4.4 Review

Reviewing the animal literature: how to describe and choose between different types of literature reviews

Journal

LABORATORY ANIMALS
Volume 55, Issue 2, Pages 129-141

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0023677220968599

Keywords

Narrative review; mapping review; scoping review; systematic review; rapid review; umbrella review

Funding

  1. R2N, Federal State of Lower Saxony
  2. DFG [FOR2591, BL953/11-1]
  3. NWO [313-99-310]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Before embarking on an animal research project, conducting a thorough literature review is essential to avoid redundancy, improve research reliability, and address research questions effectively. Understanding the various types of literature reviews and their associated terminology can help clarify conclusions and prevent ambiguity in research interpretation.
Before starting any (animal) research project, review of the existing literature is good practice. From both the scientific and the ethical perspective, high-quality literature reviews are essential. Literature reviews have many potential advantages besides synthesising the evidence for a research question. First, they can show if a proposed study has already been performed, preventing redundant research. Second, when planning new experiments, reviews can inform the experimental design, thereby increasing the reliability, relevance and efficiency of the study. Third, reviews may even answer research questions using already available data. Multiple definitions of the term literature review co-exist. In this paper, we describe the different steps in the review process, and the risks and benefits of using various methodologies in each step. We then suggest common terminology for different review types: narrative reviews, mapping reviews, scoping reviews, rapid reviews, systematic reviews and umbrella reviews. We recommend which review to select, depending on the research question and available resources. We believe that improved understanding of review methods and terminology will prevent ambiguity and increase appropriate interpretation of the conclusions of reviews.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available