如何撰写文献综述

作业句：

这篇[课程论文 / 学位论文章节 / 独立综述]综合[年份或无年限][问题]方面已发表的研究，使用来自[具名数据库]的[同行评审文章 / 书籍 / 灰色文献]。

范围句：

我纳入研究[人群、方法或概念]的研究，排除[相邻主题]，因为它们不回答该问题。

组织句（UNC 模型）：

综述按[主题 / 年代 / 方法]围绕[两到三个具名主题]组织，而不是按来源逐条。

论点 / 带走句：

在纳入的研究中，文献显示[模式]，在[争论]上存在分歧，并且仍缺少[你的项目能点名的空白]。

系统综述关口：

若提示要求方案、PRISMA 流程图、双人筛选和团队，就不要再把它当课程叙述性综述来写，起草前先打开 Cochrane Handbook 和 PRISMA 2020。

A literature review discusses published information in a particular subject area, and sometimes information in a particular subject area within a certain time period.

A literature review can be just a simple summary of the sources, but it usually has an organizational pattern and combines both summary and synthesis.

A summary is a recap of the important information of the source, but a synthesis is a re-organization, or a reshuffling, of that information.

A literature review is an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers.

It is not just a descriptive list of the material available, or a set of summaries.

A literature review is a piece of discursive prose, not a list describing or summarizing one piece of literature after another. It’s usually a bad sign to see every paragraph beginning with the name of a researcher.

be organized around and related directly to the thesis or research question you are developing

synthesize results into a summary of what is and is not known

identify areas of controversy in the literature

formulate questions that need further research

The main focus of an academic research paper is to develop a new argument, and a research paper is likely to contain a literature review as one of its parts. In a research paper, you use the literature as a foundation and as support for a new insight that you contribute. The focus of a literature review, however, is to summarize and synthesize the arguments and ideas of others without adding new contributions.

A literature review, like a term paper, is usually organized around ideas, not the sources themselves as an annotated bibliography would be organized.

Published materials which provide an examination of recent or current literature. Review articles can cover a wide range of subject matter at various levels of completeness and comprehensiveness based on analyses of literature that may include research findings.

Systematized reviews attempt to include one or more elements of the systematic review process while stopping short of claiming that the resultant output is a systematic review.

Systematized reviews are typically conducted as a postgraduate student assignment, in recognition that they are not able to draw upon the resources required for a full systematic review (such as two reviewers).

A systematic review attempts to collate all the empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria in order to answer a specific research question. It uses explicit, systematic methods that are selected with a view to minimizing bias, thus providing more reliable findings from which conclusions can be drawn and decisions made (Antman et al 1992, Oxman and Guyatt 1993).

Systematic reviews should be undertaken by a team. Indeed, Cochrane will not publish a review that is proposed to be undertaken by a single person.

A review that uses explicit, systematic methods to collate and synthesise findings of studies that address a clearly formulated question

The main PRISMA reporting guideline (PRISMA 2020) primarily provides guidance for the reporting of systematic reviews evaluating the effects of interventions.

The PRISMA-Children and Adolescents (PRISMA-C) 2026 statement is an extension of PRISMA 2020.

Scoping reviews serve to synthesize evidence and assess the scope of literature on a topic. Among other objectives, scoping reviews help determine whether a systematic review of the literature is warranted.

This type of review provides a preliminary assessment of the potential size and scope of available research literature. It aims to identify the nature and extent of research evidence (usually including ongoing research).

Weeks LC, Strudsholm T. A scoping review of research on complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) and the mass media: Looking back, moving forward. BMC Complement Altern Med. 2008;8:43. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6882-8-43

所述目标：确定 CAM 与大众传媒研究的数量、焦点与性质，然后汇总并传播这些结果。

他们报告的筛选数字：识别 4,454 条记录；最终样本纳入 16 项研究。

• 大致应纳入多少来源？
• 什么类型的来源（书籍、期刊文章、网站）？
• 是否应通过讨论共同主题或议题来摘要、综合或批评来源？
• 是否应评估来源？
• 是否应提供小标题以及其他背景信息，例如定义和/或历史？

• 检索的数据库与平台，以及每次运行的日期
• 精确检索式与任何限制（同行评审、语言、年份）
• 检索到的记录数，然后是去重后的数量
• 应用于题名、摘要与全文的纳入与排除规则
• 综述保留的数量，以及临界排除的一行理由

Have I cited and discussed studies contrary to my perspective?

UNC 的第一个澄清问题是纳入多少来源。没有普遍的本科数字。典型课程论文常落在十几到三十出头；学位论文章节与独立综述更长，因为问题更宽。问题的质量与覆盖胜过你发明的配额。问布置论文的人。

The current trend in treatment for congestive heart failure combines surgery and medicine.

More and more cultural studies scholars are accepting popular media as a subject worthy of academic consideration.

• 引言
  • 问题、为何重要，以及你实际检索的范围
  • 综述类型（叙述性、系统化、系统、范围）
  • 一句话的组织原则
• 主题 1：[第一个争论或概念]
  • 大多数研究同意什么
  • 方法或人群在何处分裂发现
  • 这一主题仍无法回答什么
• 主题 2：[第二个争论或概念]
  • 对立主张
  • 支持与削弱它的研究
  • 你对更强证据的评估
• 该领域使用的方法（若方法还不是主题 2，则为可选）
  • 主导设计以及它们看不见什么
  • 反复出现的测量或样本
• 结论
  • 跨主题的模式
  • 空白，以及——若本综述位于一项研究之前——你将如何处理它

Introduction: Gives a quick idea of the topic of the literature review, such as the central theme or organizational pattern.

Body: Contains your discussion of sources and is organized either chronologically, thematically, or methodologically.

Conclusions/Recommendations: Discuss what you have drawn from reviewing literature so far. Where might the discussion proceed?

However, other studies have shown that even gender-neutral antecedents are more likely to produce masculine images than feminine ones (Gastil, 1990). Hamilton (1988) asked students to complete sentences that required them to fill in pronouns that agreed with gender-neutral antecedents such as “writer,” “pedestrian,” and “persons.” The students were asked to describe any image they had when writing the sentence. Hamilton found that people imagined 3.3 men to each woman in the masculine “generic” condition and 1.5 men per woman in the unbiased condition. Thus, while ambient sexism accounted for some of the masculine bias, sexist language amplified the effect.

Select only the most important points in each source to highlight in the review.

Falk and Mills do not use any direct quotes. That is because the survey nature of the literature review does not allow for in-depth discussion or detailed quotes from the text.

Notice that Falk and Mills weave references to other sources into their own text, but they still maintain their own voice by starting and ending the paragraph with their own ideas and their own words.

一致：

在[设计或人群]中，研究报告[共享发现]（Name, 2020; Name, 2021）。

按方法分裂：

该关联出现在[方法 A]研究中（Name, 2020），但不出现在[方法 B]研究中（Name, 2021），表明结果对[设计选择]敏感。

按人群分裂：

来自[群体]的发现不能干净地转移到[群体]（Name, 2020; Name, 2021）。

机制争论：

作者同意[结果]会变化；他们分歧的是路径是[机制]（Name, 2020）还是[机制]（Name, 2021）。

空白：

纳入研究均未在[缺失人群]中测量[缺失构念]，因此文献尚不能回答[问题]。

• 引言陈述问题、范围、综述类型与组织
• 大多数正文段落讨论不止一个来源
• 相反发现存在并得到解释，而不是被省略
• 检索数据库、日期与标准可从论文或附录重建
• 引文稀少且有目的
• 每条文内引用在指定体例中都有参考文献条目
• 结论点名一种模式和一个具体空白
• 论文上的标签（叙述性、系统化、系统、范围）与你实际使用的方法相符