2024) was used for this part of the analysis. Based on the multiple coding, paper occurrences were counted in relation to their categories, divided into indexed journals, non-indexed journals, student papers, and working papers. The schemes, subdomains, and subdirectories of the URL strings were filtered out while top-level domains and second-level domains were kept, which led to normalizing domain names. This, in turn, allowed the counting of domain frequencies in the environment and health categories. To distinguish word prominences and meanings in the environment and health-related GPT-fabricated questionable papers, a semantically-aware word cloud visualization was produced through the use of a word rain (Centre for Digital Humanities Uppsala, 2023) for full-text versions of the papers. Font size and y-axis positions indicate word prominences through TF-IDF scores for the environment and health papers (also visualized in a separate bar chart with raw term frequencies in parentheses), and words are positioned along the x-axis to reflect semantic similarity (Skeppstedt et al., 2024), with an English Word2vec skip gram model space (Fares et al., 2017). An English stop word list was used, along with a manually produced list including terms such as “https,” “volume,” or “years.”

• Artificial Intelligence
• / Search engines

Cite this Essay

Haider, J., Söderström, K. R., Ekström, B., & Rödl, M. (2024). GPT-fabricated scientific papers on Google Scholar: Key features, spread, and implications for preempting evidence manipulation. Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review . https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-156

• / Appendix B

Bibliography

Antkare, I. (2020). Ike Antkare, his publications, and those of his disciples. In M. Biagioli & A. Lippman (Eds.), Gaming the metrics (pp. 177–200). The MIT Press. https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/11087.003.0018

Barbour, R. S. (2001). Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: A case of the tail wagging the dog? BMJ , 322 (7294), 1115–1117. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.322.7294.1115

Bom, H.-S. H. (2023). Exploring the opportunities and challenges of ChatGPT in academic writing: A roundtable discussion. Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging , 57 (4), 165–167. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13139-023-00809-2

Cabanac, G., & Labbé, C. (2021). Prevalence of nonsensical algorithmically generated papers in the scientific literature. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology , 72 (12), 1461–1476. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24495

Cabanac, G., Labbé, C., & Magazinov, A. (2021). Tortured phrases: A dubious writing style emerging in science. Evidence of critical issues affecting established journals . arXiv. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2107.06751

Carrion, M. L. (2018). “You need to do your research”: Vaccines, contestable science, and maternal epistemology. Public Understanding of Science , 27 (3), 310–324. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662517728024

Centre for Digital Humanities Uppsala (2023). CDHUppsala/word-rain [Computer software]. https://github.com/CDHUppsala/word-rain

Chinn, S., & Hasell, A. (2023). Support for “doing your own research” is associated with COVID-19 misperceptions and scientific mistrust. Harvard Kennedy School (HSK) Misinformation Review, 4 (3). https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-117

Cholewiak, S. A., Ipeirotis, P., Silva, V., & Kannawadi, A. (2023). SCHOLARLY: Simple access to Google Scholar authors and citation using Python (1.5.0) [Computer software]. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5764801

Dadkhah, M., Lagzian, M., & Borchardt, G. (2017). Questionable papers in citation databases as an issue for literature review. Journal of Cell Communication and Signaling , 11 (2), 181–185. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12079-016-0370-6

Dadkhah, M., Oermann, M. H., Hegedüs, M., Raman, R., & Dávid, L. D. (2023). Detection of fake papers in the era of artificial intelligence. Diagnosis , 10 (4), 390–397. https://doi.org/10.1515/dx-2023-0090

DeGeurin, M. (2024, March 19). AI-generated nonsense is leaking into scientific journals. Popular Science. https://www.popsci.com/technology/ai-generated-text-scientific-journals/

Dunlap, R. E., & Brulle, R. J. (2020). Sources and amplifiers of climate change denial. In D.C. Holmes & L. M. Richardson (Eds.), Research handbook on communicating climate change (pp. 49–61). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781789900408.00013

Fares, M., Kutuzov, A., Oepen, S., & Velldal, E. (2017). Word vectors, reuse, and replicability: Towards a community repository of large-text resources. In J. Tiedemann & N. Tahmasebi (Eds.), Proceedings of the 21st Nordic Conference on Computational Linguistics (pp. 271–276). Association for Computational Linguistics. https://aclanthology.org/W17-0237

Google Scholar Help. (n.d.). Inclusion guidelines for webmasters . https://scholar.google.com/intl/en/scholar/inclusion.html

Gu, J., Wang, X., Li, C., Zhao, J., Fu, W., Liang, G., & Qiu, J. (2022). AI-enabled image fraud in scientific publications. Patterns , 3 (7), 100511. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patter.2022.100511

Gusenbauer, M., & Haddaway, N. R. (2020). Which academic search systems are suitable for systematic reviews or meta-analyses? Evaluating retrieval qualities of Google Scholar, PubMed, and 26 other resources. Research Synthesis Methods , 11 (2), 181–217.   https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1378

Haider, J., & Åström, F. (2017). Dimensions of trust in scholarly communication: Problematizing peer review in the aftermath of John Bohannon’s “Sting” in science. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology , 68 (2), 450–467. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.23669

Huang, J., & Tan, M. (2023). The role of ChatGPT in scientific communication: Writing better scientific review articles. American Journal of Cancer Research , 13 (4), 1148–1154. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10164801/

Jones, N. (2024). How journals are fighting back against a wave of questionable images. Nature , 626 (8000), 697–698. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-024-00372-6

Kitamura, F. C. (2023). ChatGPT is shaping the future of medical writing but still requires human judgment. Radiology , 307 (2), e230171. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.230171

Littell, J. H., Abel, K. M., Biggs, M. A., Blum, R. W., Foster, D. G., Haddad, L. B., Major, B., Munk-Olsen, T., Polis, C. B., Robinson, G. E., Rocca, C. H., Russo, N. F., Steinberg, J. R., Stewart, D. E., Stotland, N. L., Upadhyay, U. D., & Ditzhuijzen, J. van. (2024). Correcting the scientific record on abortion and mental health outcomes. BMJ , 384 , e076518. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj-2023-076518

Lund, B. D., Wang, T., Mannuru, N. R., Nie, B., Shimray, S., & Wang, Z. (2023). ChatGPT and a new academic reality: Artificial Intelligence-written research papers and the ethics of the large language models in scholarly publishing. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 74 (5), 570–581. https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.24750

Martín-Martín, A., Orduna-Malea, E., Ayllón, J. M., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2016). Back to the past: On the shoulders of an academic search engine giant. Scientometrics , 107 , 1477–1487. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1917-2

Martín-Martín, A., Thelwall, M., Orduna-Malea, E., & Delgado López-Cózar, E. (2021). Google Scholar, Microsoft Academic, Scopus, Dimensions, Web of Science, and OpenCitations’ COCI: A multidisciplinary comparison of coverage via citations. Scientometrics , 126 (1), 871–906. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03690-4

Simon, F. M., Altay, S., & Mercier, H. (2023). Misinformation reloaded? Fears about the impact of generative AI on misinformation are overblown. Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review, 4 (5). https://doi.org/10.37016/mr-2020-127

Skeppstedt, M., Ahltorp, M., Kucher, K., & Lindström, M. (2024). From word clouds to Word Rain: Revisiting the classic word cloud to visualize climate change texts. Information Visualization , 23 (3), 217–238. https://doi.org/10.1177/14738716241236188

Swedish Research Council. (2017). Good research practice. Vetenskapsrådet.

Stokel-Walker, C. (2024, May 1.). AI Chatbots Have Thoroughly Infiltrated Scientific Publishing . Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/chatbots-have-thoroughly-infiltrated-scientific-publishing/

Subbaraman, N. (2024, May 14). Flood of fake science forces multiple journal closures: Wiley to shutter 19 more journals, some tainted by fraud. The Wall Street Journal . https://www.wsj.com/science/academic-studies-research-paper-mills-journals-publishing-f5a3d4bc

The pandas development team. (2024). pandas-dev/pandas: Pandas (v2.2.2) [Computer software]. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.10957263

Thorp, H. H. (2023). ChatGPT is fun, but not an author. Science , 379 (6630), 313–313. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.adg7879

Tripodi, F. B., Garcia, L. C., & Marwick, A. E. (2023). ‘Do your own research’: Affordance activation and disinformation spread. Information, Communication & Society , 27 (6), 1212–1228. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2023.2245869

Vikramaditya, N. (2020). Nv7-GitHub/googlesearch [Computer software]. https://github.com/Nv7-GitHub/googlesearch

This research has been supported by Mistra, the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research, through the research program Mistra Environmental Communication (Haider, Ekström, Rödl) and the Marcus and Amalia Wallenberg Foundation [2020.0004] (Söderström).

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

The research described in this article was carried out under Swedish legislation. According to the relevant EU and Swedish legislation (2003:460) on the ethical review of research involving humans (“Ethical Review Act”), the research reported on here is not subject to authorization by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (“etikprövningsmyndigheten”) (SRC, 2017).

This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original author and source are properly credited.

Data Availability

All data needed to replicate this study are available at the Harvard Dataverse: https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/WUVD8X

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank two anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on the article manuscript as well as the editorial group of Harvard Kennedy School (HKS) Misinformation Review for their thoughtful feedback and input.

• Open access
• Published: 13 September 2024

The phenomenon of yoga in the imagination of Turkish nursing students: "The way to place goodness in the heart"

• Özüm Erki̇n 1 ,
• Aynur Çeti̇nkaya 2 &
• Begüm Güler 3  

BMC Nursing volume  23 , Article number:  655 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

The aim of the research is to shed light on the experiences of a group of nursing students enrolled in a yoga elective course who practiced yoga regularly for 14 weeks, regarding yoga and the phenomenon of doing yoga, with a qualitative approach.

This qualitative study was conducted at a public university in Izmir, Turkey. The study sample consisted of 61 students enrolled in the 1st-year yoga course at the Department of Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences. Except for two students, 59 of them participated in the study. Participants attended a face-to-face yoga course once a week for 1.5 h over a 14-week period. Each session comprised 30 min of theoretical instruction and 60 min of practice. In data collection, an interview form containing five questions was used to understand nursing students' experiences and thoughts about practicing yoga. In addition, A4 sized papers in different colors were presented to the participants. The participants were asked to draw and/or cut a shape by choosing the paper in the color that most evokes yoga. Then they were asked to explain why they chose this color and why they drew this shape. Participants were given one hour. After the data were collected, the pictures drawn by the participants and their descriptions of their drawings were transferred to the computer and included in the analysis. Qualitative data were hand-coded by the researchers. Within in-vivo coding, code names were formed from the participants' expressions. The findings analyzed by content analysis were interpreted with the literature under the themes by presenting quotations.

It was determined that the participants used nature figures (sun, cloud, tree, sky, flower) (f = 75), people doing yoga (f = 12), and sound, light and other figures (bird sound, wave sound, candle, light bulb, traffic light, heart, eye, left key, peace, swing, India, circle, etc.) (f = 29) in the shapes they drew and cut out on A4 sized papers in different colors to describe their experiences and thoughts about practicing yoga. The participants mostly chose blue-green-yellow colors ( n  = 41). With qualitative question analysis, a list of codes was created from the answers given by the students to the questions for the phenomenon of “doing yoga” (number of codes = 98). After the analysis of the data, four categories were reached. The category names and frequency numbers explaining the phenomenon of practicing yoga were distributed as “symbol of health and serenity (f = 345)”, “the way to place goodness in your heart (f = 110)”, “the most effective way to meet the self (f = 93)” and “no guarantee of relaxation (f = 71)”, respectively.

Conclusions

The results indicate that yoga is perceived by nursing students as a multifaceted practice that evokes a range of emotional and physical responses. Most participants associate yoga with symbols of health, serenity, and self-awareness, often using natural elements and blue-green-yellow the colors to represent these feelings. However, there is also recognition that yoga may not guarantee relaxation for everyone, as some students reported difficulties in meditation, physical discomfort, and challenges in focusing. The study highlights the variability in how individuals experience yoga, emphasizing both its positive effects on well-being and the potential challenges in practice. These findings suggest that while yoga is widely valued for its calming and health-promoting benefits, it may not be universally effective in achieving relaxation or mindfulness.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Yoga is a practice that has been subject to many different interpretations and translations over thousands of years. Patanjali's phrase "Yogas Chitta Vrittis Nirodha" translates to "Yoga is the cessation of the fluctuations of the mind" in English [ 1 ]. Hagen & Hagen (2024) have emphasized that yoga is commonly understood in society as a tool for mental calmness and balance[ 2 ]. This provides a comprehensive model for personal development, contributing to the individual's balanced harmony in every aspect—mental, physical, emotional, and spiritual [ 3 , 4 ]. By developing inner awareness as well as meta-awareness, yoga offers a roadmap for individuals to see and understand their own state and surroundings more clearly [ 5 ]. Yoga enhances physical functionality by alleviating pain and discomfort, thereby reducing physical ailments. Moreover, yoga offers physical health benefits, including increased strength and flexibility, as well as improved posture [ 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 ].

According to Bhavanani (2014), yoga extends beyond mere physical or mental health; it also addresses emotional, social, and spiritual needs [ 11 ]. By increasing personal awareness, it can strengthens both inner attachment and social connections [ 6 , 9 , 12 ]. Research shows that participants' self-confidence increases during yoga practice, and they might gain better skills to manage their mental health. This underscores not only the physical advantages of yoga but also its significant contributions to mental and emotional well-being [ 8 , 9 , 13 , 14 ]. Yoga can fosters heightened bodily awareness, elevates mood, and enhances overall well-being. It also promotes self-acceptance, personal fulfillment, and social harmony. This holistic process provides psychological relief and mental tranquility, aiding in the management of common mental health issues such as anxiety and depression [ 11 ].

Today, young adults increasingly experience stress, pressure, and mental health issues [ 15 ]. Research links young people's stress levels to high demands at school and the pressure to meet these demands [ 16 ]. Additionally, lack of physical activity and sleep problems also can contribute to their difficulties in coping with these issues [ 17 , 18 ]. Academic expectations from parents, especially those from middle-class families, can further increase the pressure on young people, leading them to evaluate their self-worth solely based on their achievements. This adds to the existing academic pressures, causing young people to worry more about future educational and career opportunities [ 19 ].

Yoga can physically contribute to nervous system balance by decreasing stress-related sympathetic activity and stimulating the parasympathetic system. Consequently, it can positively impact stress and mental health issues, particularly in young people. Nursing students, who often undergo a stressful educational period, can also benefit from these effects [ 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 ]. Therefore, it is recommended to integrate mindfulness programs, including breathing techniques, meditation, and yoga, into the nursing curriculum [ 21 , 22 ]. In the literature, a yoga course was integrated into the nursing curriculum in Turkey for the first time by Erkin and Aykar (2021) [ 20 ]. Most studies with students in the field of yoga in the literature are quantitative, although yoga has been studied in college students using qualitative methods, no studies found in nursing. This is one of the starting points of this research. The aim of the research is to shed light on the experiences of a group of nursing students enrolled in a yoga elective course who practiced yoga regularly for 14 weeks, regarding yoga and the phenomenon of doing yoga, with a qualitative approach. This qualitative study tries to fill this gap in the literature by explaining the imaginary meanings that nursing students attending yoga courses attribute to the yoga experience.

Design and participants

The research, designed in a qualitative type, was conducted during the 2018–2019 academic year. In line with the qualitative research approach, a purposeful sampling method was used. The qualitative method sees the experience of reality as subjective, varying from person to person. Moreover, it is a reliable method for studying a little known or understood area. Therefore, a qualitative descriptive design was adopted to explore students’ knowledge and perspectives [ 25 ].

Participants attended a face-to-face yoga course once a week for 1.5 h over a 14-week period. Each session comprised 30 min of theoretical instruction and 60 min of practice. The content of the yoga course is detailed in Table 1 . The theoretical component included a weekly 30-min PowerPoint presentation covering topics such as the history of yoga, meditation, breathing techniques (pranayama), yoga poses (asanas), chakras, mindfulness, and compassion. The practical sessions were conducted in a tranquil and dimly lit room, following a structured 60-min schedule: 15 min of pranayama (e.g., ocean breath, equal breathing, cooling breath, humming bee breath, alternate nostril breath, kapalbhati pranayama), 30 min of hatha yoga asanas involving gentle stretching and strengthening exercises with each pose held for 5–10 breaths and repeated five times, 5 min of meditation, and 10 min of shavasana. These sessions were led by a yoga instructor (first author) registered with the Yoga Alliance. No home practice was required. According to the course rules, students were allowed up to 20% absenteeism. At the end of the 14-week period, it was determined that students were absent for an average of 1.5 weeks. There was only one change in the planned yoga protocol. Although it was initially planned to use one breathing technique every two weeks, all breathing techniques were combined based on the students’ feedback and used in the sessions after students learned all the techniques (after the 6th week). Class attendance was encouraged through messages in a WhatsApp group. However, attendance was not included in the scoring.

The sample of the research was planned to consist of first-year students enrolled in the elective course "Yoga" in the Nursing Department of the Faculty of Health Sciences at İzmir Democracy University in Izmir ( N  = 61). Two students did not participate in the study because the topic and objectives did not interest them. Data were collected from a total of 59 nursing students on a voluntary basis. After the yoga course, the last week interviews were conducted with 59 participants who voluntarily agreed to participate in the study. Of the participants (n:59), 40 were female and 19 were male, with ages ranging from 18 to 21. Forty-six participants described their health perception as "good," nine as "very good," and four as "poor." (Appendix 1).

Data collection

Data collection was conducted using a structured interview form alongside a creative activity where participants were asked to draw a picture and write a text representing the concept of doing yoga. Data were collected through structured interviews guided by a pre-developed interview Schedule (see Appendix 1). The structured interview form developed for this study included seven open-ended questions and prompts designed to elicit detailed responses from the participants regarding their experiences with the yoga course. Prior to commencing data collection with the main participant group, the interview schedule was pilot tested with five nursing students who met the inclusion criteria but were not part of the final sample. This pilot testing allowed for refinement of the interview questions and ensured clarity and comprehensiveness.

After obtaining the necessary permissions for the research, the students engaged in the yoga course were comprehensively briefed on the study’s objectives, content, methodology, and the individuals responsible for its execution. The last week of "Yoga" course (14th week), students asked to draw a picture and write a text representing the concept of doing yoga. Each student was given colored A4 papers and, for those who wished to use them, colored pencils in the classroom environment. Before starting to draw, students were asked to write their gender on the back of the paper, but not their name or surname. In addition to the picture they drew, they were asked to write their thoughts about yoga and what they drew regarding the concept of doing yoga on a separate piece of paper or in appropriate spaces on their drawing paper. Besides students filled the interview form. They also filled out a structured interview form to capture their experiences and thoughts about practicing yoga. Participants were given one hour to complete the task. After the data were collected, the drawings and their related descriptions made by the participants were digitized and included in the analysis [ 26 ]. For security purposes, the data were stored in Google Drive™ accessible to authors.

To examine subjective experiences, the techniques of "drawing" and "description" were used together, attempting to integrate the strengths of both methods. Participants were provided with A4 papers in different colors and asked to choose the color that most reminded them of yoga. Starting from the theme of "The meaning of doing yoga for them," participants were asked to draw pictures representing their perceptions and to write descriptions related to their drawings. In a similar approach referred to as "projective technique" in the literature, the drawing is accepted as a tool for reflecting emotions. Projection means expression and is based on the assumption that "an individual's behavior is a reflection of their personality" [ 26 , 27 ].

Data analysis and interpretation process

The data were analyzed using an inductive approach. Inductive analysis involves coding the data to categorize it, identifying relationships between these categories, and reaching a holistic picture based on this. The key point in data analysis in this study was to create categorical labels embedded in the data [ 26 , 27 ]. In this study, a code list was developed, data were coded, categories were created, and data were reported within these categories. Data analysis was conducted by the researchers through coding. For some themes, in-vivo coding, which is included in the qualitative research methodology of grounded theory, was used as an inductive coding process. In vivo coding involves creating a theme tag using the code that comes directly from the data, i.e., the participant's own expressions [ 28 ].

All these processes were carried out in collaboration with two field experts (ÖE, AÇ). Similar codes were grouped together to form a certain number of categories and reported to establish the main idea in the data. Comparing codes and categories with the literature aimed to contribute to the validity of the data analysis. At the end of the data collection phase, a conceptual model related to the topic was developed by the researchers [ 26 ]

The research team acknowledges the importance of reflexivity in qualitative research. The first researcher, who has a PhD degree in public health nursing with 16 years of experience in nursing, is an instructor of yoga courses for undergraduate nursing students. The researcher maintained a critical awareness of their own biases and assumptions that could potentially influence the data analysis throughout the research process. We aimed to minimize bias by employing a systematic thematic analysis approach and by regularly discussing the emerging themes with a second author, who is a specialist on qualitative research and has a qualitative PhD thesis in public health nursing. This cooperation contributed to ensuring the findings’ objectivity and reliability. Regretfully, it was not possible to get direct participant input on the findings because of the anonymous nature of the data collection process. The third researcher, who is a master’s degree student in public health nursing with 3 years of clinical experience in nursing, is an instructor of yoga. Nonetheless, we think that the utilization of rich participant quotes in conjunction with the iterative analytic process guarantees that the results truly reflect the participants’ experiences with the yoga course.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Before starting data collection, information about the research was provided to the school administration, permission was obtained, and contact was made with the participants. Approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Manisa Celal Bayar University (02/12/2019, no:20.478.486). Participation was based on voluntariness and willingness, and students were informed about sensitive points related to the teacher-student relationship (such as participation or non-participation in the research not affecting their performance evaluations, etc.). Written informed consent to participate was obtained from all of the participants in this study.

Research validity and reliability

In qualitative research, the researcher investigating the problem is at the center of the research. The main measurement tool in the research is the researcher themselves. Therefore, the issue of objectivity has always been at the center of methodological debates in social sciences. In qualitative research, the concept of "trustworthiness" is considered instead of validity and reliability [ 27 ]. Various criteria of trustworthiness were considered in the processes of this research.

During the data analysis phase, in the creation of the code list, and in the interpretation of the findings, a comprehensive perspective was attempted to be reflected through a thorough literature review on the subject. All records in the data collection and analysis processes were kept systematically. Quotations were made from all data sources. The frequencies of the drawings and descriptions were determined, and those with high frequencies and those that were strikingly related to the topic were included. The data collection and data analysis processes were reported in detail as far as space limitations allowed, and original quotations from the data were included. Furthermore, in the quotations, descriptions written by the participants in their own handwriting were also used.

The number of participants in the study was 56. This number is considered sufficient for an in-depth exploration of the research topic. Students were instructed to create an illustration and compose a text depicting the concept of practicing yoga. Each student received colored A4 paper, and colored pencils were provided for those who wished to use them within the classroom setting. Prior to beginning their drawings, students were asked to indicate their gender on the back of the paper, ensuring that they did not include their name or surname. Alongside their drawings, students were required to write their reflections on yoga and describe what they had drawn related to the practice of yoga, either on a separate sheet of paper or in suitable spaces on their drawing paper. Additionally, students completed an interview form. Participants were allotted one hour to finish the assignment. This approach allowed for a thorough and comprehensive examination of the participants’ perspectives. To enhance transferability, purposive sampling was employed in the study. In purposive sampling, participants are selected to have specific characteristics relevant to the research topic. This approach ensured that the participants’ perspectives would represent the research topic effectively. To ensure dependability, interview questions, data collection, and analysis were consistently applied throughout the entire research process. In this study, to achieve confirmability, all stages of the research were described openly and transparently, aiming to reduce the impact of researcher bias. All transcripts and notes used in the study were stored for reference.

The reporting process of the study adhered to the COREQ (CONsolidated criteria for Reporting Qualitative research) guidelines, as outlined by Tong et al. (2007) [ 29 ]. The study follows CLARIFY 2021 guidelines for reporting yoga research [ 30 ].

Participants expressed their experiences and thoughts about practicing yoga by drawing and cutting shapes on A4-sized papers of different colors. It was determined that they used nature figures (sun, cloud, tree, sky, flower) (f = 75), figures of people practicing yoga (f = 12), and other figures such as sound, light, and others (bird sound, wave sound, candle, light bulb, traffic light, heart, eye, key, peace, swing, India, circle, etc.) (f = 29). Participants mostly chose blue-green-yellow colors ( n  = 41).

A code list was created from the responses of students to questions about the concept of "practicing yoga" through qualitative question analysis (number of codes = 98). After analyzing the data, four categories were reached. The categories describing the concept of practicing yoga were distributed as follows in terms of symbols and frequency numbers: "symbol of health and tranquility (f = 345)", "the way to place goodness in your heart (f = 110)", "the most effective way to meet oneself (f = 93)", and "no guarantee of relaxation (f = 71)" (Fig. 1 ).

Concepts and codes identified in the qualitative analysis of nursing students' perception of the phenomenon of "practicing yoga"

Category 1. Symbol of health and serenity (f = 345)

The subcategories that received the most references from nursing students in explaining the phenomenon of practicing yoga under this category are "Serenity and Peace (f = 169)", "Comfort (f = 120)", "Health, Well-being, Happiness, and Energy (f = 56)". Below is the picture and description of the participant related to the subcategory "Symbol of Health and Serenity" (Fig. 2 ): "The reason for choosing the shape of a cloud and the color blue is that it brings me peace, reminds me to take deep breaths and be grateful. It reminds me that there are beautiful things in life and that I need to enjoy life." Additionally, "when you start doing yoga, your thoughts change, you feel rested, and your heart fills with peace." Participant 7, Female.

Cloud figure (blue) -participant 7

Participant 22 wrote the following in the interpretation of the figure they drew (Fig. 3 ): "The color blue always makes me feel happy and peaceful. I chose this color because yoga makes me feel peaceful and happy. For example, when I feel restless and unhappy, going to the beach, seeing the sea, seeing blue calms me down. Also, when I think of yoga, I imagine an endless deep blue sea. A sea with birds flying over it and a deep blue sky. A painting with sunny weather" Participant 22.

Interpretation by participant 22 (blue)

Participant 35's drawn figure is a butterfly, and their description is as follows (Fig. 4 ): “When I think of yoga, I think of a butterfly. Because when I do yoga, I feel as free and light as a butterfly. I imagine my wings taking me wherever I want inside. The green color relaxes me and makes me happy. The wings of the butterfly in my soul's greenery take me to purity…”.

Butterfly figure (green) -participant 35

Participant 9, in the chosen color and the comment on their drawing, expressed the following regarding the sub-category "Symbol of Health and Serenity" (Fig. 5 ): "I chose this color for its energy. Since energy is important in yoga, I chose orange. I chose this shape because I believe yoga is best done in a natural environment. Yoga reminds me of serenity, the feeling of being in emptiness, and relaxation (Fig. 5 )."

Tree figure and comment (orange) -participant 9

Participant 19, in the chosen figure and the comment on their drawing, stated the following (Fig. 6 ): "Because yoga reminds me of mental and physical health. In my opinion, health is manifested in the combination of blue and green colors. That is, balance in nature is something that exists in the soul and body." Participant 19 depicted a ladder figure in combination with blue and green, defining yoga as "soul and body therapy" (Fig. 6 ).

The place where the moon meets the sun (turquoise)-participant 19

Category 2. The way to place goodness in your heart (f = 110)

The meaning of the phenomenon of doing yoga by participant 11, an 18-year-old female nursing student, was labeled as "being aware of placing goodness in heart" as the category tag. This category, referred to 110 times by the participants, includes the subcategories of "Purification (f = 65)" and "Being a virtuous person (f = 45)". Participants mentioned virtues such as "patience, tolerance, love for all creatures, flexibility, equality, non-prejudice, peace, optimism, freedom" contributing to the concept.

Participant 51, an 18-year-old male who described his health as poor, used the light bulb figure to express "happiness, peace, security" and commented, "It causes positive effects on people" (Fig. 7 ). Participant 51 expressed the following regarding the subcategory " The way to place goodness in your heart" in the figure and comment (Fig. 7 ): "The light bulb illuminating the environment is connected to yoga. Yoga enlightens a person's mind."

Light bulb (yellow) -participant 51

Participant 39, a 19-year-old male, mentioned that practicing yoga leads to "thinking more compassionately." Participant 21, a female, stated, "Yoga is something that requires patience."

Here is the drawn peace figure and comment by participant 46, related to this category (Fig. 8 ). This participant said, "I chose pink because it opens up and gives peace. Of course, there is also light pink, not just dark pinks. I chose this sign because where there is yoga, there is love for all living beings, and where there is love, peace is inevitable."

Peace figure (pink) -participant 46

Category 3. The most effective way to meet yourself (f = 93)

For nursing students, practicing yoga means creating "awareness" and is the most effective way to meet oneself (f = 93). Participant 43, a 19-year-old female with a poor health perception, described feeling "calmer, more aware, and internally peaceful" when practicing yoga, as shown in Fig. 9 . Under the category of "the most effective way to meet oneself," Participant 43's figure and comment about yoga are as follows (Fig. 9 ): "…I chose this color because it gives me peace. The other colors make me restless, but this color makes me feel like I can breathe. Yellow is like an endless void to me. A color that makes me experience everything with all its reality. It's like a sky where you can escape from the chaos of the world and get lost in it…".

The world and heart (yellow) -participant 43

Participant 8 chose a cloud figure, describing yoga as "like rising above the clouds" and wrote the following about yoga practice: "Finding oneself in life, being at peace with oneself… [someone who starts practicing yoga] starts to know themselves, their love for life increases." Participant 8, Female.

Participant 33, a female who chose yellow for its calmness and non-straining quality, described the effect of yoga as "self-discovery" and wrote the following (Fig. 10 ): "You awaken your sleeping mind and body, and find the 'self' within you." Participant 33, Female.

Flower and human (yellow)- participant 33

The statement from participant 48 is as follows (Fig. 11 ): "In this image, what I want to convey is; the individual who practices yoga finds themselves, reaches their essence, and becomes aware of their own existence after a long and perhaps short journey. I chose the color orange because it reminds me that energy exists, is alive, and can be transmitted at any moment. For me, yoga is an indicator of energy. After yoga, the body revives and rejuvenates."

The road (orange)- participant 48

Category 4. No guarantee of relaxation (f = 71)

Among the nursing students ( n  = 59), 16 (27.1%) indicated that they do not recommend yoga. The subcategories of this category include "difficulty in relaxing during meditation/emptying the mind (f = 23)", physical complaints (f = 21)", "difficulty in focusing (f = 18)", and "negative perceptions (f = 9)". Participants used expressions such as "headache, neck pain, back pain, dizziness, exhausting, feeling bad, difficult, fear, nervousness, inability to relax, disbelief" in relation to this category. A 19-year-old male participant, participant 41, stated about yoga, "I cannot meditate, I do not feel comfortable." Participant 44, a 19-year-old female participant who rated her health as poor, stated during yoga, "I cannot fully control my breathing and do meditation, I cannot empty my mind, so I cannot achieve complete peace."

Yoga, often conceptualized in the Western world as a physical practice [ 31 ], is considered a practice that can calm the mind and access a higher state of consciousness where individual and universal consciousness merge, using the body [ 32 ], in yoga traditions, the physical, mental, and spiritual dimensions of the individual are intricately connected [ 1 ]. When we relate the benefits of yoga to traditional yoga theories and systems, it can be interesting to explore its connection with the chakra system and colors. The main focus of yoga can be to regulate the functioning of chakras while awakening the associated energies [ 33 , 34 ]. It was thought that the free association of the students' drawings and descriptions could provide guidance in determining their experiences related to the concept of yoga. In this study, where the experiences of nursing students who took the elective yoga course were evaluated with a qualitative approach, participants mostly chose blue, green, and yellow-colored papers, symbolizing nature. When viewed from the perspective of the chakra-yoga system explained in the yoga course, it was thought that the participants might have resonated with certain energy centers or chakras. Blue, green, and yellow colors are respectively associated with the throat chakra, heart chakra, and solar plexus chakra [ 35 ]. The throat chakra is associated with communication, speech power, intellectual development, creativity, and expression [ 36 ]. Participants 7 and 22, who currently perceive their health as good, and participant 19, who chose blue and turquoise colors, may reflect a desire for in-depth communication and original expression, or a need for improvement in these areas. During yoga practice, especially breathing exercises and poses focusing on the throat region can be worked on this chakra, thus enhancing students' capacity for clearer communication and expressing inner truths [ 37 , 38 ].

The philosophy of yoga emphasizes the importance of harmony and unity with nature, which is why many yoga asanas (poses) are named after elements from nature, such as the tree pose, which symbolizes the stability and balance of a tree through its strong roots and upward-reaching branches [ 39 ]. In this study, visuals related to yoga such as the sun, clouds, trees, sky, and flowers were found. Participant 9 recalling and drawing a tree figure during yoga experiences indicates their awareness of this symbolic relationship. Research has shown that spending time in nature has positive effects on people's mood and mental health [ 40 , 41 ]; similarly, many yoga philosophies emphasize the importance of being in harmony with nature [ 42 ]. Therefore, a student's preference for a natural environment while practicing yoga and associating this practice with a tree in nature is thought to reflect both the healing power of nature and the relationship of yoga poses with elements in nature. This symbiotic relationship reminds us of how interconnected humans are with nature and how yoga practice can strengthen this connection. This aspect of yoga can also encourage individuals to strengthen their relationship with nature and adopt a more respectful attitude towards the environment. This can be seen as a reflection of the principle of 'ahimsa' or non-harming, which is one of the foundational principles of yoga philosophy [ 43 ].

Deep breathing practices are fundamental components of yoga and meditation. Consciously controlling breathing can activate the parasympathetic nervous system and trigger the relaxation response [ 44 , 45 ]. Additionally, breath awareness is part of mindfulness practice and brings the individual into the present moment. Feeling gratitude helps a person recognize the positive aspects of their life and develop a more positive life perspective [ 46 ]. Gratitude practice can improve mental health and allow for greater enjoyment of life [ 47 ]. Participant 7's choice of a cloud shape and blue color is explained by the feeling of tranquility it brings, reminding them to take deep breaths and be thankful, and to remember that there are beautiful things in life that they should enjoy. Participant 7's statement confirms this. The shape of a cloud and the choice of the color blue directing them to take deep breaths, be thankful, remember that there are beautiful things in life, and enjoy life, can contribute to the participant's spirituality [ 48 ]. Such an approach can be balancing both mentally and emotionally, especially for students under academic pressure [ 49 ].

Yoga, meditation, and breathwork (pranayama) practices can be effective in creating a deep sense of peace by bringing individuals to the present moment and calming their inner dialogue [ 50 , 51 ]. Participant 22's statement, " The color blue always makes me feel happy and peaceful. I chose this color because yoga makes me feel peaceful and happy. For example, when I feel restless and unhappy, going to the beach, seeing the sea, and seeing blue calms me down ," also indicates the participant's association of yoga practice with feelings of peace and happiness, demonstrating the potential of yoga experience to provide inner tranquility and balance. Furthermore, the participant's desire to go to the beach and see the sea may refer to the healing and calming effect of nature [ 52 ]. Participant 19 states, " Yoga reminds me of spiritual and physical health. For me, health lives in the colors blue and green, meaning it is something in nature and in the spirit of nature ," and Participant 35 says, " When I think of yoga, I think of a butterfly because when I do yoga, I feel as light as a butterfly. I think my wings take me wherever I want inside me. The color green relaxes me, makes me happy, and the green inside me takes me to purity. " These statements may be associated with the heart chakra represented by the color green. This chakra is considered the center of love, compassion, and connection [ 36 ], and therefore, the association of green with this chakra may symbolize the participant's feelings of relaxation and happiness during yoga practice [ 48 ]. The phrase " the green inside me takes me to purity " in Participant 35's statement indicates that green represents purity and healing in the heart chakra, and the opening of this chakra allows the person to feel more peaceful and purer [ 53 ]. In this context, Participant 35's positive feelings toward green and the sense of relaxation may be a result of balancing and opening the heart chakra, contributing to their emotional experiences such as lightness and tranquility in yoga practices [ 54 ].

Participant 51, despite describing their health as poor, mentioning positive effects such as " Happiness, peace, trust " through the figure of a light bulb during yoga practices, can be explained by the illuminating effect of yoga on the mind. Just as a light bulb illuminates its surroundings, yoga enlightens the individual's mental and spiritual state, capable of transforming negative thoughts and emotions into positive ones. This contributes to achieving a general state of well-being and a positive mood by providing both physical and mental relaxation [ 55 ]. Participant 39 mentioned the effect of " thinking more humanely " while practicing yoga. Participant 21 commented that " yoga requires patience ." Participant 46 chose pink because " It opens up and gives peace within me, where there is yoga, there is love for all living beings, and where there is love, peace is inevitable. " Yoga can facilitates a tranquil mental state, reducing stress and tension, thereby promoting harmonious relationships and fostering peace within individuals and their social interactions. Central to yoga philosophy are humanism and the pursuit of a peaceful life [ 56 ] qualities reflected in participants' experiences, affirming yoga's role in cultivating positive personal and societal outcomes.

In the chakra system, colors and their associated energy centers are believed to promote balance and harmony in our daily lives and physical well-being [ 33 ]. Students' selection of these colors related to chakras may reflect their own energy balances and personal development needs, often unconsciously. Yoga practice can equips individuals with tools to enhance the harmony and integrity of these energy centers [ 57 ]. Participant 43, with a negative perception of health, reported becoming " A calmer person, awareness increases, and inner peace occurs; I chose this color (yellow) because it gives me peace. While other colors make me uneasy, when I look at this color, it feels like it gives me breath, and it continues to an endless void. Yellow, for me, is like escaping from the chaos of the world and getting lost in an endless sky ." Participants finding the color yellow soothing and describing it as providing a sense of freedom and freshness like an endless sky can be associated with the solar plexus chakra, typically represented by the color yellow [ 35 ]. This chakra is linked to self-confidence, willpower, and self-realization. [ 58 ]. Participant 33 described the experince of yoga with a flower and human figure as " Self-discovery ," stating, " you awaken your sleeping mind and body and find the 'self' within ." Participant 8 drawn a cloud figure, describing yoga as " like rising above the clouds," saying, "finding yourself in life, being at peace with yourself… [someone who starts practicing yoga] begins to know themselves, their love for life increases ."These statements and figures reinforce the basic themes of "self-discovery" and "being at peace with oneself" in yoga practice [ 59 ], indicating an important relationship between one's yoga practice, personal growth, and quest for inner peace [ 60 ]. Participant 48 believes that " After a long and perhaps short journey of practicing yoga, individuals find themselves, reach their essence, and become aware of their existence. I chose this color (orange) because it reminds me that energy exists, is alive, and can be transmitted at any moment. For me, yoga is a sign of energy; after yoga, the body revitalizes and refreshes. " The choice of orange suggests a strong relationship between yoga practice and energy, as this color, can be associated with the Sacral chakra, symbolizes vitality, creativity, and emotional balance [ 36 ].

In this study, there seem to be mixed views among some participants regarding yoga practice. While yoga and meditation are generally recommended as tools for reducing stress and enhancing personal well-being [ 24 , 61 , 62 ], some students (participants 41–44) have reported not finding this practice beneficial. For example, some participants have advised against practicing yoga due to physical discomfort (head, neck, and back pain, dizziness), inability to empty the mind during meditation, difficulty in focusing, and negative perceptions. The comments of participants 41 and 44 are thought to indicate their individual experiences regarding their inability to meditate and the discomfort they feel during yoga practice. Yoga and meditation practices can create different experiences in each individual; while they can be relaxing and healing for some, they can be challenging and discomforting for others [ 63 ]. This suggests that yoga and meditation can not universal solutions but practices that should be compatible with an individual's personal preferences, experiences, and health conditions [ 26 ].

Participants' health conditions can influence their experiences during yoga practice. Participants who feel unwell or have a specific health problem may find the practice challenging. This underscores the importance for educators and health professionals to provide stress management and relaxation techniques tailored to individual needs [ 64 ].

Limitations

The qualitative data collected in this study regarding the phenomenon of yoga is in Turkish. However, selecting an international journal for publication and translating the text into English may have limited the full conveyance of the figures and participants' expressions to the readers due to the unique cultural characteristics of the language. The concepts of yoga and chakras, meditation, and similar topics, which were theoretically as well as practically conveyed to the participants during the 14-week course content, may have influenced the participants' views on the phenomenon of yoga. The use of a qualitative design tradition in the research both limited the generalizability of the findings and contributed to the originality of the study.

This study has identified four themes that explain the phenomenon of practicing yoga. These are respectively; "symbol of health and tranquility", "way to place goodness in the heart", "most effective way to meet the self", and "no guarantee of relaxation" themes. The findings will contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of student experiences and ultimately understand their positive and negative experiences. By delving into the student perspective, this research aims to provide valuable insights for educators and healthcare professionals. Most of the research on the phenomenon of practicing yoga is conducted abroad, and it is a less studied area in Turkey. Although yoga, which is becoming increasingly popular in our country, is known to be a practice that makes a person feel good; research on how individuals feel about practicing yoga and how they think about it is specific to the subject. Participants associated practicing yoga with symbols and colors found in nature, emphasizing the importance of its effects on the body, mind, and spirituality. In addition, findings regarding the experiences of individuals practicing yoga, a practice that is also becoming increasingly popular in Turkey, have been obtained. Although it is seen that qualitative approaches such as in-depth interviews and content analysis are used in almost all of the qualitative studies on the subject [ 48 , 65 , 66 ], no study has been found that examines individuals' perceptions by drawing pictures and interpreting them. In this respect, the current research's unique research method can contribute to the literature.

Acknowledgements

The authors extend their sincere gratitude to the nursing students who willingly took part in this study. Their participation is greatly valued and appreciated.

Human ethics and consent to participate declarations

Applicable.

Not applicable.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Public Health Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Izmir Democracy University, Izmir, Turkey

Özüm Erki̇n

Department of Public Health Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Manisa Celal Bayar University, Manisa, Turkey

Aynur Çeti̇nkaya

Begüm Güler

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

ÖE and AÇ contributed to study design. AÇ contributed to analyze data. ÖE, AÇ and BG write the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Begüm Güler .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from Manisa Celal Bayar University Non-invasive Clinical Research Ethics Committee (Decision no:20.478.486, Date:02/13/2019). We adhered to the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and relevant guidelines. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants in this study. Participants were ensured to provide their consent voluntarily and without coercion. Written informed consent to participate was obtained from all of the participants in this study. Before the research, the purpose of the study was explained to the students and that they could leave the study at any time. At the beginning of the study, it was informed that participation in the study was voluntary and that no grade would be given. The evaluation of this course consisted of 10 open-ended questions as part of the year-end assessment. Students were asked to name 10 yoga poses they knew, describe the posture, explain the benefits, indicate the indications and contraindications, and identify the associated chakras. The grade distribution of the students was as follows: AA (n:31), BA (n:16), BB (n:6), CB (n:6).  Necessary precautions were taken to protect the confidentiality of the data, the identity information of the participants was not included in the data collection tools and all personal details in the data collection forms were kept confidential. The identifying images or other personal details of participants are presented in a way that does not compromise anonymity.

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. applicable (appendix 1)., rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, 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 you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. 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-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Erki̇n, Ö., Çeti̇nkaya, A. & Güler, B. The phenomenon of yoga in the imagination of Turkish nursing students: "The way to place goodness in the heart". BMC Nurs 23 , 655 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-02288-y

Download citation

Received : 28 June 2024

Accepted : 23 August 2024

Published : 13 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-024-02288-y

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

• Nursing student
• Qualitative research

BMC Nursing

ISSN: 1472-6955

• General enquiries: [email protected]