New Submissions are open for the 2026 volume cycle — median first decision in 21 days. See how journals run with us

Research methods

How to Choose Between a Literature Review, Scoping Review, Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The review type follows from the question. If you cannot state the question precisely, you are not ready to choose.

These four are often treated as a hierarchy of rigour, with narrative review at the bottom. They are better understood as different instruments for different questions.

Narrative literature review

Answers: what is currently understood about this topic?

Method: expert selection of relevant work, synthesised into an argument. No pre-specified search, no formal appraisal.

Use when: introducing a field, framing a thesis chapter, or writing an invited overview. Its strength is breadth and interpretation; its weakness is that selection cannot be checked.

Typical time: weeks.

Scoping review

Answers: what kind of evidence exists here, and how much?

Method: systematic search, but charting the literature rather than appraising quality or synthesising effect. Reported using PRISMA-ScR.

Use when: the field is unmapped, the question is broad, or you are deciding whether a systematic review is even feasible. Frequently the correct first step.

Typical time: three to six months.

Systematic review

Answers: what does the totality of evidence say about this specific question?

Method: registered protocol, exhaustive reproducible search, duplicate screening, formal risk-of-bias appraisal, structured synthesis. Reported using PRISMA 2020.

Use when: the question is narrow and answerable, and enough primary studies exist. See how to write one.

Typical time: six to twelve months with a team.

Meta-analysis

Answers: what is the pooled magnitude of this effect?

Method: a statistical technique applied within a systematic review, pooling comparable outcomes into a weighted estimate. See the difference between the two and how to conduct one.

Use when: included studies measure the same outcome comparably. When they do not, a narrative synthesis is the correct choice, not a failure.

Choosing

  1. Is your question narrow and specific? If not, scoping review.
  2. Do enough comparable primary studies exist? If unknown, scoping review first.
  3. Do you need to appraise quality, or only map the field? Appraisal means systematic.
  4. Do the included studies report the same outcome? If yes, add a meta-analysis.
  5. Do you have a team and six months? If not, be honest about which is achievable.

Working on something this touches on? Send us the details and we will tell you honestly whether we can help.

Request a proposal