A strong medical literature review proves you know the field, maps prior studies, and shows where your paper adds value. This guide gives you a clean, repeatable path from question to clean prose. You will plan the scope, run smart searches, screen studies without bias, extract data with care, appraise quality, and write with plain language. Templates, examples, and two short tables keep things tight.
What A Medical Literature Review Must Deliver
Editors and peer reviewers look for clarity, rigor, and traceability. Here is a quick checklist of outcomes your review needs to show and how to show them.
| Outcome | How You Show It | Proof To Keep |
|---|---|---|
| Clear scope | Define the population, exposure or intervention, comparator, and outcomes | Your question statement and inclusion rules |
| Reproducible search | Prebuild strings, list databases, record dates and limits | Saved queries, database logs, export files |
| Transparent selection | Screen titles, abstracts, and full texts against the same rules | Decision log with reasons for exclusion |
| Quality appraisal | Apply a suitable tool to each study design | Completed checklists and notes |
| Faithful synthesis | Summarize effects, gaps, and agreement without spin | Tables, figures, and traced quotes |
| Clean reporting | Follow a known standard and journal rules | Filled checklists and a flow diagram |
Doing A Literature Review For A Medical Research Paper: Start Strong
Set A Clear Question With PICO Or PEO
Write one sentence that names the people, the exposure or intervention, the comparator, and the outcomes. That short line guides your search terms and your study picks. For prevention or diagnostic topics, adjust the parts to fit. Keep the wording plain and free of jargon so readers from nearby fields can follow along.
Define Eligibility Rules Up Front
List what you will include and what you will exclude. State study designs you will read, settings, time frames, languages you can read, and any age or sex limits if they apply. Explain why each rule exists. This keeps screening fair and reduces drift when fatigue sets in.
Pick Your Sources
State the databases and registers you will search. PubMed or MEDLINE is near universal for biomedicine. Embase widens drug and device coverage. For trials, add ClinicalTrials.gov. For nursing or allied health, add CINAHL. Keep Google Scholar for backward and forward citation chasing, not for your main counts. Set a time span only if your topic demands it.
Use Reporting Standards From Day One
Even for a narrative review, a reporting checklist keeps you honest. The PRISMA 2020 checklist lays out items readers expect to see, from the flow diagram to funding notes. Use it early so you collect what you need instead of patch gaps later.
Build A Search Strategy That Works
Break The Question Into Concepts
Write each concept in a column and brainstorm synonyms. Add lay terms, brand names, and spelling variants. For hypertension, think “high blood pressure,” “arterial pressure,” and drug classes if relevant. For outcomes, name both clinical end points and lab markers. Keep a running list in a spreadsheet with a column for evidence of why a term belongs.
Combine MeSH Terms And Plain Words
In PubMed, medical subject headings group related words. Pair a MeSH term with main text words using OR. Then connect concepts with AND. Test singular and plural forms. Wrap multiword phrases in quotes. Use field tags like [tiab] for title and abstract, and [Mesh] for subject headings. The PubMed search builder shows how queries are translated and lets you add pieces step by step.
Write The Master String
Here is a template you can adapt. Replace the sample disease and outcome with your own, then test and trim. Save each version by date so your trail is clear.
(hypertension[tiab] OR "high blood pressure"[tiab] OR Hypertension[Mesh])
AND
("angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors"[tiab] OR ACE inhibitors[tiab] OR "Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors"[Mesh])
AND
(mortality[tiab] OR hospitalization[tiab] OR "treatment outcome"[tiab] OR Mortality[Mesh])
Balance Recall And Precision
If your set is too small, add synonyms, drop narrow filters, or expand years. If the set is too large, add field tags, limit to humans if fitting, or add a concept. Avoid limits that throw away good studies, such as language filters when you can read the abstract.
Document Everything
Capture the date searched, the database name and platform, every full string used, and the result count. Export citations with abstracts to a reference manager so you can deduplicate across sources.
How To Conduct A Literature Review For A Medical Paper: Search Smart
Run Your Searches
Start with PubMed or your local MEDLINE mirror. Move to Embase and the Cochrane Library if your field needs them. Add a trial register for ongoing work. For each source, paste the master string, adjust syntax, and export the results. Keep a “search history” sheet that mirrors the database history pane.
Chase Citations
Take your best seed papers and scan reference lists for older gems. Then use the “cited by” feature in Google Scholar to see newer work. Record what you find and from where so your trail is auditable.
Deduplicate With Care
Import batches into your reference manager and run a duplicate check. Inspect a sample of supposed matches by hand so you do not drop non-duplicates that share a title. Keep the clean library as your screening set.
Screen And Select Studies Without Bias
Title And Abstract Pass
Scan titles and abstracts against your eligibility rules. When in doubt, send the record forward to full text. Log the rule that blocked an item so you can report counts later. If two screeners are available, split the set and swap a sample to gauge agreement.
Full Text Pass
Open the PDF and confirm the design, the population, the exposure or intervention, the comparator, and the outcomes. Record exact reasons for exclusion using a short list of standard labels. Note papers you cannot obtain and any author contact.
Track The Flow
Keep counts for found, screened, assessed, included, and excluded items. Note the number at each step and why items left the pool. When you write, show a flow figure that mirrors the steps readers expect.
Extract Data And Keep Them Tidy
Build A Simple Form
Use a spreadsheet with one row per study and clear column labels. Short text beats free prose. Define each field in a tab called “codebook” so anyone can pick up the work. Pilot the form on three papers and refine before you scale.
What To Capture
At minimum, capture study design, setting, sample size, inclusion rules, major baseline traits, exposure or dose, follow-up, outcomes, effect size, and funding. Add risk of bias notes and any red flags you spot.
| Data Item | Where You Find It | Tip |
|---|---|---|
| Study design | Methods section, first paragraph | Match terms to your codebook |
| Population | Eligibility and baseline tables | Record age range and major comorbid states |
| Exposure or intervention | Methods and protocol notes | Record dose, device, route, and duration |
| Comparator | Methods | Usual care, placebo, or active control |
| Outcome | Outcomes section | Name the exact metric and time point |
| Effect size | Results and figures | Note the model used and any adjustments |
| Funding and conflicts | Footnotes or end matter | Save grant numbers for your report |
Appraise Study Quality And Bias
Pick The Right Tool
Match the appraisal tool to design. Randomized trials fit RoB 2. Nonrandomized studies fit ROBINS-I. Diagnostic accuracy work fits QUADAS-2. Case series need a short checklist that flags basic threats. Read the guidance for each tool before you score.
Score With Notes
Work domain by domain. Quote the line that led to each judgment so another reader can see why you made the call. Avoid blanket labels like “low quality” without showing the logic. If two raters score, resolve gaps by open discussion and record the final call.
Use Appraisal In The Synthesis
Do not hide the effect of bias. If high risk studies drive an effect, say so and show the split. If better studies point a different way, make that clear in text and in a small table.
Synthesize Findings The Right Way
Pick A Sane Structure
Group studies by design, by population, or by exposure class. Lead each group with a one-line takeaway, then back it with numbers. Keep claims tight to the data on the page. If your set is suited to pooling, name the model and the effect measure. Report heterogeneity and the range of effects, then test if the pooled claim survives when you drop fragile items.
Write Plainly And With Traceability
Use short sentences. Prefer concrete nouns over buzzwords. Quote a number, not a vague swing. Link every summary line to the studies that back it. Use tables and a compact figure to keep readers oriented. The checklist you used earlier helps you line up the parts that readers expect to see.
Report With Standards And Journal Rules
Follow A Reporting Standard
Readers expect a methods section that shows your search and selection path. The PRISMA 2020 checklist helps you tick the right boxes, from search strings to the flow figure. Copy the item list into your draft and fill it as you go.
Respect Journal Style And Ethics
Match the house style for headings, numbers, and units. Disclose funding and any role of sponsors. Use a conflicts form if the journal asks. For reference style and authorship rules, check the ICMJE Recommendations. Save proof of permissions for any reused figure.
State Limits Without Spin
Say where your search may miss items, such as nonindexed local work. If your topic moved during the review period, say so and list a plan to refresh the search before submission. Give readers enough detail to repeat what you did.
Helpful Add-Ons That Save Time
Reference Managers
Zotero, EndNote, and similar tools store citations and PDFs, build groups for screening, and insert references as you write. Pick one, learn the dedup steps, and lock your library before screening so counts stay stable.
Project Logs And Templates
Keep a dated log with tasks done, decisions made, and to-dos. Freeze your codebook and your search strings in a read-only copy. Place tables and figures in a shared folder with version tags.
Small Team Tactics
If you work in a pair, agree on rules for conflicts, tie-breaks, and timelines. Share a short style guide so prose feels like one voice. Split drudge tasks but keep one owner for flow.
Common Pitfalls And Fixes
Vague Questions
Fix by tightening PICO or PEO. If two aims are clashing, split the review or pick one aim for now.
Overtight Filters
Fix by removing narrow limits and testing recall with known anchor papers. If recall stays weak, broaden a concept or add synonyms.
Cherry Picking
Fix by sticking to the written rules. Report the full flow and reasons for exclusion. Use appraisal to temper claims that lean on weak items.
Long, Dense Prose
Fix by using subheadings, lists, and visuals. Lead every section with a one-line point. Keep paragraphs short and active.
Final Checks Before Submission
Run your search strings once more to catch any late hits. Recheck counts in your flow figure and match them to the library. Read the draft out loud and trim long sentences. Confirm that links to appendices and data files work. Make sure your methods let a peer repeat the steps. When the reference list is clean and the figures match the text, you are ready to send. Spot-check three random studies from extraction to manuscript to ensure numbers travel intact across tables, text, and captions. Run spell check and expand the first instance of each abbreviation. Double check.
Want a quick rules sheet for your desk? Bookmark the PubMed search builder page for syntax checks, save the PRISMA 2020 checklist for reporting, and keep the ICMJE Recommendations close when you write and cite.