Tier 4

literature_review

Systematic procedure for conducting comprehensive literature reviews on any topic

Usage in Claude Code: /literature_review your question here

Literature Review

Overview

Systematic procedure for conducting comprehensive literature reviews on any topic

Steps

Step 1: Define scope and criteria

Establish clear boundaries for the review:

  1. State the research question precisely
  2. Define inclusion criteria (what makes a source relevant)
  3. Define exclusion criteria (what disqualifies a source)
  4. Set time boundaries (publication date range)
  5. Set geographic/language boundaries
  6. Define source types to include (journals, grey literature, etc.)

Step 2: Develop search strategy

Create comprehensive search approach:

  1. Identify relevant databases for the topic
    • Academic: Google Scholar, Semantic Scholar, PubMed, SSRN, arXiv
    • Grey literature: Think tanks, government reports, NGOs
  2. Develop keyword combinations
    • Core concept terms
    • Synonyms and related terms
    • Technical/jargon terms
    • Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT)
  3. Plan snowballing strategy
    • Forward: papers citing key works
    • Backward: references in key works
  4. Identify key authors and journals to monitor

Run searches systematically:

  1. Execute search strings in each database
  2. Record number of results per database
  3. Export citations to reference manager
  4. Remove duplicate entries
  5. Document search date and exact strings used

Target: 100-500 initial results is typical If too few: broaden search terms If too many: add specificity or date limits

Step 4: Screen by title and abstract

Apply inclusion/exclusion criteria:

  1. Review each title - exclude clearly irrelevant
  2. Review abstracts of remaining - apply criteria
  3. Mark uncertain cases for full-text review
  4. Document reasons for exclusion

Typical reduction: 70-90% excluded at this stage If excluding too few: criteria may be too broad If excluding too many: criteria may be too narrow

Step 5: Full-text review and extraction

Deep review of remaining sources: For each source:

  1. Obtain and read full text
  2. Confirm meets inclusion criteria
  3. Assess quality using evidence hierarchy
    • Level 1: Systematic reviews/meta-analyses (strongest)
    • Level 2: RCTs
    • Level 3: Quasi-experimental
    • Level 4: Observational studies
    • Level 5: Cross-sectional
    • Level 6: Case reports/expert opinion (weakest)
  4. Extract key information:
    • Citation details
    • Methodology summary
    • Key findings
    • Sample/population
    • Limitations
    • Relevance score (1-5)
  5. Note quotes and insights for synthesis

Step 6: Snowball and iterate

Expand search through citation networks:

  1. Identify highest-quality and most-cited sources
  2. Forward snowball: Find papers citing these
  3. Backward snowball: Review their reference lists
  4. Screen new finds through Steps 3-5
  5. Repeat until reaching saturation (few new relevant finds)

Also check:

  • Other work by key authors
  • Recent issues of key journals
  • Conference proceedings in the field

Step 7: Synthesize findings

Integrate findings across sources:

  1. Choose synthesis method based on literature:
    • Thematic: Organize by emerging themes (diverse literature)
    • Chronological: Show evolution over time (historical topics)
    • Methodological: Compare by research method (methods matter)
    • Theoretical: Organize by theoretical framework (competing theories)
  2. Code sources by theme/category
  3. Identify patterns within and across categories
  4. Note areas of consensus and contradiction
  5. Assess overall evidence strength
  6. Document gaps and limitations

When to Use

  • Starting a research project requiring background knowledge
  • Evaluating the evidence base for a claim or intervention
  • Writing background/introduction section for papers or proposals
  • Understanding current state of knowledge on any topic
  • Identifying gaps in research for new contributions
  • Making evidence-based policy or business decisions
  • Preparing for expert consultation or interviews
  • Building foundation for systematic review or meta-analysis

Verification

  • Search strategy used multiple databases and snowballing
  • Inclusion/exclusion criteria consistently applied
  • Each source assessed for quality using evidence hierarchy
  • Synthesis identifies patterns, not just lists sources
  • Contradictions in literature explicitly addressed
  • Gaps in literature documented with implications
  • Methods documented sufficiently for reproduction

Input: $ARGUMENTS

Apply this procedure to the input provided.