analyze the role of literature review in research

• UConn Library
• Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide
• Introduction

Literature Review: The What, Why and How-to Guide — Introduction

• Getting Started
• How to Pick a Topic
• Strategies to Find Sources
• Evaluating Sources & Lit. Reviews
• Tips for Writing Literature Reviews
• Writing Literature Review: Useful Sites
• Citation Resources
• Other Academic Writings

What are Literature Reviews?

So, what is a literature review? "A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers. In writing the literature review, your purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are. As a piece of writing, the literature review must be defined by a guiding concept (e.g., your research objective, the problem or issue you are discussing, or your argumentative thesis). It is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries." Taylor, D.  The literature review: A few tips on conducting it . University of Toronto Health Sciences Writing Centre.

Goals of Literature Reviews

What are the goals of creating a Literature Review?  A literature could be written to accomplish different aims:

• To develop a theory or evaluate an existing theory
• To summarize the historical or existing state of a research topic
• Identify a problem in a field of research 

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1997). Writing narrative literature reviews .  Review of General Psychology , 1 (3), 311-320.

What kinds of sources require a Literature Review?

• A research paper assigned in a course
• A thesis or dissertation
• A grant proposal
• An article intended for publication in a journal

All these instances require you to collect what has been written about your research topic so that you can demonstrate how your own research sheds new light on the topic.

Types of Literature Reviews

What kinds of literature reviews are written?

Narrative review: The purpose of this type of review is to describe the current state of the research on a specific topic/research and to offer a critical analysis of the literature reviewed. Studies are grouped by research/theoretical categories, and themes and trends, strengths and weakness, and gaps are identified. The review ends with a conclusion section which summarizes the findings regarding the state of the research of the specific study, the gaps identify and if applicable, explains how the author's research will address gaps identify in the review and expand the knowledge on the topic reviewed.

• Example : Predictors and Outcomes of U.S. Quality Maternity Leave: A Review and Conceptual Framework:  10.1177/08948453211037398  

Systematic review : "The authors of a systematic review use a specific procedure to search the research literature, select the studies to include in their review, and critically evaluate the studies they find." (p. 139). Nelson, L. K. (2013). Research in Communication Sciences and Disorders . Plural Publishing.

• Example : The effect of leave policies on increasing fertility: a systematic review:  10.1057/s41599-022-01270-w

Meta-analysis : "Meta-analysis is a method of reviewing research findings in a quantitative fashion by transforming the data from individual studies into what is called an effect size and then pooling and analyzing this information. The basic goal in meta-analysis is to explain why different outcomes have occurred in different studies." (p. 197). Roberts, M. C., & Ilardi, S. S. (2003). Handbook of Research Methods in Clinical Psychology . Blackwell Publishing.

• Example : Employment Instability and Fertility in Europe: A Meta-Analysis:  10.1215/00703370-9164737

Meta-synthesis : "Qualitative meta-synthesis is a type of qualitative study that uses as data the findings from other qualitative studies linked by the same or related topic." (p.312). Zimmer, L. (2006). Qualitative meta-synthesis: A question of dialoguing with texts .  Journal of Advanced Nursing , 53 (3), 311-318.

• Example : Women’s perspectives on career successes and barriers: A qualitative meta-synthesis:  10.1177/05390184221113735

Literature Reviews in the Health Sciences

• UConn Health subject guide on systematic reviews Explanation of the different review types used in health sciences literature as well as tools to help you find the right review type
• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: How to Pick a Topic >>
• Last Updated: Sep 21, 2022 2:16 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uconn.edu/literaturereview

Libraries | Research Guides

Literature reviews, what is a literature review, learning more about how to do a literature review.

• Planning the Review
• The Research Question
• Choosing Where to Search
• Organizing the Review
• Writing the Review

A literature review is a review and synthesis of existing research on a topic or research question. A literature review is meant to analyze the scholarly literature, make connections across writings and identify strengths, weaknesses, trends, and missing conversations. A literature review should address different aspects of a topic as it relates to your research question. A literature review goes beyond a description or summary of the literature you have read. 

• Sage Research Methods Core This link opens in a new window SAGE Research Methods supports research at all levels by providing material to guide users through every step of the research process. SAGE Research Methods is the ultimate methods library with more than 1000 books, reference works, journal articles, and instructional videos by world-leading academics from across the social sciences, including the largest collection of qualitative methods books available online from any scholarly publisher. – Publisher

• Next: Planning the Review >>
• Last Updated: Jul 8, 2024 11:22 AM
• URL: https://libguides.northwestern.edu/literaturereviews

Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library

• Collections
• Research Help

YSN Doctoral Programs: Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

• Biomedical Databases
• Global (Public Health) Databases
• Soc. Sci., History, and Law Databases
• Grey Literature
• Trials Registers
• Data and Statistics
• Public Policy
• Google Tips
• Recommended Books
• Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

What is a literature review?

A literature review is an integrated analysis -- not just a summary-- of scholarly writings and other relevant evidence related directly to your research question.  That is, it represents a synthesis of the evidence that provides background information on your topic and shows a association between the evidence and your research question.

A literature review may be a stand alone work or the introduction to a larger research paper, depending on the assignment.  Rely heavily on the guidelines your instructor has given you.

Why is it important?

A literature review is important because it:

• Explains the background of research on a topic.
• Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area.
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
• Identifies critical gaps and points of disagreement.
• Discusses further research questions that logically come out of the previous studies.

APA7 Style resources

APA Style Blog - for those harder to find answers

1. Choose a topic. Define your research question.

Your literature review should be guided by your central research question.  The literature represents background and research developments related to a specific research question, interpreted and analyzed by you in a synthesized way.

• Make sure your research question is not too broad or too narrow.  Is it manageable?
• Begin writing down terms that are related to your question. These will be useful for searches later.
• If you have the opportunity, discuss your topic with your professor and your class mates.

2. Decide on the scope of your review

How many studies do you need to look at? How comprehensive should it be? How many years should it cover? 

• This may depend on your assignment.  How many sources does the assignment require?

3. Select the databases you will use to conduct your searches.

Make a list of the databases you will search. 

Where to find databases:

• use the tabs on this guide
• Find other databases in the Nursing Information Resources web page
• More on the Medical Library web page
• ... and more on the Yale University Library web page

4. Conduct your searches to find the evidence. Keep track of your searches.

• Use the key words in your question, as well as synonyms for those words, as terms in your search. Use the database tutorials for help.
• Save the searches in the databases. This saves time when you want to redo, or modify, the searches. It is also helpful to use as a guide is the searches are not finding any useful results.
• Review the abstracts of research studies carefully. This will save you time.
• Use the bibliographies and references of research studies you find to locate others.
• Check with your professor, or a subject expert in the field, if you are missing any key works in the field.
• Ask your librarian for help at any time.
• Use a citation manager, such as EndNote as the repository for your citations. See the EndNote tutorials for help.

Review the literature

Some questions to help you analyze the research:

• What was the research question of the study you are reviewing? What were the authors trying to discover?
• Was the research funded by a source that could influence the findings?
• What were the research methodologies? Analyze its literature review, the samples and variables used, the results, and the conclusions.
• Does the research seem to be complete? Could it have been conducted more soundly? What further questions does it raise?
• If there are conflicting studies, why do you think that is?
• How are the authors viewed in the field? Has this study been cited? If so, how has it been analyzed?

Tips: 

• Review the abstracts carefully.  
• Keep careful notes so that you may track your thought processes during the research process.
• Create a matrix of the studies for easy analysis, and synthesis, across all of the studies.
• << Previous: Recommended Books
• Last Updated: Jun 20, 2024 9:08 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.yale.edu/YSNDoctoral

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.

• University of Texas Libraries

Literature Reviews

Steps in the literature review process.

• What is a literature review?
• Define your research question
• Determine inclusion and exclusion criteria
• Choose databases and search
• Review Results
• Synthesize Results
• Analyze Results
• Librarian Support
• Artificial Intelligence (AI) Tools
• You may need to some exploratory searching of the literature to get a sense of scope, to determine whether you need to narrow or broaden your focus
• Identify databases that provide the most relevant sources, and identify relevant terms (controlled vocabularies) to add to your search strategy
• Finalize your research question
• Think about relevant dates, geographies (and languages), methods, and conflicting points of view
• Conduct searches in the published literature via the identified databases
• Check to see if this topic has been covered in other discipline's databases
• Examine the citations of on-point articles for keywords, authors, and previous research (via references) and cited reference searching.
• Save your search results in a citation management tool (such as Zotero, Mendeley or EndNote)
• De-duplicate your search results
• Make sure that you've found the seminal pieces -- they have been cited many times, and their work is considered foundational 
• Check with your professor or a librarian to make sure your search has been comprehensive
• Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of individual sources and evaluate for bias, methodologies, and thoroughness
• Group your results in to an organizational structure that will support why your research needs to be done, or that provides the answer to your research question  
• Develop your conclusions
• Are there gaps in the literature?
• Where has significant research taken place, and who has done it?
• Is there consensus or debate on this topic?
• Which methodological approaches work best?
• For example: Background, Current Practices, Critics and Proponents, Where/How this study will fit in 
• Organize your citations and focus on your research question and pertinent studies
• Compile your bibliography

Note: The first four steps are the best points at which to contact a librarian. Your librarian can help you determine the best databases to use for your topic, assess scope, and formulate a search strategy.

Videos Tutorials about Literature Reviews

This 4.5 minute video from Academic Education Materials has a Creative Commons License and a British narrator.

Recommended Reading

• Last Updated: Aug 13, 2024 1:52 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.utexas.edu/literaturereviews

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

What is the Purpose of a Literature Review?

4-minute read

• 23rd October 2023

If you’re writing a research paper or dissertation , then you’ll most likely need to include a comprehensive literature review . In this post, we’ll review the purpose of literature reviews, why they are so significant, and the specific elements to include in one. Literature reviews can:

1. Provide a foundation for current research.

2. Define key concepts and theories.

3. Demonstrate critical evaluation.

4. Show how research and methodologies have evolved.

5. Identify gaps in existing research.

6. Support your argument.

Keep reading to enter the exciting world of literature reviews!

What is a Literature Review?

A literature review is a critical summary and evaluation of the existing research (e.g., academic journal articles and books) on a specific topic. It is typically included as a separate section or chapter of a research paper or dissertation, serving as a contextual framework for a study. Literature reviews can vary in length depending on the subject and nature of the study, with most being about equal length to other sections or chapters included in the paper. Essentially, the literature review highlights previous studies in the context of your research and summarizes your insights in a structured, organized format. Next, let’s look at the overall purpose of a literature review.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

Literature reviews are considered an integral part of research across most academic subjects and fields. The primary purpose of a literature review in your study is to:

Provide a Foundation for Current Research

Since the literature review provides a comprehensive evaluation of the existing research, it serves as a solid foundation for your current study. It’s a way to contextualize your work and show how your research fits into the broader landscape of your specific area of study.  

Define Key Concepts and Theories

The literature review highlights the central theories and concepts that have arisen from previous research on your chosen topic. It gives your readers a more thorough understanding of the background of your study and why your research is particularly significant .

Demonstrate Critical Evaluation 

A comprehensive literature review shows your ability to critically analyze and evaluate a broad range of source material. And since you’re considering and acknowledging the contribution of key scholars alongside your own, it establishes your own credibility and knowledge.

Show How Research and Methodologies Have Evolved

Another purpose of literature reviews is to provide a historical perspective and demonstrate how research and methodologies have changed over time, especially as data collection methods and technology have advanced. And studying past methodologies allows you, as the researcher, to understand what did and did not work and apply that knowledge to your own research.  

Identify Gaps in Existing Research

Besides discussing current research and methodologies, the literature review should also address areas that are lacking in the existing literature. This helps further demonstrate the relevance of your own research by explaining why your study is necessary to fill the gaps.

Support Your Argument

A good literature review should provide evidence that supports your research questions and hypothesis. For example, your study may show that your research supports existing theories or builds on them in some way. Referencing previous related studies shows your work is grounded in established research and will ultimately be a contribution to the field.  

Literature Review Editing Services 

Ensure your literature review is polished and ready for submission by having it professionally proofread and edited by our expert team. Our literature review editing services will help your research stand out and make an impact. Not convinced yet? Send in your free sample today and see for yourself! 

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

5-minute read

Free Email Newsletter Template (2024)

Promoting a brand means sharing valuable insights to connect more deeply with your audience, and...

6-minute read

How to Write a Nonprofit Grant Proposal

If you’re seeking funding to support your charitable endeavors as a nonprofit organization, you’ll need...

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

Frequently asked questions

What is the purpose of a literature review.

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.

Frequently asked questions: Academic writing

A rhetorical tautology is the repetition of an idea of concept using different words.

Rhetorical tautologies occur when additional words are used to convey a meaning that has already been expressed or implied. For example, the phrase “armed gunman” is a tautology because a “gunman” is by definition “armed.”

A logical tautology is a statement that is always true because it includes all logical possibilities.

Logical tautologies often take the form of “either/or” statements (e.g., “It will rain, or it will not rain”) or employ circular reasoning (e.g., “she is untrustworthy because she can’t be trusted”).

You may have seen both “appendices” or “appendixes” as pluralizations of “ appendix .” Either spelling can be used, but “appendices” is more common (including in APA Style ). Consistency is key here: make sure you use the same spelling throughout your paper.

The purpose of a lab report is to demonstrate your understanding of the scientific method with a hands-on lab experiment. Course instructors will often provide you with an experimental design and procedure. Your task is to write up how you actually performed the experiment and evaluate the outcome.

In contrast, a research paper requires you to independently develop an original argument. It involves more in-depth research and interpretation of sources and data.

A lab report is usually shorter than a research paper.

The sections of a lab report can vary between scientific fields and course requirements, but it usually contains the following:

• Title: expresses the topic of your study
• Abstract: summarizes your research aims, methods, results, and conclusions
• Introduction: establishes the context needed to understand the topic
• Method: describes the materials and procedures used in the experiment
• Results: reports all descriptive and inferential statistical analyses
• Discussion: interprets and evaluates results and identifies limitations
• Conclusion: sums up the main findings of your experiment
• References: list of all sources cited using a specific style (e.g. APA)
• Appendices: contains lengthy materials, procedures, tables or figures

A lab report conveys the aim, methods, results, and conclusions of a scientific experiment . Lab reports are commonly assigned in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields.

The abstract is the very last thing you write. You should only write it after your research is complete, so that you can accurately summarize the entirety of your thesis , dissertation or research paper .

If you’ve gone over the word limit set for your assignment, shorten your sentences and cut repetition and redundancy during the editing process. If you use a lot of long quotes , consider shortening them to just the essentials.

If you need to remove a lot of words, you may have to cut certain passages. Remember that everything in the text should be there to support your argument; look for any information that’s not essential to your point and remove it.

To make this process easier and faster, you can use a paraphrasing tool . With this tool, you can rewrite your text to make it simpler and shorter. If that’s not enough, you can copy-paste your paraphrased text into the summarizer . This tool will distill your text to its core message.

Revising, proofreading, and editing are different stages of the writing process .

• Revising is making structural and logical changes to your text—reformulating arguments and reordering information.
• Editing refers to making more local changes to things like sentence structure and phrasing to make sure your meaning is conveyed clearly and concisely.
• Proofreading involves looking at the text closely, line by line, to spot any typos and issues with consistency and correct them.

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 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.

Avoid citing sources in your abstract . There are two reasons for this:

• The abstract should focus on your original research, not on the work of others.
• The abstract should be self-contained and fully understandable without reference to other sources.

There are some circumstances where you might need to mention other sources in an abstract: for example, if your research responds directly to another study or focuses on the work of a single theorist. In general, though, don’t include citations unless absolutely necessary.

An abstract is a concise summary of an academic text (such as a journal article or dissertation ). It serves two main purposes:

• To help potential readers determine the relevance of your paper for their own research.
• To communicate your key findings to those who don’t have time to read the whole paper.

Abstracts are often indexed along with keywords on academic databases, so they make your work more easily findable. Since the abstract is the first thing any reader sees, it’s important that it clearly and accurately summarizes the contents of your paper.

In a scientific paper, the methodology always comes after the introduction and before the results , discussion and conclusion . The same basic structure also applies to a thesis, dissertation , or research proposal .

Depending on the length and type of document, you might also include a literature review or theoretical framework before the methodology.

Whether you’re publishing a blog, submitting a research paper , or even just writing an important email, there are a few techniques you can use to make sure it’s error-free:

• Take a break : Set your work aside for at least a few hours so that you can look at it with fresh eyes.
• Proofread a printout : Staring at a screen for too long can cause fatigue – sit down with a pen and paper to check the final version.
• Use digital shortcuts : Take note of any recurring mistakes (for example, misspelling a particular word, switching between US and UK English , or inconsistently capitalizing a term), and use Find and Replace to fix it throughout the document.

If you want to be confident that an important text is error-free, it might be worth choosing a professional proofreading service instead.

Editing and proofreading are different steps in the process of revising a text.

Editing comes first, and can involve major changes to content, structure and language. The first stages of editing are often done by authors themselves, while a professional editor makes the final improvements to grammar and style (for example, by improving sentence structure and word choice ).

Proofreading is the final stage of checking a text before it is published or shared. It focuses on correcting minor errors and inconsistencies (for example, in punctuation and capitalization ). Proofreaders often also check for formatting issues, especially in print publishing.

The cost of proofreading depends on the type and length of text, the turnaround time, and the level of services required. Most proofreading companies charge per word or page, while freelancers sometimes charge an hourly rate.

For proofreading alone, which involves only basic corrections of typos and formatting mistakes, you might pay as little as $0.01 per word, but in many cases, your text will also require some level of editing , which costs slightly more.

It’s often possible to purchase combined proofreading and editing services and calculate the price in advance based on your requirements.

There are many different routes to becoming a professional proofreader or editor. The necessary qualifications depend on the field – to be an academic or scientific proofreader, for example, you will need at least a university degree in a relevant subject.

For most proofreading jobs, experience and demonstrated skills are more important than specific qualifications. Often your skills will be tested as part of the application process.

To learn practical proofreading skills, you can choose to take a course with a professional organization such as the Society for Editors and Proofreaders . Alternatively, you can apply to companies that offer specialized on-the-job training programmes, such as the Scribbr Academy .

Ask our team

Want to contact us directly? No problem.  We  are always here for you.

• Email [email protected]
• Start live chat
• Call +1 (510) 822-8066
• WhatsApp +31 20 261 6040

Our team helps students graduate by offering:

• A world-class citation generator
• Plagiarism Checker software powered by Turnitin
• Innovative Citation Checker software
• Professional proofreading services
• Over 300 helpful articles about academic writing, citing sources, plagiarism, and more

Scribbr specializes in editing study-related documents . We proofread:

• PhD dissertations
• Research proposals
• Personal statements
• Admission essays
• Motivation letters
• Reflection papers
• Journal articles
• Capstone projects

Scribbr’s Plagiarism Checker is powered by elements of Turnitin’s Similarity Checker , namely the plagiarism detection software and the Internet Archive and Premium Scholarly Publications content databases .

The add-on AI detector is powered by Scribbr’s proprietary software.

The Scribbr Citation Generator is developed using the open-source Citation Style Language (CSL) project and Frank Bennett’s citeproc-js . It’s the same technology used by dozens of other popular citation tools, including Mendeley and Zotero.

You can find all the citation styles and locales used in the Scribbr Citation Generator in our publicly accessible repository on Github .

• Library databases
• Library website

Library Guide to Capstone Literature Reviews: Role of the Literature Review

The role of the literature review.

Your literature review gives readers an understanding of the scholarly research on your topic.

In your literature review you will:

• demonstrate that you are a well-informed scholar with expertise and knowledge in the field by giving an overview of the current state of the literature
• find a gap in the literature, or address a business or professional issue, depending on your doctoral study program; the literature review will illustrate how your research contributes to the scholarly conversation
• provide a synthesis of the issues, trends, and concepts surrounding your research

Be aware that the literature review is an iterative process. As you read and write initial drafts, you will find new threads and complementary themes, at which point you will return to search, find out about these new themes, and incorporate them into your review.

The purpose of this guide is to help you through the literature review process. Take some time to look over the resources in order to become familiar with them. The tabs on the left side of this page have additional information.

Short video: Research for the Literature Review

Short Video: Research for the Literature Review

(4 min 10 sec) Recorded August 2019 Transcript 

Literature review as a dinner party

To think about the role of the literature review, consider this analogy:  pretend that you throw a dinner party for the other researchers working in your topic area. First, you’d need to develop a guest list.

• The guests of honor would be early researchers or theorists; their work likely inspired subsequent studies, ideas, or controversies that the current researchers pursue.
• Then, think about the important current researchers to invite. Which guests might agree with each other?  Which others might provide useful counterpoints?
• You likely won’t be able to include everyone on the guest list, so you may need to choose carefully so that you don’t leave important figures out. 
• Alternatively, if there aren’t many researchers working in your topic area, then your guest list will need to include people working in other, related areas, who can still contribute to the conversation.

After the party, you describe the evening to a friend. You’ll summarize the evening’s conversation. Perhaps one guest made a comment that sparked a conversation, and then you describe who responded and how the topic evolved. There are other conversations to share, too. This is how you synthesize the themes and developments that you find in your research. Thinking about your literature research this way will help you to present your dinner party (and your literature review) in a lively and engaging way.

Short video: Empirical research

Video: How to locate and identify empirical research for your literature review

(6 min 16 sec) Recorded May 2020 Transcript 

Here are some useful resources from the Writing Center, the Office of Research and Doctoral Services, and other departments within the Office of Academic Support. Take some time to look at what is available to help you with your capstone/dissertation.

• Familiarize yourself with Walden support
• Doctoral Capstone Resources website
• Capstone writing resources
• Office of Student Research Administration
• Office of Research and Doctoral Services
• Visit the Writing Center

You can watch recorded webinars on the literature review in our Library Webinar Archives .

• Next Page: Scope
• Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

• Academic Residencies
• Academic Skills
• Career Planning and Development
• Customer Care Team
• Field Experience
• Military Services
• Student Success Advising
• Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

• Center for Social Change
• Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
• Office of Degree Acceleration
• Office of Student Affairs

Student Resources

• Doctoral Writing Assessment
• Form & Style Review
• Quick Answers
• ScholarWorks
• SKIL Courses and Workshops
• Walden Bookstore
• Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
• Student Safety/Title IX
• Legal & Consumer Information
• Website Terms and Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Accessibility
• Accreditation
• State Authorization
• Net Price Calculator
• Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

Research Methods: Literature Reviews

• Annotated Bibliographies
• Literature Reviews
• Scoping Reviews
• Systematic Reviews
• Scholarship of Teaching and Learning
• Persuasive Arguments
• Subject Specific Methodology

A literature review involves researching, reading, analyzing, evaluating, and summarizing scholarly literature (typically journals and articles) about a specific topic. The results of a literature review may be an entire report or article OR may be part of a article, thesis, dissertation, or grant proposal. A literature review helps the author learn about the history and nature of their topic, and identify research gaps and problems.

Steps & Elements

Problem formulation

• Determine your topic and its components by asking a question
• Research: locate literature related to your topic to identify the gap(s) that can be addressed
• Read: read the articles or other sources of information
• Analyze: assess the findings for relevancy
• Evaluating: determine how the article are relevant to your research and what are the key findings
• Synthesis: write about the key findings and how it is relevant to your research

Elements of a Literature Review

• Summarize subject, issue or theory under consideration, along with objectives of the review
• Divide works under review into categories (e.g. those in support of a particular position, those against, those offering alternative theories entirely)
• Explain how each work is similar to and how it varies from the others
• Conclude which pieces are best considered in their argument, are most convincing of their opinions, and make the greatest contribution to the understanding and development of an area of research

Writing a Literature Review Resources

• How to Write a Literature Review From the Wesleyan University Library
• Write a Literature Review From the University of California Santa Cruz Library. A Brief overview of a literature review, includes a list of stages for writing a lit review.
• Literature Reviews From the University of North Carolina Writing Center. Detailed information about writing a literature review.
• Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach Cronin, P., Ryan, F., & Coughan, M. (2008). Undertaking a literature review: A step-by-step approach. British Journal of Nursing, 17(1), p.38-43

Literature Review Tutorial

• << Previous: Annotated Bibliographies
• Next: Scoping Reviews >>
• Last Updated: Jul 8, 2024 3:13 PM
• URL: https://guides.auraria.edu/researchmethods

1100 Lawrence Street Denver, CO 80204 303-315-7700 Ask Us Directions

Warning: The NCBI web site requires JavaScript to function. more...

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
• Browse Titles

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Lau F, Kuziemsky C, editors. Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach [Internet]. Victoria (BC): University of Victoria; 2017 Feb 27.

Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach [Internet].

Chapter 9 methods for literature reviews.

Guy Paré and Spyros Kitsiou .

9.1. Introduction

Literature reviews play a critical role in scholarship because science remains, first and foremost, a cumulative endeavour ( vom Brocke et al., 2009 ). As in any academic discipline, rigorous knowledge syntheses are becoming indispensable in keeping up with an exponentially growing eHealth literature, assisting practitioners, academics, and graduate students in finding, evaluating, and synthesizing the contents of many empirical and conceptual papers. Among other methods, literature reviews are essential for: (a) identifying what has been written on a subject or topic; (b) determining the extent to which a specific research area reveals any interpretable trends or patterns; (c) aggregating empirical findings related to a narrow research question to support evidence-based practice; (d) generating new frameworks and theories; and (e) identifying topics or questions requiring more investigation ( Paré, Trudel, Jaana, & Kitsiou, 2015 ).

Literature reviews can take two major forms. The most prevalent one is the “literature review” or “background” section within a journal paper or a chapter in a graduate thesis. This section synthesizes the extant literature and usually identifies the gaps in knowledge that the empirical study addresses ( Sylvester, Tate, & Johnstone, 2013 ). It may also provide a theoretical foundation for the proposed study, substantiate the presence of the research problem, justify the research as one that contributes something new to the cumulated knowledge, or validate the methods and approaches for the proposed study ( Hart, 1998 ; Levy & Ellis, 2006 ).

The second form of literature review, which is the focus of this chapter, constitutes an original and valuable work of research in and of itself ( Paré et al., 2015 ). Rather than providing a base for a researcher’s own work, it creates a solid starting point for all members of the community interested in a particular area or topic ( Mulrow, 1987 ). The so-called “review article” is a journal-length paper which has an overarching purpose to synthesize the literature in a field, without collecting or analyzing any primary data ( Green, Johnson, & Adams, 2006 ).

When appropriately conducted, review articles represent powerful information sources for practitioners looking for state-of-the art evidence to guide their decision-making and work practices ( Paré et al., 2015 ). Further, high-quality reviews become frequently cited pieces of work which researchers seek out as a first clear outline of the literature when undertaking empirical studies ( Cooper, 1988 ; Rowe, 2014 ). Scholars who track and gauge the impact of articles have found that review papers are cited and downloaded more often than any other type of published article ( Cronin, Ryan, & Coughlan, 2008 ; Montori, Wilczynski, Morgan, Haynes, & Hedges, 2003 ; Patsopoulos, Analatos, & Ioannidis, 2005 ). The reason for their popularity may be the fact that reading the review enables one to have an overview, if not a detailed knowledge of the area in question, as well as references to the most useful primary sources ( Cronin et al., 2008 ). Although they are not easy to conduct, the commitment to complete a review article provides a tremendous service to one’s academic community ( Paré et al., 2015 ; Petticrew & Roberts, 2006 ). Most, if not all, peer-reviewed journals in the fields of medical informatics publish review articles of some type.

The main objectives of this chapter are fourfold: (a) to provide an overview of the major steps and activities involved in conducting a stand-alone literature review; (b) to describe and contrast the different types of review articles that can contribute to the eHealth knowledge base; (c) to illustrate each review type with one or two examples from the eHealth literature; and (d) to provide a series of recommendations for prospective authors of review articles in this domain.

9.2. Overview of the Literature Review Process and Steps

As explained in Templier and Paré (2015) , there are six generic steps involved in conducting a review article:

• formulating the research question(s) and objective(s),
• searching the extant literature,
• screening for inclusion,
• assessing the quality of primary studies,
• extracting data, and
• analyzing data.

Although these steps are presented here in sequential order, one must keep in mind that the review process can be iterative and that many activities can be initiated during the planning stage and later refined during subsequent phases ( Finfgeld-Connett & Johnson, 2013 ; Kitchenham & Charters, 2007 ).

Formulating the research question(s) and objective(s): As a first step, members of the review team must appropriately justify the need for the review itself ( Petticrew & Roberts, 2006 ), identify the review’s main objective(s) ( Okoli & Schabram, 2010 ), and define the concepts or variables at the heart of their synthesis ( Cooper & Hedges, 2009 ; Webster & Watson, 2002 ). Importantly, they also need to articulate the research question(s) they propose to investigate ( Kitchenham & Charters, 2007 ). In this regard, we concur with Jesson, Matheson, and Lacey (2011) that clearly articulated research questions are key ingredients that guide the entire review methodology; they underscore the type of information that is needed, inform the search for and selection of relevant literature, and guide or orient the subsequent analysis. Searching the extant literature: The next step consists of searching the literature and making decisions about the suitability of material to be considered in the review ( Cooper, 1988 ). There exist three main coverage strategies. First, exhaustive coverage means an effort is made to be as comprehensive as possible in order to ensure that all relevant studies, published and unpublished, are included in the review and, thus, conclusions are based on this all-inclusive knowledge base. The second type of coverage consists of presenting materials that are representative of most other works in a given field or area. Often authors who adopt this strategy will search for relevant articles in a small number of top-tier journals in a field ( Paré et al., 2015 ). In the third strategy, the review team concentrates on prior works that have been central or pivotal to a particular topic. This may include empirical studies or conceptual papers that initiated a line of investigation, changed how problems or questions were framed, introduced new methods or concepts, or engendered important debate ( Cooper, 1988 ). Screening for inclusion: The following step consists of evaluating the applicability of the material identified in the preceding step ( Levy & Ellis, 2006 ; vom Brocke et al., 2009 ). Once a group of potential studies has been identified, members of the review team must screen them to determine their relevance ( Petticrew & Roberts, 2006 ). A set of predetermined rules provides a basis for including or excluding certain studies. This exercise requires a significant investment on the part of researchers, who must ensure enhanced objectivity and avoid biases or mistakes. As discussed later in this chapter, for certain types of reviews there must be at least two independent reviewers involved in the screening process and a procedure to resolve disagreements must also be in place ( Liberati et al., 2009 ; Shea et al., 2009 ). Assessing the quality of primary studies: In addition to screening material for inclusion, members of the review team may need to assess the scientific quality of the selected studies, that is, appraise the rigour of the research design and methods. Such formal assessment, which is usually conducted independently by at least two coders, helps members of the review team refine which studies to include in the final sample, determine whether or not the differences in quality may affect their conclusions, or guide how they analyze the data and interpret the findings ( Petticrew & Roberts, 2006 ). Ascribing quality scores to each primary study or considering through domain-based evaluations which study components have or have not been designed and executed appropriately makes it possible to reflect on the extent to which the selected study addresses possible biases and maximizes validity ( Shea et al., 2009 ). Extracting data: The following step involves gathering or extracting applicable information from each primary study included in the sample and deciding what is relevant to the problem of interest ( Cooper & Hedges, 2009 ). Indeed, the type of data that should be recorded mainly depends on the initial research questions ( Okoli & Schabram, 2010 ). However, important information may also be gathered about how, when, where and by whom the primary study was conducted, the research design and methods, or qualitative/quantitative results ( Cooper & Hedges, 2009 ). Analyzing and synthesizing data : As a final step, members of the review team must collate, summarize, aggregate, organize, and compare the evidence extracted from the included studies. The extracted data must be presented in a meaningful way that suggests a new contribution to the extant literature ( Jesson et al., 2011 ). Webster and Watson (2002) warn researchers that literature reviews should be much more than lists of papers and should provide a coherent lens to make sense of extant knowledge on a given topic. There exist several methods and techniques for synthesizing quantitative (e.g., frequency analysis, meta-analysis) and qualitative (e.g., grounded theory, narrative analysis, meta-ethnography) evidence ( Dixon-Woods, Agarwal, Jones, Young, & Sutton, 2005 ; Thomas & Harden, 2008 ).

9.3. Types of Review Articles and Brief Illustrations

EHealth researchers have at their disposal a number of approaches and methods for making sense out of existing literature, all with the purpose of casting current research findings into historical contexts or explaining contradictions that might exist among a set of primary research studies conducted on a particular topic. Our classification scheme is largely inspired from Paré and colleagues’ (2015) typology. Below we present and illustrate those review types that we feel are central to the growth and development of the eHealth domain.

9.3.1. Narrative Reviews

The narrative review is the “traditional” way of reviewing the extant literature and is skewed towards a qualitative interpretation of prior knowledge ( Sylvester et al., 2013 ). Put simply, a narrative review attempts to summarize or synthesize what has been written on a particular topic but does not seek generalization or cumulative knowledge from what is reviewed ( Davies, 2000 ; Green et al., 2006 ). Instead, the review team often undertakes the task of accumulating and synthesizing the literature to demonstrate the value of a particular point of view ( Baumeister & Leary, 1997 ). As such, reviewers may selectively ignore or limit the attention paid to certain studies in order to make a point. In this rather unsystematic approach, the selection of information from primary articles is subjective, lacks explicit criteria for inclusion and can lead to biased interpretations or inferences ( Green et al., 2006 ). There are several narrative reviews in the particular eHealth domain, as in all fields, which follow such an unstructured approach ( Silva et al., 2015 ; Paul et al., 2015 ).

Despite these criticisms, this type of review can be very useful in gathering together a volume of literature in a specific subject area and synthesizing it. As mentioned above, its primary purpose is to provide the reader with a comprehensive background for understanding current knowledge and highlighting the significance of new research ( Cronin et al., 2008 ). Faculty like to use narrative reviews in the classroom because they are often more up to date than textbooks, provide a single source for students to reference, and expose students to peer-reviewed literature ( Green et al., 2006 ). For researchers, narrative reviews can inspire research ideas by identifying gaps or inconsistencies in a body of knowledge, thus helping researchers to determine research questions or formulate hypotheses. Importantly, narrative reviews can also be used as educational articles to bring practitioners up to date with certain topics of issues ( Green et al., 2006 ).

Recently, there have been several efforts to introduce more rigour in narrative reviews that will elucidate common pitfalls and bring changes into their publication standards. Information systems researchers, among others, have contributed to advancing knowledge on how to structure a “traditional” review. For instance, Levy and Ellis (2006) proposed a generic framework for conducting such reviews. Their model follows the systematic data processing approach comprised of three steps, namely: (a) literature search and screening; (b) data extraction and analysis; and (c) writing the literature review. They provide detailed and very helpful instructions on how to conduct each step of the review process. As another methodological contribution, vom Brocke et al. (2009) offered a series of guidelines for conducting literature reviews, with a particular focus on how to search and extract the relevant body of knowledge. Last, Bandara, Miskon, and Fielt (2011) proposed a structured, predefined and tool-supported method to identify primary studies within a feasible scope, extract relevant content from identified articles, synthesize and analyze the findings, and effectively write and present the results of the literature review. We highly recommend that prospective authors of narrative reviews consult these useful sources before embarking on their work.

Darlow and Wen (2015) provide a good example of a highly structured narrative review in the eHealth field. These authors synthesized published articles that describe the development process of mobile health ( m-health ) interventions for patients’ cancer care self-management. As in most narrative reviews, the scope of the research questions being investigated is broad: (a) how development of these systems are carried out; (b) which methods are used to investigate these systems; and (c) what conclusions can be drawn as a result of the development of these systems. To provide clear answers to these questions, a literature search was conducted on six electronic databases and Google Scholar . The search was performed using several terms and free text words, combining them in an appropriate manner. Four inclusion and three exclusion criteria were utilized during the screening process. Both authors independently reviewed each of the identified articles to determine eligibility and extract study information. A flow diagram shows the number of studies identified, screened, and included or excluded at each stage of study selection. In terms of contributions, this review provides a series of practical recommendations for m-health intervention development.

9.3.2. Descriptive or Mapping Reviews

The primary goal of a descriptive review is to determine the extent to which a body of knowledge in a particular research topic reveals any interpretable pattern or trend with respect to pre-existing propositions, theories, methodologies or findings ( King & He, 2005 ; Paré et al., 2015 ). In contrast with narrative reviews, descriptive reviews follow a systematic and transparent procedure, including searching, screening and classifying studies ( Petersen, Vakkalanka, & Kuzniarz, 2015 ). Indeed, structured search methods are used to form a representative sample of a larger group of published works ( Paré et al., 2015 ). Further, authors of descriptive reviews extract from each study certain characteristics of interest, such as publication year, research methods, data collection techniques, and direction or strength of research outcomes (e.g., positive, negative, or non-significant) in the form of frequency analysis to produce quantitative results ( Sylvester et al., 2013 ). In essence, each study included in a descriptive review is treated as the unit of analysis and the published literature as a whole provides a database from which the authors attempt to identify any interpretable trends or draw overall conclusions about the merits of existing conceptualizations, propositions, methods or findings ( Paré et al., 2015 ). In doing so, a descriptive review may claim that its findings represent the state of the art in a particular domain ( King & He, 2005 ).

In the fields of health sciences and medical informatics, reviews that focus on examining the range, nature and evolution of a topic area are described by Anderson, Allen, Peckham, and Goodwin (2008) as mapping reviews . Like descriptive reviews, the research questions are generic and usually relate to publication patterns and trends. There is no preconceived plan to systematically review all of the literature although this can be done. Instead, researchers often present studies that are representative of most works published in a particular area and they consider a specific time frame to be mapped.

An example of this approach in the eHealth domain is offered by DeShazo, Lavallie, and Wolf (2009). The purpose of this descriptive or mapping review was to characterize publication trends in the medical informatics literature over a 20-year period (1987 to 2006). To achieve this ambitious objective, the authors performed a bibliometric analysis of medical informatics citations indexed in medline using publication trends, journal frequencies, impact factors, Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) term frequencies, and characteristics of citations. Findings revealed that there were over 77,000 medical informatics articles published during the covered period in numerous journals and that the average annual growth rate was 12%. The MeSH term analysis also suggested a strong interdisciplinary trend. Finally, average impact scores increased over time with two notable growth periods. Overall, patterns in research outputs that seem to characterize the historic trends and current components of the field of medical informatics suggest it may be a maturing discipline (DeShazo et al., 2009).

9.3.3. Scoping Reviews

Scoping reviews attempt to provide an initial indication of the potential size and nature of the extant literature on an emergent topic (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005; Daudt, van Mossel, & Scott, 2013 ; Levac, Colquhoun, & O’Brien, 2010). A scoping review may be conducted to examine the extent, range and nature of research activities in a particular area, determine the value of undertaking a full systematic review (discussed next), or identify research gaps in the extant literature ( Paré et al., 2015 ). In line with their main objective, scoping reviews usually conclude with the presentation of a detailed research agenda for future works along with potential implications for both practice and research.

Unlike narrative and descriptive reviews, the whole point of scoping the field is to be as comprehensive as possible, including grey literature (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005). Inclusion and exclusion criteria must be established to help researchers eliminate studies that are not aligned with the research questions. It is also recommended that at least two independent coders review abstracts yielded from the search strategy and then the full articles for study selection ( Daudt et al., 2013 ). The synthesized evidence from content or thematic analysis is relatively easy to present in tabular form (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005; Thomas & Harden, 2008 ).

One of the most highly cited scoping reviews in the eHealth domain was published by Archer, Fevrier-Thomas, Lokker, McKibbon, and Straus (2011) . These authors reviewed the existing literature on personal health record ( phr ) systems including design, functionality, implementation, applications, outcomes, and benefits. Seven databases were searched from 1985 to March 2010. Several search terms relating to phr s were used during this process. Two authors independently screened titles and abstracts to determine inclusion status. A second screen of full-text articles, again by two independent members of the research team, ensured that the studies described phr s. All in all, 130 articles met the criteria and their data were extracted manually into a database. The authors concluded that although there is a large amount of survey, observational, cohort/panel, and anecdotal evidence of phr benefits and satisfaction for patients, more research is needed to evaluate the results of phr implementations. Their in-depth analysis of the literature signalled that there is little solid evidence from randomized controlled trials or other studies through the use of phr s. Hence, they suggested that more research is needed that addresses the current lack of understanding of optimal functionality and usability of these systems, and how they can play a beneficial role in supporting patient self-management ( Archer et al., 2011 ).

9.3.4. Forms of Aggregative Reviews

Healthcare providers, practitioners, and policy-makers are nowadays overwhelmed with large volumes of information, including research-based evidence from numerous clinical trials and evaluation studies, assessing the effectiveness of health information technologies and interventions ( Ammenwerth & de Keizer, 2004 ; Deshazo et al., 2009 ). It is unrealistic to expect that all these disparate actors will have the time, skills, and necessary resources to identify the available evidence in the area of their expertise and consider it when making decisions. Systematic reviews that involve the rigorous application of scientific strategies aimed at limiting subjectivity and bias (i.e., systematic and random errors) can respond to this challenge.

Systematic reviews attempt to aggregate, appraise, and synthesize in a single source all empirical evidence that meet a set of previously specified eligibility criteria in order to answer a clearly formulated and often narrow research question on a particular topic of interest to support evidence-based practice ( Liberati et al., 2009 ). They adhere closely to explicit scientific principles ( Liberati et al., 2009 ) and rigorous methodological guidelines (Higgins & Green, 2008) aimed at reducing random and systematic errors that can lead to deviations from the truth in results or inferences. The use of explicit methods allows systematic reviews to aggregate a large body of research evidence, assess whether effects or relationships are in the same direction and of the same general magnitude, explain possible inconsistencies between study results, and determine the strength of the overall evidence for every outcome of interest based on the quality of included studies and the general consistency among them ( Cook, Mulrow, & Haynes, 1997 ). The main procedures of a systematic review involve:

• Formulating a review question and developing a search strategy based on explicit inclusion criteria for the identification of eligible studies (usually described in the context of a detailed review protocol).
• Searching for eligible studies using multiple databases and information sources, including grey literature sources, without any language restrictions.
• Selecting studies, extracting data, and assessing risk of bias in a duplicate manner using two independent reviewers to avoid random or systematic errors in the process.
• Analyzing data using quantitative or qualitative methods.
• Presenting results in summary of findings tables.
• Interpreting results and drawing conclusions.

Many systematic reviews, but not all, use statistical methods to combine the results of independent studies into a single quantitative estimate or summary effect size. Known as meta-analyses , these reviews use specific data extraction and statistical techniques (e.g., network, frequentist, or Bayesian meta-analyses) to calculate from each study by outcome of interest an effect size along with a confidence interval that reflects the degree of uncertainty behind the point estimate of effect ( Borenstein, Hedges, Higgins, & Rothstein, 2009 ; Deeks, Higgins, & Altman, 2008 ). Subsequently, they use fixed or random-effects analysis models to combine the results of the included studies, assess statistical heterogeneity, and calculate a weighted average of the effect estimates from the different studies, taking into account their sample sizes. The summary effect size is a value that reflects the average magnitude of the intervention effect for a particular outcome of interest or, more generally, the strength of a relationship between two variables across all studies included in the systematic review. By statistically combining data from multiple studies, meta-analyses can create more precise and reliable estimates of intervention effects than those derived from individual studies alone, when these are examined independently as discrete sources of information.

The review by Gurol-Urganci, de Jongh, Vodopivec-Jamsek, Atun, and Car (2013) on the effects of mobile phone messaging reminders for attendance at healthcare appointments is an illustrative example of a high-quality systematic review with meta-analysis. Missed appointments are a major cause of inefficiency in healthcare delivery with substantial monetary costs to health systems. These authors sought to assess whether mobile phone-based appointment reminders delivered through Short Message Service ( sms ) or Multimedia Messaging Service ( mms ) are effective in improving rates of patient attendance and reducing overall costs. To this end, they conducted a comprehensive search on multiple databases using highly sensitive search strategies without language or publication-type restrictions to identify all rct s that are eligible for inclusion. In order to minimize the risk of omitting eligible studies not captured by the original search, they supplemented all electronic searches with manual screening of trial registers and references contained in the included studies. Study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments were performed inde­­pen­dently by two coders using standardized methods to ensure consistency and to eliminate potential errors. Findings from eight rct s involving 6,615 participants were pooled into meta-analyses to calculate the magnitude of effects that mobile text message reminders have on the rate of attendance at healthcare appointments compared to no reminders and phone call reminders.

Meta-analyses are regarded as powerful tools for deriving meaningful conclusions. However, there are situations in which it is neither reasonable nor appropriate to pool studies together using meta-analytic methods simply because there is extensive clinical heterogeneity between the included studies or variation in measurement tools, comparisons, or outcomes of interest. In these cases, systematic reviews can use qualitative synthesis methods such as vote counting, content analysis, classification schemes and tabulations, as an alternative approach to narratively synthesize the results of the independent studies included in the review. This form of review is known as qualitative systematic review.

A rigorous example of one such review in the eHealth domain is presented by Mickan, Atherton, Roberts, Heneghan, and Tilson (2014) on the use of handheld computers by healthcare professionals and their impact on access to information and clinical decision-making. In line with the methodological guide­lines for systematic reviews, these authors: (a) developed and registered with prospero ( www.crd.york.ac.uk/ prospero / ) an a priori review protocol; (b) conducted comprehensive searches for eligible studies using multiple databases and other supplementary strategies (e.g., forward searches); and (c) subsequently carried out study selection, data extraction, and risk of bias assessments in a duplicate manner to eliminate potential errors in the review process. Heterogeneity between the included studies in terms of reported outcomes and measures precluded the use of meta-analytic methods. To this end, the authors resorted to using narrative analysis and synthesis to describe the effectiveness of handheld computers on accessing information for clinical knowledge, adherence to safety and clinical quality guidelines, and diagnostic decision-making.

In recent years, the number of systematic reviews in the field of health informatics has increased considerably. Systematic reviews with discordant findings can cause great confusion and make it difficult for decision-makers to interpret the review-level evidence ( Moher, 2013 ). Therefore, there is a growing need for appraisal and synthesis of prior systematic reviews to ensure that decision-making is constantly informed by the best available accumulated evidence. Umbrella reviews , also known as overviews of systematic reviews, are tertiary types of evidence synthesis that aim to accomplish this; that is, they aim to compare and contrast findings from multiple systematic reviews and meta-analyses ( Becker & Oxman, 2008 ). Umbrella reviews generally adhere to the same principles and rigorous methodological guidelines used in systematic reviews. However, the unit of analysis in umbrella reviews is the systematic review rather than the primary study ( Becker & Oxman, 2008 ). Unlike systematic reviews that have a narrow focus of inquiry, umbrella reviews focus on broader research topics for which there are several potential interventions ( Smith, Devane, Begley, & Clarke, 2011 ). A recent umbrella review on the effects of home telemonitoring interventions for patients with heart failure critically appraised, compared, and synthesized evidence from 15 systematic reviews to investigate which types of home telemonitoring technologies and forms of interventions are more effective in reducing mortality and hospital admissions ( Kitsiou, Paré, & Jaana, 2015 ).

9.3.5. Realist Reviews

Realist reviews are theory-driven interpretative reviews developed to inform, enhance, or supplement conventional systematic reviews by making sense of heterogeneous evidence about complex interventions applied in diverse contexts in a way that informs policy decision-making ( Greenhalgh, Wong, Westhorp, & Pawson, 2011 ). They originated from criticisms of positivist systematic reviews which centre on their “simplistic” underlying assumptions ( Oates, 2011 ). As explained above, systematic reviews seek to identify causation. Such logic is appropriate for fields like medicine and education where findings of randomized controlled trials can be aggregated to see whether a new treatment or intervention does improve outcomes. However, many argue that it is not possible to establish such direct causal links between interventions and outcomes in fields such as social policy, management, and information systems where for any intervention there is unlikely to be a regular or consistent outcome ( Oates, 2011 ; Pawson, 2006 ; Rousseau, Manning, & Denyer, 2008 ).

To circumvent these limitations, Pawson, Greenhalgh, Harvey, and Walshe (2005) have proposed a new approach for synthesizing knowledge that seeks to unpack the mechanism of how “complex interventions” work in particular contexts. The basic research question — what works? — which is usually associated with systematic reviews changes to: what is it about this intervention that works, for whom, in what circumstances, in what respects and why? Realist reviews have no particular preference for either quantitative or qualitative evidence. As a theory-building approach, a realist review usually starts by articulating likely underlying mechanisms and then scrutinizes available evidence to find out whether and where these mechanisms are applicable ( Shepperd et al., 2009 ). Primary studies found in the extant literature are viewed as case studies which can test and modify the initial theories ( Rousseau et al., 2008 ).

The main objective pursued in the realist review conducted by Otte-Trojel, de Bont, Rundall, and van de Klundert (2014) was to examine how patient portals contribute to health service delivery and patient outcomes. The specific goals were to investigate how outcomes are produced and, most importantly, how variations in outcomes can be explained. The research team started with an exploratory review of background documents and research studies to identify ways in which patient portals may contribute to health service delivery and patient outcomes. The authors identified six main ways which represent “educated guesses” to be tested against the data in the evaluation studies. These studies were identified through a formal and systematic search in four databases between 2003 and 2013. Two members of the research team selected the articles using a pre-established list of inclusion and exclusion criteria and following a two-step procedure. The authors then extracted data from the selected articles and created several tables, one for each outcome category. They organized information to bring forward those mechanisms where patient portals contribute to outcomes and the variation in outcomes across different contexts.

9.3.6. Critical Reviews

Lastly, critical reviews aim to provide a critical evaluation and interpretive analysis of existing literature on a particular topic of interest to reveal strengths, weaknesses, contradictions, controversies, inconsistencies, and/or other important issues with respect to theories, hypotheses, research methods or results ( Baumeister & Leary, 1997 ; Kirkevold, 1997 ). Unlike other review types, critical reviews attempt to take a reflective account of the research that has been done in a particular area of interest, and assess its credibility by using appraisal instruments or critical interpretive methods. In this way, critical reviews attempt to constructively inform other scholars about the weaknesses of prior research and strengthen knowledge development by giving focus and direction to studies for further improvement ( Kirkevold, 1997 ).

Kitsiou, Paré, and Jaana (2013) provide an example of a critical review that assessed the methodological quality of prior systematic reviews of home telemonitoring studies for chronic patients. The authors conducted a comprehensive search on multiple databases to identify eligible reviews and subsequently used a validated instrument to conduct an in-depth quality appraisal. Results indicate that the majority of systematic reviews in this particular area suffer from important methodological flaws and biases that impair their internal validity and limit their usefulness for clinical and decision-making purposes. To this end, they provide a number of recommendations to strengthen knowledge development towards improving the design and execution of future reviews on home telemonitoring.

9.4. Summary

Table 9.1 outlines the main types of literature reviews that were described in the previous sub-sections and summarizes the main characteristics that distinguish one review type from another. It also includes key references to methodological guidelines and useful sources that can be used by eHealth scholars and researchers for planning and developing reviews.

Typology of Literature Reviews (adapted from Paré et al., 2015).

As shown in Table 9.1 , each review type addresses different kinds of research questions or objectives, which subsequently define and dictate the methods and approaches that need to be used to achieve the overarching goal(s) of the review. For example, in the case of narrative reviews, there is greater flexibility in searching and synthesizing articles ( Green et al., 2006 ). Researchers are often relatively free to use a diversity of approaches to search, identify, and select relevant scientific articles, describe their operational characteristics, present how the individual studies fit together, and formulate conclusions. On the other hand, systematic reviews are characterized by their high level of systematicity, rigour, and use of explicit methods, based on an “a priori” review plan that aims to minimize bias in the analysis and synthesis process (Higgins & Green, 2008). Some reviews are exploratory in nature (e.g., scoping/mapping reviews), whereas others may be conducted to discover patterns (e.g., descriptive reviews) or involve a synthesis approach that may include the critical analysis of prior research ( Paré et al., 2015 ). Hence, in order to select the most appropriate type of review, it is critical to know before embarking on a review project, why the research synthesis is conducted and what type of methods are best aligned with the pursued goals.

9.5. Concluding Remarks

In light of the increased use of evidence-based practice and research generating stronger evidence ( Grady et al., 2011 ; Lyden et al., 2013 ), review articles have become essential tools for summarizing, synthesizing, integrating or critically appraising prior knowledge in the eHealth field. As mentioned earlier, when rigorously conducted review articles represent powerful information sources for eHealth scholars and practitioners looking for state-of-the-art evidence. The typology of literature reviews we used herein will allow eHealth researchers, graduate students and practitioners to gain a better understanding of the similarities and differences between review types.

We must stress that this classification scheme does not privilege any specific type of review as being of higher quality than another ( Paré et al., 2015 ). As explained above, each type of review has its own strengths and limitations. Having said that, we realize that the methodological rigour of any review — be it qualitative, quantitative or mixed — is a critical aspect that should be considered seriously by prospective authors. In the present context, the notion of rigour refers to the reliability and validity of the review process described in section 9.2. For one thing, reliability is related to the reproducibility of the review process and steps, which is facilitated by a comprehensive documentation of the literature search process, extraction, coding and analysis performed in the review. Whether the search is comprehensive or not, whether it involves a methodical approach for data extraction and synthesis or not, it is important that the review documents in an explicit and transparent manner the steps and approach that were used in the process of its development. Next, validity characterizes the degree to which the review process was conducted appropriately. It goes beyond documentation and reflects decisions related to the selection of the sources, the search terms used, the period of time covered, the articles selected in the search, and the application of backward and forward searches ( vom Brocke et al., 2009 ). In short, the rigour of any review article is reflected by the explicitness of its methods (i.e., transparency) and the soundness of the approach used. We refer those interested in the concepts of rigour and quality to the work of Templier and Paré (2015) which offers a detailed set of methodological guidelines for conducting and evaluating various types of review articles.

To conclude, our main objective in this chapter was to demystify the various types of literature reviews that are central to the continuous development of the eHealth field. It is our hope that our descriptive account will serve as a valuable source for those conducting, evaluating or using reviews in this important and growing domain.

• Ammenwerth E., de Keizer N. An inventory of evaluation studies of information technology in health care. Trends in evaluation research, 1982-2002. International Journal of Medical Informatics. 2004; 44 (1):44–56. [ PubMed : 15778794 ]
• Anderson S., Allen P., Peckham S., Goodwin N. Asking the right questions: scoping studies in the commissioning of research on the organisation and delivery of health services. Health Research Policy and Systems. 2008; 6 (7):1–12. [ PMC free article : PMC2500008 ] [ PubMed : 18613961 ] [ CrossRef ]
• Archer N., Fevrier-Thomas U., Lokker C., McKibbon K. A., Straus S.E. Personal health records: a scoping review. Journal of American Medical Informatics Association. 2011; 18 (4):515–522. [ PMC free article : PMC3128401 ] [ PubMed : 21672914 ]
• Arksey H., O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology. 2005; 8 (1):19–32.
• A systematic, tool-supported method for conducting literature reviews in information systems. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 19th European Conference on Information Systems ( ecis 2011); June 9 to 11; Helsinki, Finland. 2011.
• Baumeister R. F., Leary M.R. Writing narrative literature reviews. Review of General Psychology. 1997; 1 (3):311–320.
• Becker L. A., Oxman A.D. In: Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Higgins J. P. T., Green S., editors. Hoboken, nj : John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2008. Overviews of reviews; pp. 607–631.
• Borenstein M., Hedges L., Higgins J., Rothstein H. Introduction to meta-analysis. Hoboken, nj : John Wiley & Sons Inc; 2009.
• Cook D. J., Mulrow C. D., Haynes B. Systematic reviews: Synthesis of best evidence for clinical decisions. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1997; 126 (5):376–380. [ PubMed : 9054282 ]
• Cooper H., Hedges L.V. In: The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis. 2nd ed. Cooper H., Hedges L. V., Valentine J. C., editors. New York: Russell Sage Foundation; 2009. Research synthesis as a scientific process; pp. 3–17.
• Cooper H. M. Organizing knowledge syntheses: A taxonomy of literature reviews. Knowledge in Society. 1988; 1 (1):104–126.
• Cronin P., Ryan F., Coughlan M. Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach. British Journal of Nursing. 2008; 17 (1):38–43. [ PubMed : 18399395 ]
• Darlow S., Wen K.Y. Development testing of mobile health interventions for cancer patient self-management: A review. Health Informatics Journal. 2015 (online before print). [ PubMed : 25916831 ] [ CrossRef ]
• Daudt H. M., van Mossel C., Scott S.J. Enhancing the scoping study methodology: a large, inter-professional team’s experience with Arksey and O’Malley’s framework. bmc Medical Research Methodology. 2013; 13 :48. [ PMC free article : PMC3614526 ] [ PubMed : 23522333 ] [ CrossRef ]
• Davies P. The relevance of systematic reviews to educational policy and practice. Oxford Review of Education. 2000; 26 (3-4):365–378.
• Deeks J. J., Higgins J. P. T., Altman D.G. In: Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Higgins J. P. T., Green S., editors. Hoboken, nj : John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2008. Analysing data and undertaking meta-analyses; pp. 243–296.
• Deshazo J. P., Lavallie D. L., Wolf F.M. Publication trends in the medical informatics literature: 20 years of “Medical Informatics” in mesh . bmc Medical Informatics and Decision Making. 2009; 9 :7. [ PMC free article : PMC2652453 ] [ PubMed : 19159472 ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dixon-Woods M., Agarwal S., Jones D., Young B., Sutton A. Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2005; 10 (1):45–53. [ PubMed : 15667704 ]
• Finfgeld-Connett D., Johnson E.D. Literature search strategies for conducting knowledge-building and theory-generating qualitative systematic reviews. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2013; 69 (1):194–204. [ PMC free article : PMC3424349 ] [ PubMed : 22591030 ]
• Grady B., Myers K. M., Nelson E. L., Belz N., Bennett L., Carnahan L. … Guidelines Working Group. Evidence-based practice for telemental health. Telemedicine Journal and E Health. 2011; 17 (2):131–148. [ PubMed : 21385026 ]
• Green B. N., Johnson C. D., Adams A. Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine. 2006; 5 (3):101–117. [ PMC free article : PMC2647067 ] [ PubMed : 19674681 ]
• Greenhalgh T., Wong G., Westhorp G., Pawson R. Protocol–realist and meta-narrative evidence synthesis: evolving standards ( rameses ). bmc Medical Research Methodology. 2011; 11 :115. [ PMC free article : PMC3173389 ] [ PubMed : 21843376 ]
• Gurol-Urganci I., de Jongh T., Vodopivec-Jamsek V., Atun R., Car J. Mobile phone messaging reminders for attendance at healthcare appointments. Cochrane Database System Review. 2013; 12 cd 007458. [ PMC free article : PMC6485985 ] [ PubMed : 24310741 ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hart C. Doing a literature review: Releasing the social science research imagination. London: SAGE Publications; 1998.
• Higgins J. P. T., Green S., editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions: Cochrane book series. Hoboken, nj : Wiley-Blackwell; 2008.
• Jesson J., Matheson L., Lacey F.M. Doing your literature review: traditional and systematic techniques. Los Angeles & London: SAGE Publications; 2011.
• King W. R., He J. Understanding the role and methods of meta-analysis in IS research. Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 2005; 16 :1.
• Kirkevold M. Integrative nursing research — an important strategy to further the development of nursing science and nursing practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 1997; 25 (5):977–984. [ PubMed : 9147203 ]
• Kitchenham B., Charters S. ebse Technical Report Version 2.3. Keele & Durham. uk : Keele University & University of Durham; 2007. Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering.
• Kitsiou S., Paré G., Jaana M. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of home telemonitoring interventions for patients with chronic diseases: a critical assessment of their methodological quality. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2013; 15 (7):e150. [ PMC free article : PMC3785977 ] [ PubMed : 23880072 ]
• Kitsiou S., Paré G., Jaana M. Effects of home telemonitoring interventions on patients with chronic heart failure: an overview of systematic reviews. Journal of Medical Internet Research. 2015; 17 (3):e63. [ PMC free article : PMC4376138 ] [ PubMed : 25768664 ]
• Levac D., Colquhoun H., O’Brien K. K. Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation Science. 2010; 5 (1):69. [ PMC free article : PMC2954944 ] [ PubMed : 20854677 ]
• Levy Y., Ellis T.J. A systems approach to conduct an effective literature review in support of information systems research. Informing Science. 2006; 9 :181–211.
• Liberati A., Altman D. G., Tetzlaff J., Mulrow C., Gøtzsche P. C., Ioannidis J. P. A. et al. Moher D. The prisma statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: Explanation and elaboration. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2009; 151 (4):W-65. [ PubMed : 19622512 ]
• Lyden J. R., Zickmund S. L., Bhargava T. D., Bryce C. L., Conroy M. B., Fischer G. S. et al. McTigue K. M. Implementing health information technology in a patient-centered manner: Patient experiences with an online evidence-based lifestyle intervention. Journal for Healthcare Quality. 2013; 35 (5):47–57. [ PubMed : 24004039 ]
• Mickan S., Atherton H., Roberts N. W., Heneghan C., Tilson J.K. Use of handheld computers in clinical practice: a systematic review. bmc Medical Informatics and Decision Making. 2014; 14 :56. [ PMC free article : PMC4099138 ] [ PubMed : 24998515 ]
• Moher D. The problem of duplicate systematic reviews. British Medical Journal. 2013; 347 (5040) [ PubMed : 23945367 ] [ CrossRef ]
• Montori V. M., Wilczynski N. L., Morgan D., Haynes R. B., Hedges T. Systematic reviews: a cross-sectional study of location and citation counts. bmc Medicine. 2003; 1 :2. [ PMC free article : PMC281591 ] [ PubMed : 14633274 ]
• Mulrow C. D. The medical review article: state of the science. Annals of Internal Medicine. 1987; 106 (3):485–488. [ PubMed : 3813259 ] [ CrossRef ]
• Evidence-based information systems: A decade later. Proceedings of the European Conference on Information Systems ; 2011. Retrieved from http://aisel ​.aisnet.org/cgi/viewcontent ​.cgi?article ​=1221&context ​=ecis2011 .
• Okoli C., Schabram K. A guide to conducting a systematic literature review of information systems research. ssrn Electronic Journal. 2010
• Otte-Trojel T., de Bont A., Rundall T. G., van de Klundert J. How outcomes are achieved through patient portals: a realist review. Journal of American Medical Informatics Association. 2014; 21 (4):751–757. [ PMC free article : PMC4078283 ] [ PubMed : 24503882 ]
• Paré G., Trudel M.-C., Jaana M., Kitsiou S. Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews. Information & Management. 2015; 52 (2):183–199.
• Patsopoulos N. A., Analatos A. A., Ioannidis J.P. A. Relative citation impact of various study designs in the health sciences. Journal of the American Medical Association. 2005; 293 (19):2362–2366. [ PubMed : 15900006 ]
• Paul M. M., Greene C. M., Newton-Dame R., Thorpe L. E., Perlman S. E., McVeigh K. H., Gourevitch M.N. The state of population health surveillance using electronic health records: A narrative review. Population Health Management. 2015; 18 (3):209–216. [ PubMed : 25608033 ]
• Pawson R. Evidence-based policy: a realist perspective. London: SAGE Publications; 2006.
• Pawson R., Greenhalgh T., Harvey G., Walshe K. Realist review—a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions. Journal of Health Services Research & Policy. 2005; 10 (Suppl 1):21–34. [ PubMed : 16053581 ]
• Petersen K., Vakkalanka S., Kuzniarz L. Guidelines for conducting systematic mapping studies in software engineering: An update. Information and Software Technology. 2015; 64 :1–18.
• Petticrew M., Roberts H. Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Malden, ma : Blackwell Publishing Co; 2006.
• Rousseau D. M., Manning J., Denyer D. Evidence in management and organizational science: Assembling the field’s full weight of scientific knowledge through syntheses. The Academy of Management Annals. 2008; 2 (1):475–515.
• Rowe F. What literature review is not: diversity, boundaries and recommendations. European Journal of Information Systems. 2014; 23 (3):241–255.
• Shea B. J., Hamel C., Wells G. A., Bouter L. M., Kristjansson E., Grimshaw J. et al. Boers M. amstar is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 2009; 62 (10):1013–1020. [ PubMed : 19230606 ]
• Shepperd S., Lewin S., Straus S., Clarke M., Eccles M. P., Fitzpatrick R. et al. Sheikh A. Can we systematically review studies that evaluate complex interventions? PLoS Medicine. 2009; 6 (8):e1000086. [ PMC free article : PMC2717209 ] [ PubMed : 19668360 ]
• Silva B. M., Rodrigues J. J., de la Torre Díez I., López-Coronado M., Saleem K. Mobile-health: A review of current state in 2015. Journal of Biomedical Informatics. 2015; 56 :265–272. [ PubMed : 26071682 ]
• Smith V., Devane D., Begley C., Clarke M. Methodology in conducting a systematic review of systematic reviews of healthcare interventions. bmc Medical Research Methodology. 2011; 11 (1):15. [ PMC free article : PMC3039637 ] [ PubMed : 21291558 ]
• Sylvester A., Tate M., Johnstone D. Beyond synthesis: re-presenting heterogeneous research literature. Behaviour & Information Technology. 2013; 32 (12):1199–1215.
• Templier M., Paré G. A framework for guiding and evaluating literature reviews. Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 2015; 37 (6):112–137.
• Thomas J., Harden A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. bmc Medical Research Methodology. 2008; 8 (1):45. [ PMC free article : PMC2478656 ] [ PubMed : 18616818 ]
• Reconstructing the giant: on the importance of rigour in documenting the literature search process. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 17th European Conference on Information Systems ( ecis 2009); Verona, Italy. 2009.
• Webster J., Watson R.T. Analyzing the past to prepare for the future: Writing a literature review. Management Information Systems Quarterly. 2002; 26 (2):11.
• Whitlock E. P., Lin J. S., Chou R., Shekelle P., Robinson K.A. Using existing systematic reviews in complex systematic reviews. Annals of Internal Medicine. 2008; 148 (10):776–782. [ PubMed : 18490690 ]

This publication is licensed under a Creative Commons License, Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC 4.0): see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

• Cite this Page Paré G, Kitsiou S. Chapter 9 Methods for Literature Reviews. In: Lau F, Kuziemsky C, editors. Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach [Internet]. Victoria (BC): University of Victoria; 2017 Feb 27.
• PDF version of this title (4.5M)
• Disable Glossary Links

In this Page

• Introduction
• Overview of the Literature Review Process and Steps
• Types of Review Articles and Brief Illustrations
• Concluding Remarks

Related information

• PMC PubMed Central citations
• PubMed Links to PubMed

Recent Activity

• Chapter 9 Methods for Literature Reviews - Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Ev... Chapter 9 Methods for Literature Reviews - Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidence-based Approach

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

Connect with NLM

National Library of Medicine 8600 Rockville Pike Bethesda, MD 20894

Web Policies FOIA HHS Vulnerability Disclosure

Help Accessibility Careers

Literature Review - what is a Literature Review, why it is important and how it is done

• Strategies to Find Sources

Evaluating Literature Reviews and Sources

Reading critically, tips to evaluate sources.

• Tips for Writing Literature Reviews
• Writing Literature Review: Useful Sites
• Citation Resources
• Other Academic Writings
• Useful Resources

A good literature review evaluates a wide variety of sources (academic articles, scholarly books, government/NGO reports). It also evaluates literature reviews that study similar topics. This page offers you a list of resources and tips on how to evaluate the sources that you may use to write your review.

• A Closer Look at Evaluating Literature Reviews Excerpt from the book chapter, “Evaluating Introductions and Literature Reviews” in Fred Pyrczak’s Evaluating Research in Academic Journals: A Practical Guide to Realistic Evaluation , (Chapter 4 and 5). This PDF discusses and offers great advice on how to evaluate "Introductions" and "Literature Reviews" by listing questions and tips. First part focus on Introductions and in page 10 in the PDF, 37 in the text, it focus on "literature reviews".
• Tips for Evaluating Sources (Print vs. Internet Sources) Excellent page that will guide you on what to ask to determine if your source is a reliable one. Check the other topics in the guide: Evaluating Bibliographic Citations and Evaluation During Reading on the left side menu.

To be able to write a good Literature Review, you need to be able to read critically. Below are some tips that will help you evaluate the sources for your paper.

Reading critically (summary from How to Read Academic Texts Critically)

• Who is the author? What is his/her standing in the field.
• What is the author’s purpose? To offer advice, make practical suggestions, solve a specific problem, to critique or clarify?
• Note the experts in the field: are there specific names/labs that are frequently cited?
• Pay attention to methodology: is it sound? what testing procedures, subjects, materials were used?
• Note conflicting theories, methodologies and results. Are there any assumptions being made by most/some researchers?
• Theories: have they evolved overtime?
• Evaluate and synthesize the findings and conclusions. How does this study contribute to your project?

Useful links:

• How to Read a Paper (University of Waterloo, Canada) This is an excellent paper that teach you how to read an academic paper, how to determine if it is something to set aside, or something to read deeply. Good advice to organize your literature for the Literature Review or just reading for classes.

Criteria to evaluate sources:

• Authority : Who is the author? what is his/her credentials--what university he/she is affliliated? Is his/her area of expertise?
• Usefulness : How this source related to your topic? How current or relevant it is to your topic?
• Reliability : Does the information comes from a reliable, trusted source such as an academic journal?

Useful site - Critically Analyzing Information Sources (Cornell University Library)

• << Previous: Strategies to Find Sources
• Next: Tips for Writing Literature Reviews >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 10:56 AM
• URL: https://lit.libguides.com/Literature-Review

The Library, Technological University of the Shannon: Midwest

• Privacy Policy

Home » Literature Review – Types Writing Guide and Examples

Literature Review – Types Writing Guide and Examples

Table of Contents

Literature Review

Definition:

A literature review is a comprehensive and critical analysis of the existing literature on a particular topic or research question. It involves identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing relevant literature, including scholarly articles, books, and other sources, to provide a summary and critical assessment of what is known about the topic.

Types of Literature Review

Types of Literature Review are as follows:

• Narrative literature review : This type of review involves a comprehensive summary and critical analysis of the available literature on a particular topic or research question. It is often used as an introductory section of a research paper.
• Systematic literature review: This is a rigorous and structured review that follows a pre-defined protocol to identify, evaluate, and synthesize all relevant studies on a specific research question. It is often used in evidence-based practice and systematic reviews.
• Meta-analysis: This is a quantitative review that uses statistical methods to combine data from multiple studies to derive a summary effect size. It provides a more precise estimate of the overall effect than any individual study.
• Scoping review: This is a preliminary review that aims to map the existing literature on a broad topic area to identify research gaps and areas for further investigation.
• Critical literature review : This type of review evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of the existing literature on a particular topic or research question. It aims to provide a critical analysis of the literature and identify areas where further research is needed.
• Conceptual literature review: This review synthesizes and integrates theories and concepts from multiple sources to provide a new perspective on a particular topic. It aims to provide a theoretical framework for understanding a particular research question.
• Rapid literature review: This is a quick review that provides a snapshot of the current state of knowledge on a specific research question or topic. It is often used when time and resources are limited.
• Thematic literature review : This review identifies and analyzes common themes and patterns across a body of literature on a particular topic. It aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the literature and identify key themes and concepts.
• Realist literature review: This review is often used in social science research and aims to identify how and why certain interventions work in certain contexts. It takes into account the context and complexities of real-world situations.
• State-of-the-art literature review : This type of review provides an overview of the current state of knowledge in a particular field, highlighting the most recent and relevant research. It is often used in fields where knowledge is rapidly evolving, such as technology or medicine.
• Integrative literature review: This type of review synthesizes and integrates findings from multiple studies on a particular topic to identify patterns, themes, and gaps in the literature. It aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current state of knowledge on a particular topic.
• Umbrella literature review : This review is used to provide a broad overview of a large and diverse body of literature on a particular topic. It aims to identify common themes and patterns across different areas of research.
• Historical literature review: This type of review examines the historical development of research on a particular topic or research question. It aims to provide a historical context for understanding the current state of knowledge on a particular topic.
• Problem-oriented literature review : This review focuses on a specific problem or issue and examines the literature to identify potential solutions or interventions. It aims to provide practical recommendations for addressing a particular problem or issue.
• Mixed-methods literature review : This type of review combines quantitative and qualitative methods to synthesize and analyze the available literature on a particular topic. It aims to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the research question by combining different types of evidence.

Parts of Literature Review

Parts of a literature review are as follows:

Introduction

The introduction of a literature review typically provides background information on the research topic and why it is important. It outlines the objectives of the review, the research question or hypothesis, and the scope of the review.

Literature Search

This section outlines the search strategy and databases used to identify relevant literature. The search terms used, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and any limitations of the search are described.

Literature Analysis

The literature analysis is the main body of the literature review. This section summarizes and synthesizes the literature that is relevant to the research question or hypothesis. The review should be organized thematically, chronologically, or by methodology, depending on the research objectives.

Critical Evaluation

Critical evaluation involves assessing the quality and validity of the literature. This includes evaluating the reliability and validity of the studies reviewed, the methodology used, and the strength of the evidence.

The conclusion of the literature review should summarize the main findings, identify any gaps in the literature, and suggest areas for future research. It should also reiterate the importance of the research question or hypothesis and the contribution of the literature review to the overall research project.

The references list includes all the sources cited in the literature review, and follows a specific referencing style (e.g., APA, MLA, Harvard).

How to write Literature Review

Here are some steps to follow when writing a literature review:

• Define your research question or topic : Before starting your literature review, it is essential to define your research question or topic. This will help you identify relevant literature and determine the scope of your review.
• Conduct a comprehensive search: Use databases and search engines to find relevant literature. Look for peer-reviewed articles, books, and other academic sources that are relevant to your research question or topic.
• Evaluate the sources: Once you have found potential sources, evaluate them critically to determine their relevance, credibility, and quality. Look for recent publications, reputable authors, and reliable sources of data and evidence.
• Organize your sources: Group the sources by theme, method, or research question. This will help you identify similarities and differences among the literature, and provide a structure for your literature review.
• Analyze and synthesize the literature : Analyze each source in depth, identifying the key findings, methodologies, and conclusions. Then, synthesize the information from the sources, identifying patterns and themes in the literature.
• Write the literature review : Start with an introduction that provides an overview of the topic and the purpose of the literature review. Then, organize the literature according to your chosen structure, and analyze and synthesize the sources. Finally, provide a conclusion that summarizes the key findings of the literature review, identifies gaps in knowledge, and suggests areas for future research.
• Edit and proofread: Once you have written your literature review, edit and proofread it carefully to ensure that it is well-organized, clear, and concise.

Examples of Literature Review

Here’s an example of how a literature review can be conducted for a thesis on the topic of “ The Impact of Social Media on Teenagers’ Mental Health”:

• Start by identifying the key terms related to your research topic. In this case, the key terms are “social media,” “teenagers,” and “mental health.”
• Use academic databases like Google Scholar, JSTOR, or PubMed to search for relevant articles, books, and other publications. Use these keywords in your search to narrow down your results.
• Evaluate the sources you find to determine if they are relevant to your research question. You may want to consider the publication date, author’s credentials, and the journal or book publisher.
• Begin reading and taking notes on each source, paying attention to key findings, methodologies used, and any gaps in the research.
• Organize your findings into themes or categories. For example, you might categorize your sources into those that examine the impact of social media on self-esteem, those that explore the effects of cyberbullying, and those that investigate the relationship between social media use and depression.
• Synthesize your findings by summarizing the key themes and highlighting any gaps or inconsistencies in the research. Identify areas where further research is needed.
• Use your literature review to inform your research questions and hypotheses for your thesis.

For example, after conducting a literature review on the impact of social media on teenagers’ mental health, a thesis might look like this:

“Using a mixed-methods approach, this study aims to investigate the relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes in teenagers. Specifically, the study will examine the effects of cyberbullying, social comparison, and excessive social media use on self-esteem, anxiety, and depression. Through an analysis of survey data and qualitative interviews with teenagers, the study will provide insight into the complex relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes, and identify strategies for promoting positive mental health outcomes in young people.”

Reference: Smith, J., Jones, M., & Lee, S. (2019). The effects of social media use on adolescent mental health: A systematic review. Journal of Adolescent Health, 65(2), 154-165. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.03.024

Reference Example: Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (Year). Title of article. Title of Journal, volume number(issue number), page range. doi:0000000/000000000000 or URL

Applications of Literature Review

some applications of literature review in different fields:

• Social Sciences: In social sciences, literature reviews are used to identify gaps in existing research, to develop research questions, and to provide a theoretical framework for research. Literature reviews are commonly used in fields such as sociology, psychology, anthropology, and political science.
• Natural Sciences: In natural sciences, literature reviews are used to summarize and evaluate the current state of knowledge in a particular field or subfield. Literature reviews can help researchers identify areas where more research is needed and provide insights into the latest developments in a particular field. Fields such as biology, chemistry, and physics commonly use literature reviews.
• Health Sciences: In health sciences, literature reviews are used to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments, identify best practices, and determine areas where more research is needed. Literature reviews are commonly used in fields such as medicine, nursing, and public health.
• Humanities: In humanities, literature reviews are used to identify gaps in existing knowledge, develop new interpretations of texts or cultural artifacts, and provide a theoretical framework for research. Literature reviews are commonly used in fields such as history, literary studies, and philosophy.

Role of Literature Review in Research

Here are some applications of literature review in research:

• Identifying Research Gaps : Literature review helps researchers identify gaps in existing research and literature related to their research question. This allows them to develop new research questions and hypotheses to fill those gaps.
• Developing Theoretical Framework: Literature review helps researchers develop a theoretical framework for their research. By analyzing and synthesizing existing literature, researchers can identify the key concepts, theories, and models that are relevant to their research.
• Selecting Research Methods : Literature review helps researchers select appropriate research methods and techniques based on previous research. It also helps researchers to identify potential biases or limitations of certain methods and techniques.
• Data Collection and Analysis: Literature review helps researchers in data collection and analysis by providing a foundation for the development of data collection instruments and methods. It also helps researchers to identify relevant data sources and identify potential data analysis techniques.
• Communicating Results: Literature review helps researchers to communicate their results effectively by providing a context for their research. It also helps to justify the significance of their findings in relation to existing research and literature.

Purpose of Literature Review

Some of the specific purposes of a literature review are as follows:

• To provide context: A literature review helps to provide context for your research by situating it within the broader body of literature on the topic.
• To identify gaps and inconsistencies: A literature review helps to identify areas where further research is needed or where there are inconsistencies in the existing literature.
• To synthesize information: A literature review helps to synthesize the information from multiple sources and present a coherent and comprehensive picture of the current state of knowledge on the topic.
• To identify key concepts and theories : A literature review helps to identify key concepts and theories that are relevant to your research question and provide a theoretical framework for your study.
• To inform research design: A literature review can inform the design of your research study by identifying appropriate research methods, data sources, and research questions.

Characteristics of Literature Review

Some Characteristics of Literature Review are as follows:

• Identifying gaps in knowledge: A literature review helps to identify gaps in the existing knowledge and research on a specific topic or research question. By analyzing and synthesizing the literature, you can identify areas where further research is needed and where new insights can be gained.
• Establishing the significance of your research: A literature review helps to establish the significance of your own research by placing it in the context of existing research. By demonstrating the relevance of your research to the existing literature, you can establish its importance and value.
• Informing research design and methodology : A literature review helps to inform research design and methodology by identifying the most appropriate research methods, techniques, and instruments. By reviewing the literature, you can identify the strengths and limitations of different research methods and techniques, and select the most appropriate ones for your own research.
• Supporting arguments and claims: A literature review provides evidence to support arguments and claims made in academic writing. By citing and analyzing the literature, you can provide a solid foundation for your own arguments and claims.
• I dentifying potential collaborators and mentors: A literature review can help identify potential collaborators and mentors by identifying researchers and practitioners who are working on related topics or using similar methods. By building relationships with these individuals, you can gain valuable insights and support for your own research and practice.
• Keeping up-to-date with the latest research : A literature review helps to keep you up-to-date with the latest research on a specific topic or research question. By regularly reviewing the literature, you can stay informed about the latest findings and developments in your field.

Advantages of Literature Review

There are several advantages to conducting a literature review as part of a research project, including:

• Establishing the significance of the research : A literature review helps to establish the significance of the research by demonstrating the gap or problem in the existing literature that the study aims to address.
• Identifying key concepts and theories: A literature review can help to identify key concepts and theories that are relevant to the research question, and provide a theoretical framework for the study.
• Supporting the research methodology : A literature review can inform the research methodology by identifying appropriate research methods, data sources, and research questions.
• Providing a comprehensive overview of the literature : A literature review provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge on a topic, allowing the researcher to identify key themes, debates, and areas of agreement or disagreement.
• Identifying potential research questions: A literature review can help to identify potential research questions and areas for further investigation.
• Avoiding duplication of research: A literature review can help to avoid duplication of research by identifying what has already been done on a topic, and what remains to be done.
• Enhancing the credibility of the research : A literature review helps to enhance the credibility of the research by demonstrating the researcher’s knowledge of the existing literature and their ability to situate their research within a broader context.

Limitations of Literature Review

Limitations of Literature Review are as follows:

• Limited scope : Literature reviews can only cover the existing literature on a particular topic, which may be limited in scope or depth.
• Publication bias : Literature reviews may be influenced by publication bias, which occurs when researchers are more likely to publish positive results than negative ones. This can lead to an incomplete or biased picture of the literature.
• Quality of sources : The quality of the literature reviewed can vary widely, and not all sources may be reliable or valid.
• Time-limited: Literature reviews can become quickly outdated as new research is published, making it difficult to keep up with the latest developments in a field.
• Subjective interpretation : Literature reviews can be subjective, and the interpretation of the findings can vary depending on the researcher’s perspective or bias.
• Lack of original data : Literature reviews do not generate new data, but rather rely on the analysis of existing studies.
• Risk of plagiarism: It is important to ensure that literature reviews do not inadvertently contain plagiarism, which can occur when researchers use the work of others without proper attribution.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Purpose of Research – Objectives and Applications

Implications in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Problem – Examples, Types and Guide

Significance of the Study – Examples and Writing...

Tables in Research Paper – Types, Creating Guide...

Ethical Considerations – Types, Examples and...

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

Types of Literature Review — A Guide for Researchers

Table of Contents

Researchers often face challenges when choosing the appropriate type of literature review for their study. Regardless of the type of research design and the topic of a research problem , they encounter numerous queries, including:

What is the right type of literature review my study demands?

• How do we gather the data?
• How to conduct one?
• How reliable are the review findings?
• How do we employ them in our research? And the list goes on.

If you’re also dealing with such a hefty questionnaire, this article is of help. Read through this piece of guide to get an exhaustive understanding of the different types of literature reviews and their step-by-step methodologies along with a dash of pros and cons discussed.

Heading from scratch!

What is a Literature Review?

A literature review provides a comprehensive overview of existing knowledge on a particular topic, which is quintessential to any research project. Researchers employ various literature reviews based on their research goals and methodologies. The review process involves assembling, critically evaluating, and synthesizing existing scientific publications relevant to the research question at hand. It serves multiple purposes, including identifying gaps in existing literature, providing theoretical background, and supporting the rationale for a research study.

What is the importance of a Literature review in research?

Literature review in research serves several key purposes, including:

• Background of the study: Provides proper context for the research. It helps researchers understand the historical development, theoretical perspectives, and key debates related to their research topic.
• Identification of research gaps: By reviewing existing literature, researchers can identify gaps or inconsistencies in knowledge, paving the way for new research questions and hypotheses relevant to their study.
• Theoretical framework development: Facilitates the development of theoretical frameworks by cultivating diverse perspectives and empirical findings. It helps researchers refine their conceptualizations and theoretical models.
• Methodological guidance: Offers methodological guidance by highlighting the documented research methods and techniques used in previous studies. It assists researchers in selecting appropriate research designs, data collection methods, and analytical tools.
• Quality assurance and upholding academic integrity: Conducting a thorough literature review demonstrates the rigor and scholarly integrity of the research. It ensures that researchers are aware of relevant studies and can accurately attribute ideas and findings to their original sources.

Types of Literature Review

Literature review plays a crucial role in guiding the research process , from providing the background of the study to research dissemination and contributing to the synthesis of the latest theoretical literature review findings in academia.

However, not all types of literature reviews are the same; they vary in terms of methodology, approach, and purpose. Let's have a look at the various types of literature reviews to gain a deeper understanding of their applications.

1. Narrative Literature Review

A narrative literature review, also known as a traditional literature review, involves analyzing and summarizing existing literature without adhering to a structured methodology. It typically provides a descriptive overview of key concepts, theories, and relevant findings of the research topic.

Unlike other types of literature reviews, narrative reviews reinforce a more traditional approach, emphasizing the interpretation and discussion of the research findings rather than strict adherence to methodological review criteria. It helps researchers explore diverse perspectives and insights based on the research topic and acts as preliminary work for further investigation.

Steps to Conduct a Narrative Literature Review

Source:- https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Steps-of-writing-a-narrative-review_fig1_354466408

Define the research question or topic:

The first step in conducting a narrative literature review is to clearly define the research question or topic of interest. Defining the scope and purpose of the review includes — What specific aspect of the topic do you want to explore? What are the main objectives of the research? Refine your research question based on the specific area you want to explore.

Conduct a thorough literature search

Once the research question is defined, you can conduct a comprehensive literature search. Explore and use relevant databases and search engines like SciSpace Discover to identify credible and pertinent, scholarly articles and publications.

Select relevant studies

Before choosing the right set of studies, it’s vital to determine inclusion (studies that should possess the required factors) and exclusion criteria for the literature and then carefully select papers. For example — Which studies or sources will be included based on relevance, quality, and publication date?

*Important (applies to all the reviews): Inclusion criteria are the factors a study must include (For example: Include only peer-reviewed articles published between 2022-2023, etc.). Exclusion criteria are the factors that wouldn’t be required for your search strategy (Example: exclude irrelevant papers, preprints, written in non-English, etc.)

Critically analyze the literature

Once the relevant studies are shortlisted, evaluate the methodology, findings, and limitations of each source and jot down key themes, patterns, and contradictions. You can use efficient AI tools to conduct a thorough literature review and analyze all the required information.

Synthesize and integrate the findings

Now, you can weave together the reviewed studies, underscoring significant findings such that new frameworks, contrasting viewpoints, and identifying knowledge gaps.

Discussion and conclusion

This is an important step before crafting a narrative review — summarize the main findings of the review and discuss their implications in the relevant field. For example — What are the practical implications for practitioners? What are the directions for future research for them?

Write a cohesive narrative review

Organize the review into coherent sections and structure your review logically, guiding the reader through the research landscape and offering valuable insights. Use clear and concise language to convey key points effectively.

Structure of Narrative Literature Review

A well-structured, narrative analysis or literature review typically includes the following components:

• Introduction: Provides an overview of the topic, objectives of the study, and rationale for the review.
• Background: Highlights relevant background information and establish the context for the review.
• Main Body: Indexes the literature into thematic sections or categories, discussing key findings, methodologies, and theoretical frameworks.
• Discussion: Analyze and synthesize the findings of the reviewed studies, stressing similarities, differences, and any gaps in the literature.
• Conclusion: Summarizes the main findings of the review, identifies implications for future research, and offers concluding remarks.

Pros and Cons of Narrative Literature Review

• Flexibility in methodology and doesn’t necessarily rely on structured methodologies
• Follows traditional approach and provides valuable and contextualized insights
• Suitable for exploring complex or interdisciplinary topics. For example — Climate change and human health, Cybersecurity and privacy in the digital age, and more
• Subjectivity in data selection and interpretation
• Potential for bias in the review process
• Lack of rigor compared to systematic reviews

Example of Well-Executed Narrative Literature Reviews

Paper title:  Examining Moral Injury in Clinical Practice: A Narrative Literature Review

Source: SciSpace

While narrative reviews offer flexibility, academic integrity remains paramount. So, ensure proper citation of all sources and maintain a transparent and factual approach throughout your critical narrative review, itself.

2. Systematic Review

A systematic literature review is one of the comprehensive types of literature review that follows a structured approach to assembling, analyzing, and synthesizing existing research relevant to a particular topic or question. It involves clearly defined criteria for exploring and choosing studies, as well as rigorous methods for evaluating the quality of relevant studies.

It plays a prominent role in evidence-based practice and decision-making across various domains, including healthcare, social sciences, education, health sciences, and more. By systematically investigating available literature, researchers can identify gaps in knowledge, evaluate the strength of evidence, and report future research directions.

Steps to Conduct Systematic Reviews

Source:- https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Steps-of-Systematic-Literature-Review_fig1_321422320

Here are the key steps involved in conducting a systematic literature review

Formulate a clear and focused research question

Clearly define the research question or objective of the review. It helps to centralize the literature search strategy and determine inclusion criteria for relevant studies.

Develop a thorough literature search strategy

Design a comprehensive search strategy to identify relevant studies. It involves scrutinizing scientific databases and all relevant articles in journals. Plus, seek suggestions from domain experts and review reference lists of relevant review articles.

Screening and selecting studies

Employ predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria to systematically screen the identified studies. This screening process also typically involves multiple reviewers independently assessing the eligibility of each study.

Data extraction

Extract key information from selected studies using standardized forms or protocols. It includes study characteristics, methods, results, and conclusions.

Critical appraisal

Evaluate the methodological quality and potential biases of included studies. Various tools (BMC medical research methodology) and criteria can be implemented for critical evaluation depending on the study design and research quetions .

Data synthesis

Analyze and synthesize review findings from individual studies to draw encompassing conclusions or identify overarching patterns and explore heterogeneity among studies.

Interpretation and conclusion

Interpret the findings about the research question, considering the strengths and limitations of the research evidence. Draw conclusions and implications for further research.

The final step — Report writing

Craft a detailed report of the systematic literature review adhering to the established guidelines of PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). This ensures transparency and reproducibility of the review process.

By following these steps, a systematic literature review aims to provide a comprehensive and unbiased summary of existing evidence, help make informed decisions, and advance knowledge in the respective domain or field.

Structure of a systematic literature review

A well-structured systematic literature review typically consists of the following sections:

• Introduction: Provides background information on the research topic, outlines the review objectives, and enunciates the scope of the study.
• Methodology: Describes the literature search strategy, selection criteria, data extraction process, and other methods used for data synthesis, extraction, or other data analysis..
• Results: Presents the review findings, including a summary of the incorporated studies and their key findings.
• Discussion: Interprets the findings in light of the review objectives, discusses their implications, and identifies limitations or promising areas for future research.
• Conclusion: Summarizes the main review findings and provides suggestions based on the evidence presented in depth meta analysis.

*Important (applies to all the reviews): Remember, the specific structure of your literature review may vary depending on your topic, research question, and intended audience. However, adhering to a clear and logical hierarchy ensures your review effectively analyses and synthesizes knowledge and contributes valuable insights for readers.

Pros and Cons of Systematic Literature Review

• Adopts rigorous and transparent methodology
• Minimizes bias and enhances the reliability of the study
• Provides evidence-based insights
• Time and resource-intensive
• High dependency on the quality of available literature (literature research strategy should be accurate)
• Potential for publication bias

Example of Well-Executed Systematic Literature Review

Paper title: Systematic Reviews: Understanding the Best Evidence For Clinical Decision-making in Health Care: Pros and Cons.

Read this detailed article on how to use AI tools to conduct a systematic review for your research!

3. Scoping Literature Review

A scoping literature review is a methodological review type of literature review that adopts an iterative approach to systematically map the existing literature on a particular topic or research area. It involves identifying, selecting, and synthesizing relevant papers to provide an overview of the size and scope of available evidence. Scoping reviews are broader in scope and include a diverse range of study designs and methodologies especially focused on health services research.

The main purpose of a scoping literature review is to examine the extent, range, and nature of existing studies on a topic, thereby identifying gaps in research, inconsistencies, and areas for further investigation. Additionally, scoping reviews can help researchers identify suitable methodologies and formulate clinical recommendations. They also act as the frameworks for future systematic reviews or primary research studies.

Scoping reviews are primarily focused on —

• Emerging or evolving topics — where the research landscape is still growing or budding. Example — Whole Systems Approaches to Diet and Healthy Weight: A Scoping Review of Reviews .
• Broad and complex topics : With a vast amount of existing literature.
• Scenarios where a systematic review is not feasible: Due to limited resources or time constraints.

Steps to Conduct a Scoping Literature Review

While Scoping reviews are not as rigorous as systematic reviews, however, they still follow a structured approach. Here are the steps:

Identify the research question: Define the broad topic you want to explore.

Identify Relevant Studies: Conduct a comprehensive search of relevant literature using appropriate databases, keywords, and search strategies.

Select studies to be included in the review: Based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, determine the appropriate studies to be included in the review.

Data extraction and charting : Extract relevant information from selected studies, such as year, author, main results, study characteristics, key findings, and methodological approaches.  However, it varies depending on the research question.

Collate, summarize, and report the results: Analyze and summarize the extracted data to identify key themes and trends. Then, present the findings of the scoping review in a clear and structured manner, following established guidelines and frameworks .

Structure of a Scoping Literature Review

A scoping literature review typically follows a structured format similar to a systematic review. It includes the following sections:

• Introduction: Introduce the research topic and objectives of the review, providing the historical context, and rationale for the study.
• Methods : Describe the methods used to conduct the review, including search strategies, study selection criteria, and data extraction procedures.
• Results: Present the findings of the review, including key themes, concepts, and patterns identified in the literature review.
• Discussion: Examine the implications of the findings, including strengths, limitations, and areas for further examination.
• Conclusion: Recapitulate the main findings of the review and their implications for future research, policy, or practice.

Pros and Cons of Scoping Literature Review

• Provides a comprehensive overview of existing literature
• Helps to identify gaps and areas for further research
• Suitable for exploring broad or complex research questions
• Doesn’t provide the depth of analysis offered by systematic reviews
• Subject to researcher bias in study selection and data extraction
• Requires careful consideration of literature search strategies and inclusion criteria to ensure comprehensiveness and validity.

In short, a scoping review helps map the literature on developing or emerging topics and identifying gaps. It might be considered as a step before conducting another type of review, such as a systematic review. Basically, acts as a precursor for other literature reviews.

Example of a Well-Executed Scoping Literature Review

Paper title: Health Chatbots in Africa Literature: A Scoping Review

Check out the key differences between Systematic and Scoping reviews — Evaluating literature review: systematic vs. scoping reviews

4. Integrative Literature Review

Integrative Literature Review (ILR) is a type of literature review that proposes a distinctive way to analyze and synthesize existing literature on a specific topic, providing a thorough understanding of research and identifying potential gaps for future research.

Unlike a systematic review, which emphasizes quantitative studies and follows strict inclusion criteria, an ILR embraces a more pliable approach. It works beyond simply summarizing findings — it critically analyzes, integrates, and interprets research from various methodologies (qualitative, quantitative, mixed methods) to provide a deeper understanding of the research landscape. ILRs provide a holistic and systematic overview of existing research, integrating findings from various methodologies. ILRs are ideal for exploring intricate research issues, examining manifold perspectives, and developing new research questions.

Steps to Conduct an Integrative Literature Review

• Identify the research question: Clearly define the research question or topic of interest as formulating a clear and focused research question is critical to leading the entire review process.
• Literature search strategy: Employ systematic search techniques to locate relevant literature across various databases and sources.
• Evaluate the quality of the included studies : Critically assess the methodology, rigor, and validity of each study by applying inclusion and exclusion criteria to filter and select studies aligned with the research objectives.
• Data Extraction: Extract relevant data from selected studies using a structured approach.
• Synthesize the findings : Thoroughly analyze the selected literature, identify key themes, and synthesize findings to derive noteworthy insights.
• Critical appraisal: Critically evaluate the quality and validity of qualitative research and included studies by using BMC medical research methodology.
• Interpret and present your findings: Discuss the purpose and implications of your analysis, spotlighting key insights and limitations. Organize and present the findings coherently and systematically.

Structure of an Integrative Literature Review

• Introduction : Provide an overview of the research topic and the purpose of the integrative review.
• Methods: Describe the opted literature search strategy, selection criteria, and data extraction process.
• Results: Present the synthesized findings, including key themes, patterns, and contradictions.
• Discussion: Interpret the findings about the research question, emphasizing implications for theory, practice, and prospective research.
• Conclusion: Summarize the main findings, limitations, and contributions of the integrative review.

Pros and Cons of Integrative Literature Review

• Informs evidence-based practice and policy to the relevant stakeholders of the research.
• Contributes to theory development and methodological advancement, especially in the healthcare arena.
• Integrates diverse perspectives and findings
• Time-consuming process due to the extensive literature search and synthesis
• Requires advanced analytical and critical thinking skills
• Potential for bias in study selection and interpretation
• The quality of included studies may vary, affecting the validity of the review

Example of Integrative Literature Reviews

Paper Title: An Integrative Literature Review: The Dual Impact of Technological Tools on Health and Technostress Among Older Workers

5. Rapid Literature Review

A Rapid Literature Review (RLR) is the fastest type of literature review which makes use of a streamlined approach for synthesizing literature summaries, offering a quicker and more focused alternative to traditional systematic reviews. Despite employing identical research methods, it often simplifies or omits specific steps to expedite the process. It allows researchers to gain valuable insights into current research trends and identify key findings within a shorter timeframe, often ranging from a few days to a few weeks — unlike traditional literature reviews, which may take months or even years to complete.

When to Consider a Rapid Literature Review?

• When time impediments demand a swift summary of existing research
• For emerging topics where the latest literature requires quick evaluation
• To report pilot studies or preliminary research before embarking on a comprehensive systematic review

Steps to Conduct a Rapid Literature Review

• Define the research question or topic of interest. A well-defined question guides the search process and helps researchers focus on relevant studies.
• Determine key databases and sources of relevant literature to ensure comprehensive coverage.
• Develop literature search strategies using appropriate keywords and filters to fetch a pool of potential scientific articles.
• Screen search results based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria.
• Extract and summarize relevant information from the above-preferred studies.
• Synthesize findings to identify key themes, patterns, or gaps in the literature.
• Prepare a concise report or a summary of the RLR findings.

Structure of a Rapid Literature Review

An effective structure of an RLR typically includes the following sections:

• Introduction: Briefly introduce the research topic and objectives of the RLR.
• Methodology: Describe the search strategy, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and data extraction process.
• Results: Present a summary of the findings, including key themes or patterns identified.
• Discussion: Interpret the findings, discuss implications, and highlight any limitations or areas for further research
• Conclusion: Summarize the key findings and their implications for practice or future research

Pros and Cons of Rapid Literature Review

• RLRs can be completed quickly, authorizing timely decision-making
• RLRs are a cost-effective approach since they require fewer resources compared to traditional literature reviews
• Offers great accessibility as RLRs provide prompt access to synthesized evidence for stakeholders
• RLRs are flexible as they can be easily adapted for various research contexts and objectives
• RLR reports are limited and restricted, not as in-depth as systematic reviews, and do not provide comprehensive coverage of the literature compared to traditional reviews.
• Susceptible to bias because of the expedited nature of RLRs. It would increase the chance of overlooking relevant studies or biases in the selection process.
• Due to time constraints, RLR findings might not be robust enough as compared to systematic reviews.

Example of a Well-Executed Rapid Literature Review

Paper Title: What Is the Impact of ChatGPT on Education? A Rapid Review of the Literature

A Summary of Literature Review Types

Tools and Resources for Conducting Different Types of Literature Reviews

Online scientific databases.

Platforms such as SciSpace , PubMed , Scopus , Elsevier , and Web of Science provide access to a vast array of scholarly literature, facilitating the search and data retrieval process.

Reference management software

Tools like SciSpace Citation Generator , EndNote, Zotero , and Mendeley assist researchers in organizing, annotating, and citing relevant literature, streamlining the review process altogether.

Automate Literature Review with AI tools

Automate the literature review process by using tools like SciSpace literature review which helps you compare and contrast multiple papers all on one screen in an easy-to-read matrix format. You can effortlessly analyze and interpret the review findings tailored to your study. It also supports the review in 75+ languages, making it more manageable even for non-English speakers.

Goes without saying — literature review plays a pivotal role in academic research to identify the current trends and provide insights to pave the way for future research endeavors. Different types of literature review has their own strengths and limitations, making them suitable for different research designs and contexts. Whether conducting a narrative review, systematic review, scoping review, integrative review, or rapid literature review, researchers must cautiously consider the objectives, resources, and the nature of the research topic.

If you’re currently working on a literature review and still adopting a manual and traditional approach, switch to the automated AI literature review workspace and transform your traditional literature review into a rapid one by extracting all the latest and relevant data for your research!

There you go!

Frequently Asked Questions

Narrative reviews give a general overview of a topic based on the author's knowledge. They may lack clear criteria and can be biased. On the other hand, systematic reviews aim to answer specific research questions by following strict methods. They're thorough but time-consuming.

A systematic review collects and analyzes existing research to provide an overview of a topic, while a meta-analysis statistically combines data from multiple studies to draw conclusions about the overall effect of an intervention or relationship between variables.

A systematic review thoroughly analyzes existing research on a specific topic using strict methods. In contrast, a scoping review offers a broader overview of the literature without evaluating individual studies in depth.

A systematic review thoroughly examines existing research using a rigorous process, while a rapid review provides a quicker summary of evidence, often by simplifying some of the systematic review steps to meet shorter timelines.

A systematic review carefully examines many studies on a single topic using specific guidelines. Conversely, an integrative review blends various types of research to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the topic.

You might also like

Boosting Citations: A Comparative Analysis of Graphical Abstract vs. Video Abstract

The Impact of Visual Abstracts on Boosting Citations

Introducing SciSpace’s Citation Booster To Increase Research Visibility

Writing the Literature Review

Barry Mauer and John Venecek

• The Literature Review

What is the Purpose of the Review?

What is the scope of the review, strategies for getting started, types of literature reviews, composition guidelines, how to locate reviews by discipline, key takeaways.

We also provide the following activities:

Types of Literature Reviews [Refresher]

Writing the literature review [refresher], the literature review [1].

Conducting a literary studies research project involves time and effort, with much of it going towards the development of a literature review . A literature review might fill several pages of your research paper and usually appears soon after an introduction but before you present your detailed argument. A literature review provides your audience with an overview of the available research about your area(s) of study, including the literary work, your theory, and methodology. The literature review demonstrates how these scholarly discussions have changed over time, and it allows you to position your research in relation to research that has come before yours. Your aim is to present the discussion up to this point. Depending on the nature of the assignment, you may also include your critical commentary on prior research, noting among this material the weaker and stronger arguments, breakthroughs and dead ends, blind spots and opportunities, the invention of key terms and methods, mistakes as well as misreadings, and so on.

Once you have gathered the research materials you need for your literature review, you have another task: conducting an analysis on the research to see where your original contribution fits into the scholarly conversation. As the saying goes, “we are standing on the shoulders of giants.” Your job is to show a portrait of these giants to your audience, and to show how your work relates to the portrait. On many scholarly topics, literature reviews already exist. You may refer to such existing reviews within your own, indicating any materials might have been overlooked, new developments that have arisen since the publication of the existing literature review, and new perspectives or insights you have about the materials.

Some beginning researchers try to tear down the work of other researchers in an effort to make their own work look good by comparison. It rarely works. First, it tends to make your audience skeptical of your claims. Second, it ignores the fact that even the mistakes, blind spots, and failures of other researchers contribute something to our knowledge. Albert Einstein didn’t disrespect Sir Isaac Newton by saying Newton’s theory of space was wrong and terrible and that Einstein’s own theory was great by comparison. He built upon Newton’s work, showing how it could be improved. If, however, a researcher willfully set out to deceive or distort or to tear down the work of other scholars without good reason, then their work does not deserve such deference.

Most literature reviews appear after the introduction. It presents your reader with relevant information about the scholarly discussion up to now. Later in your paper, you discuss your contribution. Before you begin work on your literature review, let’s discuss what we mean by “literature”; understand the purpose and scope of the review; establish criteria for selecting, organizing, and interpreting your findings; and discuss how to connect your findings to your research question.

Many students seek to “find sources that agree with my claim or idea.” That approach is too narrow, in our view. If we use such an approach, we may get the following results:

• Because we can find sources that agree with almost any claim, readers will wonder whether your claims are weak and the sources are cherry picked.
• While literary scholars sometimes cite authorities to support their claims, they don’t rely only on authority. They respect authority, but not too much. Your own claims need to rely more on evidence (from the literary text, historical and biographical information), and your critical and creative reasoning skills.
• Scholarship is a conversation; thus, the goal is less about finding agreement and more about joining the conversation with the aim of making a valuable contribution to the discussion.

The literature review provides your reader with an overview of the existing research about your topic or problem. It provides the context necessary for your reader to catch up with the scholarly conversation and then to appreciate the value of your contribution to it. The literature review sharpens the focus of your research and demonstrates your knowledge and understanding of the scholarly conversation around your topic, which, in turn, helps establish your credibility as a researcher.

Creating the literature review involves more than gathering citations. It is a qualitative process through which you will discover what is already known about your topic, and identify the key authorities, methods, and theoretical foundations, so you can begin to position your contributions within the scholarly conversation.

Defining the scope of your review will also help you establish criteria to determine the relevance of the sources you are finding. At this stage, you are not reading in-depth; instead, you are skimming through what has already been published and identifying the major concepts, theories, methodologies, and methods present within these published works. You should also be identifying connections, tensions, and contradictions within the already published works of your topic or problem. This involves building on the knowledge of others and understanding what methods, measures, and models we have inherited from previous researchers in our field.

Literature Reviews: Common Errors Made When Conducting a Literature Review [12 min 22 sec]

Video provided courtesy of the Center for Quality Research (CQR)

A literature review helps your reader understand the relationship of your research project to the work of other scholars. It covers the existing knowledge about a problem, and allows you to show the relevance/significance of your contribution to the discussion. Your reader may or may not have read scholarly literature about the theories, methodologies, and literary works you are discussing. But they want to know that you have read it and have thought about it. Your literature review provides not only a summary of the existing scholarship for readers; it also offers your perspective on it.

Begin your work on the literature review by synthesizing the various sources in your annotated bibliography .

For advice on Synthesizing Sources, consider the following from The Purdue Online Writing Lab: [2]

Note that  synthesizing is not the same as summarizing .

• A summary restates the information in one or more sources without providing new insight or reaching new conclusions.
• A synthesis draws on multiple sources to reach a broader conclusion.
• Don’t force a relationship between sources if there isn’t one. Not all of your sources have to complement one another.
• Do your best to highlight the relationships between sources in very clear ways.
• Don’t ignore any outliers in your research. It’s important to take note of every perspective (even those that disagree with your broader conclusions).

Not all humanities research projects contain literature reviews, but many do. Keep in mind that the type of literature review you choose (see list below) pertains to the secondary research – other scholarly sources – and not to the primary literary work. For instance, a literature review about Kate Chopin’s writing will be your thoughts about the scholarship on Chopin and not about Chopin’s text itself. You are summarizing what you see in the scholarly literature about Chopin’s writing. The literature review puts you in the position of authority not just on Chopin’s writing but on the scholarship about her writing. You are seeking to understand what scholars have said about her work. Scholars might belong to different schools of thought (psychoanalytic, feminist, Marxist, etc.). They might make different arguments about Chopin. They might use different methodological approaches. 

If your research involves two or more theories, such as psychology and genre studies, you may need to create multiple literature reviews, one for each theory or methodology. If the theories overlap with each other significantly (i.e., Marxism and Cultural Studies), you may combine them. Your literature review need not include everything about the subject area – you would need to write a book to cover a single theory – but only those concepts and methods that are most relevant to your research problem.

Factors to Consider When Developing Your Literature Review

• Determine the Scope : How broad or narrow should your literature review be? You may want to focus on recent scholarship only, or on a particular school of thought in the literature. Your scope is determined by your purpose; what is it you aim to achieve with your research?
• Establish Criteria : We discussed the importance of defining the purpose and scope of your review on the previous page, but it’s worth reviewing here as well. This step will help you establish important criteria and focus your searching. For example, how many sources will you need? What types of sources (primary, secondary, statistics, media)? Is currency important? Do you know who the prominent authors or theorists are in your subject area? Take some time to map out these or other important factors before you begin searching journals and databases.
• Consider Your Audience : Unlike a work cited page or an annotated bibliography, both of which are lists of sources, a literature review is essayistic and can be considered a precursor to your final paper. Therefore, it should be written in your own voice, and it should be geared toward a specific audience. Considering audience during this early stage will help focus your final paper as well.
• Find Models : We’ll discuss the different types of literature reviews and how to locate examples in the section below. However, even if you’re undecided about what type of review will work best for you, you may want to review some example literature reviews to get a sense of what they look like before you begin your own.

One piece of advice before starting: look for existing literature reviews on your area of scholarship. You can build on the work that other scholars have put into reviewing the scholarly literature. There’s no need to completely “reinvent the wheel” if some of the work is already done.

Scholars sometimes publish “stand-alone” literature reviews that are not part of a larger work; such literature reviews are valuable contributions to the field, as they summarize the state of knowledge for other scholars.

Maria J. Grant and Andrew Booth’s “A Typology of Reviews” identifies 14 distinct types of literature reviews. Further, the UCLA library created a chart to complement the article and for easy comparison of those 14 types of reviews. This section provides a brief summary of the most common literature reviews. For a more complete analysis, please see the full article and the chart .

To choose the most appropriate structure, put yourself in your reader’s shoes and think through their need for information. The literature review is about providing context for your contribution. How much context do people need? Keep it to the minimum necessary; compressing a lot of information into a small amount of text is a must.

These structures are not meant to be straightjackets but tools to help you organize your research. If you find that the tool is working, then keep using it. If not, switch tools or modify the one you are using. Keep in mind that the types of literature reviews are just different ways of organizing information. So, you can discuss literary trends without organizing your review of secondary literature by trend; your discussion can be organized by theory or theme, for examples. In our literature reviews, we are not recounting other scholars’ arguments at length but merely providing key concepts so we can summarize the discussion so far and position our own claims. You don’t have to adhere strictly to one structure or another. They are just organizing tools that help you manage your material (and help your reader make sense of it).

Types of Reviews

• Traditional or narrative reviews : This approach will generate a comprehensive, critical analysis of the published research on your topic. However, rather than merely compiling as many sources as possible, use this approach to establish a theoretical framework for your paper, establish trends, and identify gaps in the research. This process should bring your research question into clearer focus and help define a thesis that you will argue for in your paper. This is perhaps the most common and general type of literature review. The examples listed below are all designed to serve a more specific purpose.
• Argumentative : The purpose of an argumentative literature review is to select sources for the purpose of supporting or refuting a specific claim. While this type of review can help the author make a strong case for or against an issue, they can also be prone to claims of bias. Later in this textbook, we will read about the distinction between warranted and unwarranted bias . One is ok and the other is not.
• Chronological : A chronological review is used when the author wants to demonstrate the progression of how a theory, methodology, or issue has progressed over time. This method is most effective when there is a clear chronological path to the research about a specific historical event or trend as opposed to a more recursive theoretical concept.
• By trend : This is similar to the chronological approach except it focuses on clearly-defined trends rather than date ranges. This would be most appropriate if you want to illustrate changing perspectives or attitudes about a given issue when specific date ranges are less important than the ebb and flow of the trend.
• Thematic : In this type of literature review, the author will select specific themes that he or she feels are important to understanding a larger topic or concept. Then, the author will organize the sources around those themes, which are often based on relevance or importance. The value of this method is that the process of organizing the review by theme is similar to constructing an argument. This can help the author see how resources connect to each other and determine how as well as why specific sources support their thesis.
• Theoretical : The goal of this type of review is to examine how theory has shaped the research on a given topic. It establishes existing theoretical models, their connections, and how extensively they have been developed in the published research. For example, Jada applied critical race theory to her analysis of Sonny’s Blues , but she might also consider conducting a more comprehensive review of other theoretical frameworks such as feminism, Marxism, or postmodernism. Doing so could provide insight into alternate readings, and help her identify theoretical gaps such as unexplored or under-developed approaches to Baldwin’s work.
• Methodological : The approach focuses on the various methodologies used by researchers in a specific area rather than an analysis of their findings. In this case, you would create a framework of approaches to data collection related to your topic or research question. This is perhaps more common in education or the social and hard sciences where published research often includes a methods section, but it is sometimes appropriate for the digital humanities as well.
• Scoping : The aim of a scoping review is to provide a comprehensive overview or map of the published research or evidence related to a research question. This might be considered a prelude to a systematic review that would take the scoping review one step further toward answering a clearly defined research question. See below for more details.
• Systematic : The systematic review is most appropriate when you have a clearly-defined research question and have established criteria for the types of sources you need. In this way, the systematic review is less exploratory than other types of reviews. Rather, it is comprehensive, strategic, and focused on answering a specific research question. For this reason, the systematic review is more common in the health and social sciences, where comprehensiveness is more important. Literature reviews in the Humanities are not usually exhaustive but tend to show only the most representative or salient developments in the scholarship.
• Meta-analysis : Does your research deal with statistics or large amounts of data? If so, then a meta-analysis might be best for you rather than providing a critical review, the meta-analysis will summarize and synthesize the results of numerous studies that involve statistics or data to provide a more comprehensive picture than would be possible from just one study.

An argumentative literature review presents and takes sides in scholarly arguments about the literary work. It makes arguments about other scholars’ work. It does not necessarily involve a claim that the literary work is itself making an argument. Likewise, a chronological literature review presents the scholarly literature in chronological order.

You don’t need to keep strictly to one type. Scholars often combine features from various types of literature reviews. A sample review that combines the follow types –

• Argumentative
• Theoretical
• Methodological

– is the excellent work of Eiranen, Reetta, Mari Hatavara, Ville Kivimäki, Maria Mäkelä & Raisa Maria Toivo (2022) “ Narrative and Experience: Interdisciplinary Methodologies between History and Narratology , ” Scandinavian Journal of History , 47:1, 1-15

When writing your literature review, please follow these pointers:

• Conduct systematic searches
• Use Evidence
• Be Selective
• Use Quotes Sparingly
• Summarize & Synthesize
• Use Caution when Paraphrasing
• Use Your Own Voice

Advice from James Mason University’s “Literature Reviews: An Overview”

A note on synthesizing : Don’t make the common mistake of summarizing individual studies or articles one after the other. The goal is to synthesize — that is, to make observations about groups of studies. Synthesis often uses language like this:

• Much of the literature on [topic x ] focuses on [major themes].
• In recent years, researchers have begun investigating [facets a , b , and c ] of [topic x ].
• The studies in this review of [topic x ] confirm / suggest / call into question / support [idea / practice / finding / method / theory / guideline y ].
• In the reviewed studies [variable x ] was generally associated with higher / lower rates of [outcome y ].
• A limitation of some / most / all of these studies is [ y ].

Please see this sample annotated literature review  from James Mason University.

Structure of a literature review [2]

• Problematization: The 2 to 3 pages of problematization are a distinct, iterative, step. It may take doing such a statement a few times before moving forward to writing the actual paper.
• Search: Write down your keyword sets, your updated keyword sets, and databases. It is perfectly within a reviewer’s rights to ask for these details.
• Summary: Really getting to know major themes requires some annotation of articles. You want to identify core papers and themes and write about them. This helps you really learn the material. [ChatGPT or Wikipedia are no substitute for deep engagement with a paper.]
• Argument: Either outline or create a slide deck that help you express the arguments in your paper. Read them out loud. Have friends look at them. Present them. [Every literature review has an argument. If not, it’s a summary. A summary does not merit publication in a top outlet.]
• Unpacking: Once you’ve nailed the short pitch, unpack the full argument. [ a) Take time in each major section to map out a) the argument, b) the supporting evidence, and the takeaway. b) Take those major sections, reconcile them, make sure they don’t overlap, then move on to writing. c) Sketch out the paper’s sections, tables, figures, and appendices.]
• Writing: Writing is the easy part. You can always put words to the screen. [Revising and improving is hard. Make time to write every day. Improving requires feedback. Find a writing partner to give feedback. Create your tables and figures. Write to them. Make sure the words in the paper align to the visuals.]
• Communicate: When the paper is done, go back and create a paper presentation. [I do this for the papers that I’m most serious about. The act of storyboarding helps me sort out the small pieces of the story that don’t fit together. If I really want it to succeed, I present it. The act of presenting helps me get it right. My best papers sometimes take seven or eight presentations to get it right. Then I return to the paper and fine tune it. Only then, does it have a shot at a top outlet.]

Literature reviews can be published as part of a scholarly article, often after the introduction and sometimes with a header, but they can also be published as a standalone essay. To find examples of what reviews look like in your discipline, choose an appropriate subject database (such as MLA for literary criticism) and conduct a keyword search with the term “Literature Review” added in quotes:

Not only do these examples demonstrate how to structure different types of literature reviews, but some offer insights into trends and directions for future research. In the next section, we’ll take a closer look at some reading strategies to help guide you through this process.

Since scholars already have produced literature reviews on various scholarly conversations, you don’t always need to “reinvent the wheel” (start a literature review from nothing). You can find a published literature review and update it or amend it; scholars do that all the time. However, you must properly cite work you incorporate from others.

• What types of literature review will you be using for your paper? Why did you make this selection over others? If you haven’t made a selection yet, which types are you considering?
• What specific challenges do you face in following a literature review structure?
• If there are any elements of your assignment that need clarification, please list them.
• What was the most important lesson you learned from this page? What point was confusing or difficult to understand?
• In the “Back Matter” of this book, you will find a page titled “Rubrics.” On that page, we provide a rubric for Creating a Literature Review ↵
• Richard West, Brigham Young University, amended by Jason Thatcher, Temple University - https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jason-thatcher-0329764_academicwriting-topten2023-activity-7146507675021766656-BB0O ↵

Writing the Literature Review Copyright © 2021 by Barry Mauer and John Venecek is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Open access
• Published: 15 August 2024

A framework for health information governance: a scoping review

• Somayeh Ghaffari Heshajin 1 ,
• Shahram Sedghi   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6457-7464 1 ,
• Sirous Panahi 1 &
• Amirhossein Takian 2  

Health Research Policy and Systems volume  22 , Article number:  109 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

90 Accesses

Metrics details

As a newly emerged concept and a product of the twenty-first century, health information governance is expanding at a rapid rate. The necessity of information governance in the healthcare industry is evident, given the significance of health information and the current need to manage it. The objective of the present scoping review is to identify the dimensions and components of health information governance to discover how these factors impact the enhancement of healthcare systems and services.

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest and the Google Scholar search engine were searched from inception to June 2024. Methodological study quality was assessed using CASP checklists for selected documents. Endnote 20 was utilized to select and review articles and manage references, and MAXQDA 2020 was used for content analysis.

A total of 37 documents, including 18 review, 9 qualitative and 10 mixed-method studies, were identified by literature search. Based on the findings, six core categories (including health information governance goals, advantages and applications, principles, components or elements, roles and responsibilities and processes) and 48 subcategories were identified to form a unified general framework comprising all extracted dimensions and components.

Conclusions

Based on the findings of this scoping review, health information governance should be regarded as a necessity in the health systems of various countries to improve and achieve their goals, particularly in developing and underdeveloped countries. Moreover, in light of the undesirable effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in various countries, the development and implementation of health information governance models at organizational, national and international levels are among the pressing concerns. Researchers can use the present findings as a comprehensive model for developing health information governance models. A possible limitation of this study is our limited access to some databases.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The value of information in the healthcare industry.

The healthcare industry is rapidly evolving while many new demands are emerging, among which there is a fundamental need for accurate and applicable information [ 1 ]. The value and importance of information in health organizations stem from their dual missions and goals. Health data and patient information are regarded as valuable sources for researchers to enhance healthcare provision in terms of efficiency, safety and quality [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]. It is acknowledged that high-quality data and information facilitate high-quality care, accurate research, favorable patient outcomes, cost-effective risk assessment and strategic decision-making [ 6 ]. Consequently, managing and controlling data and information in health organizations are regarded as the core fundamental requirement in these organizations.

What is information governance?

Timely and effective management of crucial information constitutes a pillar of support for any organization [ 7 ]. In this regard, most organizations have devoted time and resources to the development of information governance systems to provide specific solutions at any time or location [ 7 , 8 ]. The concept of information governance has been around since the early twentieth century when organizations began to develop effective and comprehensive management of data and information. Many consider it to be the effective management of knowledge assets [ 9 , 10 ]. Information governance is an enterprise-wide accountability framework that promotes appropriate behavior when handling information-related matters [ 8 , 10 , 11 ]. This concept encompasses the processes, rules, standards and criteria that guarantee an organization’s effective and efficient use of information to achieve its goals. Information governance also encompasses the entire information life cycle, including how information is created, stored, used, archived and discarded. In addition, this concept determines who should have access to specific information when and how [ 1 , 4 , 6 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ].

Health information governance (HIG)

Information governance in the healthcare industry is a relatively new concept. Primary efforts in this field date back to 1997, when the National Health Service of England (NHS) developed the Caldicott Principles [ 3 ]. They initiated the practice of information governance in the health sector in 2002 [ 16 ]. Legal, regulatory and information security requirements shape the primary drivers for developing information governance programs in various organizations [ 16 , 17 ]. In healthcare organizations, however, quality control and confidentiality of the ever-increasing volumes of information are crucial. Therefore, creating information governance programs is essential to improve care quality and achieve satisfactory results for patients and other stakeholders [ 1 , 16 ].

The necessity of HIG

According to Smallwood: “Bad information [in health] means people could die.” [ 16 ]. The United States has the most expensive healthcare in the world; however, medical mistakes are the third reason for death in this country [ 18 ]. To explain the necessity of HIG, it is important to consider some experts’ opinions; Smallwood explained in 2019 that one possible reason for the over 250,000 people dying from medical mistakes each year in the U.S. [ 18 ] is poor information governance [ 16 ]. Moreover, Riegner believes that the cause of major failures and problems during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is the lack of global information governance [ 19 ]. Conversely, a recent book published by OCED Library highlights South Korea, one of the countries with the best results against COVID-19, has one of the strongest health data and information governance [ 20 ].

Information governance is essential for enhancing healthcare outcomes in several ways; accurate, reliable and current information greatly benefits population health and care provision by enabling better clinical decision-making and reducing medical mistakes [ 8 , 16 , 21 ]. An example is the electronic health record system that assists medical specialists in accessing information about a patient’s medications, allergies and more [ 22 ]. In addition, HIG enables seamless sharing of patient data among different healthcare providers, facilitating better care coordination, especially for patients with complex or chronic conditions who may see multiple specialists [ 23 ]. Furthermore, HIG can lead to (1) more efficient healthcare delivery through effective data management [ 24 ], (2) enhanced population health management by analyzing big data to identify trends, risk factors and opportunities for preventive care [ 25 ], (3) advancements in medical research and treatment protocols [ 26 ] and (4) empowerment of patients to play a more active role in their healthcare decisions [ 21 , 24 ].

HIG best practices

Despite the brief history of HIG, numerous studies have emphasized its significance [ 16 , 27 ]. In addition to England, some other countries, such as Canada, Australia and the United States, have developed and implemented HIG models [ 2 ]. Information Governance Principles for Healthcare (IGPHC) and the associated maturity model, developed in 2014 by the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA), are among the most recent and comprehensive efforts in this field. IGPHC is a framework that includes eight fundamental principles for HIG [ 8 , 28 ]. In addition, various models of HIG have been developed based on research reports. Each model introduces specific dimensions and components, mostly built upon the fundamental principles proposed by AHIMA. Slight nuances depend on the study background, aim and geographical location.

Apart from the models presented and used by the pioneering countries, no other comprehensive resources were found for studying and obtaining ideas for using or developing novel models of HIG; indeed, despite the booming growth of the healthcare industry, concerns have been raised about the lack of information governance programs [ 2 , 10 , 16 ]. Therefore, the present study aims to:

Map the existing literature on HIG models to identify the types of models used by pioneering counties and explore the available resources for developing novel models.

Identify the dimensions and components of existing HIG models and identify any potential knowledge gaps.

Explore the relationship between HIG factors and the enhancement of healthcare systems and services.

By achieving these objectives, this scoping review will provide a clear understanding of the current landscape of HIG models and their impact on healthcare. It will also identify areas for further research and development of more comprehensive and effective HIG programs.

Methodology

This scoping review was conducted based on the five steps outlined by Arksey and O’Malley [ 29 ]: (1) formulating the research question, (2) searching for relevant literature, (3) selection of eligible studies, (4) data extraction and (5) analysing and describing the results. In addition, we followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) reporting guidelines [ 30 ]. No protocol was registered for this review. The scoping review methodology was selected due to its relevance to the clarification of key concepts in literature and identifying key characteristics or factors related to the concept of HIG [ 31 ].

Search strategy and information sources

The search strategy for electronic databases was developed, piloted and refined by the team’s librarians. After finalizing our search in PubMed through an iterative process involving pilot tests, we completed a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest and Google Scholar for relevant published articles up to July 2022 and updated until June 2024; there was no time constraints for publications and records. Furthermore, the reference lists of all included studies were manually scanned to identify any relevant investigations suitable for inclusion. Search strategies by the following two categories of keywords using Boolean operators are presented in ‘Supplementary Table 1, Additional file 1 ’:

(1) (‘information governance’ OR ‘data governance’ OR ‘knowledge governance’ OR ‘information policy’).

AND (2) (health* OR medical OR clinical OR hospital*).

Eligibility criteria

The criteria for the inclusion and exclusion of articles are listed below (Table  1 ).

Study selection

After conducting a literature search, we imported the results into Endnote 20 (Thomson Reuters, New York, NY). Two reviewers used Endnote 20 to screen the articles. After removing duplicates, two reviewers independently read and reviewed the title and abstract of each document to determine if it met the inclusion criteria. Publications that were deemed potentially relevant were retrieved in full text and screened by two independent reviewers. Any disagreements between the reviewers were resolved through discussion. If consensus could not be reached, a third reviewer made the final decision.

Data quality assessment

After the selected articles were rechecked, two independent authors assessed each document using the CASP quality assessment checklists. We have used CASP checklists for review articles, case–control articles and qualitative research, which have 10, 12 and 10 questions, respectively. The validity, results and clinical relevance are the three main areas covered by CASP checklists [ 32 ]. We changed the possible answers for each item from yes or no to yes and no or unclear to reflect methodological quality (Supplementary Fig. 1, Additional file 1 ). All documents with a total score of six or more were considered as the research population. Two of the articles, which scored five, did not meet the required score. However, to prevent potential bias and to include a diverse range of related literature, the reviewers decided to include these articles in the final collection of selected articles.

Data extraction

Eventually, 37 articles underwent in-depth analysis and information extraction after their quality was confirmed. A data charting form was developed and the first 10 articles were piloted by the reviewers. Data extracted included study characteristics (first author, year, country of affiliation, article type, study setting), type of health governance investigated and the summary of the findings. Excel-formatted integrated data charting form was used to compare, combine and classify the results and findings. Data were extracted by a single reviewer and validated by the second reviewer. If any disagreement happened, it was resolved by discussion.

Statistical analysis

The content analysis results of the reviewed articles were arranged in chronological order, and the qualitative data analysis software MAXQDA 2020 was used for the thematic analysis of the findings to achieve more accurate results and to extract valid and documented themes. MAXQDA is suitable for content analysis due to its strong coding capabilities, powerful visual tools, advanced search features and sharing and collaboration features [ 33 ]. We primarily have used this software for its ability to share data among reviewers, visually organize codes (especially important due to the wide range and complexity of our study’s data) and help to identify key themes. To prevent any bias, we manually coded the literature and did not use electronic coding tools in MAXQDA to generate the codes. The codes were generated based on the concepts in the text. Then, related codes were grouped together based on their similarities and differences and labelled to form descriptive themes. The main themes were then identified. Data analysis and grouping were independently carried out by two reviewers. Any discrepancies were resolved through discussion with a third reviewer.

Search results

The initial database search resulted in the retrieval of 3955 records. After eliminating inappropriate documents, remaining 37 titles aligned with the objectives were chosen for in-depth inspection, extraction of the dimensions and components and content analysis (see Fig.  1 ).

PRISMA flow diagram of included studies

Publication characteristics

The characteristics of the articles reviewed are summarized in ‘Supplementary Table 2, Additional file 1 .’ The publication date of the chosen articles fell between 2003 and 2024 despite the absence of a certain time limit during the document search phase. The majority of the articles (over 70%) were published between 2011 and 2020. Additionally, the fewest articles were published between 2003 and 2010. The document types were review, mixed-methods and qualitative, respectively. In a scoping review, a wide range of articles can be included, such as review articles, as selected sources. Using a variety of sources can help provide a more comprehensive and in-depth view of the topic under discussion [ 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 ]. In most articles, the data collection tool was a literature review, an interview guide, a questionnaire, a data collection (charting) form, or a combination of these. Furthermore, there were eight articles where no information was available about the data collection tool, and these were labelled as ‘not specified’. More than 60% of the articles analysed their data using the content analysis method. Descriptive statistics, inferential statistics, framework analysis and thematic analysis were the other used data analysis methods. Additionally, seven articles did not demonstrate their analysing method, labelled as ‘not specified’ in the table. Sixteen of the Included studies dealt with information governance, 12 with data governance, and the remaining nine examined various aspects of health-related IT governance, digital data governance, indigenous data governance, clinical governance and information security governance.

The process of classifying and codifying the results yielded six themes or main components (including information governance goals, applications of information governance, principles, components or elements, roles and responsibilities and information governance processes) (Fig.  2 ).

HIG main components

The goals of information governance in the health system

The first theme extracted from the literature review introduced ‘the goals of HIG’ based on the needs of the health system and information governance stakeholders (see Table  2 ).

According to the results, ‘providing high-quality health care’ is the primary goal of health information governance. This goal can subsume and serve as a precondition for the other goals. Effective and efficient management leads to high-quality care, which in turn generates high-quality data, boosts productivity and lowers healthcare costs [ 6 , 38 , 39 , 40 ]. Numerous studies have emphasized that access, security and privacy of highly sensitive health data and information are among the most important goals of HIG [ 6 , 22 , 40 , 41 , 44 , 47 ]. According to our findings, the common objectives of HIG programs in various contexts are aligned with the organizational objectives of healthcare systems, which ultimately lead to client satisfaction and trust. Several studies have stated that gaining and maintaining the clients’ trust is the ultimate goal of HIG and its effectiveness [ 22 , 41 , 42 , 44 , 45 , 48 ].

Advantages and applications of HIG

The second theme derived from the review includes their ‘advantages and applications’, which are related to the system goals and contribute to the realization of those goals. Table 3 presents five primary applications of the HIG systems and their respective constituents.

Cost reduction and economic improvement

The first identified category in the theme of advantages and applications of HIG, can be viewed as an application and primary goal not only in health organizations but in all organizations that use information governance programs. This theme is divided into eight subcategories, such as ‘savings in service provision, resource allocation and procurement, time and information costs’ [ 8 , 22 , 38 , 39 , 49 , 51 , 52 ]. These categories ultimately emerge within the eighth subcategory labelled ‘business intelligence’ [ 38 ]. In fact, business intelligence can be viewed as a concept encompassing the seven preceding subcategories.

Improved quality of and access to healthcare services

According to the second category identified under the advantages and applications, HIG can improve the quality of service delivery in diverse ways within health organizations: planning for the management and optimization of community health by increasing the potential for high-quality health service delivery and fair access to services for different segments of society, improving the ability to follow up on high-quality results, increasing cooperation and interaction with doctors and, thus, reducing medical errors, improving and optimizing the health services received by patients, enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness from various perspectives as regards the health organizations services and interaction with all potential stakeholders, as well as identifying defects and risk management [ 8 , 22 , 38 , 39 , 49 ].

Management and policymaking at different levels of healthcare organizations

The present study divided the levels of health care organizations for managing and policymaking into macro levels, inter-organizational and organizational levels. At the macro-organizational level, HIG leads to the planning, determination and implementation of rules, policies and standards. Moreover, the specification of roles and responsibilities, approaches related to medical equipment management, restrictions on information access and decision-making processes are among the additional advantages of information governance at the macro level of healthcare organizations [ 8 , 22 , 38 , 39 ]. One of the benefits of HIG in inter-organizational management is the monitoring and assessing compliance with rules, as well as the cooperation and competition between organizations [ 22 , 40 , 49 ]. Finally, issues such as improving organizational performance, supporting strategic decisions, resource management, reducing repetitive actions and enhancing patient interaction have been cited as benefits of HIG at the basic organizational level [ 8 , 22 , 45 , 51 ].

‘Creation of a culture of trust’ and ‘Information and knowledge management’

These are the last two categories identified in relation to the advantages and applications in the present study. Among the subcategories associated with the theme of establishing a ‘culture of trust’ are the ‘sharing of data and information’ and the ‘consideration of privacy, security and reliability’ [ 8 , 40 , 45 , 51 ]. In the realm of ‘information and knowledge management’, data and knowledge are treated as assets, and their potential benefits to an organization are discussed at length. These benefits include, but are not limited to, increased productivity, better decision-making and new avenues for health research [ 8 , 22 , 51 , 52 ].

In reviewing the selected studies, we found a consensus regarding the applications of HIG programs; in fact, most studies have mentioned all five applications listed in the table, along with the corresponding components, the only differences being in their scope and depth. The compatibility of applications with the stated HIG goals and definitions is one of the most important aspects of this section’s findings. Gartner’s definition pertains to the applications of information management and the establishment of a culture of trust, which includes roles, policies, standards and criteria that considers effective use of information as a prerequisite for ensuring the achievement of organizational goals [ 22 , 55 ]. Smallwood also included the accuracy and security of the data in his definition [ 6 , 16 ]. Donaldson and Walker introduced information governance in 2004 as an organization-wide movement towards confidentiality, integrity and secure access to information [ 55 ]. In addition, Panian’s (2010) definition emphasizes adopting management and policy applications, fostering a culture of trust and enhancing the quality and accessibility of healthcare services [ 43 ]. The Association of Records Managers and Administrators (ARMA) highlights the policy and management aspects of information governance [ 39 ]. Additionally, the AHIMA has pinpointed the importance of information management in the health sector, as reflected in Briggs’ (2013) definition [ 39 ].

HIG principles

The principles of HIG, comprising 13 components, emerged as the third theme in this analysis. In this regard, the majority of reviewed studies reflected a consensus. These principles are presented in Table  4 .

The eight IGPHC principles developed by AHIMA are accountability, transparency, integrity, protection, compliance, availability, retention and disposal [ 6 , 8 , 49 , 56 , 57 , 59 , 65 ]. In addition to these eight principles, the developed HIG programs have also developed concepts such as consent, participation, continuous quality improvement, independence and justice and effectiveness and efficiency. In practice, however, there are minor differences in the principles based on the goals and approaches of the programs.

Transparency

The first category under the principles theme is transparency, which presents all decisions, policies and measures related to the use of data in a way that is accessible to stakeholders and the public in an effort to gain and maintain trust [ 6 , 8 , 40 , 44 , 56 ]. However, it is emphasized that maintaining the confidentiality and controlling access to confidential information does not conflict with transparency, and healthcare organizations should consider their obligations in this regard [ 56 ].

Accountability

‘Accountability’ is predicated on the presence of a senior leader who should assist various groups in developing, implementing and updating a comprehensive HIG program [ 56 ]. Two applicable digital health governance principles, noted by Marcelo et al. [ 38 ], are ‘responsibility and accountability’, where an accountable person is defined as someone who is responsible for making decisions and taking actions related to digital health. The principle of accountability also involves digital health responsiveness to the health system priorities and its ability to balance the competing needs of various stakeholders [ 38 ]. Laurie and Sethi have defined responsibility and accountability as fundamental principles in the framework of good health governance. According to their view, this principle refers to the responsible use of health data in scientific studies directed by the goals of the relevant organizations and includes 15 key subareas [ 46 ].

The third principle of HIG identified in this study is ‘integrity’, ensuring a reasonable and adequate level of information authenticity and reliability for the organization. This principle seeks to ensure the accuracy of information through the design and implementation of governance processes and procedures that govern the production, use and maintenance of information [ 40 , 57 , 58 ].

‘Protection’ is the fourth category under the theme of HIG principles. It involves ensuring the confidentiality and security of sensitive information, which is essential for strong information governance programs. In various studies, it is emphasized as protection [ 6 , 40 , 57 , 61 , 62 , 65 ], confidentiality [ 38 ] or security and confidentiality [ 58 ]. According to the principle of protection, information has varying degrees of sensitivity that must be classified and safeguarded throughout its lifetime. Additionally, this information must be protected at the source and throughout the ecosystem of the healthcare organization [ 57 ]. The six principles developed by the Caldicott Committee address the use of patients’ personal data and compliance with their security and confidentiality, demonstrating the significance of health data protection [ 60 , 66 ]. Also, protection is regarded as an essential component of the digital health governance [ 38 , 64 ].

The next principle is ‘compliance’, which requires the information governance system to operate legally and ethically. Neglecting compliance can result in the organization’s inability to deliver quality services [ 59 ]. In line with the compliance principle, Willison et al. developed the principle of obedience to the rule of law to gain and maintain public trust [ 44 ]. The same definition further highlights the importance of compliance with the rule of law in digital health governance [ 38 ].

Availability

In theory, the most important goal of availability is to gain the organization’s trust, as a lack of access to the right information at the right time can put patient care at risk [ 59 ]. Marcelo et al. believe that timely access to reliable and high-quality health data improves the surveillance of infectious diseases, enables more targeted allocation of health resources, expedites the response to the community’s healthcare needs and facilitates the monitoring of care quality [ 38 ].

Retention and disposal

The ‘retention’ principle can contribute significantly to the success of HIG programs. An organization’s ability to maintain all the necessary information is of utmost importance in light of the fact that organizations produce and store vast amounts of data (mostly electronically) [ 65 ]. Retention is one of the accentuated principles in NHS’s HOURS model [ 58 ]. Part of the principles of digital data governance refers to the establishment of an independent, long-term data storage and management program [ 64 ], which contrasts with HIG’s principle of retention in certain ways. To reduce potential losses and expenses, IGPHC states that certain types of data must be deleted after their retention periods have expired [ 65 ]. This highlights the importance of ‘disposal’ as the next HIG principle. Based on this principle, information has a shelf life, and when the organization no longer requires it, it becomes a burden and must be disposed of in accordance with the rules of the retention plan [ 65 ].

‘Consent’ is a route for voicing preferences and the need for being treated with dignity [ 40 ]. If consent cannot be obtained for the use of personal data, according to Laurie and Sethi, two specific actions can be taken: anonymizing the data as much reasonably as possible and obtaining permission from an appropriate regulatory body [ 46 ]. Anonymization involves removing clients’ identity information from data sets to protect privacy so that they can be used legally for other legitimate purposes [ 47 ].

Participation

‘Participation’ is a further category identified in this review under the principles theme, by which anyone affected by the health sector decisions can make their own contributions to this process [ 38 ]. When individuals are unable to make decisions about their personal information, it is crucial for them, including patients and other stakeholders, to have the opportunity to have input throughout the governance process [ 44 ]. The primary objective is to gain and maintain the stakeholders’ trust.

Continuous quality improvement, independence and effectiveness

According to the ‘continuous quality improvement’ principle, the process of information governance deals with the provision of accurate and up-to-date data and services to establish and uphold trust [ 44 , 51 , 64 ]. Impartiality, fairness, independence and inclusiveness, with the same objective as the quality improvement principle, are intertwined with the fair presentation of the information governance program’s benefits [ 38 , 44 ]. Finally, ‘effectiveness and efficiency’ were the last category identified in the theme of principles in HIG, which deals with ensuring the fulfilment of the organization’s comprehensive goals and its efficiency in obtaining the highest efficiency as a result of its activities. The ultimate goal of this principle is to gain and maintain the stakeholders’ trust and achieve the organization’s business goals [ 38 , 44 ].

HIG components or elements

The fourth theme resulting from the study review (i.e. HIG components or elements) consists of 11 components that characterize the fundamental components of information governance models according to the established principles (Table  5 ).

Rules, standards and policies

The focus of HIG programs is on the categories of laws, standards and policies, which have been occasionally discussed either as distinct categories or complementary components in some studies. Due to their fundamental proximity and alignment, ‘laws and standards’ were determined to be the first category in this study, followed by ‘policies and guidelines’. Legal requirements and standards are also introduced as the fundamental components of information governance in the ARMA and AHIMA definitions [ 39 , 49 ]. The Data Governance Institute (DGI) has introduced the laws and rules of interaction, which include policies and standards, as one of its three core categories of governance components in data governance [ 6 ]. In addition, other studies have identified legal requirements, policies, standards and implementation of standards as the principal components of HIG programs [ 48 , 54 , 61 , 62 ].

Compliance with information governance policies and procedures enables healthcare organizations to meet legal and regulatory requirements and ensures the safety and quality of patient care [ 57 ]. Consequently, policies and strategies may be conceived as including rules and standards, the prominent aspects of which may include data protection, freedom of information, confidentiality and information security. Other categories of interest are document and records management, policy for determining the responsibilities of key stakeholders, operational and training directives, the framework for organizational costs, policies related to setting objectives and developing strategic plans [ 6 , 40 , 49 , 53 , 62 , 63 , 67 ].

Information management

‘Information management’ addresses the management of the life cycle of information, from production to disposal, which is a crucial issue for health organizations and all organizations. Information management can handle the entire life cycle of information, including how to create, store, use and archive information. In addition, information management determines who should have access to particular information, when and how [ 6 ]. Notably, ‘document management’ and ‘quality assurance’ are listed as one of the subcategories of information management in the current study, because information management can also encompass documents. In addition, information life cycle management comprises the following steps: generation and collection, analysis, access and use, storage and organization, dissemination, disposal, exchange, quality management and integrity of information [ 22 , 39 , 50 ].

The remaining three categories in the current study introduced as essential categories for HIG elements are the governance program types. Due to the expansive nature of the concept of information governance, data governance, IT governance and information security governance are introduced as the subsets of information governance in several studies. Moreover, it has been acknowledged that the umbrella term ‘information governance’ subsumes these three governance concepts [ 22 , 40 , 49 , 58 , 62 ].

Data governance

Data governance is the processes, policies, standards and technologies necessary for an organization to manage and ensure data availability, quality, consistency, auditability and security [ 43 ]. Data managers establish policies and procedures governing the definition, accessibility, protection, archiving, ownership and integrity of data to ensure the precision and security of them [ 6 , 16 , 52 ]. Furthermore, since health data is the foundation of any governance process, it is logical to prioritize data governance as one of the primary categories within the HIG elements theme.

Information technology governance

Dong et al. have emphasized that information governance and information technology governance are inseparable in nature. Effective information governance programs require IT assistance to manage information governance policies and processes, engage stakeholders and guarantee data quality. Additionally, information in the IT sector is crucial for identifying the appropriate technology that can support information governance, and technology investments should support the mission and vision of information governance [ 6 ]. According to Datskovsky et al., information cannot be trusted unless the technology infrastructure on which it is created, used, maintained and stored is reliable by itself [ 57 ]. The category of information technology governance in this study differs from other studies [ 40 , 57 ] in treating information technology management as a subcategory of information technology governance. This is because the information technology governance category encompasses all other aspects of the concept of information technology management.

Information security governance and risk management

‘Information security governance’ is the third aspect of governance patterns identified in the current study as one of the categories related to the theme of HIG elements. The objective of information security governance in healthcare is to safeguard all health-related data to ensure their confidentiality, availability and integrity. This is crucial to maintain business continuity, reduce risks and demonstrate best practices and compliance [ 62 ]. Furthermore, information security governance tended to fully incorporate information security management in an attempt to comply with legal and professional requirements [ 62 ]. The first part of the Information Security Management Standard in the NHS HOURS series highlights the information security best practices such as security policy, security organization, asset classification, control, communication, operations, management, access control, systems development and maintenance, business management and compliance. Numerous studies have repeatedly referred to information security aspects, either as a separate category or in conjunction with such categories as laws, policies and standards [ 39 , 51 , 58 , 60 , 62 , 66 ]. Some studies have also recommended information security as a subcategory of risk management [ 22 , 39 , 40 , 49 , 53 , 57 , 60 , 62 , 66 ]. Information security is ascertained as a distinct category from risk management in the present investigation due to its high rate of sensitivity and salience as well as the increasing emphasis on these two facets of information governance. Risk assessment is a security process that entails considering potential threats and risks to data, creating policies and procedures for security officials and other staff to follow and designing appropriate protective measures in the healthcare sector [ 62 ]. Recommended methods for risk management involve clear reporting culture, regular risk recording, risk reduction in patient-related processes, quality impact assessments, continuous risk reduction, service speed and scale development and innovation and transformation [ 53 ].

Human resource

‘Human resource management’ is another category identified as an element of HIG models that encompasses all processes related to employees and human resources; it is also regarded as an essential and valuable aspect for both the health sector and other organizations. Among the significant issues that must be addressed in this category are employee knowledge and skills, knowledge expansion and training and strategic orientation [ 50 , 53 , 54 , 62 ]. In addition, time management and the optimal utilization of employees’ knowledge, skills and competencies are considered as important factors in this field [ 53 ]. This category has a direct relationship with the principle of compliance, as workforce training enables individuals to align their activities with policies and help appreciate their significance [ 57 ]. Alternatives for participation and consensus may include open meetings, public workshops, national associations, advisory committees, satisfaction surveys, conferences and national health associations [ 53 ].

Quality management

In light of the significance of assuring the quality and integrity of healthcare information [ 22 ], the next theme of the elements of HIG patterns is ‘the quality management’, which can be characterized by factors such as reducing and adjusting mortality data, improving clinical results, improving research results, positive patient feedback, providing fruitful services and enhancing the treatment goals for appropriate and timely care [ 53 ]. Notably, adhering to information governance policies and procedures can assist the organizations in meeting legal requirements and ensuring the safety and quality of patient care [ 57 ].

Project and change management

Since the modern era necessitates routine monitoring of the organizational structures and infrastructures [ 57 ] to identify and modify possible shortcomings and lower the rate of related risks, ‘the project management and change’ category emerged in the present study as a defining category within the elements of HIG. This category is a combination of ‘the monitoring category’ and ‘audit and change management category’ Rouzbahani et al. [ 40 ] reported in their study; in the present study, it is merged into a single component due to overlapping major themes.

‘The audit category’ is the final category mentioned in the theme of the elements of HIG patterns identified in the current review. In addition to emphasizing the financial and commercial aspects of the organization, this category documents the information-related activities, thereby enhancing the reliability and integrity of the desired information [ 57 ]. Better system performance and gaining the satisfaction and trust of stakeholders are the end results of audit cycles in the areas of service provision, financial affairs, research results and information assets, as well as audits of changes adopted in practice.

Roles and responsibilities (of individuals) in HIG programs

Officials, policymakers and executives make up the backbone of ‘the roles and responsibilities’ theme. Table 6 describes the levels and responsibilities of each official, as well as their respective duties.

Based on the present study, the roles and responsibilities of HIG are presented separately at three organizational levels, as shown in Figs.  3 , 4 and 5 .

Roles and responsibilities at the organizational senior level

Roles and responsibilities at the organizational middle level

Roles and responsibilities at the organizational operational level

Senior level

The executive director is the first and most crucial role at the senior level. This position is central to the accountability principle of the HIG program and is regarded as the primary position accountable for the program’s design and implementation [ 56 ]. Baskaran et al. believe that information governance principles should be communicated downward through a more robust leadership structure than at the board level [ 68 ]. The key responsibilities of executive director include: ensuring timely and budget-conscious project completion, taking responsibility for regulatory compliance policies and, most importantly, overseeing the development, implementation and revision of policies and procedures to maintain the organization’s integrity [ 22 , 40 , 69 ]. Chief Executive Officers, Chief Information Officers, Chief Legal Officers and Chief Medical Officers are examples of executive directors who may be accountable for smaller task-related departments [ 56 ].

In most cases, the second role and responsibility at the organization’s senior level falls on the senior director of the information governance program. In some studies, this position is referred to as the Caldicott guardian [ 66 , 67 ], who is typically a senior expert in the health field and has the most significant responsibility for protecting the confidentiality of patient information.

The third senior-level role is the core team with executive leadership, composed of representatives from clinical, business and technology domains. This group is responsible for making final decisions on proposed policy or procedure changes and ensuring the proper resolution of operational or data issues [ 22 , 40 ]. Principal members oversee the decision-making principles and protocols, organizational barriers, expansion and strengthening of partnerships and interaction with institutions, the needs of stakeholders, as well as the implementation of governance mechanisms [ 52 , 70 ].

Senior information risk management is the final role identified in the present study for the organization’s senior level. This role, also known as the manager of information-threatening risks, is highly reliant on the regulations and policies of countries. There is a critical emphasis on the importance of stressing context-specific confidentiality and information security protection [ 49 , 67 ].

Middle-level

Managers of organizational information governance must foster an environment conducive to change and provide employees with precise descriptions of individual responsibilities and penalties for violations. In addition, these managers are responsible for assessing the efficacy of training on information governance and identifying the training needs of employees [ 68 ]. Data steward [ 22 , 69 ], data manager or controller [ 40 ] and data protection officer [ 66 , 67 ] are all terms that have been used to refer to the role of data manager. The data manager or steward reports to superiors on all matters concerning data protection. Among these factors, we can mention information governance risks for the organization, privacy concerns and suggestions for potential changes or updates involving personal data processing [ 67 ]. Management of information assets or owners of information assets deals specifically with managing people’s information assets and ensures compliance with policies and laws pertaining to their protection.

Information technology management [ 22 , 67 ], managing the legal and financial department [ 22 , 68 ] and quality and compliance management [ 22 ] are a few examples of roles at the middle level of an organization sporadically mentioned in various studies. The definition of each responsibility depends on each organization’s context and target policies. Information technology management is responsible for developing and implementing appropriate information security methods and protocols to ensure compliance with data protection laws [ 67 ].

Operational-level

The operational level is the third and final organizational level identified in this review, which consists of operations managers and employees who, in practice, must abide by the laws and policies of HIG in conducting their tasks and execute and implement the principles of information governance at this organizational level [ 40 , 67 , 68 ].

Processes in HIG programs

‘The process’, as the final theme emerging from the present review, is a lesser-studied and less-mentioned component of HIG programs. What appears to be the root cause of this phenomenon is the dependence of the process dimensions to the geographical, activity, goal and organizational contexts in which the HIG program is being developed. Renaud’s point of view can be used to corroborate this assertion; he thinks the process is more similar to a delicate tool that needs to be built with care, deployed selectively and used under close supervision in a supportive setting so that human elements are not dehumanized [ 55 ]. Therefore, one could argue that the definition of a process and procedure in information governance and HIG programs depends on the activity’s context, the desired field and the organization’s policies. Indeed, it is impossible to determine a fixed and specific procedure for all programs of HIG. The current review has identified four core categories and nine subcategories within the theme of HIG processes based on different processes narrowly developed and reported in previous studies (Table 7 ). These core categories and subcategories have specified the development and implementation of the information governance program in a comprehensive manner. Policy making, decision-making, planning and implementation begin with an objective assessment of relevant factors such as assets, risk, capability and criteria and progress by a logical sequence that culminates in the monitoring of outcomes following policy implementation and outcome monitoring [ 6 , 38 , 55 , 62 ].

This review compiled and analysed previous research on HIG-related programs in an effort to unravel its various facets and constituents. The objective was providing a comprehensive picture of the studies conducted and the programs developed, as well as suggesting a framework encompassing all existing dimensions. The study was conducted with 37 articles selected from the review of related studies, and the results led to the development of six core categories and 48 subcategories for HIG programs. Figure  6 provides a summary of the findings from the review of the articles.

Summary of dimensions and components of HIG programs

The first theme derived from the review of studies identifies ‘the HIG goals’, comprising six subcategories: providing quality healthcare, providing affordable health services, ensuring equitable access to healthcare information and services, preserving data security, meeting legal obligations and fostering trust. Smallwood defines information governance as ‘comprehensive policies and processes to optimize and use information while keeping it secure and complying with legal and privacy obligations, in line with stated organizational business goals.’ [ 16 ] Moreover, according to Willison et al., the three primary objectives of HIG are to optimize the use of data to achieve business objectives, to maintain data security and to comply with legal and privacy requirements. In addition, gaining and maintaining the trust of patients, stakeholders, data providers and the general public are described as the objectives for using data in public interest research [ 44 ]. According to Kadlec, the main objective of HIG programs is to proactively and effectively manage the increasing volume of information collected and maintained daily [ 22 ]. Various studies have pointed to broader goals for HIG programs, such as improving and maintaining the health of the community [ 38 ], establishing effective and efficient management of information, improving productivity and effectiveness of services [ 39 ], enhancing the desire to maintain a competitive advantage, ensuring better performance and results of organizations and promptly responding to information requests [ 22 ]. As reflected by the focal points of the studies as well as goals focused on local and specific fields and after eliminating some overlaps, the current study has identified six comprehensive goals as categories associated with this theme.

The second theme derived from the studies analysed in this review is ‘the advantages and applications of HIG’, comprised five core categories and 39 subcategories. The core areas of focus for this theme are ‘cost containment and economic growth’, ‘healthcare quality and availability’, ‘healthcare management and policymaking at the macro, inter-organizational and organizational levels’, ‘trust building’ and ‘knowledge management’. It is conceivable that the benefits and applications of HIG are logically consistent with the goals of these programs, and the existence of some overlap between these two primary categories is not unanticipated. In his study, Kloss argues that improving organizational performance, reducing costs, and minimizing risks are the true benefits of information governance in organizations [ 71 ]. Moreover, according to Willison and colleagues, the expectations and, consequently, the applications of HIG programs from the users’ perspective fall into three primary categories: meeting expectations regarding how to perform and provide services, gaining trust in institutions and individuals, and creating belief in the accuracy and value of health services [ 44 ]. Rouzbahani et al. categorized the applications of HIG programs into six categories: improving healthcare and patient safety, reducing costs, enhancing the quality of health information, improving the security and confidentiality of health information, enhancing health information management and boosting the management of healthcare organizations [ 39 ]. Additionally, the results of AHIMA’s case studies identified some other applications of the HIG program’s used by the investigated centres [ 52 ]. The review of the current literature and the examination of the extracted categories indicate the breadth and frequency of applications and benefits of HIG. Given the young age of governance programs in the health field, it can be acknowledged that some potential benefits have not yet been identified. Therefore, it is anticipated that by expanding the application and use of this important strategy, additional benefits will be identified and implemented over time.

The third theme identified from the present review concerns ‘HIG principles’, with 13 categories as follows: transparency, accountability, integrity, protection, compliance, availability, retention, disposal, consent, participation, continuous quality improvement, independence and justice and effectiveness and efficiency. It is acknowledged that the theme of principles and related categories provide a comprehensive set of common speech and behavioural points for a diverse range of HIG program beneficiaries, allowing everyone to progress in line with the information governance project [ 8 ]. The first eight categories were those developed by AHIMA, regarded as fundamental principles in most of the previous studies; the rest of the categories were cumulatively added to literature over time. These principles are among the fundamental topics that have been investigated by research and developed as models of information governance. Accountability, participation and transparency have been cited as principles of health governance by Ibrahimova and Korjonen [ 53 ]. Likewise, Lauriea et al. emphasized the principles of transparency and consent as obvious criteria for protecting privacy [ 47 ]. Informed by the conceptual work of Lauriea and Sethi, Willison et al. developed eight principles for their governance model: transparency, accountability, obedience to the rule of law, honesty, participation and inclusion, impartiality and independence, effectiveness and accountability and continuous quality improvement [ 44 ]. In addition, Rouzbahani et al. have presented a model comprising 12 HIG principles [ 40 ]. In the present study, the categories associated with the theme of HIG principles are presented as exhaustively as possible by incorporating all categories highlighted in literature and models developed, as well as by eliminating their likely overlaps with other categories close to other themes or specific domains. Notably, ethical principles are emphasized alongside professional principles in HIG models, with no weighting or differentiation between the categories presented [ 56 , 59 , 67 ].

‘Components or elements of HIG programs’ is the fourth theme identified in the present review, with 11 distinct categories: laws and standards, policies and guidelines, information management, data governance, information technology governance, information security governance, management risk, human resource management, quality management, project and change management and auditing. In his article, Kadlec introduced several HIG components considered by AHIMA, including quality management, regulations, risk reduction, patient participation and business intelligence [ 22 ]. Williams considered audit and control, risk management and compliance to be essential components of information governance [ 62 ]. Rouzbahani et al. have introduced 13 elements as HIG model components [ 40 ]. Ibrajimova and Korjonen noted seven components of clinical governance, including patient participation, staff management, clinical effectiveness, use of information and information technology, education, risk management and audit, in relation to other governance programs [ 53 ]. In the present review, an attempt was made to consider all these categories associated with elements of HIG programs, and it appeared that all these elements indeed played a determining role. Given the scope of the introduced elements, it is reasonable to conclude that HIG, as an all-encompassing strategy and umbrella term, embraces other governance programs.

The fifth theme associated with HIG programs is ‘the roles and responsibilities’, denoting the introduction of HIG officials and policymakers at three organizational levels: senior, middle and operational levels. At the senior level, four categories and their respective responsibilities are identified: executive director, senior information governance program manager, core team and senior information risk manager. The middle organizational level includes the categories of the information asset manager, data manager and organizational information governance manager. The operational level of an organization consists of operations managers and employees. According to the model proposed and developed by Baskaran et al., the information governance hierarchy consists of six levels: executive director, financial and functional manager, information governance manager, team leaders of operations management, line managers and employees [ 68 ]. Rouzbahani et al. developed a model for Iran’s HIG and incorporated 14 roles and responsibilities into this model, with the Minister of Health assuming the highest role [ 40 ]. Haarbrandt et al. introduced the HiGHmed governance platform, where some of the roles considered included the executive board, supervisory board, technical coordination board, project management office, educational board, support and access committee, ethics working group, advisory board and the general assembly [ 70 ]. With a different view, Ibragimova and Korjonen detailed three groups of library activities that supported clinical and health governance in healthcare organizations: infrastructure (staff and resources); program management (library products and services); and direct participation (needs assessment, committees, audits, HTA, etc.) [ 53 ]. Given that the introduced studies developed their models in distinct domains, the disparity in the hierarchy of responsibilities seems reasonable. The current literature review introduces three levels and nine roles for HIG officials and policymakers, which are the sets of categories introduced in the reviewed studies after eliminating duplicate items and merging the overlapping items.

The final theme introduced in this literature review is that of ‘the processes’ by which HIG programs are developed, implemented and monitored. The associated categories are assessing strategic options, formulating policies, developing plans and tracking progress. In addition, nine subcategories were identified, including asset assessment, risk assessment, capability assessment, criterion assessment, policy development and implementation, internal and external validation, monitoring and change management, stakeholder support, results assessment and reporting. Several studies have described various processes linked to the developed programs in a very limited manner. Governance processes identified in the study by Marcelo et al. include policy and decision-making, planning, resource allocation, coordination and monitoring and evaluation [ 38 ]. While asset identification, risk assessment, policy implementation, capability assessment, procedure development, protection and compatibility, criteria assessment and possible external validation are among the six processes introduced by Williams [ 62 ], Dong et al. have introduced eight further key processes for information governance: data element definition, data integration, information sharing and accountability, information to information and information from information [ 6 ]. Although ‘the processes’ constitute an integral part of HIG programs, it has received less attention than other principles in academic research, because ‘the process’ is highly dependent on the location, activity, goals and overall vision of the organization in which the HIG program is being developed and implemented.

Despite its short history, health information governance has been the focus of several studies which have emphasized its significance, value and necessity. In fact, the development and implementation of national HIG models, particularly in developed nations, is evidence of this claim. The conclusions drawn from a review of the present articles reflect a number of specific aspects. Primarily, the extent and diversity of HIG-related dimensions and components are quite extensive, due to the fact that information governance encompasses the entire health system in the desired area, taking into account all advantages and disadvantages, with the goal of improving the system. Therefore, it requires the experts’ consideration in order to develop impeccable models that function as comprehensively as possible. Second, due to the unique significance and sensitivity of the information within the health organizations, the need to develop HIG models and programs becomes evident, particularly in the present age. Therefore, it can be concluded that developing and underdeveloped nations require the development of information governance models to manage and optimally utilize their health data and information to achieve the national health system goals. Finally, as the COVID-19 pandemic has led to unprecedented death toll since 2020, it appears logical to develop HIG models in order to maintain health system preparation for potential crises in future and to help prevent such tragic outbreaks. For the development of organizational, national and international models, it is our hope that the current literature review serve as a tentative road map and a comprehensive overview by describing the general framework of existing HIG models developed by experts and scientists.

Limitations

Although the scoping review is a valuable tool for comprehensively examining a broad topic such as HIG, it is essential to note the following possible limitations:

A scoping review provides an overview of the dimensions and components of the subject. However, a deeper understanding of these dimensions and components may require more focused studies.

The findings from the scoping review may not directly address a specific problem or answer a focused question.

We encountered difficulties for accessing some databases, but we made a comprehensive effort to search for articles in as many databases as possible.

The study tried to include different types of articles to prevent potential bias.

Additionally, it is important to consider that various factors such as technology, policy, regulation and health system structure influence the HIG landscape and related definitions. Therefore, these definitions may vary depending on the context.

The statistical analysis tool used in the study was not considered a limitation, as our purpose was to organize and structure the studies to more accurately identify the concepts. It is also worth noting that the authors manually coded the entire process in the software.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files].

Kadlec L. Coming soon to your healthcare facility: Information governance. A look at healthcare information governance trends through practical case studies. J AHIMA. 2014;85(8):26–32.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hovenga EJ, Grain H. Health information governance in a digital environment. Ios Press; 2013. ( ISBN: 97816149929162912 ).

Google Scholar  

Caldicott F. Information: To share or not to share. Information governance review. Health Do; 2013. http://collections.crest.ac.uk/id/eprint/9560

Warner D. IG 101: What is information governance? Jurnal Of AHIMA; 2013. https://journal.ahima.org/page/ig-101-what-is-information-governance

Pierotti D, Meehan A. Information governance: an interview with Ann Meehan. RHIA Home Healthc Now. 2017;35(7):402–3. https://doi.org/10.1097/nhh.0000000000000566 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Dong L, Keshavjee K. Why is information governance important for electronic healthcare systems? A Canadian experience. J Adv Hum Soc Sci. 2016;2(5):250–60. https://doi.org/10.20474/jahss-2.5.1 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Dogiparthi H. History of information governance. Cumberlands: University of the Cumberlands; 2018. p. 1–20.

Empel S. The way forward. AIHMA develops information governance principles to lead healthcare toward better data management. J Ahima. 2014;85(10):30–2 ( quiz 4 ).

Butler M. Keeping information clean: new information governance efforts challenge HIM to sort out dirty data. J AHIMA. 2013;84(11):28–31.

Ellington NN. Impact information governance has on healthcare organizations: University of Tennessee Health Science Center; 2018. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/234018953.pdf

Beach T, Rana O, Rezgui Y, Parashar M. Governance model for cloud computing in building information management. IEEE Trans Serv Comput. 2013;8(2):314–27. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSC.2013.50 .

Kwan H, Riley M, Prasad N, Robinson K. An investigation of the status and maturity of hospitals’ health information governance in Victoria. Aust Health Inf Manag J. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/1833358320938309 .

Kooper MN, Maes R, Lindgreen ER. On the governance of information: introducing a new concept of governance to support the management of information. Int J Inf Manage. 2011;31(3):195–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.05.009 .

Proença D, Vieira R, Borbinha J. Information governance maturity model. Springer International Publishing Switzerland; 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43997-6_2 .

Book   Google Scholar  

Bunker D, Ehnis C, Seltsikas P, Levine L, editors. Crisis management and social media: Assuring effective information governance for long term social sustainability. In: IEEE international conference on technologies for homeland security (HST) . IEEE; 2013. https://doi.org/10.1109/THS.2013.6699008

Smallwood RF. Information governance for healthcare professionals: a practical approach. Boca Raton: Routledge/CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2019. ( 978-0-203-70524-7 ).

Maxcer C. Measuring success of an information governance program not so simple: IronMountain; 2011. http://docs.media.bitpipe.com/io_10x/io_105560/item_570545/Iron%20Mountain_sContentMgt_IO%23105560_EGuide_082012.pdf .

Christensen J, Cohen E. Medical errors may be third leading cause of death in the U.S.: cnn.com; 2016. https://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/03/health/medical-error-a-leading-cause-of-death .

Riegner M. Global information governance in pandemic times: in the geopolitics of global health information, international institutional law is more important than ever. Völkerrechtsblog; 2020. https://doi.org/10.17176/20200410-152747-0 .

OECD. Towards an integrated health information system in Korea. OECD; 2022.

Mastaneh Z, Mouseli L. Information governance in heath sector. J Health Manag. 2012;3(3):29–36.

Kadlec L. Coming soon to your healthcare facility: information governance. J Ahima. 2014;85(8):26–32.

Buckbee M. Data governance in healthcare: Your complete guide; 2022. https://www.varonis.com/blog/data-governance-in-healthcare .

Tinker A. The top seven healthcare outcome measures and three measurement essentials; 2019. https://www.healthcatalyst.com/insights/top-7-healthcare-outcome-measures .

Seditas K, Dobson H. Data access systems in NHS Scotland: experiences of cancer data utilisation projects. Scotland: Innovative Healthcare Delivery Programme(IHDP); 2019. https://www.ed.ac.uk/usher/ihdp/our-work/information-governance/information-governance-case-studies

Bougnague S. Cloudficient; 2023. https://www.cloudficient.com/blog/what-is-information-governance-in-healthcare-an-overview .

Donaldson A, Walker P. Information governance—a view from the NHS. Int J Med Inf. 2004;73(3):281–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2003.11.009 .

Rouzbahani F. Developing a model of health information governance program for healthcare system of Iran [PhD Thesis]. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences; 2018.

Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616 .

Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, Moher D. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850 .

Munn Z, Peters MD, Stern C, Tufanaru C, McArthur A, Aromataris E. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x .

Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. Critical appraisal tools and resources; 2023. https://casp-uk.net/critical-appraisal-tools-and-resources/ .

Literature Review with MAXQDA: VERBI GmbH; 2024. https://www.maxqda.com/literature-review .

Verdejo C, Tapia-Benavente L, Schuller-Martínez B, Vergara-Merino L, Vargas-Peirano M, Silva-Dreyer AM. What you need to know about scoping reviews. Medwave. 2021. https://doi.org/10.5867/medwave.2021.02.8144 .

Kazi MR, Chowdhury N, Chowdhury M, Turin TC. Conducting comprehensive scoping reviews to systematically capture the landscape of a subject matter. Popul Med. 2021;3:1–9. https://doi.org/10.18332/popmed/143831 .

Gottlieb M, Haas MRC, Daniel M, Chan TM. The scoping review: a flexible, inclusive, and iterative approach to knowledge synthesis. AEM Educ Train. 2021;5(3): e10609. https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10609 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Peters MDJ, Marnie C, Colquhoun H, Garritty CM, Hempel S, Horsley T, et al. Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application. Syst Rev. 2021;10(1):263. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01821-3 .

Marcelo A, Medeiros D, Ramesh K, Roth S, Wyatt P. Transforming health systems through good digital health governance. Asian Development Bank; 2018. Contract No.: 51. https://doi.org/10.22617/WPS189244-2

Rouzbahani F, Rabiei R, Asadi F, Moghaddasi H, Emami H. Information governance program: a review of applications in healthcare. J Paramed Sci. 2019;10(1):47–55. https://doi.org/10.22037/jps.v9i1.16927 .

Rouzbahani F, Asadi F, Rabiei R, Moghaddasi H, Emami H. Developing a model for national health information governance program in Iran. J Med Life. 2020;13(4):510–6. https://doi.org/10.25122/jml-2020-0036 .

Holly L, Thom S, Elzemety M, Murage B, Mathieson K, Iñigo Petralanda MI. Strengthening health data governance: new equity and rights-based principles. Int J Health Governance. 2023;28(3):225–37. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHG-11-2022-0104 .

Foy M, Martyn D, Daly D, Byrne A, Aguneche C, Brennan R. Blockchain-based governance models for COVID-19 digital health certificates: a legal, technical, ethical and security requirements analysis. Procedia Comput Sci. 2022;198:662–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.12.303 .

Bruhn J. Identifying useful approaches to the governance of indigenous data. Int Indigenous Policy J. 2014;5(2):1–32. https://doi.org/10.18584/iipj.2014.5.2.5 .

Willison DJ, Trowbridge J, Greiver M, Keshavjee K, Mumford D, Sullivan F. Participatory governance over research in an academic research network: the case of Diabetes Action Canada. BMJ Open. 2019;9(4):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026828 .

Were V, Moturi C. Toward a data governance model for the Kenya health professional regulatory authorities. TQM J. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-10-2016-0092 .

Laurie G, Sethi N. Towards principles-based approaches to governance of health-related research using personal data. Eur J Risk Regul. 2013;4(1):43–57. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1867299X00002786 .

Laurie G, Ainsworth J, Cunningham J, Dobbs C, Jones KH, Kalra D, et al. On moving targets and magic bullets: Can the UK lead the way with responsible data linkage for health research? Int J Med Inform. 2015;84(11):933–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2015.08.011 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Li Q, Lan L, Zeng N, You L, Yin J, Zhou X, Meng Q. A framework for big data governance to advance RHINs: a case study of China. IEEE Access. 2019;7:50330–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2910838 .

Rabiei R, Rouzbahani F, Asadi F, Moghaddasi H, Emami H, Rahimi F. Health information governance program: a review on components and principles. Crescent J Med Biol Sci. 2021;8(1):10–4.

Tumulak A, Tin J, Keshavjee K. Towards a unified framework for information and interoperability governance. In: The role of digital health policy and leadership. IOS Press; 2024. https://doi.org/10.3233/shti231310 .

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Paolino AR, McGlynn EA, Lieu T, Nelson AF, Prausnitz S, Horberg MA, et al. Building a governance strategy for CER: the patient outcomes research to advance learning (PORTAL) network experience. Generat Evid Methods Improve Patient Outcomes. 2016;4(2):17. https://doi.org/10.13063/2327-9214.1216 .

Nunn S. Driving compliance through data governance. J Am Health Inf Manag Assoc. 2009;80(3):50–1.

Ibragimova I, Korjonen MH. The value of librarians for clinical and health governance (a view from Europe). Int J Health Governance. 2019;24(1):66–88. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHG-11-2018-0062 .

Faridoon A, Kechadi MT. Healthcare Data Governance, Privacy, and Security-A Conceptual Framework. arXiv preprint arXiv:240317648; 2024. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2403.17648

Renaud K. Clinical and information governance proposes; human fallibility disposes. Clin Governance. 2014;19(2):94–109. https://doi.org/10.1108/CGIJ-01-2014-0001 .

Datskovsky G, Hedges R, Empel S. Evaluating the Information governance principles for healthcare: accountability and transparency. J Ahima. 2015;86(2):52–3.

Datskovsky G, Hedges R, Empel S, Washington L. Evaluating the information governance principles for healthcare: integrity and protection. J Ahima. 2015;86(4):48–9.

Lillywhite TP. Implementing BS7799 in the UK National Health Service. Comput Fraud Secur. 2004;2004(2):4–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1361-3723(04)00027-2 .

Datskovsky G, Hedges R, Empel S, Washington L. Evaluating the information governance principles for healthcare: compliance and availability. J Ahima. 2015;86(6):54–5.

Ryan FS, Cedro MK, Pabari S, Davenport-Jones L, Noar JH. Clinicians’ knowledge and practice of data protection legislation and information management. Br Dent J. 2009;206(2):E4. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2009.53 . ( discussion 90-1 ).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Welle Donker F, van Loenen B. How to assess the success of the open data ecosystem? Int J Digital Earth. 2017;10(3):284–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2016.1224938 .

Williams P. Information governance: a model for security in medical practice. J Dig For Secur Law. 2007;2(1):57–74.

Stahl BC, Rainey S, Harris E, Fothergill BT. The role of ethics in data governance of large neuro-ICT projects. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018;25(8):1099–107. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocy040 .

Tiffin N, George A, LeFevre AE. How to use relevant data for maximal benefit with minimal risk: digital health data governance to protect vulnerable populations in low-income and middle-income countries. BMJ Glob Health. 2019;4(2): e001395. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001395 .

Datskovsky G, Hedges R, Empel S, Washington L. Evaluating the information governance principles for healthcare: retention and disposition. J Ahima. 2015;86(9):50–1.

Roch-Berry C. What is a Caldicott guardian? Postgrad Med J. 2003;79(935):516–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/pmj.79.935.516 .

Corporate Information Governance. Information governance policy; 2019. https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/information-governance-policy-v5.1.pdf

Baskaran V, Davis K, Bali RK, Naguib RN, Wickramasinghe N. Managing information and knowledge within maternity services: privacy and consent issues. Inform Health Soc Care. 2013;38(3):196–210. https://doi.org/10.3109/17538157.2012.735732 .

Shaw-Taylor Y. Making quality improvement programs more effective. Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2014;27(4):264–70. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHCQA-02-2013-0017 .

Haarbrandt B, Schreiweis B, Rey S, Sax U, Scheithauer S, Rienhoff O, et al. HiGHmed–an open platform approach to enhance care and research across institutional boundaries. Methods Inf Med. 2018;57(S01):e66–81.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Kloss LL. Leading innovation in enterprise information governance. J Am Health Inf Manag Assoc. 2013;84(9):34–8.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is part of a PhD thesis in Medical Library and Information Science supported and founded by the Iran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran. The ethical code is IR.IUMS.REC.1400.1158. We thank Iran University of Medical Science for supporting this research.

The present study is the funded by Iran University of Medical Sciences(IUMS) (IR.IUMS.REC.1400.1158).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Medical Library and Information Science, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Somayeh Ghaffari Heshajin, Shahram Sedghi & Sirous Panahi

Department of Global Health & Public Policy, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Amirhossein Takian

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

S.G.H. performed several tasks, including conceptualization, methodology development, using software, formal analysis, investigation, resource allocation, original draft writing and data curation. S.S. undertakes various activities and roles, including supervision, project administration, funding acquisition and writing reviews. S.P. is involved in various activities, including writing – review and editing, as well as validation, conceptualization, data curation and methodology development. A.T. undertakes various activities and roles, including methodology development, conceptualization and writing – review and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shahram Sedghi .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have 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, supplementary material 2, 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.

Ghaffari Heshajin, S., Sedghi, S., Panahi, S. et al. A framework for health information governance: a scoping review. Health Res Policy Sys 22 , 109 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01193-9

Download citation

Received : 10 February 2024

Accepted : 20 July 2024

Published : 15 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01193-9

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

• Health information governance
• Scoping review
• Healthcare industry
• Health information

Health Research Policy and Systems

ISSN: 1478-4505

• Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
• General enquiries: [email protected]

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
• Open access
• Published: 10 August 2024

Mapping biomimicry research to sustainable development goals

• Raghu Raman 1 ,
• Aswathy Sreenivasan 2 ,
• M. Suresh 2 &
• Prema Nedungadi 3  

Scientific Reports volume  14 , Article number:  18613 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

565 Accesses

Metrics details

• Environmental sciences
• Environmental social sciences

This study systematically evaluates biomimicry research within the context of sustainable development goals (SDGs) to discern the interdisciplinary interplay between biomimicry and SDGs. The alignment of biomimicry with key SDGs showcases its interdisciplinary nature and potential to offer solutions across the health, sustainability, and energy sectors. This study identified two primary thematic clusters. The first thematic cluster focused on health, partnership, and life on land (SDGs 3, 17, and 15), highlighting biomimicry's role in healthcare innovations, sustainable collaboration, and land management. This cluster demonstrates the potential of biomimicry to contribute to medical technologies, emphasizing the need for cross-sectoral partnerships and ecosystem preservation. The second thematic cluster revolves around clean water, energy, infrastructure, and marine life (SDGs 6, 7, 9, and 14), showcasing nature-inspired solutions for sustainable development challenges, including energy generation and water purification. The prominence of SDG 7 within this cluster indicates that biomimicry significantly contributes to sustainable energy practices. The analysis of thematic clusters further revealed the broad applicability of biomimicry and its role in enhancing sustainable energy access and promoting ecosystem conservation. Emerging research topics, such as metaheuristics, nanogenerators, exosomes, and bioprinting, indicate a dynamic field poised for significant advancements. By mapping the connections between biomimicry and SDGs, this study provides a comprehensive overview of the field's trajectory, emphasizing its importance in advancing global sustainability efforts.

Similar content being viewed by others

Assessing the sustainability of the European Green Deal and its interlin kages with the SDGs

Greater gains for Australia by tackling all SDGs but the last steps will be the most challenging

Six Transformations to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction.

Biomimicry, which combines 'bio' (life) and 'mimicry' (imitation), uses nature's patterns to solve human problems, aligning with the SDGs by fostering innovations 1 . This discipline studies natural processes to inspire sustainable designs and promote responsible consumption and production 2 . Biomimicry emphasizes sustainability, ideation, and education in reconnecting with nature to achieve the SDGs 3 . Collaboration among designers, technologists, and business experts is vital for translating natural mechanisms into commercial solutions 4 . Biomimetics, which aims for radical innovations by replicating living systems, strives for breakthroughs in economic growth 5 . By promoting systemic change through the emulation of nature's regenerative processes, biomimicry's alignment with the SDGs could enhance sustainability efforts. Merging biomimicry insights with SDGs could exceed sustainability benchmarks.

Integrating biomimicry with sustainable development goals (SDGs) is crucial for addressing global challenges. The SDGs offer a blueprint for global well-being and environmental stewardship by 2030 6 . They aim to protect the environment and foster social and economic development. Biomimicry provides innovative approaches to these objectives, drawing from natural strategies. While SDGs offer clear targets, biomimicry complements these by providing a unique lens for solutions 7 . The investigation of biomimicry in conjunction with the SDGs is based on the understanding that the development of biologically inspired materials, structures, and systems offers a novel and sustainable solution to design problems, particularly in the built environment 8 . By mimicking nature's answers to complicated challenges, biomimicry produces creative, clever, long-lasting, and environmentally responsible ideas.

The SDGs outline a comprehensive sustainability agenda targeting social equity, environmental conservation, and poverty alleviation 9 . The use of biomimicry in research can lead to the development of solutions that mimic natural efficiency 10 , revolutionizing industries with resource-efficient technologies and enhancing sustainability. This synergy could lead to environmentally friendly products, improved energy solutions, and effective waste management systems. Integrating biomimicry into industry and education promotes environmental stewardship and ecological appreciation 11 . Marrying biomimicry research with SDGs has accelerated progress toward sustainable development.

Biomimicry can provide insightful and useful solutions consistent with sustainability ideals by imitating the adaptability and efficiency observed in biological systems 12 . The built environment's use of biomimicry has a greater sustainable impact when circular design features are included 13 . Reusing materials, cutting waste, and designing systems that work with natural cycles are all stressed in a circular design. Combining biomimicry and circular design promotes social inclusion, environmental resilience, resourcefulness, and compassionate governance, all of which lead to peaceful coexistence with the environment. This all-encompassing strategy demonstrates a dedication to tackling the larger social and environmental concerns that the SDGs represent and design challenges 14 . Complementing these studies, Wamane 7 examined the intersection of biomimicry, the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) framework, and circular economy principles, advocating for an economic paradigm shift toward sustainability.

A key aspect of realizing the impact of biomimicry on SDGs is the successful translation and commercialization of biomimicry discoveries. This involves overcoming barriers such as skill gaps, the engineering mindset, commercial acumen, and funding. Insights from the "The State of Nature-Inspired-Innovation in the UK" report provide a comprehensive analysis of these challenges and potential strategies to address them, underscoring the importance of integrating commercial perspectives into biomimicry research.

This research employs bibliometric techniques to assess the integration and coherence within circular economy policy-making, emphasizing the potential for a synergistic relationship between environmental stewardship, economic growth, and social equity to foster a sustainable future.

In addressing the notable gap in comprehensive research concerning the contribution of biomimicry solutions to specific SDGs, this study offers significant insights into the interdisciplinary applications of biomimicry and its potential to advance global sustainability efforts. Our investigation aims to bridge this research gap through a systematic analysis, resulting in the formulation of the following research questions:

RQ1: How does an interdisciplinary analysis of biomimicry research align with and contribute to advancing specific SDGs?

RQ2: What emerging topics within biomimicry research are gaining prominence, and how do they relate to the SDGs?

RQ3 : What are the barriers to the translation and commercialization of biomimicry innovations, and how can these barriers be overcome to enhance their impact on SDGs?

RQ4: Based on the identified gaps in research and the potential for interdisciplinary collaboration, what innovative areas within biomimicry can be further explored to address underrepresented SDGs?

The remainder of this paper is arranged as follows. Section " Literature review " focuses on the literature background of biomimicry, followed by methods (section " Methods ") and results and discussion, including emerging research topics (section " Results and discussion "). Section " Conclusion " concludes with recommendations and limitations.

Literature review

The potential of biomimicry solutions for sustainability has long been recognized, yet there is a notable lack of comprehensive studies that explore how biomimicry can address specific sustainable development goals (SDGs) (Table 1 ). This research aims to fill this gap by investigating relevant themes and building upon the literature in this field.

Biomimicry, with its roots tracing back to approximately 500 BC, began with Greek philosophers who developed classical concepts of beauty and drew inspiration from natural organisms for balanced design 15 . This foundational idea of looking to nature for design principles continued through history, as exemplified by Leonardo Da Vinci's creation of a flying machine inspired by birds in 1482. This early instance of biomimicry influenced subsequent advancements, including the Wright brothers' development of the airplane in 1948 12 , 15 . The term "bionics," coined in 1958 to describe "the science of natural systems or their analogs," evolved into "biomimicry" by 1982. Janine Benyus's 1997 book, “Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature,” and the founding of the Biomimicry Institute (Biomimicry 16 ) were pivotal, positioning nature as a guide and model for sustainable design. Benyus’s work underscores the potential of biomimicry in tackling contemporary environmental challenges such as climate change and ecosystem degradation 12 , 17 .

In recent years, the call for more targeted research in biomimicry has grown, particularly in terms of architecture and energy use. Meena et al. 18 and Varshabi et al. 19 highlighted the need for biomimicry to address energy efficiency in building design, stressing the potential of nature-inspired solutions to reduce energy consumption and enhance sustainability. This perspective aligns with that of Perricone et al. 20 , who explored the differences between artificial and natural systems, noting that biomimetic designs, which mimic the principles of organism construction, can significantly improve resource utilization and ecosystem restoration. Aggarwal and Verma 21 contributed to this discourse by mapping the evolution and applications of biomimicry through scientometric analysis, revealing the growing significance of nature-inspired optimization methodologies, especially in clustering techniques. Their work suggested that these methodologies not only provide innovative solutions but also reflect a deeper integration of biomimetic principles in technological advancements. Building on this, Pinzón and Austin 22 emphasized the infancy of biomimicry in the context of renewable energy, advocating for more research to explore how nature can inspire new energy solutions. Their work connects with that of Carniel et al. 23 , who introduced a natural language processing (NLP) technique to identify research themes in biomimicry across disciplines, facilitating a holistic understanding of current trends and future directions.

To further illustrate the practical applications of biomimicry, Nasser et al. 24 presented the Harmony Search Algorithm (HSA), a nature-inspired optimization technique. Their bibliometric analysis demonstrated the algorithm's effectiveness in reducing energy and resource consumption, highlighting the practical benefits of biomimicry in technological innovation. Rusu et al. 25 expanded on these themes by documenting significant advancements in soft robotics, showing how biomimicry influences design principles and applications in this rapidly evolving field. Their findings underscore the diverse applications of biomimetic principles, from robotics to building design. Shashwat et al. 26 emphasized the role of bioinspired solutions in enhancing energy efficiency within the built environment, promoting the use of high solar reflectance surfaces that mimic natural materials. This perspective is in line with that of Pires et al. 27 , who evaluated the application of biomimicry in dental restorative materials and identified a need for more clinical studies to realize the full potential of biomimetic innovations in healthcare. Liu et al. 28 explored the application of nature-inspired design principles in software-defined networks, demonstrating how biomimetic algorithms can optimize resource and energy utilization in complex systems. This study builds on the broader narrative of biomimicry's potential to transform various sectors by offering efficient, sustainable solutions. Finally, Hinkelman et al. 29 synthesized these insights by discussing the transdisciplinary applications of ecosystem biomimicry, which supports sustainable development goals by integrating biomimetic principles across engineering and environmental disciplines. This comprehensive approach underscores the transformative potential of biomimicry, suggesting that continued interdisciplinary research and innovation are crucial for addressing global sustainability challenges effectively.

PRISMA framework

This study utilizes the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) framework to structure its analysis, following the established five-step protocol: formulating research questions, defining a search strategy, executing a literature search, screening identified literature, and analyzing the findings (Page et al., 2021). The application of the PRISMA guidelines across various research domains, including the SDGs, is well documented 30 .

To ensure a comprehensive search, we searched the Scopus database, a widely utilized resource for bibliometric studies 31 (Donthu et al. 82 ), which led to the discovery of 46,141 publications from 2013 to 2023. This period marked significant research activity following the introduction of the SDGs at the Rio + 20 summit in 2012. Publications were identified using the following terms in the title and abstract: “ (biomimic* OR biomimetic* OR bioinspired OR bioinsp* OR bionic* OR nature-inspired OR "biologically inspired" OR bioinspiration OR biomimesis OR biognosis).”

During the screening phase, publications lacking complete author details were reviewed, narrowing the field to 46,083 publications for further analysis. The eligibility phase utilized proprietary algorithms to map publications to the 17 SDGs, informed by initiatives such as the University of Auckland (Auckland’s SDG mapping 32 ) and Elsevier's SDG Mapping Initiatives (Elsevier's SDG Mapping 33 ). The selection of the Elsevier SDG Mapping Initiative for this study was based on its seamless integration with Scopus, facilitating the use of predefined search queries for each SDG and employing a machine learning model that has been refined through expert review. This approach has been utilized in various studies to analyze research trends within emerging fields. For example, the exploration of green hydrogen was detailed by Raman et al. 34 , while investigations into Fake News and the Dark Web were conducted by Raman et al. 35 , 36 , 37 and Rama et al. 38 , respectively. These examples demonstrate the efficacy of SDG mapping in elucidating how research outputs align with and contribute to sustainable development goals in these emerging domains. This phase identified 13,287 publications as mapped to SDGs. In the inclusion phase, stringent criteria further filtered the publications to English-language journals and review articles, culminating in 13,271 publications deemed suitable for in-depth analysis. This process ensures a comprehensive and high-quality dataset for the study, reflecting the robust and systematic approach afforded by the PRISMA framework in evaluating literature relevant to SDGs.

Our keyword search strategy, while comprehensive, may capture papers that do not genuinely contribute to the field. To mitigate this, we employed manual verification. After the automated search, the authors conducted a manual review of a subset of the final set of identified papers to assess their relevance and authenticity in the context of biomimicry. The subset was based on 20 highly cited papers from each year. We believe that papers that are frequently cited within the community are more likely to be accurately classified. The authors mainly reviewed the introduction, methodology, and results sections to confirm the relevance and authenticity of the papers. However, we acknowledge that these steps may not fully eliminate the inclusion of irrelevant papers, which could skew the results of our meta-analysis.

SDG framework

The examination of sustainable development goals (SDGs) reveals their interconnected nature, where the achievement of one goal often supports progress in others. Studies by Le Blanc (2015) and Allison et al. (2016) have mapped out the complex web of relationships among the SDGs, identifying both strong and subtle linkages across different objectives. To visualize these connections, we employed a cocitation mapping approach using VOSviewer 39 , which allows us to depict the semantic relationships between SDGs through their cocitation rates in scholarly works. This approach generates a visual map where each SDG is represented as a node, with the node size reflecting the goal's research prominence and the thickness of the lines between nodes indicating the frequency of cocitations among the goals. This visual representation reveals the SDGs as an intricate but unified framework, emphasizing the collaborative nature of global sustainability initiatives.

Topic prominence percentile

The Scopus prominence percentile is a crucial metric indicating the visibility and impact of emerging research topics within the scientific community. High-ranking topics in this percentile are rapidly gaining attention, highlighting emerging trends and areas poised for significant advancements. This tool enables researchers and policymakers to identify and focus on innovative topics, ensuring that their efforts align with the forefront of scientific development 35 , 36 , 37 . Topics above the 99.9th percentile were used in this study.

Results and discussion

Rq1: sdg framework and interdisciplinary research (rq4).

This study evaluates biomimicry research through the framework of SDGs. A cocitation SDG map shows two clusters and provides insights into the interplay between biomimicry themes and SDGs, highlighting the cross-disciplinary nature of this research (Fig.  1 ). The blue box hidden behind the “3 – Good Health and Well-being” and “7 – Affordable and Clean Energy” is “11 – Sustainable cities and Communities”. The blue box hidden behind “15 – Life on Land” is “16 – Peace, Justice and Strong institutions”.

Interdisciplinary SDG network of biomimicry research.

Cluster 1 (Red): Biomimetic innovations for health, partnership, and life on land

This cluster comprises a diverse array of research articles that explore the application of biomimicry across various SDGs 3 (health), 17 (partnership), and 15 (land). The papers in this cluster delve into innovative biomimetic ideas, each contributing uniquely to the intersection of sustainable development and biological inspiration. SDG 3, emphasizing good health and well-being for all, is significantly represented, indicating a global effort to leverage biomimicry for advancements in healthcare, such as new medication delivery systems and medical technologies. Similarly, the frequent citations of SDG 17 underscore the vital role of partnerships in achieving sustainable growth, especially where bioinspired solutions require interdisciplinary collaboration to address complex challenges. Finally, the prominence of 15 SDG citations reflects a commitment to preserving terrestrial ecosystems, where biomimicry is increasingly applied in land management, demonstrating nature's adaptability and resilience as a model for sustainable practices. Table 2 lists the top 5 relevant papers from Cluster 1, further illustrating the multifaceted application of biomimicry in addressing these SDGs.

A unique binary variant of the gray wolf optimization (GWO) technique, designed especially for feature selection in classification tasks, was presented by Emary et al. 40 . GWO is a method inspired by the social hierarchy and hunting behavior of gray wolves to find the best solutions to complex problems. This bioinspired optimization technique was used to optimize SDG15, which also highlights its ecological benefits. The results of the study highlight the effectiveness of binary gray wolf optimization in identifying the feature space for ideal pairings and promoting environmental sustainability and biodiversity. Lin et al. 41 focused on SDG 3 by examining catalytically active nanomaterials as potential candidates for artificial enzymes. While acknowledging the limits of naturally occurring enzymes, this study explores how nanobiotechnology can address problems in the food, pharmaceutical, and agrochemical sectors.

The investigation of enzymatic nanomaterials aligns with health-related objectives, highlighting the potential for major improvements in human health. Parodi et al. 42 used biomimetic leukocyte membranes to functionalize synthetic nanoparticles, extending biomimicry into the biomedical domain. To meet SDG 3, this research presents "leukolike vectors," which are nanoporous silicon particles that can communicate with cells, evade the immune system, and deliver specific payloads. In line with the SDGs about health, this study emphasizes the possible uses of biomimetic structures in cancer detection and treatments. A novel strategy for biological photothermal nanodot-based anticancer therapy utilizing peptide‒porphyrin conjugate self-assembly was presented by Zou et al. 43 . For therapeutic reasons, efficient light-to-heat conversion can be achieved by imitating the structure of biological structures. By providing a unique biomimetic approach to cancer treatment and demonstrating the potential of self-assembling biomaterials in biomedical applications, this research advances SDG 3. Finally, Wang et al. 44 presented Monarch butterfly optimization (MBO), which is a bioinspired algorithm that mimics the migration patterns of monarch butterflies to solve optimization problems effectively. This method presents a novel approach to optimization, mimicking the migration of monarch butterflies, aligning with SDG 9. Comparative analyses highlight MBO's exceptional performance and demonstrate its capacity to address intricate issues about business and innovation, supporting objectives for long-term collaboration and sector expansion.

The publications in Cluster 1 show a wide range of biomimetic developments, from ecological optimization to new optimization techniques and biomedical applications. These varied contributions highlight how biomimicry can advance sustainable development in health, symbiosis, and terrestrial life.

Cluster 2 (green): Nature-inspired solutions for clean water, energy, and infrastructure

Cluster 2, which focuses on the innovative application of biomimicry in sustainable development, represents a range of research that aligns with SDGs 6 (sanitation), 7 (energy), 9 (infrastructure), and 14 (water). This cluster is characterized by studies that draw inspiration from natural processes and structures to offer creative solutions to sustainability-related challenges. The papers in this cluster, detailed in Table 3 , demonstrate how biomimicry can address key global concerns in a varied and compelling manner.

Within this cluster, the high citation counts for SDG 7 underscore the significance of accessible clean energy, a domain where biomimicry contributes innovative energy generation and storage solutions inspired by natural processes. This aligns with the growing emphasis on sustainable energy practices. The prominence of SDG 9 citations further highlights the global focus on innovation and sustainable industry, where biomimicry's role in developing nature-inspired designs is crucial for building robust systems and resilient infrastructure. Furthermore, the substantial citations for SDG 6 reflect a dedicated effort toward ensuring access to clean water and sanitation for all. In this regard, biomimicry principles are being applied in water purification technologies, illustrating how sustainable solutions modeled after natural processes can effectively meet clean water objectives.

The study by Sydney Gladman et al. (2016), which presented the idea of shape-morphing systems inspired by nastic plant motions, is one notable addition to this cluster. This discovery creates new opportunities for tissue engineering, autonomous robotics, and smart textile applications by encoding composite hydrogel designs that exhibit anisotropic swelling behavior. The emphasis of SDG 9 on promoting industry, innovation, and infrastructure aligns with this biomimetic strategy. SDGs 7 and 13 are addressed in the study of Li et al. 45 , which is about engineering heterogeneous semiconductors for solar water splitting. This work contributes to the goals of inexpensive, clean energy and climate action by investigating methods such as band structure engineering and bionic engineering to increase the efficiency of solar water splitting. Li et al. 46 conducted a thorough study highlighting the importance of catalysts for the selective photoreduction of CO2 into solar fuels. This review offers valuable insights into the use of semiconductor catalysts for selective photocatalytic CO2 reduction. Our work advances sustainable energy solutions by investigating biomimetic, metal-based, and metal-free cocatalysts and contributes to SDGs 7 and 13. Wang et al. 47 address the critical problem of water pollution. Creating materials with superlyophilic and superlyophobic qualities offers a creative method for effectively separating water and oil. This contributes to the goals of clean water, industry, innovation, and life below the water. It also correlates with SDGs 6, 9, and 14. Singh et al. 48 also explored the 'green' synthesis of metals and their oxide nanoparticles for environmental remediation, which furthers SDG 9. This review demonstrates the environmentally benign and sustainable features of green synthesis and its potential to lessen the environmental impact of conventional synthesis methods.

Cluster 2 provides nature-inspired solutions for clean water, renewable energy, and sustainable infrastructure, demonstrating the scope and importance of biomimicry. The varied applications discussed in these papers help overcome difficult problems and advance sustainable development in line with several SDGs.

RQ2: Emerging research topics

Temporal evolution of emerging topics.

Figure  2 displays the publication counts for various emerging topics from 2013 to 2022, indicating growth trends over the years. For 'Metaheuristics', there is a notable increase in publications peaking in approximately 2020, suggesting a surge in interest. 'Strain sensor' research steadily increased, reaching its highest publication frequency toward the end of the period, which is indicative of growing relevance in the field. 'Bioprinting' sharply increased over the next decade, subsequently maintaining high interest, which highlights its sustained innovation. In contrast, 'Actuators' showed fluctuating publication counts, with a recent upward trend. 'Cancer' research, while historically a major topic, displayed a spike in publications in approximately 2018, possibly reflecting a breakthrough or increased research funding. 'Myeloperoxidase' has a smaller presence in the literature, with a modest peak in 2019. The number of 'Water '-related publications remains relatively low but shows a slight increase, suggesting a gradual but increasing recognition of its importance. Research on exosomes has significantly advanced, particularly since 2018, signifying a greater area of focus. 'Mechanical' topic publications have moderate fluctuations without a clear trend, indicating steady research interest. 'Micromotors' experienced an initial publication surge, followed by a decline and then a recent resurgence, possibly due to new technological applications. 'Nanogenerators' have shown a dramatic increase in interest, particularly in recent years, while 'Hydrogel' publications have varied, with a recent decline, which may point toward a shift in research focus or maturity of the topic.

Evolution of emerging topics according to publications (y-axis denotes the number of publications; x-axis denotes the year of publication).

Figure  3 presents the distribution of various research topics based on their prominence percentile and total number of publications. Topics above the 99.9th percentile and to the right of the vertical threshold line represent the most emergent and prolific topics of study. Next, we examine the topics within each of the four quadrants, focusing on how each topic has developed over the years in relation to SDGs and the key phrases associated with each topic.

Distribution of research topics based on prominence percentile and total number of publications.

Next, we examine each research topic in four quadrants, assessing their evolution concerning SDGs. We also analyze the keyphrase cloud to identify which keyphrases are most relevant (indicated by their font size) and whether they are growing or not. In the key phrase cloud, green indicates an increasing relevance of the key phrase, grey signifies that its relevance remains constant, and blue represents a declining relevance of the key phrase.

Niche biomimetic applications

These are topics with a lower number of publications and prominence percentiles, indicating specialized or emerging areas of research that are not yet widely recognized or pursued (Quadrant 1—bottom left).

Myeloperoxidase; colorimetric; chromogenic compounds

The inclusion of myeloperoxidase indicates that inflammation and the immune system are the main research topics. The focus on chromogenic and colorimetric molecules suggests a relationship to analytical techniques for identifying biological materials. The evolution of the research is depicted in Fig.  4 a shows an evolving emphasis on various sustainable development goals (SDGs) over time. The research trajectory, initially rooted in SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), has progressively branched out to encompass SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) and SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), reflecting an expanding scope of inquiry within the forestry sciences. More recently, the focus has transitioned toward SDG 15 (Life on Land), indicating an increased recognition of the interconnectedness between forest ecosystems and broader environmental and sustainability goals. This trend underscores the growing complexity and multidisciplinary nature of forestry research, highlighting the need to address comprehensive ecological concerns along with human well-being and sustainable development.

Evolution of research ( a ) and key phrases ( b ).

The word cloud in Fig.  4 b highlights key phrases such as 'Biocompatible', 'Actuator', and 'Self-healing Hydrogel', reflecting a focus on advanced materials, while terms such as 'Elastic Modulus' and 'Polymeric Networks' suggest an emphasis on the structural properties essential for creating innovative diagnostic and environmental sensing tools. Such developments are pertinent to health monitoring and water purification, resonating with SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation). The prominence of 'Self-healing' and 'Bioinspired' indicates a shift toward materials that emulate natural processes for durability and longevity, supporting sustainable industry practices aligned with SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) and SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production), contributing to the overarching aim of sustainable development.

Next, we analyzed the top 3 cited publications. Catalytically active nanomaterials, or nanozymes, are exciting candidates for artificial enzymes, according to Lin et al. 41 . The authors explore the structural features and biomimetics applications of these enzymes, classifying them as metal-, carbon-, and metal oxide-based nanomaterials. This study emphasizes the benefits of enzymes over natural enzymes, including their high stability, variable catalytic activity, and controlled production. Wang et al. 49 developed biomimetic nanoflowers made from nanozymes to cause intracellular oxidative damage in hypoxic malignancies. Under both normoxic and hypoxic conditions, the nanoflowers demonstrated catalytic efficiency. By overcoming the constraints of existing systems that depend on oxygen availability or external stimuli, this novel technique represents a viable treatment option for malignant neoplasms. Gao et al. 50 investigated the use of a dual inorganic nanozyme-catalyzed cascade reaction as a biomimetic approach for nanocatalytic tumor therapy. This approach produces a high level of therapeutic efficacy by cascading catalytic events inside the tumor microenvironment. This study highlights the potential of inorganic nanozymes for achieving high therapeutic efficacy and outstanding biosafety, which adds to the growing interest in nanocatalytic tumor therapy.

Water; hydrophobicity; aerogels

With an emphasis on hydrophobicity, aerogel use, and water-related features, this topic relates to materials science and indicates interest in cutting-edge materials with unique qualities. From Fig.  5 a, we can see that, initially, the focus was directed toward SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation), which is intrinsically related to the research theme, as biomimetic approaches are leveraged to develop innovative water purification and management solutions. As the research progressed, the scope expanded to intersect with SDG 14 (Life Below Water) and SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), signifying a broadened impact of biomimetic innovations in marine ecosystem conservation and energy-efficient materials. The gradual involvement with SDG 9 (industry, innovation, and infrastructure) and SDG 13 (climate action) indicates the interdisciplinary reach of this research, which aims to influence industrial practices and climate change mitigation strategies.

The word cloud in Fig.  5 b reinforces this narrative by showcasing key phrases such as 'Hydrophobic', 'Bioinspired', 'Emulsion', and 'Oil Pollution', which reflect the emphasis on developing materials and technologies that mimic natural water repellency and separation processes. 'Aerogel' and 'polydopamine', along with 'Underwater' and 'Biomimetic Cleaning', suggest a strong focus on creating lightweight, efficient materials capable of self-cleaning and oil spill remediation. These keywords encapsulate the essence of the research theme, demonstrating a clear alignment with the targeted SDGs and the overall aim of sustainable development through biomimicry.

Three highly referenced works that have made substantial contributions to the field of biomimetic materials for oil/water separation are included in the table. The development of superlyophilic and superlyophobic materials for effective oil/water separation was examined by Wang et al. 47 . This review highlights the applications of these materials in separating different oil-and-water combinations by classifying them according to their surface wettability qualities. The excellent efficiency, selectivity, and recyclability of the materials—which present a viable treatment option for industrial oily wastewater and oil spills—are highlighted in the paper. Su et al. 51 explored the evolution of super wettability systems. The studies included superhydrophobicity, superoleophobicity, and undersea counterparts, among other extreme wettabilities. The kinetics, material structures, and wetting conditions related to obtaining superwettability are covered in the article. This demonstrates the wide range of uses for these materials in chemistry and materials science, including self-cleaning fabrics and systems for separating oil and water. Zhang et al. 52 presented a bioinspired multifunctional foam with self-cleaning and oil/water separation capabilities. To construct a polyurethane foam with superhydrophobicity and superoleophobicity, this study used porous biomaterials and superhydrophobic self-cleaning lotus leaves. Foam works well for separating oil from water because of its slight weight and ability to float on water. It also shows exceptional resistance to corrosive liquids. According to the article, multifunctional foams for large-scale oil spill cleaning might be designed using a low-cost fabrication technology that could be widely adopted.

Growing interest in bioinspired healthcare

These topics have a higher prominence percentile but a lower number of publications, suggesting growing interest and importance in the field despite a smaller body of research (Quadrant 2—top left).

Exosomes; extracellular vesicles; MicroRNAs

Exosomes and extracellular vesicles are essential for intercellular communication, and reference to microRNAs implies a focus on genetic regulation. The evolution of this topic reflects an increasing alignment with specific sustainable development goals (SDGs) over the years. The initial research focused on SDG 3 (good health and well-being) has expanded to encompass SDG 9 (industry, innovation, and infrastructure) and SDG 6 (clean water and sanitation), showcasing the multifaceted impact of biomimetic research in healthcare (Fig.  6 a). The research trajectory into SDG 9 and SDG 6 suggests broader application of bioinspired technologies beyond healthcare, potentially influencing sustainable industrial processes and water treatment technologies, respectively.

The word cloud (Fig.  6 b) underscores the central role of 'Extracellular Vesicles' and 'Exosomes' as platforms for 'Targeted Drug Delivery' and 'Nanocarrier' systems, which are key innovations in medical biotechnology. The prominence of terms such as 'Bioinspired', 'Biomimetic', 'Liposome', and 'Gold Nanoparticle' illustrates the inspiration drawn from biological systems for developing advanced materials and delivery mechanisms. These key phrases indicate significant advancements in 'Controlled Drug Delivery Systems', 'Cancer Chemotherapy', and 'Molecular Imaging', which have contributed to improved diagnostics and treatment options, consistent with the objectives of SDG 3.

The work by Jang et al. 53 , which introduced bioinspired exosome-mimetic nanovesicles for improved drug delivery to tumor tissues, is one of the most cited articles. These nanovesicles, which resemble exosomes but have higher creation yields, target cells and slow the growth of tumors in a promising way. Yong et al.'s 54 work presented an effective drug carrier for targeted cancer chemotherapy, focusing on biocompatible tumor cell-exocytosed exosome-biomimetic porous silicon nanoparticles. A paper by Cheng et al. 55 discussed the difficulties in delivering proteins intracellularly. This study suggested a biomimetic nanoparticle platform that uses extracellular vesicle membranes and metal–organic frameworks. These highly cited studies highlight the importance of biomimetic techniques in improving drug delivery systems for improved therapeutic interventions.

Nanogenerators; piezoelectric; energy harvesting

This topic advises concentrating on technology for energy harvesting, especially for those that use piezoelectric materials and nanogenerators. We see a rising focus on medical applications of biomimetics, from diagnostics to energy harvesting mimicking biological systems.

The evolution of this research topic reflects a broader contribution to the SDGs by not only addressing healthcare needs but also by promoting sustainable energy practices and supporting resilient infrastructure through biomimetic innovation (Fig.  7 a). Initially, the emphasis on SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) suggested the early application of biomimetic principles in healthcare, particularly in medical devices and diagnostics leveraging piezoelectric effects. Over time, the transition toward SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) and SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) indicates an expansion of bioinspired technologies into sustainable energy solutions and industrial applications. Nanogenerators and energy harvesting techniques draw inspiration from biological processes and structures, aiming to optimize energy efficiency and contribute to clean energy initiatives.

The word cloud in Fig.  7 b emphasizes key phrases such as 'Piezoelectric', 'Energy Harvesting', 'Tactile Sensor', 'Triboelectricity', and 'Nanogenerators', highlighting the core technologies that are being developed. These terms, along with 'Bioinspired', 'Wearable Electronic Devices', and 'Energy Conversion Efficiency', illustrate the convergence of natural principles with advanced material science to create innovative solutions for energy generation and sensor technology.

Yang et al.'s 56 study in Advanced Materials presented the first triboelectrification-based bionic membrane sensor. Wearable medical monitoring and biometric authentication systems will find new uses for this sensor since it allows self-powered physiological and behavioral measurements, such as noninvasive human health evaluation, anti-interference throat voice recording, and multimodal biometric authentication. A thorough analysis of the state-of-the-art in piezoelectric energy harvesting was presented by Sezer and Koç 57 . This article addresses the fundamentals, components, and uses of piezoelectric generators, highlighting their development, drawbacks, and prospects. It also predicts a time when piezoelectric technology will power many electronics. The 2021 paper by Zhao et al. 58 examines the use of cellulose-based materials in flexible electronics. This section describes the benefits of these materials and the latest developments in intelligent electronic device creation, including biomimetic electronic skins, optoelectronics, sensors, and optoelectronic devices. This review sheds light on the possible drawbacks and opportunities for wearable technology and bioelectronic systems based on cellulose.

Leading edge of biomimetic sensing and electronics

This quadrant represents topics with both a high number of publications and a prominence percentile, indicating well-established and influential research areas (Quadrant 3—top right).

Strain sensor; flexible electronics; sensor

Figure  8 a highlights the progress of research on bioinspired innovations, particularly in the development of strain sensors and flexible electronics for adaptive sensing technologies. Initially, concentrated on health applications aligned with SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), the focus has expanded. The integration of SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) indicates a shift toward industrial applications, while the incorporation of SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy) suggests a commitment to energy-efficient solutions. Additionally, the mention of SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) and SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) reflects the broadening scope to include urban sustainability and eco-friendly manufacturing practices.

Figure  8 b provides insight into the key phrases associated with this research topic, highlighting terms such as 'Bioinspired', 'Self-healing', 'Wearable Electronic Devices', 'Flexible Electronics', and 'Pressure Sensor'. These key phrases speak to the innovative approaches for creating sensors and electronics that are not only inspired by biological systems but also capable of seamlessly integrating human activity and environmental needs. The mention of 'Wearable Sensors' and 'Tactile Sensor' indicates a focus on user interaction and sensitivity, which is crucial for medical applications and smart infrastructure.

The top three articles with the most citations represent the cutting edge of this topic’s study. Chortos et al. 59 investigated how skin characteristics can be replicated for medicinal and prosthetic uses. Kim et al. 60 focused on creating ultrathin silicon nanoribbon sensors for smart prosthetic skin, opening up new possibilities for bionic systems with many sensors. A bioinspired microhairy sensor for ultraconformability on nonflat surfaces was introduced in Pang et al.'s 61 article, which significantly improved signal-to-noise ratios for accurate physiological measurements.

Cancer; photoacoustics; theranostic nanomedicine

Modern technologies such as photoacoustics, theranostic nanomedicine, and cancer research suggest that novel cancer diagnosis and therapy methods are highly needed. Figure  9 a traces the research focus that has evolved across various SDGs over time, commencing with SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), which is indicative of the central role of health in biomimetic research. It then extends into SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) and SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), illustrating the cross-disciplinary applications of biomimetic technologies from healthcare to the energy and industrial sectors.

Figure  9 b provides a snapshot of the prominent keywords within this research theme, featuring terms such as “photodynamic therapy”, “photothermal chemotherapy”, “nanocarrier”, and “controlled drug delivery”. These terms underscore the innovative therapeutic strategies that mimic biological mechanisms for targeted cancer treatment. 'Bioinspired' and 'Biomimetic Synthesis' reflect the approach of deriving design principles from natural systems for the development of advanced materials and medical devices. 'Theranostic nanomedicine' integrates diagnosis and therapy, demonstrating a trend toward personalized and precision medicine.

A study conducted by Yu et al. 62 presented a novel approach for synergistic chemiexcited photodynamic-starvation therapy against metastatic tumors: a biomimetic nanoreactor, or bio-NR. Bio-NRs use hollow mesoporous silica nanoparticles to catalyze the conversion of glucose to hydrogen peroxide for starvation therapy while also producing singlet oxygen for photodynamic therapy. Bio-NR is promising for treating cancer metastasis because its coating on cancer cells improves its biological qualities. Yang et al.'s 63 study focused on a biocompatible Gd-integrated CuS nanotheranostic agent created via a biomimetic approach. This drug has low systemic side effects and good photothermal conversion efficiency, making it suitable for skin cancer therapy. It also performs well in imaging. The ultrasmall copper sulfide nanoparticles generated within ferritin nanocages are described in Wang et al.’s 64 publication. This work highlights the possibility of photoacoustic imaging-guided photothermal therapy with improved therapeutic efficiency and biocompatibility. These highly referenced articles highlight the significance of biomimetic techniques in furthering nanotheranostics and cancer therapy.

Established biomimetic foundations

Here, there are topics with a greater number of publications but a lower prominence percentile, which may imply areas where there has been significant research but that may be waning in influence or undergoing a shift in focus (Quadrant 4—bottom right).

Metaheuristics; Fireflies; Chiroptera

This topic is a fascinating mix of subjects. Using Firefly and Chiroptera in metaheuristic optimization algorithms provides a bioinspired method for resolving challenging issues. The thematic progression of research papers suggests the maturation of biomimetic disciplines that resonate with several SDGs (Fig.  10 a). The shift from initially aligning with SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) extends to intersecting with goals such as SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure), SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities), SDG 13 (Climate Action), and SDG 15 (Life on Land). This diversification reflects the expansive utility of biomimetic approaches, from health applications to broader environmental and societal challenges.

The top keyphrases, such as 'Swarm Intelligence', 'Global Optimization', 'Cuckoo Search Algorithm', and 'Particle Swarm Optimization', are shown in Fig.  10 b highlights the utilization of nature-inspired algorithms for solving complex optimization problems. These terms, along with the 'Firefly Algorithm' and 'Bat Algorithm', underscore the transition of natural phenomena into computational algorithms that mimic the behavioral patterns of biological organisms, offering robust solutions in various fields, including resource management, logistics, and engineering design.

The three highly referenced metaheuristic publications centered around the “Moth Flame Optimization (MFO),” Salp Swarm Algorithm (SSA),” and Whale Optimization Algorithm (WOA).” The WOA, authored by Mirjalili and Lewis 65 , is a competitive solution for mathematical optimization and structural design issues because it emulates the social behavior of humpback whales. Inspired by the swarming behavior of salps, Mirjalili et al. 66 introduced the SSA and multiobjective SSA. This shows how well they function in optimizing a variety of engineering design difficulties. Finally, Mirjalili 67 suggested the MFO algorithm, which is modeled after the navigational strategy of moths and exhibits competitive performance in resolving benchmark and real-world engineering issues.

Bioprinting; three-dimensional printing; tissue engineering

The emphasis on sophisticated manufacturing methods for biological applications in this field suggests a keen interest in the nexus of biology and technology, especially in tissue engineering. As shown in Fig.  11 a, the topic's evolution encompasses Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that have transitioned over the years, including SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), which is inherently connected to the advancement of medical technologies and tissue engineering for health applications. This research also touches upon SDG 6 (Clean Water and Sanitation) and SDG 7 (Affordable and Clean Energy), suggesting applications of bioprinting technologies in the environmental sustainability and energy sectors. The progression toward SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation, and Infrastructure) and SDG 15 (Life on Land) reflects a broader impact, where biomimetic principles are applied to foster innovation in industrial processes and contribute to the preservation of terrestrial ecosystems.

Key phrases emerging from the word cloud in Fig.  11 b, such as “Hydrogel”, “Biofabrication”, “Tissue Scaffold”, and “Regenerative Medicine”, highlight the specialized methodologies and materials that are inspired by natural processes and structures. Terms such as 'Three-Dimensional Printing' and 'Bioprinting' underscore the technological advancements in creating complex biological structures, aiming to revolutionize the field of tissue engineering and regenerative medicine.

Three widely referenced papers about advances in 3D printing—particularly in bioprinting, soft matter, and the incorporation of biological tissue with functional electronics—are described next. Truby and Lewis’s 68 review of light- and ink-based 3D printing techniques is ground-breaking. This highlights the technology's capacity to create soft matter with tunable properties and its potential applications in robotics, shape-morphing systems, biologically inspired composites, and soft sensors. Ozbolat, and Hospodiuk 69 provide a thorough analysis of “extrusion-based bioprinting (EBB).” The adaptability of EBB in printing different biologics is discussed in the paper, with a focus on its uses in pharmaceutics, primary research, and clinical contexts. Future directions and challenges in EBB technology are also discussed. Using 3D printing, Mannoor et al. 70 presented a novel method for fusing organic tissue with functioning electronics. In the proof-of-concept, a hydrogel matrix seeded with cells and an interwoven conductive polymer containing silver nanoparticles are 3D printed to create a bionic ear. The improved auditory sensing capabilities of the printed ear show how this novel technology allows biological and nanoelectronic features to work together harmoniously.

RQ3: Translation and commercialization

Biomimicry offers promising solutions for sustainability in commercial industries with environmentally sustainable product innovation and energy savings with reduced resource commitment 71 . However, translating biomimicry innovations from research to commercialization presents challenges, including product validation, regulatory hurdles, and the need for strategic investment, innovative financial models, and interdisciplinary collaboration 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 . Ethical considerations highlight the need for universally applicable ethical guidelines regarding the moral debates surrounding biomimicry, such as motivations for pursuing such approaches and the valuation of nature 75 .

Addressing these barriers requires interdisciplinary collaboration, targeted education, and training programs. Strategic investment in biomimicry research and development is also crucial. Encouraging an engineering mindset that integrates biomimicry principles into conventional practices and developing commercial acumen among researchers is essential for navigating the market landscape 76 . Securing sufficient funding is essential for the development, testing, and scaling of these innovations 76 .

Successful case studies illustrate that the strategic integration of biomimicry enhances corporate sustainability and innovation (Larson & Meier 2017). In biomedical research, biomimetic approaches such as novel scaffolds and artificial skins have made significant strides (Zhang 2012). Architecture benefits through energy-efficient building facades modeled after natural cooling systems (Webb et al. 2017). The textile industry uses biomimicry to create sustainable, high-performance fabrics 77 .

RQ4: Interdisciplinary collaboration

Agricultural innovations (sdgs 1—no poverty and 2—zero hunger).

Environmental degradation, biodiversity loss, poverty, and hunger highlight the need for sustainable agricultural methods to mimic natural ecosystems. This includes computational models for ecological interactions, field experiments for biomimetic techniques, and novel materials inspired by natural soil processes. Research can develop solutions such as artificial photosynthesis for energy capture, polyculture systems mimicking ecosystem diversity, and bioinspired materials for soil regeneration and water retention 28 . These innovations can improve sustainability and energy efficiency in agriculture, addressing poverty and hunger through sustainable farming practices.

Educational models (SDG 4—Quality education)

Integrating sustainability principles and biomimicry into educational curricula at all levels presents opportunities for innovation. Collaborations between educators, environmental scientists, and designers can create immersive learning experiences that promote sustainability. This includes interdisciplinary curricula with biomimicry case studies, digital tools, and simulations for exploring biomimetic designs, and participatory learning approaches for engaging students with natural environments. Designing biomimicry-based educational tools and programs can help students engage in hands-on, project-based learning 10 , fostering a deeper understanding of sustainable living and problem-solving.

Gender-inclusive design (SDG 5—Gender inequality)

Gender biases in design and innovation call for research into biomimetic designs and technologies that facilitate gender equality. This includes participatory design processes involving women as cocreators, studying natural systems for inclusive strategies, and applying biomimetic principles to develop technologies supporting gender equality. Bioinspired technologies can address women's specific needs, enhancing access to education, healthcare, and economic opportunities. Interdisciplinary approaches involving gender studies, engineering, and environmental science can uncover new pathways for inclusive innovation.

Inclusive urban solutions (SDG 11—Sustainable cities and communities)

Rapid urbanization challenges such as housing shortages, environmental degradation, and unsustainable transportation systems require innovative solutions. Methodologies include systems thinking in urban planning, simulation tools for modeling biomimetic solutions, and pilot projects testing bioinspired urban innovations. Research on biomimetic architecture for affordable housing, green infrastructure for climate resilience, and bioinspired transportation systems can offer solutions. Collaborative efforts among architects, urban planners, ecologists, and sociologists are essential 78 .

Peace and justice (SDG 16—Peace, justice and institutions)

Social conflicts and weak institutions necessitate innovative approaches that integrate political science, sociology, and biology. Methods involve case studies, theoretical modeling, and participatory action research to develop strategies for peacebuilding and institutional development.

This research provides a comprehensive exploration of the multifaceted dimensions of biomimicry, SDG alignment, and interdisciplinary topics, demonstrating a clear trajectory of growth and relevance. Interdisciplinary collaboration has emerged as a pivotal strategy for unlocking the full potential of biomimicry in addressing underexplored SDGs.

While answering RQ1, the interdisciplinary analysis underscores the significant alignment of biomimicry research with several SDGs. This reflects the interdisciplinary nature of biomimicry and its ability to generate solutions for societal challenges. The analysis of two thematic clusters revealed the broad applicability of biomimicry across various sustainable development goals (SDGs). The first cluster includes health, partnership, and life on land (SDGs 3, 17, and 15), highlighting biomimicry's potential in medical technologies, sustainability collaborations, and land management. The second cluster encompasses clean water, energy, infrastructure, and marine life (SDGs 6, 7, 9, and 14), demonstrating innovative approaches to clean energy generation, sustainable infrastructure, and water purification.

In response to RQ2, this study highlights emerging topics within biomimicry research, such as metaheuristics and nanogenerators, which reflect a dynamic and evolving field that is swiftly gaining attention. These topics, alongside sensors, flexible electronics, and strain sensors, denote evolving research objectives and societal demands, pointing to new areas of study and innovation. This focus on interdisciplinary topics within biomimicry underscores the field’s adaptability and responsiveness to the shifting landscapes of technological and societal challenges.

In addressing RQ3, biomimicry holds potential for sustainable innovation but faces challenges in commercialization. Biomimicry inspires diverse technological and product innovations, driving sustainable advancements (Lurie-Luke 84 ). Overcoming these barriers through strategic investment, training, interdisciplinary collaboration, and ethical guidelines is essential for unlocking their full potential.

For RQ4 , the recommendations are formulated based on underexplored SDGs like 1, 4, 5, and 10 where biomimicry could play a pivotal role.

Future research could apply generative AI models to this dataset to validate the findings and explore additional insights. While our current study did not explore this topic, we see significant potential for this approach. Generative AI models can process extensive datasets and reveal patterns, potentially offering insights into biomimetic research correlations. The interpretation required for context-specific analysis remains challenging for generative AI 36 , 37

Our study provides valuable insights, but some limitations are worth considering. The chosen database might limit the comprehensiveness of the research captured, potentially excluding relevant work from other sources. Additionally, while the combination of cocitation mapping and BERTopic modeling provides a powerful analysis, both methods have inherent limitations. They may oversimplify the complexities of the field or introduce bias during theme interpretation, even with advanced techniques. Furthermore, our use of citations to thematically clustered publications as a proxy for impact inherits the limitations of citation analysis, such as biases toward established ideas and potential misinterpretations 79 , 80 . Another limitation of our study is the potential for missing accurate SDG mappings, as multiple SDG mapping initiatives are available, and our reliance on a single, Scopus-integrated method may not capture all relevant associations. Consequently, this could have resulted in the exclusion of papers that were appropriately aligned with certain SDGs but were not identified by our chosen mapping approach. Given these limitations, this study provides a valuable snapshot for understanding biomimicry research.

Data availability

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files.

El-Zeiny, R. M. A. Biomimicry as a problem solving methodology in interior architecture. Procedia. Soc. 50 , 502–512 (2012).

Article   Google Scholar  

Othmani, N. I., Sahak, N. M. & Yunos, M. Y. M. Biomimicry in agrotechnology: Future solution of water problem for the agriculture industry?. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 756 (1), 012051. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/756/1/012051 (2021).

Bensaude-Vincent, B. Bioinformed emerging technologies and their relation to the sustainability aims of biomimicry. Environ. Values 28 (5), 551–571 (2019).

Chirazi, J. E. Commercialization journeys: Bringing biomimetic innovation to the market. In Biomim. Mat., Des. and Habit. (pp. 393–436). Elsevier (2022).

Vincent, J. F., Bogatyreva, O. A., Bogatyrev, N. R., Bowyer, A. & Pahl, A. K. Biomimetics: Its practice and theory. J. R. Soc. Interface 3 (9), 471–482 (2006).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Pogge, T. & Sengupta, M. The sustainable development goals: A plan for building a better world?. J. Glob. Ethics 11 (1), 56–64 (2015).

Wamane, G. V. A “new deal” for a sustainable future: Enhancing circular economy by employing ESG principles and biomimicry for efficiency. Manag. Environ. Qual. https://doi.org/10.1108/MEQ-07-2022-0189 (2023).

Butt, A. N. & Dimitrijević, B. Multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary collaboration in nature-based design of sustainable architecture and urbanism. Sustainability 14 (16), 10339 (2022).

Gupta, J. & Vegelin, C. Sustainable development goals and inclusive development. INEA 16 , 433–448 (2016).

Google Scholar  

Hayes, S., Desha, C. & Baumeister, D. Learning from nature—Biomimicry innovation to support infrastructure sustainability and resilience. TFSC 161 , 120287 (2020).

Toner, J., Desha, C., Reis, K., Hes, D. & Hayes, S. Integrating ecological knowledge into regenerative design: A rapid practice review. Sustainability 15 (17), 13271 (2023).

Jamei, E. & Vrcelj, Z. Biomimicry and the built environment, learning from nature’s solutions. Appl. Sci. 11 (16), 7514 (2021).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Blanco, E., Pedersen Zari, M., Raskin, K. & Clergeau, P. Urban ecosystem-level biomimicry and regenerative design: Linking ecosystem functioning and urban built environments. Sustainability 13 (1), 404 (2021).

Rebecca, C. Climate Action Through Biomimcry: Innovation for the SDGs. Sustainable Brands. https://sustainablebrands.com/read/product-service-design-innovation/climate-action-through-biomimicry-innovation-for-the-sdgs . (Accessed on January 9, 2024) (2020).

Vierra, S. Biomimicry: Designing to model nature. Whole Build. Des. Guide 1–10 (2011).

Biomimicry Institute. Case Studies of Commercialisation of Biomimicry Innovations (2023).

Fayemi, P. E., Wanieck, K., Zollfrank, C., Maranzana, N. & Aoussat, A. Biomimetics: Process, tools and practice. Bioinsp. Biomim. 12 (1), 011002. https://doi.org/10.1088/1748-3190/12/1/011002 (2017).

Article   PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

Meena, A. K., D’Costa, D., Bhavsar, S., Kshirsagar, M. & Kulkarni, S. Applications of biomimicry in construction and architecture: A bibliometric analysis. Lib. Phil. Prac. Lincoln, NE, USA , 1–17 (2021).

Varshabi, N., Arslan Selçuk, S. & Mutlu Avinç, G. Biomimicry for energy-efficient building design: A bibliometric analysis. Biomimetics 7 (1), 21 (2022).

Perricone, V., Langella, C. & Santulli, C. Sustainable Biomimetics: A Discussion on Differences in Scale, Complexity, and Organization Between the Natural and Artificial World. In Bion. Sustain. Design 171–193 (Springer Nature Singapore, 2022).

Aggarwal, S., & Verma, A. Scientometric analysis of research trends in clustering and nature inspired techniques. In AIP Conf. Proc. (Vol. 2576, No. 1). AIP Publishing (2022, December).

Pinzón, O. A. & Austin, M. C. Nature as an Inspiration to Exploit Renewable Energy Sources: A Review on Trends and Biological Strategies. In 2022 8th International Engineering, Sciences and Technology Conference (IESTEC) 463–468 (IEEE, 2022).

Carniel, T., Cazenille, L., Dalle, J. M. & Halloy, J. Using natural language processing to find research topics in Living Machines conferences and their intersections with Bioinspiration & Biomimetics publications. Bioinsp. & Biomim 17 (6), 065008 (2022).

Nasser, H. K. et al. Harmony search algorithm for solving combinatorial optimization problems: Bibliometric analysis. Math. Model. Eng. Prob. 10 (3), 906 (2023).

Rusu, D. M. et al. Soft robotics: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis. Micromachines 14 (2), 359. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi14020359 (2023).

Shashwat, S. et al. A review on bioinspired strategies for an energy-efficient built environment. Energy Build. 296 , 113382 (2023).

Pires, P. M. et al. Bioactive restorative materials applied over coronal dentine—A bibliometric and critical review. Bioengineering 10 (6), 731. https://doi.org/10.3390/bioengineering10060731 (2023).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   CAS   Google Scholar  

Liu, H., Liao, X. & Du, B. The applications of nature-inspired meta-heuristic algorithms for decreasing the energy consumption of software-defined networks: A comprehensive and systematic literature review. Sustain. Comput.: Inform. Syst. 39 , 100895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.suscom.2023.100895 (2023).

Hinkelman, K., Yang, Y. & Zuo, W. Design methodologies and engineering applications for ecosystem biomimicry: An interdisciplinary review spanning cyber, physical, and cyber-physical systems. Bioinsp. Biomim. 18 (2), 021001 (2023).

Raman, R., Lathabhai, H., Mandal, S., Kumar, C. & Nedungadi, P. Contribution of business research to sustainable development goals: bibliometrics and science mapping analysis. Sustainability 15 (17), 12982 (2023).

Nedungadi, P. et al. Mapping autism’s research landscape: Trends in autism screening and its alignment with sustainable development goals. Front. Psychiatry 14 , 1294254 (2024).

Auckland's SDG Mapping. University of Auckland's SDG Mapping initiative from https://www.sdgmapping.auckland.ac.nz , accessed on 4th February 2024

Elsevier's SDG Mapping - Elsevier's SDG Mapping Initiative from https://www.elsevier.com/about/partnerships/sdg-research-mapping-initiative , accessed on 4th February 2024

Raman, R., Nair, V. K., Prakash, V., Patwardhan, A. & Nedungadi, P. Green-hydrogen research: What have we achieved, and where are we going? Bibliometrics analysis. Energy Rep. 8 , 9242–9260 (2022).

Raman, R. et al. Fake news research trends, linkages to generative artificial intelligence and sustainable development goals. Heliyon 10 (3), e24727 (2024).

Raman, R. et al. ChatGPT: Literate or intelligent about UN sustainable development goals?. Plos one 19 (4), e0297521 (2024).

Raman, R., Calyam, P. & Achuthan, K. ChatGPT or bard: Who is a better certified ethical hacker?. Comput. Secur. 140 , 103804 (2024).

Rama, R., Nair, V. K., Nedungadi, P., Ray, I. & Achuthan, K. Darkweb research: Past, present, and future trends and mapping to sustainable development goals. Heliyon 9 (11), e22269 (2023).

Van Eck, N. J. & Waltman, L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 84 , 523–538 (2010).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Emary, E., Zawbaa, H. M. & Hassanien, A. E. Binary gray wolf optimization approaches for feature selection. Neurocomputing 172 , 371–381 (2016).

Lin, Y., Ren, J. & Qu, X. Catalytically active nanomaterials: a promising candidate for artificial enzymes. Acc. Chem. Res. 47 (4), 1097–1105 (2014).

Parodi, A. et al. Synthetic nanoparticles functionalized with biomimetic leukocyte membranes possess cell-like functions. Nat. Nanotechnol. 8 (1), 61–68 (2013).

Article   ADS   PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

Zou, Q. et al. Biological photothermal nanodots based on self-assembly of peptide–porphyrin conjugates for antitumor therapy. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 139 (5), 1921–1927 (2017).

Wang, G. G., Deb, S. & Cui, Z. Monarch butterfly optimization. Neural Comput. Appl. 31 , 1995–2014 (2019).

Li, X. et al. Engineering heterogeneous semiconductors for solar water splitting. J. Mater. Chem. 3 (6), 2485–2534 (2015).

Li, X., Yu, J., Jaroniec, M. & Chen, X. Cocatalysts for selective photoreduction of CO 2 into solar fuels. Chem. Rev. 119 (6), 3962–4179 (2019).

Wang, B., Liang, W., Guo, Z. & Liu, W. Biomimetic superlyophobic and superlyophilic materials applied for oil/water separation: A new strategy beyond nature. Chem. Soc. Rev. 44 (1), 336–361 (2015).

Singh, J. et al. ‘Green’synthesis of metals and their oxide nanoparticles: Applications for environmental remediation. J. Nanobiotechnology 16 (1), 1–24 (2018).

Wang, Z. et al. Biomimetic nanoflowers by self-assembling nanozymes to induce intracellular oxidative damage against hypoxic tumors. Nat. Commun. 9 (1), 3334 (2018).

Article   ADS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Gao, S. et al. Nanocatalytic tumor therapy by biomimetic dual inorganic nanozyme-catalyzed cascade reaction. Adv. Sci. 6 (3), 1801733 (2019).

Su, B., Tian, Y. & Jiang, L. Bioinspired interfaces with superwettability: From materials to chemistry. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 138 (6), 1727–1748 (2016).

Zhang, X., Li, Z., Liu, K. & Jiang, L. Bioinspired multifunctional foam with self-cleaning and oil/water separation. Adv. Funct. Mater. 23 (22), 2881–2886 (2013).

Jang, S. C. et al. Bioinspired exosome-mimetic nanovesicles for targeted delivery of chemotherapeutics to malignant tumors. ACS Nano 7 (9), 7698–7710 (2013).

Yong, T. et al. Tumor exosome-based nanoparticles are efficient drug carriers for chemotherapy. Nat. Commun. 10 (1), 3838 (2019).

Cheng, G. et al. Self-assembly of extracellular vesicle-like metal–organic framework nanoparticles for protection and intracellular delivery of biofunctional proteins. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 140 (23), 7282–7291 (2018).

Yang, J. et al. Eardrum-inspired active sensors for self-powered cardiovascular system characterization and throat-attached anti-interference voice recognition. Adv. Mater. 27 (8), 1316–1326 (2015).

Sezer, N. & Koç, M. A comprehensive review on the state-of-the-art of piezoelectric energy harvesting. Nano Energy 80 , 105567 (2021).

Zhao, D. et al. Cellulose-based flexible functional materials for emerging intelligent electronics. Adv. Mater. 33 (28), 2000619 (2021).

Chortos, A., Liu, J. & Bao, Z. Pursuing prosthetic electronic skin. Nat. mater. 15 (9), 937–950 (2016).

Kim, J. et al. Stretchable silicon nanoribbon electronics for skin prosthesis. Nat. Commun. 5 (1), 5747 (2014).

Pang, C. et al. Highly skin-conformal microhairy sensor for pulse signal amplification. Adv. Mater. 27 (4), 634–640 (2015).

Yu, Z., Zhou, P., Pan, W., Li, N. & Tang, B. A biomimetic nanoreactor for synergistic chemiexcited photodynamic and starvation therapy against tumor metastasis. Nat. Commun. 9 (1), 5044 (2018).

Yang, W. et al. Albumin-bioinspired Gd: CuS nanotheranostic agent for in vivo photoacoustic/magnetic resonance imaging-guided tumor-targeted photothermal therapy. ACS Nano 10 (11), 10245–10257 (2016).

Wang, Z. et al. Biomineralization-inspired synthesis of copper sulfide–ferritin nanocages as cancer theranostics. ACS Nano 10 (3), 3453–3460 (2016).

Mirjalili, S. & Lewis, A. The whale optimization algorithm. Adv. Eng. Softw. 95 , 51–67 (2016).

Mirjalili, S. et al. Salp Swarm Algorithm: A bioinspired optimizer for engineering design problems. Adv. Eng. Softw. 114 , 163–191 (2017).

Mirjalili, S. Moth-flame optimization algorithm: A novel nature-inspired heuristic paradigm. Knowl. Based Syst. 89 , 228–249 (2015).

Truby, R. L. & Lewis, J. A. Printing soft matter in three dimensions. Nature 540 (7633), 371–378 (2016).

Ozbolat, I. T. & Hospodiuk, M. Current advances and future perspectives in extrusion-based bioprinting. Biomater. 76 , 321–343 (2016).

Mannoor, M. S. et al. 3D printed bionic ears. Nano Lett. 13 (6), 2634–2639 (2013).

Article   ADS   PubMed   PubMed Central   CAS   Google Scholar  

Kennedy, E. B. & Marting, T. A. Biomimicry: Streamlining the front end of innovation for environmentally sustainable products. Res. Technol. Manage. 59 (4), 40–48 (2016).

Chazhaev, M. Economic potential of biotechnologies: challenges and windows of opportunity. BIO Web Conf. 76 , 10002 (2023).

Kasatova, A. A., Vagizova, V. I. & Tufetulov, A. M. Stages of biotechnology commercialization in the system of interaction between financial and innovative industrial structures. Acad. Strateg. Manag. J. 15 , 191 (2016).

Rovalo, E., McCardle, J., Smith, E. & Hooker, G. Growing the practice of biomimicry: Opportunities for mission-based organisations based on a global survey of practitioners. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 32 (1), 71–87 (2020).

Broeckhoven, C. & Winters, S. Biomimethics: a critical perspective on the ethical implications of biomimetics in technological innovation. Bioinspir. Biomim. 18 (5), 053001 (2023).

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

Biomimicry Innovation Lab. The State of Nature-Inspired Innovation in the UK. Retrieved from https://www.biomimicryinnovationlab.com/blog/the-state-of-nature-inspired-innovation-in-the-uk (2023).

Weerasinghe, D. U., Perera, S. & Dissanayake, D. Application of biomimicry for sustainable functionalization of textiles: Review of current status and prospectus. Textile Res. J. 89 (22), 4282–4294 (2019).

Madmar, S., Shah, M. Z., Matusin, A. M. R. A. & Ilhan, A. A. Applications of biomimicry to urban planning: interrogating the relevance of emerging approaches to design cities by inspiring from nature. IOP Conf. Ser.: Earth Environ. Sci. 1274 (1), 012015 (2023).

Letrud, K. & Hernes, S. Affirmative citation bias in scientific myth debunking: A three-in-one case study. PLoS One 14 (9), e0222213 (2019).

McCain, K. W. Obliteration by incorporation. Beyond bibliometrics: Harnessing multidimensional indicators of scholarly impact. J. Scientometr. Res. 4 (1), 129–149 (2014).

Benyus, J. M. (1997). Biomimicry: Innovation inspired by nature.

Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Pandey, N., Pandey, N., & Mishra, A. (2021). Mapping the electronic word-of-mouth (eWOM) research: A systematic review and bibliometric analysis. J. Bus. Res. , 135 , 758–773.

Sydney Gladman, A., Matsumoto, E. A., Nuzzo, R. G., Mahadevan, L., & Lewis, J. A. (2016). Biomimetic 4D printing. Nature materials , 15 (4), 413–418.

Lurie-Luke, E. Product and technology innovation: What can biomimicry inspire?. Biotechnology advances , 32 (8), 1494–1505 (2014).

Download references

This research received no specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Amrita School of Business, Amritapuri, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Kollam, Kerala, India

Raghu Raman

Amrita School of Business, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India

Aswathy Sreenivasan & M. Suresh

Amrita School of Computing, Amritapuri, Amrita Vishwa Vidyapeetham, Kollam, Kerala, India

Prema Nedungadi

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

R.R.—Conceptualization; supervision; methodology; data curation; visualization; writing—original draft; and writing—review and editing. A.S.—Data curation; Writing—original draft; and Writing—review and editing. M.S.—writing—original draft; and writing—review and editing. P.N.—Data curation; writing—original draft; and writing—review and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Raghu Raman .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

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-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.

Raman, R., Sreenivasan, A., Suresh, M. et al. Mapping biomimicry research to sustainable development goals. Sci Rep 14 , 18613 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-69230-9

Download citation

Received : 28 April 2024

Accepted : 01 August 2024

Published : 10 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-69230-9

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

• Sustainable development goal
• Network map
• Thematic areas

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines . If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.

Quick links

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

Sign up for the Nature Briefing: Anthropocene newsletter — what matters in anthropocene research, free to your inbox weekly.

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

Agrifood sustainability transitions in firms and industry: a bibliographic analysis of research themes.

1. Introduction

1.1. the global agrifood system, 1.2. agrifood sustainability transitions, 1.3. sustainability transitions research, 1.4. agrifood sustainability transitions—firms and industries.

• Evaluate and describe the current state of the literature on the (STRN) theme of firms and industries.
• Identify gaps and propose areas for future research to address these areas.
• Is the theme of “industries and firms” still a marginal topic within the agrifood sustainability transition literature?
• How has the agrifood sustainability transition literature on “industries and firms” evolved?
• What are the main themes and topics within this theme and what gaps exist within this literature?
• What are the potential areas for future research on firms and industries in sustainability transitions?

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. data collection, 2.2. data analysis, 3.1. descriptive analysis of publications, 3.2. co-citation analysis, 3.3. co-occurrence of keyword analysis, 3.3.1. agriculture, 3.3.2. innovation, 3.3.3. governance, 3.3.4. food system, 3.3.5. agroecology, 4. discussion and conclusions, 4.1. key findings, 4.2. research gaps and future research, 4.3. theoretical contribution, 4.4. implications for managers and policymakers, author contributions, data availability statement, conflicts of interest, appendix a. list of papers.

• Ahmad, K. Global population will increase to nine billion by 2050. Lancet 2001 , 357 , 864. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Boliko, M.C. FAO and the situation of food security and nutrition in the world. J. Nutr. Sci. Vitaminol. 2019 , 65 , 4–8. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Ezeh, A.C.; Bongaarts, J.; Mberu, B. Global population trends and policy options. Lancet 2012 , 380 , 142–148. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• UNICEF. Brief to the State of Food Security and Nutrition in the World 2022 ; United Nations Children’s Fund: New York, NY, USA, 2022. [ Google Scholar ]
• United Nations. World Population Prospects 2022, Online Edition ; Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division: New York, NY, USA, 2022; Available online: https://population.un.org/wpp/ (accessed on 30 August 2023).
• Godfray, H.C.J.; Crute, I.R.; Haddad, L.; Lawrence, D.; Muir, J.F.; Nisbett, N.; Pretty, J.; Robinson, S.; Toulmin, C.; Whiteley, R. The future of the global food system. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Biol. Sci. 2010 , 365 , 2769–2777. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• OECD. How We Feed the World Today ; OECD: Paris, France, 2022; Available online: https://www.oecd.org/agriculture/understanding-the-global-food-system/how-we-feed-the-world-today/ (accessed on 20 January 2024)).
• Gaitán-Cremaschi, D.; Klerkx, L.; Duncan, J.; Trienekens, J.H.; Huenchuleo, C.; Dogliotti, S.; Contesse, M.E.; Rossing, W.A.H. Characterizing diversity of food systems in view of sustainability transitions. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2019 , 39 , 1. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hackfort, S. Unlocking sustainability? The power of corporate lock-ins and how they shape digital agriculture in Germany. J. Rural Stud. 2023 , 101 , 103065. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mehrabi, S.; Perez-Mesa, J.C.; Giagnocavo, C. The Role of Consumer-Citizens and Connectedness to Nature in the Sustainable Transition to Agroecological Food Systems: The mediation of innovative business models and a multi-level perspective. Agriculture 2022 , 12 , 203. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wojtynia, N.; van Dijk, J.; Derks, M.; Groot Koerkamp, P.; Hekkert, M. A new green revolution or agribusiness as usual? Uncovering alignment issues and potential transition complications in agri-food system transitions. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2021 , 41 , 77. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wojtynia, N.; van Dijk, J.; Derks, M.; Groot Koerkamp, P.; Hekkert, M. Spheres of transformation: Exploring personal, political and practical drivers of farmer agency and behaviour change in the Netherlands. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2023 , 49 , 100776. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Marinova, D.; Bogueva, D.; Wu, Y.; Guo, X. China and changing food trends: A sustainability transition perspective. Ukr. Food J. 2022 , 11 , 126–147. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Meynard, J.-M.; Jeuffroy, M.-H.; Le Bail, M.; Lefèvre, A.; Magrini, M.-B.; Michon, C. Designing coupled innovations for the sustainability transition of agrifood systems. Agric. Syst. 2017 , 157 , 330–339. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vinnari, M.; Vinnari, E. A framework for sustainability transition: The case of plant-based diets. J. Agric. Environ. Ethics 2014 , 27 , 369–396. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Willett, W.; Rockström, J.; Loken, B.; Springmann, M.; Lang, T.; Vermeulen, S.; Garnett, T.; Tilman, D.; DeClerck, F.; Wood, A. Food in the Anthropocene: The EAT–Lancet Commission on healthy diets from sustainable food systems. Lancet 2019 , 393 , 447–492. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• El Bilali, H. Research on agro-food sustainability transitions: A systematic review of research themes and an analysis of research gaps. J. Clean. Prod. 2019 , 221 , 353–364. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• FAO. Global Food Losses and Food Waste—Extent, Causes and Prevention ; Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations: Rome, Italy, 2011; Available online: https://www.fao.org/4/mb060e/mb060e.pdf (accessed on 10 November 2023).
• Kummu, M.; De Moel, H.; Porkka, M.; Siebert, S.; Varis, O.; Ward, P.J. Lost food, wasted resources: Global food supply chain losses and their impacts on freshwater, cropland, and fertiliser use. Sci. Total Environ. 2012 , 438 , 477–489. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Moult, J.; Allan, S.; Hewitt, C.; Berners-Lee, M. Greenhouse gas emissions of food waste disposal options for UK retailers. Food Policy 2018 , 77 , 50–58. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Guh, D.P.; Zhang, W.; Bansback, N.; Amarsi, Z.; Birmingham, C.L.; Anis, A.H. The incidence of co-morbidities related to obesity and overweight: A systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Public Health 2009 , 9 , 88. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• WHO. Obesity and Overweight ; WHO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021; Available online: https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/obesity-and-overweight (accessed on 13 September 2023).
• Bui, S. Enacting transitions—The combined effect of multiple niches in whole system reconfiguration. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 6135. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Aschemann-Witzel, J.; Mulders, M.D.G.H.; Mouritzen, S.L.T. Outside-in and bottom-up: Using sustainability transitions to understand the development phases of mainstreaming plant-based in the food sector in a meat and dairy focused economy. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2023 , 197 , 122906. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Béné, C. Why the Great Food Transformation may not happen–A deep-dive into our food systems’ political economy, controversies and politics of evidence. World Dev. 2022 , 154 , 105881. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kuokkanen, A.; Uusitalo, V.; Koistinen, K. A framework of disruptive sustainable innovation: An example of the Finnish food system. Technol. Anal. Strateg. Manag. 2019 , 31 , 749–764. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sustainability Transition Research Network. (2021, 2022). Available online: https://transitionsnetwork.org/ (accessed on 28 October 2023).
• Gosnell, H.; Gill, N.; Voyer, M. Transformational adaptation on the farm: Processes of change and persistence in transitions to ‘climate-smart’regenerative agriculture. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2019 , 59 , 101965. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• El Bilali, H.; Strassner, C.; Ben Hassen, T. Sustainable agri-food systems: Environment, economy, society, and policy. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 6260. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Geels, F.W. Technological transitions as evolutionary reconfiguration processes: A multi-level perspective and a case-study. Res. Policy 2002 , 31 , 1257–1274. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Van den Ende, J.; Kemp, R. Technological transformations in history: How the computer regime grew out of existing computing regimes. Res. Policy 1999 , 28 , 833–851. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Verbong, G.; Geels, F. The ongoing energy transition: Lessons from a socio-technical, multi-level analysis of the Dutch electricity system (1960–2004). Energy Policy 2007 , 35 , 1025–1037. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lachman, D.A. A survey and review of approaches to study transitions. Energy Policy 2013 , 58 , 269–276. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Loorbach, D.; Frantzeskaki, N.; Avelino, F. Sustainability transitions research: Transforming science and practice for societal change. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 2017 , 42 , 599–626. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Köhler, J.; Geels, F.W.; Kern, F.; Markard, J.; Onsongo, E.; Wieczorek, A.; Alkemade, F.; Avelino, F.; Bergek, A.; Boons, F.; et al. An agenda for sustainability transitions research: State of the art and future directions. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2019 , 31 , 1–32. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Visser, M.; van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Large-scale comparison of bibliographic data sources: Scopus, Web of Science, Dimensions, Crossref, and Microsoft Academic. Quant. Sci. Stud. 2021 , 2 , 20–41. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Van Eck, N.; Waltman, L. Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics 2010 , 84 , 523–538. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Bui, S.; Costa, I.; De Schutter, O.; Dedeurwaerdere, T.; Hudon, M.; Feyereisen, M. Systemic ethics and inclusive governance: Two key prerequisites for sustainability transitions of agri-food systems. Agric. Hum. Values 2019 , 36 , 277–288. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Williams, T.G.; Bui, S.; Conti, C.; Debonne, N.; Levers, C.; Swart, R.; Verburg, P.H. Synthesising the diversity of European agri-food networks: A meta-study of actors and power-laden interactions. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2023 , 83 , 102746. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bulah, B.M.; Tziva, M.; Bidmon, C.; Hekkert, M.P. Incumbent entry modes and entry timing in sustainable niches: The plant-based protein transition in the United States, Netherlands, and United Kingdom. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2023 , 48 , 100735. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vermunt, D.A.; Negro, S.O.; van Laerhoven, F.; Verweij, P.A.; Hekkert, M.P. Sustainability transitions in the agri-food sector: How ecology affects transition dynamics. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2020 , 36 , 236–249. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dedeurwaerdere, T.; De Schutter, O.; Hudon, M.; Mathijs, E.; Annaert, B.; Avermaete, T.; Bleeckx, T.; de Callataÿ, C.; De Snijder, P.; Fernández-Wulff, P.; et al. The governance features of social enterprise and social network activities of collective food buying groups. Ecol. Econ. 2017 , 140 , 123–135. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• van Oers, L.; Feola, G.; Moors, E.; Runhaar, H. The politics of deliberate destabilisation for sustainability transitions. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2021 , 40 , 159–171. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• van Oers, L.; Feola, G.; Runhaar, H.; Moors, E. Unlearning in sustainability transitions: Insight from two Dutch community-supported agriculture farms. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2023 , 46 , 100693. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Giagnocavo, C.; de Cara-García, M.; González, M.; Juan, M.; Marín-Guirao, J.I.; Mehrabi, S.; Rodríguez, E.; van der Blom, J.; Crisol-Martínez, E. Reconnecting farmers with Nature through agroecological transitions: Interacting niches and experimentation and the role of agricultural knowledge and innovation systems. Agriculture 2022 , 12 , 137. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kuokkanen, A.; Nurmi, A.; Mikkilä, M.; Kuisma, M.; Kahiluoto, H.; Linnanen, L. Agency in regime destabilization through the selection environment: The Finnish food system’s sustainability transition. Res. Policy 2018 , 47 , 1513–1522. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Elsevier. Agricultural Systems—Aims & Scope ; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2024; Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/journal/agricultural-systems (accessed on 30 January 2024).
• El Bilali, H. Relation between innovation and sustainability in the agro-food system. Ital. J. Food Sci. 2018 , 30 , 200–225. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pant, L.P.; Bahadur, K.; Fraser, E.D.; Shrestha, P.K.; Lama, A.B.; Jirel, S.K.; Chaudhary, P. Adaptive transition management for transformations to agricultural sustainability in the Karnali mountains of Nepal. Agroecol. Sustain. Food Syst. 2014 , 38 , 1156–1183. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Smith, A.; Raven, R. What is protective space? Reconsidering niches in transitions to sustainability. Res. Policy 2012 , 41 , 1025–1036. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Geels, F.W.; Schot, J. Typology of socio-technical transition pathways. Res. Policy 2007 , 36 , 399–417. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Geels, F.W. Regime resistance against low-carbon transitions: Introducing politics and power into the multi-level perspective. Theory Cult. Soc. 2014 , 31 , 21–40. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Markard, J.; Raven, R.; Truffer, B. Sustainability transitions: An emerging field of research and its prospects. Res. Policy 2012 , 41 , 955–967. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Geels, F.W. Reconceptualising the co-evolution of firms-in-industries and their environments: Developing an inter-disciplinary Triple Embeddedness Framework. Res. Policy 2014 , 43 , 261–277. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Klerkx, L.; Aarts, N.; Leeuwis, C. Adaptive management in agricultural innovation systems: The interactions between innovation networks and their environment. Agric. Syst. 2010 , 103 , 390–400. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Geels, F.W. The multi-level perspective on sustainability transitions: Responses to seven criticisms. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2011 , 1 , 24–40. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Viola, E.; Mendes, V. Agriculture 4.0 and climate change in Brazil. Ambiente Soc. 2022 , 25 , e02462. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Farhangi, M.H.; Turvani, M.E.; van der Valk, A.; Carsjens, G.J. High-tech urban agriculture in Amsterdam: An actor network analysis. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 3955. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Swaffield, S.R.; Corry, R.C.; Opdam, P.; McWilliam, W.; Primdahl, J. Connecting business with the agricultural landscape: Business strategies for sustainable rural development. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2019 , 28 , 1357–1369. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• van der Gaast, K.; van Leeuwen, E.; Wertheim-Heck, S. Food systems in transition: Conceptualizing sustainable food entrepreneurship. Int. J. Agric. Sustain. 2022 , 20 , 705–721. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Horn, E.K.; Joyce, A.; Chowdhury, R.B.; Caputo, S.; Jacobs, B.; Winkler, M.; Proksch, G. Translating Environmental Potential to Economic Reality: Assessment of Commercial Aquaponics through Sustainability Transitions Theory. Circ. Econ. Sustain. 2023 , 4 , 523–554. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Davidson, D.J.; Jones, K.E.; Parkins, J.R. Food safety risks, disruptive events and alternative beef production: A case study of agricultural transition in Alberta. Agric. Hum. Values 2016 , 33 , 359–371. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kinniburgh, F. The politics of expertise in assessing alternatives to glyphosate in France. Environ. Sci. Policy 2023 , 145 , 60–72. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Manuel-Navarrete, D.; Gallopín, G.C. Feeding the world sustainably: Knowledge governance and sustainable agriculture in the Argentine Pampas. Environ. Dev. Sustain. 2012 , 14 , 321–333. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• McInnes, A. Integrating sustainability transitions and food systems research to examine consultation failures in Canadian food policymaking. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 2019 , 21 , 407–426. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Marletto, G.; Sillig, C. Lost in mainstreaming? Agrifood and urban mobility grassroots innovations with multiple pathways and outcomes. Ecol. Econ. 2019 , 158 , 88–100. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Block, C.; Rennings, M.; Bröring, S. Selecting technologies to engage in sustainability transitions—A multi-stakeholder perspective. Bus. Strategy Environ. 2023 , 32 , 3569–3595. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Long, T.B.; Blok, V.; Coninx, I. The diffusion of climate-smart agricultural innovations: Systems level factors that inhibit sustainable entrepreneurial action. J. Clean. Prod. 2019 , 232 , 993–1004. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Trotter, P.A.; Becker, T.; Renaldi, R.; Wang, X.; Khosla, R.; Walther, G. The role of supply chains for the sustainability transformation of global food systems: A large-scale, systematic review of food cold chains. J. Ind. Ecol. 2023 , 27 , 1429–1446. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Keating, C.B.; Katina, P.F.; Pyne, J.C.; Jaradat, R.M. Systemic intervention for complex system governance development. In Proceedings of the American Society for Engineering Management International Annual Conference, Huntsville, AL, USA, 18–21 October 2017. [ Google Scholar ]
• Halbe, J.; Pahl-Wostl, C. A methodological framework to initiate and design transition governance processes. Sustainability 2019 , 11 , 844. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Rossing, W.A.H.; Albicette, M.M.; Aguerre, V.; Leoni, C.; Ruggia, A.; Dogliotti, S. Crafting actionable knowledge on ecological intensification: Lessons from co-innovation approaches in Uruguay and Europe. Agric. Syst. 2021 , 190 , 103103. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ribeiro, B.; Turner, J.A. Sustainability buckets: A flexible heuristic for facilitating strategic investment on place-dependent sustainability narratives. Sustainability 2021 , 13 , 9367. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Audet, R.; Lefèvre, S.; Brisebois, É.; El-Jed, M. Structuring tensions and key relations of Montreal seasonal food markets in the sustainability transition of the agri-food sector. Sustainability 2017 , 9 , 320. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Stephens, R.; Barbier, M. Digital fooding, cashless marketplaces and reconnection in intermediated third places: Conceptualizing metropolitan food provision in the age of prosumption. J. Rural Stud. 2021 , 82 , 366–379. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Desa, G.; Jia, X. Sustainability transitions in the context of pandemic: An introduction to the focused issue on social innovation and systemic impact. Agric. Hum. Values 2020 , 37 , 1207–1215. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Donati, L.; Stefani, G.; Bellandi, M. The evolutionary emergence of quintuple helix coalitions: A case study of place-based sustainability transition. Triple Helix 2023 , 10 , 125–155. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ferguson, P. Productivity growth as a barrier to a sustainability transition. Environ. Innov. Soc. Transit. 2016 , 20 , 86–88. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gonera, A.; Nykamp, H.A.; Carraresi, L. Incumbents’ capabilities for sustainability-oriented innovation in the Norwegian food sector—An integrated framework. Circ. Econ. Sustain. 2023 , 3 , 1299–1326. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Pellizzoni, L.; Centemeri, L. Tackling material dependency in sustainability transition: Rationales and insights from the agriculture sector. J. Environ. Policy Plan. 2022 , 24 , 355–366. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hák, T.; Janoušková, S.; Moldan, B. Sustainable Development Goals: A need for relevant indicators. Ecol. Indic. 2016 , 60 , 565–573. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Lees, N.J.; Sivakumar, S.; Lucock, X. Agrifood Sustainability Transitions in Firms and Industry: A Bibliographic Analysis of Research Themes. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 7079. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167079

Lees NJ, Sivakumar S, Lucock X. Agrifood Sustainability Transitions in Firms and Industry: A Bibliographic Analysis of Research Themes. Sustainability . 2024; 16(16):7079. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167079

Lees, Nic J., Sivashankar Sivakumar, and Xiaomeng Lucock. 2024. "Agrifood Sustainability Transitions in Firms and Industry: A Bibliographic Analysis of Research Themes" Sustainability 16, no. 16: 7079. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167079

Article Metrics

Further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

• Instructions for Authors
• Submit Log in/Register

Share this article with

Create alert.

Exploring the Role of Circulating Cell-Free DNA in Disease Diagnosis and Therapy

How to cite: Odah, M. Exploring the Role of Circulating Cell-Free DNA in Disease Diagnosis and Therapy. Preprints 2024 , 2024030467. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202403.0467.v2 Odah, M. Exploring the Role of Circulating Cell-Free DNA in Disease Diagnosis and Therapy. Preprints 2024, 2024030467. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202403.0467.v2 Copy

Odah, M. Exploring the Role of Circulating Cell-Free DNA in Disease Diagnosis and Therapy. Preprints 2024 , 2024030467. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202403.0467.v2

Odah, M. (2024). Exploring the Role of Circulating Cell-Free DNA in Disease Diagnosis and Therapy. Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202403.0467.v2

Odah, M. 2024 "Exploring the Role of Circulating Cell-Free DNA in Disease Diagnosis and Therapy" Preprints. https://doi.org/10.20944/preprints202403.0467.v2

Copyright: This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Comments (0)

Not displayed online.

Mathematical equations can be typed in either LaTeX formats \\[ ... \\] or $$ ... $$, or MathML format <math> ... </math>. Try the LaTeX or MathML example.

Please click a symbol to insert it into the message box below:

Please enter the link here:

Optionally, you can enter text that should appear as linked text:

Please enter or paste the URL to the image here (please only use links to jpg/jpeg, png and gif images):

Wikify editor is a simple editor for wiki-style mark-up. It was written by MDPI for Sciforum in 2014. The rendering of the mark-up is based on Wiky.php with some tweaks. Rendering of mathematical equations is done with MathJax . Please send us a message for support or for reporting bugs.

Comments must follow the standards of professional discourse and should focus on the scientific content of the article. Insulting or offensive language, personal attacks and off-topic remarks will not be permitted. Comments must be written in English. Preprints reserves the right to remove comments without notice. Readers who post comments are obliged to declare any competing interests, financial or otherwise.

We encourage comments and feedback from a broad range of readers. See criteria for comments and our Diversity statement.

what’s this?

Add a record of this review to Publons to track and showcase your reviewing expertise across the world’s journals.