A literature review is a piece of argument built from other people's research. It shows what is known about a nursing question, where studies agree or conflict, and where the gaps are. This guide walks through a defensible search, screening, synthesis and a structure that reads as a review, not a list of summaries.
A review answers a focused question by gathering, judging and combining published studies. It is different from an annotated bibliography, which describes sources one at a time, and from an evidence-based practice paper, which ends in a practice recommendation. A review ends in an understanding of the field: what is established, what is contested and what is missing. Some programs ask for a narrative review, others for a more systematic approach, so check which your rubric expects.
Broad topics produce shapeless reviews. Move from "pain management" to a question with a defined population, phenomenon and setting, such as how nurses assess pain in older adults with dementia in long-term care. A PICOT-style structure helps for intervention questions, and our PICOT guide explains it.
Search several databases, typically CINAHL, PubMed and one more that suits your topic. Combine synonyms with OR and concepts with AND. Record each search in a log so another person could repeat it:
| Database | Date | Search string | Limits | Results |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Name of database | Date searched | Full string as entered | Peer reviewed, date range, language | Number returned |
Also scan the reference lists of the best articles you find. Following citations backward often turns up studies your database search missed.
Write your rules before you screen, and apply them consistently. Common criteria include publication date range, language, population, setting, study design and peer-reviewed status. State each criterion and the reason for it, for example: "Studies published after 2015 were included to reflect current practice." Your date range should match your course requirements, since some instructors expect recent sources.
Screening happens in stages: remove duplicates, screen titles and abstracts, read the full text of what remains, then decide what to include. The PRISMA flow diagram records this path, showing records identified, screened, assessed for eligibility and included, with reasons for exclusion at the full-text stage. Full systematic reviews follow the complete PRISMA statement. For most coursework, a simplified diagram or a short paragraph describing the same stages is enough.
A matrix is the tool that turns a pile of articles into a review. Put each study in a row and the ideas you care about in columns.
| Source | Design and sample | Key findings | Theme | Quality and limits |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Author, Year | Design, setting, participants | Main result in one line | Which theme it supports | Strengths and weaknesses |
Reading down a theme column shows you which studies agree, which disagree and why. Reading down the quality column shows how much weight each deserves.
Most nursing reviews are organised thematically, meaning each section covers an idea and draws on several studies. A chronological structure suits a topic whose understanding has changed over time, and a methodological structure suits a review that compares designs. Each body paragraph should open with a claim, bring together two or more sources, evaluate them and connect to your question.
Watch for "Author says, then Author says". If every sentence starts with a researcher's name, you are summarising. Start sentences with the idea and cite the studies behind it.
Share your question, rubric and any articles you already hold, and get a model review or a careful edit.
Your syllabus decides. A well-chosen smaller set, carefully synthesised, is usually better than a large set skimmed.
No. A systematic review follows a strict, pre-registered protocol and is usually done by a team. Coursework reviews are typically narrative or integrative, though they borrow systematic methods such as search logs and criteria.
Often yes, at least briefly. Tools such as those from the Joanna Briggs Institute help, and the research critique guide explains how.
Write the analysis first from your matrix, then add the introduction and conclusion. It is easier to state a gap once you have seen the whole picture. See the literature review resource for an outline, and the annotated bibliography guide if your first task is to collect and summarise sources.
For a model review or editorial feedback, request an instant quote at /order. You receive 14 days of free revisions after delivery, and refund terms are on the money-back guarantee page. Use any model paper in line with your institution's academic-integrity policy.