literature-review

<!-- Adapted from: claude-scientific-skills/scientific-skills/literature-review -->

Literature Review Guide

Conduct comprehensive, systematic literature reviews using academic databases.

When to Use

• Conducting systematic literature reviews
• Synthesizing research on a topic
• Writing literature review sections
• Identifying research gaps
• Building bibliographies

Core Workflow

Phase 1: Planning

1. Define Research Question (PICO framework for clinical)

   • Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome

2. Establish Scope

   • Review type: narrative, systematic, scoping
   • Time period, geographic scope
   • Study types to include

3. Develop Search Strategy

   • Key terms and synonyms
   • Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT)
   • Database-specific syntax

Phase 2: Searching

Key Databases:

Database	Coverage
PubMed	Biomedical, life sciences
arXiv	Physics, CS, math preprints
Semantic Scholar	Broad academic
Google Scholar	Broad coverage
Web of Science	Multidisciplinary

Search Strategy Template:

(term1 OR synonym1) AND (term2 OR synonym2) AND (term3)

Phase 3: Screening

1. Title/Abstract Screening

   • Apply inclusion/exclusion criteria
   • Track reasons for exclusion

2. Full-Text Review

   • Assess eligibility
   • Extract key data

Phase 4: Synthesis

Organize Thematically:

## Theme 1: [Topic]
- Finding A (Author, Year)
- Finding B (Author, Year)
- Synthesis and gaps

## Theme 2: [Topic]
...

Comparison Table:

Study	Methods	Sample	Key Findings
Author 2023	RCT	n=100	Finding X
Author 2022	Cohort	n=500	Finding Y

Phase 5: Writing

Structure:

1. Introduction (scope, objectives)
2. Methods (search strategy, criteria)
3. Results (thematic synthesis)
4. Discussion (gaps, future directions)
5. Conclusion

Citation Management

Citation Styles

**APA 7:**
Author, A. A., & Author, B. B. (Year). Title. Journal, Volume(Issue), pages. https://doi.org/xxx

**Nature:**
Author, A. A. & Author, B. B. Title. Journal Volume, pages (Year).

**Vancouver:**
Author AA, Author BB. Title. Journal. Year;Volume(Issue):pages.

Tools

• Zotero (free, open source)
• Mendeley (free)
• EndNote (institutional)

Quality Assessment

For RCTs: Cochrane Risk of Bias tool For Observational: Newcastle-Ottawa Scale For Qualitative: CASP checklist

PRISMA Flow Diagram

Records identified (n=X)
    ↓
Duplicates removed (n=X)
    ↓
Records screened (n=X)
    ↓
Records excluded (n=X)
    ↓
Full-text assessed (n=X)
    ↓
Studies included (n=X)

Best Practices

1. Document everything - reproducibility
2. Use multiple databases - comprehensive coverage
3. Two reviewers - reduce bias (when possible)
4. Pre-register protocol - transparency
5. Update searches - before publication

Common Pitfalls

• Publication bias (positive results overrepresented)
• Language bias (English-only searches)
• Citation bias (citing famous papers)
• Not updating searches before submission

Resources

• PRISMA Guidelines: http://prisma-statement.org/
• Cochrane Handbook: https://training.cochrane.org/handbook
• PROSPERO (protocol registration): https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/