Making the Case: How to Do a Literature Review

A literature review is not a laundry list of everything published on a topic. Whether it stands alone or opens an original research paper, it makes the case for why the work matters. In the third installment of a 4-part webinar series from the International Journal of MS Care, editor in chief François Bethoux, MD, and associate editor Mary Alissa Willis, MD, walk through how to build one.

The first decision is what kind of review to write. A precise clinical question, such as the effectiveness of a treatment, points to a systematic review, often framed with PICO: participant, intervention, comparison, outcome. Mapping a broad field or locating research gaps points to a scoping review, framed with PCC: population, concept, context. The distinction matters, because systematic reviews require an assessment of risk of bias for every study included.

Searching comes next, and it should be deliberate. MeSH terms, keywords, and a robust search string do what a general internet search cannot. Citation searching adds more: begin with a few high-quality seed references, work backward through their reference lists, and forward to newer papers that have cited them. A medical librarian can also be a key resource. They can optimize a search string, open doors through institutional licenses, and set up a repeating search that regularly delivers new results.

The installment closes on record keeping, including how to track each paper’s design and findings, how to screen in rounds, and how to report transparently what was excluded and why.

Earlier installments cover finding a question worth publishing and turning a conference poster into a manuscript. The final one looks at peer review from the editor’s side of the desk.