A Narrative (or Traditional) review
This type of review provides an overview of existing research on a particular topic, identifying trends, themes, and gaps in the literature. Its approach is broad and descriptive, and it does not always follow a systematic process when searching for or selecting sources. This type of review is commonly used in the humanities and social sciences. For example, a narrative review might explore theories about social media’s impact on identity formation.
A Systematic Review
This Aims to comprehensively identify, evaluate, and synthesize all relevant studies that address a specific research question. It follows a structured and replicable process with clearly defined inclusion and exclusion criteria. Systematic reviews are widely used in health, psychology, and education research. An example would be a review assessing the effectiveness of mindfulness interventions in reducing workplace stress.
A Meta-Analysis
This statistically combines the results of multiple quantitative studies to produce an overall understanding of a research question. It is a subset of systematic review that uses statistical methods to integrate findings. Meta-analyses are common in medical, psychological, and social sciences research. For instance, one might calculate the overall effect size of therapy on depression outcomes.
A Scoping Review
A scoping review maps the existing literature on a broad topic to identify key concepts, evidence types, and research gaps. While it employs systematic searching methods, it is broader in focus and less concerned with assessing study quality. Scoping reviews are often used when a topic is emerging or not yet well-defined. An example is exploring how “digital wellbeing” is defined and studied across different disciplines.
The Integrative Review
This synthesizes both empirical and theoretical literature to develop new frameworks or perspectives. It includes diverse methodologies, encompassing both qualitative and quantitative research. This type of review is common in nursing, health, and social sciences. For example, an integrative review might combine studies from various methods to understand patient-centered care more holistically.
The critical review
This goes beyond summary and description by critically evaluating and challenging existing research and theories. It is analytical and interpretive in nature, often leading to new conceptual insights. This type of review is typically used in theoretical or conceptual work. An example would be a critical examination of dominant paradigms in climate change communication research.
Rapid Review
This review is designed to quickly synthesize existing evidence to inform policy or practice decisions. It uses streamlined systematic methods, such as limiting the number of databases searched or narrowing inclusion criteria. Rapid reviews are often conducted in healthcare, government, and policy research settings. For instance, researchers might rapidly review evidence on the effectiveness of remote learning during the COVID-19 pandemic.
A Theoretical or Conceptual Review
This review focuses on analyzing how key theories or concepts have been developed and applied in existing literature. Rather than summarizing empirical findings, it examines ideas, definitions, and theoretical relationships. This type of review is common in philosophy, sociology, and education. An example would be reviewing how the concept of “resilience” has been conceptualized in educational research.