literature reviews qualitative data

Archer Library

Qualitative research: literature review .

• Archer Library This link opens in a new window
• Schedule a Reference Appointment This link opens in a new window
• Qualitative Research Handout This link opens in a new window
• Locating Books
• ebook Collections This link opens in a new window
• A to Z Database List This link opens in a new window
• Research & Stats
• Literature Review Resources
• Citation & Reference

Exploring the literature review 

Literature review model: 6 steps.

Adapted from The Literature Review , Machi & McEvoy (2009, p. 13).

Your Literature Review

Step 2: search, boolean search strategies, search limiters, ★ ebsco & google drive.

1. Select a Topic

"All research begins with curiosity" (Machi & McEvoy, 2009, p. 14)

Selection of a topic, and fully defined research interest and question, is supervised (and approved) by your professor. Tips for crafting your topic include:

• Be specific. Take time to define your interest.
• Topic Focus. Fully describe and sufficiently narrow the focus for research.
• Academic Discipline. Learn more about your area of research & refine the scope.
• Avoid Bias. Be aware of bias that you (as a researcher) may have.
• Document your research. Use Google Docs to track your research process.
• Research apps. Consider using Evernote or Zotero to track your research.

Consider Purpose

What will your topic and research address?

In The Literature Review: A Step-by-Step Guide for Students , Ridley presents that literature reviews serve several purposes (2008, p. 16-17).  Included are the following points:

• Historical background for the research;
• Overview of current field provided by "contemporary debates, issues, and questions;"
• Theories and concepts related to your research;
• Introduce "relevant terminology" - or academic language - being used it the field;
• Connect to existing research - does your work "extend or challenge [this] or address a gap;" 
• Provide "supporting evidence for a practical problem or issue" that your research addresses.

★ Schedule a research appointment

At this point in your literature review, take time to meet with a librarian. Why? Understanding the subject terminology used in databases can be challenging. Archer Librarians can help you structure a search, preparing you for step two. How? Contact a librarian directly or use the online form to schedule an appointment. Details are provided in the adjacent Schedule an Appointment box.

2. Search the Literature

Collect & Select Data: Preview, select, and organize

AU Library is your go-to resource for this step in your literature review process. The literature search will include books and ebooks, scholarly and practitioner journals, theses and dissertations, and indexes. You may also choose to include web sites, blogs, open access resources, and newspapers. This library guide provides access to resources needed to complete a literature review.

Books & eBooks: Archer Library & OhioLINK

Databases: Scholarly & Practitioner Journals

Review the Library Databases tab on this library guide, it provides links to recommended databases for Education & Psychology, Business, and General & Social Sciences.

Expand your journal search; a complete listing of available AU Library and OhioLINK databases is available on the Databases  A to Z list . Search the database by subject, type, name, or do use the search box for a general title search. The A to Z list also includes open access resources and select internet sites.

Databases: Theses & Dissertations

Review the Library Databases tab on this guide, it includes Theses & Dissertation resources. AU library also has AU student authored theses and dissertations available in print, search the library catalog for these titles.

Did you know? If you are looking for particular chapters within a dissertation that is not fully available online, it is possible to submit an ILL article request . Do this instead of requesting the entire dissertation.

Newspapers:  Databases & Internet

Consider current literature in your academic field. AU Library's database collection includes The Chronicle of Higher Education and The Wall Street Journal .  The Internet Resources tab in this guide provides links to newspapers and online journals such as Inside Higher Ed , COABE Journal , and Education Week .

The Chronicle of Higher Education has the nation’s largest newsroom dedicated to covering colleges and universities.  Source of news, information, and jobs for college and university faculty members and administrators

The Chronicle features complete contents of the latest print issue; daily news and advice columns; current job listings; archive of previously published content; discussion forums; and career-building tools such as online CV management and salary databases. Dates covered: 1970-present.

Offers in-depth coverage of national and international business and finance as well as first-rate coverage of hard news--all from America's premier financial newspaper. Covers complete bibliographic information and also subjects, companies, people, products, and geographic areas. 

Comprehensive coverage back to 1984 is available from the world's leading financial newspaper through the ProQuest database. 

Newspaper Source provides cover-to-cover full text for hundreds of national (U.S.), international and regional newspapers. In addition, it offers television and radio news transcripts from major networks.

Provides complete television and radio news transcripts from CBS News, CNN, CNN International, FOX News, and more.

Search Strategies & Boolean Operators

There are three basic boolean operators:  AND, OR, and NOT.

Used with your search terms, boolean operators will either expand or limit results. What purpose do they serve? They help to define the relationship between your search terms. For example, using the operator AND will combine the terms expanding the search. When searching some databases, and Google, the operator AND may be implied.

Overview of boolean terms

About the example: Boolean searches were conducted on November 4, 2019; result numbers may vary at a later date. No additional database limiters were set to further narrow search returns.

Database Search Limiters

Database strategies for targeted search results.

Most databases include limiters, or additional parameters, you may use to strategically focus search results.  EBSCO databases, such as Education Research Complete & Academic Search Complete provide options to:

• Limit results to full text;
• Limit results to scholarly journals, and reference available;
• Select results source type to journals, magazines, conference papers, reviews, and newspapers
• Publication date

Keep in mind that these tools are defined as limiters for a reason; adding them to a search will limit the number of results returned.  This can be a double-edged sword.  How? 

• If limiting results to full-text only, you may miss an important piece of research that could change the direction of your research. Interlibrary loan is available to students, free of charge. Request articles that are not available in full-text; they will be sent to you via email.
• If narrowing publication date, you may eliminate significant historical - or recent - research conducted on your topic.
• Limiting resource type to a specific type of material may cause bias in the research results.

Use limiters with care. When starting a search, consider opting out of limiters until the initial literature screening is complete. The second or third time through your research may be the ideal time to focus on specific time periods or material (scholarly vs newspaper).

★ Truncating Search Terms

Expanding your search term at the root.

Truncating is often referred to as 'wildcard' searching. Databases may have their own specific wildcard elements however, the most commonly used are the asterisk (*) or question mark (?).  When used within your search. they will expand returned results.

Asterisk (*) Wildcard

Using the asterisk wildcard will return varied spellings of the truncated word. In the following example, the search term education was truncated after the letter "t."

Explore these database help pages for additional information on crafting search terms.

• EBSCO Connect: Searching with Wildcards and Truncation Symbols
• EBSCO Connect: Searching with Boolean Operators
• EBSCO Connect: EBSCOhost Search Tips
• EBSCO Connect: Basic Searching with EBSCO
• ProQuest Help: Search Tips
• ERIC: How does ERIC search work?

★ EBSCO Databases & Google Drive

Tips for saving research directly to Google drive.

Researching in an EBSCO database?

It is possible to save articles (PDF and HTML) and abstracts in EBSCOhost databases directly to Google drive. Select the Google Drive icon, authenticate using a Google account, and an EBSCO folder will be created in your account. This is a great option for managing your research. If documenting your research in a Google Doc, consider linking the information to actual articles saved in drive.

EBSCO Databases & Google Drive

EBSCOHost Databases & Google Drive: Managing your Research

This video features an overview of how to use Google Drive with EBSCO databases to help manage your research. It presents information for connecting an active Google account to EBSCO and steps needed to provide permission for EBSCO to manage a folder in Drive.

About the Video:  Closed captioning is available, select CC from the video menu.  If you need to review a specific area on the video, view on YouTube and expand the video description for access to topic time stamps.  A video transcript is provided below.

• EBSCOhost Databases & Google Scholar

Defining Literature Review

What is a literature review.

A definition from the Online Dictionary for Library and Information Sciences .

A literature review is "a comprehensive survey of the works published in a particular field of study or line of research, usually over a specific period of time, in the form of an in-depth, critical bibliographic essay or annotated list in which attention is drawn to the most significant works" (Reitz, 2014). 

A systemic review is "a literature review focused on a specific research question, which uses explicit methods to minimize bias in the identification, appraisal, selection, and synthesis of all the high-quality evidence pertinent to the question" (Reitz, 2014).

Recommended Reading

About this page

EBSCO Connect [Discovery and Search]. (2022). Searching with boolean operators. Retrieved May, 3, 2022 from https://connect.ebsco.com/s/?language=en_US

EBSCO Connect [Discover and Search]. (2022). Searching with wildcards and truncation symbols. Retrieved May 3, 2022; https://connect.ebsco.com/s/?language=en_US

Machi, L.A. & McEvoy, B.T. (2009). The literature review . Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press: 

Reitz, J.M. (2014). Online dictionary for library and information science. ABC-CLIO, Libraries Unlimited . Retrieved from https://www.abc-clio.com/ODLIS/odlis_A.aspx

Ridley, D. (2008). The literature review: A step-by-step guide for students . Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Archer Librarians

Schedule an appointment.

Contact a librarian directly (email), or submit a request form. If you have worked with someone before, you can request them on the form.

• ★ Archer Library Help • Online Reqest Form
• Carrie Halquist • Reference & Instruction
• Jessica Byers • Reference & Curation
• Don Reams • Corrections Education & Reference
• Diane Schrecker • Education & Head of the IRC
• Tanaya Silcox • Technical Services & Business
• Sarah Thomas • Acquisitions & ATS Librarian
• << Previous: Research & Stats
• Next: Literature Review Resources >>
• Last Updated: Jul 31, 2024 10:06 AM
• URL: https://libguides.ashland.edu/qualitative

Archer Library • Ashland University © Copyright 2023. An Equal Opportunity/Equal Access Institution.

University Libraries

• Research Guides
• Blackboard Learn
• Interlibrary Loan
• Study Rooms
• University of Arkansas

Literature Reviews

• Qualitative or Quantitative?
• Getting Started
• Finding articles
• Primary sources? Peer-reviewed?
• Review Articles/ Annual Reviews...?
• Books, ebooks, dissertations, book reviews

Qualitative researchers TEND to:

Researchers using qualitative methods tend to:

• t hink that social sciences cannot be well-studied with the same methods as natural or physical sciences
• feel that human behavior is context-specific; therefore, behavior must be studied holistically, in situ, rather than being manipulated
• employ an 'insider's' perspective; research tends to be personal and thereby more subjective.
• do interviews, focus groups, field research, case studies, and conversational or content analysis.

Image from https://www.editage.com/insights/qualitative-quantitative-or-mixed-methods-a-quick-guide-to-choose-the-right-design-for-your-research?refer-type=infographics

Qualitative Research (an operational definition)

Qualitative Research: an operational description

Purpose : explain; gain insight and understanding of phenomena through intensive collection and study of narrative data

Approach: inductive; value-laden/subjective; holistic, process-oriented

Hypotheses: tentative, evolving; based on the particular study

Lit. Review: limited; may not be exhaustive

Setting: naturalistic, when and as much as possible

Sampling : for the purpose; not necessarily representative; for in-depth understanding

Measurement: narrative; ongoing

Design and Method: flexible, specified only generally; based on non-intervention, minimal disturbance, such as historical, ethnographic, or case studies

Data Collection: document collection, participant observation, informal interviews, field notes

Data Analysis: raw data is words/ ongoing; involves synthesis

Data Interpretation: tentative, reviewed on ongoing basis, speculative

• Qualitative research with more structure and less subjectivity
• Increased application of both strategies to the same study ("mixed methods")
• Evidence-based practice emphasized in more fields (nursing, social work, education, and others).

Some Other Guidelines

• Guide for formatting Graphs and Tables
• Critical Appraisal Checklist for an Article On Qualitative Research

Quantitative researchers TEND to:

Researchers using quantitative methods tend to:

• think that both natural and social sciences strive to explain phenomena with confirmable theories derived from testable assumptions
• attempt to reduce social reality to variables, in the same way as with physical reality
• try to tightly control the variable(s) in question to see how the others are influenced.
• Do experiments, have control groups, use blind or double-blind studies; use measures or instruments.

Quantitative Research (an operational definition)

Quantitative research: an operational description

Purpose: explain, predict or control phenomena through focused collection and analysis of numberical data

Approach: deductive; tries to be value-free/has objectives/ is outcome-oriented

Hypotheses : Specific, testable, and stated prior to study

Lit. Review: extensive; may significantly influence a particular study

Setting: controlled to the degree possible

Sampling: uses largest manageable random/randomized sample, to allow generalization of results to larger populations

Measurement: standardized, numberical; "at the end"

Design and Method: Strongly structured, specified in detail in advance; involves intervention, manipulation and control groups; descriptive, correlational, experimental

Data Collection: via instruments, surveys, experiments, semi-structured formal interviews, tests or questionnaires

Data Analysis: raw data is numbers; at end of study, usually statistical

Data Interpretation: formulated at end of study; stated as a degree of certainty

This page on qualitative and quantitative research has been adapted and expanded from a handout by Suzy Westenkirchner. Used with permission.

Images from https://www.editage.com/insights/qualitative-quantitative-or-mixed-methods-a-quick-guide-to-choose-the-right-design-for-your-research?refer-type=infographics.

• << Previous: Books, ebooks, dissertations, book reviews
• Last Updated: Aug 1, 2024 4:37 PM
• URL: https://uark.libguides.com/litreview
• See us on Instagram
• Follow us on Twitter
• Phone: 479-575-4104

Chapter 9. Reviewing the Literature

What is a “literature review”.

No researcher ever comes up with a research question that is wholly novel. Someone, somewhere, has asked the same thing. Academic research is part of a larger community of researchers, and it is your responsibility, as a member of this community, to acknowledge others who have asked similar questions and to put your particular research into this greater context. It is not simply a convention or custom to begin your study with a review of previous literature (the “ lit review ”) but an important responsibility you owe the scholarly community.

Too often, new researchers pursue a topic to study and then write something like, “No one has ever studied this before” or “This area is underresearched.” It may be that no one has studied this particular group or setting, but it is highly unlikely no one has studied the foundational phenomenon of interest. And that comment about an area being underresearched? Be careful. The statement may simply signal to others that you haven’t done your homework. Rubin ( 2021 ) refers to this as “free soloing,” and it is not appreciated in academic work:

The truth of the matter is, academics don’t really like when people free solo. It’s really bad form to omit talking about the other people who are doing or have done research in your area. Partly, I mean we need to cite their work, but I also mean we need to respond to it—agree or disagree, clarify for extend. It’s also really bad form to talk about your research in a way that does not make it understandable to other academics.…You have to explain to your readers what your story is really about in terms they care about . This means using certain terminology, referencing debates in the literature, and citing relevant works—that is, in connecting your work to something else. ( 51–52 )

A literature review is a comprehensive summary of previous research on a topic. It includes both articles and books—and in some cases reports—relevant to a particular area of research. Ideally, one’s research question follows from the reading of what has already been produced. For example, you are interested in studying sports injuries related to female gymnasts. You read everything you can find on sports injuries related to female gymnasts, and you begin to get a sense of what questions remain open. You find that there is a lot of research on how coaches manage sports injuries and much about cultures of silence around treating injuries, but you don’t know what the gymnasts themselves are thinking about these issues. You look specifically for studies about this and find several, which then pushes you to narrow the question further. Your literature review then provides the road map of how you came to your very specific question, and it puts your study in the context of studies of sports injuries. What you eventually find can “speak to” all the related questions as well as your particular one.

In practice, the process is often a bit messier. Many researchers, and not simply those starting out, begin with a particular question and have a clear idea of who they want to study and where they want to conduct their study but don’t really know much about other studies at all. Although backward, we need to recognize this is pretty common. Telling students to “find literature” after the fact can seem like a purposeless task or just another hurdle for completing a thesis or dissertation. It is not! Even if you were not motivated by the literature in the first place, acknowledging similar studies and connecting your own research to those studies are important parts of building knowledge. Acknowledgment of past research is a responsibility you owe the discipline to which you belong.

Literature reviews can also signal theoretical approaches and particular concepts that you will incorporate into your own study. For example, let us say you are doing a study of how people find their first jobs after college, and you want to use the concept of social capital . There are competing definitions of social capital out there (e.g., Bourdieu vs. Burt vs. Putnam). Bourdieu’s notion is of one form of capital, or durable asset, of a “network of more or less institutionalized relationships of mutual acquaintance or recognition” ( 1984:248 ). Burt emphasizes the “brokerage opportunities” in a social network as social capital ( 1997:355 ). Putnam’s social capital is all about “facilitating coordination and cooperation for mutual benefit” ( 2001:67 ). Your literature review can adjudicate among these three approaches, or it can simply refer to the one that is animating your own research. If you include Bourdieu in your literature review, readers will know “what kind” of social capital you are talking about as well as what kind of social scientist you yourself are. They will likely understand that you are interested more in how some people are advantaged by their social capital relative to others rather than being interested in the mechanics of how social networks operate.

The literature review thus does two important things for you: firstly, it allows you to acknowledge previous research in your area of interest, thereby situating you within a discipline or body of scholars, and, secondly, it demonstrates that you know what you are talking about. If you present the findings of your research study without including a literature review, it can be like singing into the wind. It sounds nice, but no one really hears it, or if they do catch snippets, they don’t know where it is coming from.

Examples of Literature Reviews

To help you get a grasp of what a good literature review looks like and how it can advance your study, let’s take a look at a few examples.

Reader-Friendly Example: The Power of Peers

The first is by Janice McCabe ( 2016 ) and is from an article on peer networks in the journal Contexts . Contexts presents articles in a relatively reader-friendly format, with the goal of reaching a large audience for interesting sociological research. Read this example carefully and note how easily McCabe is able to convey the relevance of her own work by situating it in the context of previous studies:

Scholars who study education have long acknowledged the importance of peers for students’ well-being and academic achievement. For example, in 1961, James Coleman argued that peer culture within high schools shapes students’ social and academic aspirations and successes. More recently, Judith Rich Harris has drawn on research in a range of areas—from sociological studies of preschool children to primatologists’ studies of chimpanzees and criminologists’ studies of neighborhoods—to argue that peers matter much more than parents in how children “turn out.” Researchers have explored students’ social lives in rich detail, as in Murray Milner’s book about high school students, Freaks, Geeks, and Cool Kids , and Elizabeth Armstrong and Laura Hamilton’s look at college students, Paying for the Party . These works consistently show that peers play a very important role in most students’ lives. They tend, however, to prioritize social over academic influence and to use a fuzzy conception of peers rather than focusing directly on friends—the relationships that should matter most for student success. Social scientists have also studied the power of peers through network analysis, which is based on uncovering the web of connections between people. Network analysis involves visually mapping networks and mathematically comparing their structures (such as the density of ties) and the positions of individuals within them (such as how central a given person is within the network). As Nicholas Christakis and James Fowler point out in their book Connected , network structure influences a range of outcomes, including health, happiness, wealth, weight, and emotions. Given that sociologists have long considered network explanations for social phenomena, it’s surprising that we know little about how college students’ friends impact their experiences. In line with this network tradition, I focus on the structure of friendship networks, constructing network maps so that the differences we see across participants are due to the underlying structure, including each participant’s centrality in their friendship group and the density of ties among their friends. ( 23 )

What did you notice? In her very second sentence, McCabe uses “for example” to introduce a study by Coleman, thereby indicating that she is not going to tell you every single study in this area but is going to tell you that (1) there is a lot of research in this area, (2) it has been going on since at least 1961, and (3) it is still relevant (i.e., recent studies are still being done now). She ends her first paragraph by summarizing the body of literature in this area (after giving you a few examples) and then telling you what may have been (so far) left out of this research. In the second paragraph, she shifts to a separate interesting focus that is related to the first but is also quite distinct. Lit reviews very often include two (or three) distinct strands of literature, the combination of which nicely backgrounds this particular study . In the case of our female gymnast study (above), those two strands might be (1) cultures of silence around sports injuries and (2) the importance of coaches. McCabe concludes her short and sweet literature review with one sentence explaining how she is drawing from both strands of the literature she has succinctly presented for her particular study. This example should show you that literature reviews can be readable, helpful, and powerful additions to your final presentation.

Authoritative Academic Journal Example: Working Class Students’ College Expectations

The second example is more typical of academic journal writing. It is an article published in the British Journal of Sociology of Education by Wolfgang Lehmann ( 2009 ):

Although this increase in post-secondary enrolment and the push for university is evident across gender, race, ethnicity, and social class categories, access to university in Canada continues to be significantly constrained for those from lower socio-economic backgrounds (Finnie, Lascelles, and Sweetman 2005). Rising tuition fees coupled with an overestimation of the cost and an underestimation of the benefits of higher education has put university out of reach for many young people from low-income families (Usher 2005). Financial constraints aside, empirical studies in Canada have shown that the most important predictor of university access is parental educational attainment. Having at least one parent with a university degree significantly increases the likelihood of a young person to attend academic-track courses in high school, have high educational and career aspirations, and ultimately attend university (Andres et al. 1999, 2000; Lehmann 2007a). Drawing on Bourdieu’s various writing on habitus and class-based dispositions (see, for example, Bourdieu 1977, 1990), Hodkinson and Sparkes (1997) explain career decisions as neither determined nor completely rational. Instead, they are based on personal experiences (e.g., through employment or other exposure to occupations) and advice from others. Furthermore, they argue that we have to understand these decisions as pragmatic, rather than rational. They are pragmatic in that they are based on incomplete and filtered information, because of the social context in which the information is obtained and processed. New experiences and information can, however, also be allowed into one’s world, where they gradually or radically transform habitus, which in turn creates the possibility for the formation of new and different dispositions. Encountering a supportive teacher in elementary or secondary school, having ambitious friends, or chance encounters can spark such transformations. Transformations can be confirming or contradictory, they can be evolutionary or dislocating. Working-class students who enter university most certainly encounter such potentially transformative situations. Granfield (1991) has shown how initially dislocating feelings of inadequacy and inferiority of working-class students at an elite US law school were eventually replaced by an evolutionary transformation, in which the students came to dress, speak and act more like their middle-class and upper-class peers. In contrast, Lehmann (2007b) showed how persistent habitus dislocation led working-class university students to drop out of university. Foskett and Hemsley-Brown (1999) argue that young people’s perceptions of careers are a complex mix of their own experiences, images conveyed through adults, and derived images conveyed by the media. Media images of careers, perhaps, are even more important for working-class youth with high ambitions as they offer (generally distorted) windows into a world of professional employment to which they have few other sources of access. It has also been argued that working-class youth who do continue to university still face unique, class-specific challenges, evident in higher levels of uncertainty (Baxter and Britton 2001; Lehmann 2004, 2007a; Quinn 2004), their higher education choices (Ball et al. 2002; Brooks 2003; Reay et al. 2001) and fears of inadequacy because of their cultural outsider status (Aries and Seider 2005; Granfield 1991). Although the number of working-class university students in Canada has slowly increased, that of middle-class students at university has risen far more steeply (Knighton and Mizra 2002). These different enrolment trajectories have actually widened the participation gap, which in tum explains our continued concerns with the potential outsider status Indeed, in a study comparing first-generation working-class and traditional students who left university without graduating, Lehmann (2007b) found that first-generation working-class students were more likely to leave university very early in some cases within the first two months of enrollment. They were also more likely to leave university despite solid academic performance. Not “fitting in,” not “feeling university,” and not being able to “relate to these people” were key reasons for eventually withdrawing from university. From the preceding review of the literature, a number of key research questions arise: How do working-class university students frame their decision to attend university? How do they defy the considerable odds documented in the literature to attend university? What are the sources of information and various images that create dispositions to study at university? What role does their social-class background- or habitus play in their transition dispositions and how does this translate into expectations for university? ( 139 )

What did you notice here? How is this different from (and similar to) the first example? Note that rather than provide you with one or two illustrative examples of similar types of research, Lehmann provides abundant source citations throughout. He includes theory and concepts too. Like McCabe, Lehmann is weaving through multiple literature strands: the class gap in higher education participation in Canada, class-based dispositions, and obstacles facing working-class college students. Note how he concludes the literature review by placing his research questions in context.

Find other articles of interest and read their literature reviews carefully. I’ve included two more for you at the end of this chapter . As you learned how to diagram a sentence in elementary school (hopefully!), try diagramming the literature reviews. What are the “different strands” of research being discussed? How does the author connect these strands to their own research questions? Where is theory in the lit review, and how is it incorporated (e.g., Is it a separate strand of its own or is it inextricably linked with previous research in this area)?

One model of how to structure your literature review can be found in table 9.1. More tips, hints, and practices will be discussed later in the chapter.

Table 9.1. Model of Literature Review, Adopted from Calarco (2020:166)

Embracing Theory

A good research study will, in some form or another, use theory. Depending on your particular study (and possibly the preferences of the members of your committee), theory may be built into your literature review. Or it may form its own section in your research proposal/design (e.g., “literature review” followed by “theoretical framework”). In my own experience, I see a lot of graduate students grappling with the requirement to “include theory” in their research proposals. Things get a little squiggly here because there are different ways of incorporating theory into a study (Are you testing a theory? Are you generating a theory?), and based on these differences, your literature review proper may include works that describe, explain, and otherwise set forth theories, concepts, or frameworks you are interested in, or it may not do this at all. Sometimes a literature review sets forth what we know about a particular group or culture totally independent of what kinds of theoretical framework or particular concepts you want to explore. Indeed, the big point of your study might be to bring together a body of work with a theory that has never been applied to it previously. All this is to say that there is no one correct way to approach the use of theory and the writing about theory in your research proposal.

Students are often scared of embracing theory because they do not exactly understand what it is. Sometimes, it seems like an arbitrary requirement. You’re interested in a topic; maybe you’ve even done some research in the area and you have findings you want to report. And then a committee member reads over what you have and asks, “So what?” This question is a good clue that you are missing theory, the part that connects what you have done to what other researchers have done and are doing. You might stumble upon this rather accidentally and not know you are embracing theory, as in a case where you seek to replicate a prior study under new circumstances and end up finding that a particular correlation between behaviors only happens when mediated by something else. There’s theory in there, if you can pull it out and articulate it. Or it might be that you are motivated to do more research on racial microaggressions because you want to document their frequency in a particular setting, taking for granted the kind of critical race theoretical framework that has done the hard work of defining and conceptualizing “microaggressions” in the first place. In that case, your literature review could be a review of Critical Race Theory, specifically related to this one important concept. That’s the way to bring your study into a broader conversation while also acknowledging (and honoring) the hard work that has preceded you.

Rubin ( 2021 ) classifies ways of incorporating theory into case study research into four categories, each of which might be discussed somewhat differently in a literature review or theoretical framework section. The first, the least theoretical, is where you set out to study a “configurative idiographic case” ( 70 ) This is where you set out to describe a particular case, leaving yourself pretty much open to whatever you find. You are not expecting anything based on previous literature. This is actually pretty weak as far as research design goes, but it is probably the default for novice researchers. Your committee members should probably help you situate this in previous literature in some way or another. If they cannot, and it really does appear you are looking at something fairly new that no one else has bothered to research before, and you really are completely open to discovery, you might try using a Grounded Theory approach, which is a methodological approach that foregrounds the generation of theory. In that case, your “theory” section can be a discussion of “Grounded Theory” methodology (confusing, yes, but if you take some time to ponder, you will see how this works). You will still need a literature review, though. Ideally one that describes other studies that have ever looked at anything remotely like what you are looking at—parallel cases that have been researched.

The second approach is the “disciplined configurative case,” in which theory is applied to explain a particular case or topic. You are not trying to test the theory but rather assuming the theory is correct, as in the case of exploring microaggressions in a particular setting. In this case, you really do need to have a separate theory section in addition to the literature review, one in which you clearly define the theoretical framework, including any of its important concepts. You can use this section to discuss how other researchers have used the concepts and note any discrepancies in definitions or operationalization of those concepts. This way you will be sure to design your study so that it speaks to and with other researchers. If everyone who is writing about microaggressions has a different definition of them, it is hard for others to compare findings or make any judgments about their prevalence (or any number of other important characteristics). Your literature review section may then stand alone and describe previous research in the particular area or setting, irrespective of the kinds of theory underlying those studies.

The third approach is “heuristic,” one in which you seek to identify new variables, hypotheses, mechanisms, or paths not yet explained by a theory or theoretical framework. In a way, you are generating new theory, but it is probably more accurate to say that you are extending or deepening preexisting theory. In this case, having a single literature review that is focused on the theory and the ways the theory has been applied and understood (with all its various mechanisms and pathways) is probably your best option. The focus of the literature reviewed is less on the case and more on the theory you are seeking to extend.

The final approach is “theory testing,” which is much rarer in qualitative studies than in quantitative, where this is the default approach. Theory-testing cases are those where a particular case is used to see if an existing theory is accurate or accurate under particular circumstances. As with the heuristic approach, your literature review will probably draw heavily on previous uses of the theory, but you may end up having a special section specifically about cases very close to your own . In other words, the more your study approaches theory testing, the more likely there is to be a set of similar studies to draw on or even one important key study that you are setting your own study up in parallel to in order to find out if the theory generated there operates here.

If we wanted to get very technical, it might be useful to distinguish theoretical frameworks properly from conceptual frameworks. The latter are a bit looser and, given the nature of qualitative research, often fit exploratory studies. Theoretical frameworks rely on specific theories and are essential for theory-testing studies. Conceptual frameworks can pull in specific concepts or ideas that may or may not be linked to particular theories. Think about it this way: A theory is a story of how the world works. Concepts don’t presume to explain the whole world but instead are ways to approach phenomena to help make sense of them. Microaggressions are concepts that are linked to Critical Race Theory. One could contextualize one’s study within Critical Race Theory and then draw various concepts, such as that of microaggressions from the overall theoretical framework. Or one could bracket out the master theory or framework and employ the concept of microaggression more opportunistically as a phenomenon of interest. If you are unsure of what theory you are using, you might want to frame a more practical conceptual framework in your review of the literature.

Helpful Tips

How to maintain good notes for what your read.

Over the years, I have developed various ways of organizing notes on what I read. At first, I used a single sheet of full-size paper with a preprinted list of questions and points clearly addressed on the front side, leaving the second side for more reflective comments and free-form musings about what I read, why it mattered, and how it might be useful for my research. Later, I developed a system in which I use a single 4″ × 6″ note card for each book I read. I try only to use the front side (and write very small), leaving the back for comments that are about not just this reading but things to do or examine or consider based on the reading. These notes often mean nothing to anyone else picking up the card, but they make sense to me. I encourage you to find an organizing system that works for you. Then when you set out to compose a literature review, instead of staring at five to ten books or a dozen articles, you will have ten neatly printed pages or notecards or files that have distilled what is important to know about your reading.

It is also a good idea to store this data digitally, perhaps through a reference manager. I use RefWorks, but I also recommend EndNote or any other system that allows you to search institutional databases. Your campus library will probably provide access to one of these or another system. Most systems will allow you to export references from another manager if and when you decide to move to another system. Reference managers allow you to sort through all your literature by descriptor, author, year, and so on. Even so, I personally like to have the ability to manually sort through my index cards, recategorizing things I have read as I go. I use RefWorks to keep a record of what I have read, with proper citations, so I can create bibliographies more easily, and I do add in a few “notes” there, but the bulk of my notes are kept in longhand.

What kinds of information should you include from your reading? Here are some bulleted suggestions from Calarco ( 2020:113–114 ), with my own emendations:

• Citation . If you are using a reference manager, you can import the citation and then, when you are ready to create a bibliography, you can use a provided menu of citation styles, which saves a lot of time. If you’ve originally formatted in Chicago Style but the journal you are writing for wants APA style, you can change your entire bibliography in less than a minute. When using a notecard for a book, I include author, title, date as well as the library call number (since most of what I read I pull from the library). This is something RefWorks is not able to do, and it helps when I categorize.

I begin each notecard with an “intro” section, where I record the aims, goals, and general point of the book/article as explained in the introductory sections (which might be the preface, the acknowledgments, or the first two chapters). I then draw a bold line underneath this part of the notecard. Everything after that should be chapter specific. Included in this intro section are things such as the following, recommended by Calarco ( 2020 ):

• Key background . “Two to three short bullet points identifying the theory/prior research on which the authors are building and defining key terms.”
• Data/methods . “One or two short bullet points with information about the source of the data and the method of analysis, with a note if this is a novel or particularly effective example of that method.” I use [M] to signal methodology on my notecard, which might read, “[M] Int[erview]s (n-35), B[lack]/W[hite] voters” (I need shorthand to fit on my notecard!).
• Research question . “Stated as briefly as possible.” I always provide page numbers so I can go back and see exactly how this was stated (sometimes, in qualitative research, there are multiple research questions, and they cannot be stated simply).
• Argument/contributions . “Two to three short bullet points briefly describing the authors’ answer to the central research question and its implication for research, theory, and practice.” I use [ARG] for argument to signify the argument, and I make sure this is prominently visible on my notecard. I also provide page numbers here.

For me, all of this fits in the “intro” section, which, if this is a theoretically rich, methodologically sound book, might take up a third or even half of the front page of my notecard. Beneath the bold underline, I report specific findings or particulars of the book as they emerge chapter by chapter. Calarco’s ( 2020 ) next step is the following:

• Key findings . “Three to four short bullet points identifying key patterns in the data that support the authors’ argument.”

All that remains is writing down thoughts that occur upon finishing the article/book. I use the back of the notecard for these kinds of notes. Often, they reach out to other things I have read (e.g., “Robinson reminds me of Crusoe here in that both are looking at the effects of social isolation, but I think Robinson makes a stronger argument”). Calarco ( 2020 ) concludes similarly with the following:

• Unanswered questions . “Two to three short bullet points that identify key limitations of the research and/or questions the research did not answer that could be answered in future research.”

As I mentioned, when I first began taking notes like this, I preprinted pages with prompts for “research question,” “argument,” and so on. This was a great way to remind myself to look for these things in particular. You can do the same, adding whatever preprinted sections make sense to you, given what you are studying and the important aspects of your discipline. The other nice thing about the preprinted forms is that it keeps your writing to a minimum—you cannot write more than the allotted space, even if you might want to, preventing your notes from spiraling out of control. This can be helpful when we are new to a subject and everything seems worth recording!

After years of discipline, I have finally settled on my notecard approach. I have thousands of notecards, organized in several index card filing boxes stacked in my office. On the top right of each card is a note of the month/day I finished reading the item. I can remind myself what I read in the summer of 2010 if the need or desire ever arose to do so…those invaluable notecards are like a memento of what my brain has been up to!

Where to Start Looking for Literature

Your university library should provide access to one of several searchable databases for academic books and articles. My own preference is JSTOR, a service of ITHAKA, a not-for-profit organization that works to advance and preserve knowledge and to improve teaching and learning through the use of digital technologies. JSTOR allows you to search by several keywords and to narrow your search by type of material (articles or books). For many disciplines, the “literature” of the literature review is expected to be peer-reviewed “articles,” but some disciplines will also value books and book chapters. JSTOR is particularly useful for article searching. You can submit several keywords and see what is returned, and you can also narrow your search by a particular journal or discipline. If your discipline has one or two key journals (e.g., the American Journal of Sociology and the American Sociological Review are key for sociology), you might want to go directly to those journals’ websites and search for your topic area. There is an art to when to cast your net widely and when to refine your search, and you may have to tack back and forth to ensure that you are getting all that is relevant but not getting bogged down in all studies that might have some marginal relevance.

Some articles will carry more weight than others, and you can use applications like Google Scholar to see which articles have made and are continuing to make larger impacts on your discipline. Find these articles and read them carefully; use their literature review and the sources cited in those articles to make sure you are capturing what is relevant. This is actually a really good way of finding relevant books—only the most impactful will make it into the citations of journals. Over time, you will notice that a handful of articles (or books) are cited so often that when you see, say, Armstrong and Hamilton ( 2015 ), you know exactly what book this is without looking at the full cite. This is when you know you are in the conversation.

You might also approach a professor whose work is broadly in the area of your interest and ask them to recommend one or two “important” foundational articles or books. You can then use the references cited in those recommendations to build up your literature. Just be careful: some older professors’ knowledge of the literature (and I reluctantly add myself here) may be a bit outdated! It is best that the article or book whose references and sources you use to build your body of literature be relatively current.

Keep a List of Your Keywords

When using searchable databases, it is a good idea to keep a list of all the keywords you use as you go along so that (1) you do not needlessly duplicate your efforts and (2) you can more easily adjust your search as you get a better sense of what you are looking for. I suggest you keep a separate file or even a small notebook for this and you date your search efforts.

Here’s an example:

Table 9.2. Keep a List of Your Keywords

Think Laterally

How to find the various strands of literature to combine? Don’t get stuck on finding the exact same research topic you think you are interested in. In the female gymnast example, I recommended that my student consider looking for studies of ballerinas, who also suffer sports injuries and around whom there is a similar culture of silence. It turned out that there was in fact research about my student’s particular questions, just not about the subjects she was interested in. You might do something similar. Don’t get stuck looking for too direct literature but think about the broader phenomenon of interest or analogous cases.

Read Outside the Canon

Some scholars’ work gets cited by everyone all the time. To some extent, this is a very good thing, as it helps establish the discipline. For example, there are a lot of “Bourdieu scholars” out there (myself included) who draw ideas, concepts, and quoted passages from Bourdieu. This makes us recognizable to one another and is a way of sharing a common language (e.g., where “cultural capital” has a particular meaning to those versed in Bourdieusian theory). There are empirical studies that get cited over and over again because they are excellent studies but also because there is an “echo chamber effect” going on, where knowing to cite this study marks you as part of the club, in the know, and so on. But here’s the problem with this: there are hundreds if not thousands of excellent studies out there that fail to get appreciated because they are crowded out by the canon. Sometimes this happens because they are published in “lower-ranked” journals and are never read by a lot of scholars who don’t have time to read anything other than the “big three” in their field. Other times this happens because the author falls outside of the dominant social networks in the field and thus is unmentored and fails to get noticed by those who publish a lot in those highly ranked and visible spaces. Scholars who fall outside the dominant social networks and who publish outside of the top-ranked journals are in no way less insightful than their peers, and their studies may be just as rigorous and relevant to your work, so it is important for you to take some time to read outside the canon. Due to how a person’s race, gender, and class operate in the academy, there is also a matter of social justice and ethical responsibility involved here: “When you focus on the most-cited research, you’re more likely to miss relevant research by women and especially women of color, whose research tends to be under-cited in most fields. You’re also more likely to miss new research, research by junior scholars, and research in other disciplines that could inform your work. Essentially, it is important to read and cite responsibly, which means checking that you’re not just reading and citing the same white men and the same old studies that everyone has cited before you” ( Calarco 2020:112 ).

Consider Multiple Uses for Literature

Throughout this chapter, I’ve referred to the literature of interest in a rather abstract way, as what is relevant to your study. But there are many different ways previous research can be relevant to your study. The most basic use of the literature is the “findings”—for example, “So-and-so found that Canadian working-class students were concerned about ‘fitting in’ to the culture of college, and I am going to look at a similar question here in the US.” But the literature may be of interest not for its findings but theoretically—for example, employing concepts that you want to employ in your own study. Bourdieu’s definition of social capital may have emerged in a study of French professors, but it can still be relevant in a study of, say, how parents make choices about what preschools to send their kids to (also a good example of lateral thinking!).

If you are engaged in some novel methodological form of data collection or analysis, you might look for previous literature that has attempted that. I would not recommend this for undergraduate research projects, but for graduate students who are considering “breaking the mold,” find out if anyone has been there before you. Even if their study has absolutely nothing else in common with yours, it is important to acknowledge that previous work.

Describing Gaps in the Literature

First, be careful! Although it is common to explain how your research adds to, builds upon, and fills in gaps in the previous research (see all four literature review examples in this chapter for this), there is a fine line between describing the gaps and misrepresenting previous literature by failing to conduct a thorough review of the literature. A little humility can make a big difference in your presentation. Instead of “This is the first study that has looked at how firefighters juggle childcare during forest fire season,” say, “I use the previous literature on how working parents juggling childcare and the previous ethnographic studies of firefighters to explore how firefighters juggle childcare during forest fire season.” You can even add, “To my knowledge, no one has conducted an ethnographic study in this specific area, although what we have learned from X about childcare and from Y about firefighters would lead us to expect Z here.” Read more literature review sections to see how others have described the “gaps” they are filling.

Use Concept Mapping

Concept mapping is a helpful tool for getting your thoughts in order and is particularly helpful when thinking about the “literature” foundational to your particular study. Concept maps are also known as mind maps, which is a delightful way to think about them. Your brain is probably abuzz with competing ideas in the early stages of your research design. Write/draw them on paper, and then try to categorize and move the pieces around into “clusters” that make sense to you. Going back to the gymnasts example, my student might have begun by jotting down random words of interest: gymnasts * sports * coaches * female gymnasts * stress * injury * don’t complain * women in sports * bad coaching * anxiety/stress * careers in sports * pain. She could then have begun clustering these into relational categories (bad coaching, don’t complain culture) and simple “event” categories (injury, stress). This might have led her to think about reviewing literature in these two separate aspects and then literature that put them together. There is no correct way to draw a concept map, as they are wonderfully specific to your mind. There are many examples you can find online.

Ask Yourself, “How Is This Sociology (or Political Science or Public Policy, Etc.)?”

Rubin ( 2021:82 ) offers this suggestion instead of asking yourself the “So what?” question to get you thinking about what bridges there are between your study and the body of research in your particular discipline. This is particularly helpful for thinking about theory. Rubin further suggests that if you are really stumped, ask yourself, “What is the really big question that all [fill in your discipline here] care about?” For sociology, it might be “inequality,” which would then help you think about theories of inequality that might be helpful in framing your study on whatever it is you are studying—OnlyFans? Childcare during COVID? Aging in America? I can think of some interesting ways to frame questions about inequality for any of those topics. You can further narrow it by focusing on particular aspects of inequality (Gender oppression? Racial exclusion? Heteronormativity?). If your discipline is public policy, the big questions there might be, How does policy get enacted, and what makes a policy effective? You can then take whatever your particular policy interest is—tax reform, student debt relief, cap-and-trade regulations—and apply those big questions. Doing so would give you a handle on what is otherwise an intolerably vague subject (e.g., What about student debt relief?).

Sometimes finding you are in new territory means you’ve hit the jackpot, and sometimes it means you’ve traveled out of bounds for your discipline. The jackpot scenario is wonderful. You are doing truly innovative research that is combining multiple literatures or is addressing a new or under-examined phenomenon of interest, and your research has the potential to be groundbreaking. Congrats! But that’s really hard to do, and it might be more likely that you’ve traveled out of bounds, by which I mean, you are no longer in your discipline . It might be that no one has written about this thing—at least within your field— because no one in your field actually cares about this topic . ( Rubin 2021:83 ; emphases added)

Don’t Treat This as a Chore

Don’t treat the literature review as a chore that has to be completed, but see it for what it really is—you are building connections to other researchers out there. You want to represent your discipline or area of study fairly and adequately. Demonstrate humility and your knowledge of previous research. Be part of the conversation.

Supplement: Two More Literature Review Examples

Elites by harvey ( 2011 ).

In the last two decades, there has been a small but growing literature on elites. In part, this has been a result of the resurgence of ethnographic research such as interviews, focus groups, case studies, and participant observation but also because scholars have become increasingly interested in understanding the perspectives and behaviors of leaders in business, politics, and society as a whole. Yet until recently, our understanding of some of the methodological challenges of researching elites has lagged behind our rush to interview them.

There is no clear-cut definition of the term elite, and given its broad understanding across the social sciences, scholars have tended to adopt different approaches. Zuckerman (1972) uses the term ultraelites to describe individuals who hold a significant amount of power within a group that is already considered elite. She argues, for example, that US senators constitute part of the country’s political elite but that among them are the ultraelites: a “subset of particularly powerful or prestigious influentials” (160). She suggests that there is a hierarchy of status within elite groups. McDowell (1998) analyses a broader group of “professional elites” who are employees working at different levels for merchant and investment banks in London. She classifies this group as elite because they are “highly skilled, professionally competent, and class-specific” (2135). Parry (1998:2148) uses the term hybrid elites in the context of the international trade of genetic material because she argues that critical knowledge exists not in traditional institutions “but rather as increasingly informal, hybridised, spatially fragmented, and hence largely ‘invisible,’ networks of elite actors.” Given the undertheorization of the term elite, Smith (2006) recognizes why scholars have shaped their definitions to match their respondents . However, she is rightly critical of the underlying assumption that those who hold professional positions necessarily exert as much influence as initially perceived. Indeed, job titles can entirely misrepresent the role of workers and therefore are by no means an indicator of elite status (Harvey 2010).

Many scholars have used the term elite in a relational sense, defining them either in terms of their social position compared to the researcher or compared to the average person in society (Stephens 2007). The problem with this definition is there is no guarantee that an elite subject will necessarily translate this power and authority in an interview setting. Indeed, Smith (2006) found that on the few occasions she experienced respondents wanting to exert their authority over her, it was not from elites but from relatively less senior workers. Furthermore, although business and political elites often receive extensive media training, they are often scrutinized by television and radio journalists and therefore can also feel threatened in an interview, particularly in contexts that are less straightforward to prepare for such as academic interviews. On several occasions, for instance, I have been asked by elite respondents or their personal assistants what they need to prepare for before the interview, which suggests that they consider the interview as some form of challenge or justification for what they do.

In many cases, it is not necessarily the figureheads or leaders of organizations and institutions who have the greatest claim to elite status but those who hold important social networks, social capital, and strategic positions within social structures because they are better able to exert influence (Burt 1992; Parry 1998; Smith 2005; Woods 1998). An elite status can also change, with people both gaining and losing theirs over time. In addition, it is geographically specific, with people holding elite status in some but not all locations. In short, it is clear that the term elite can mean many things in different contexts, which explains the range of definitions. The purpose here is not to critique these other definitions but rather to highlight the variety of perspectives.

When referring to my research, I define elites as those who occupy senior-management- and board-level positions within organizations. This is a similar scope of definition to Zuckerman’s (1972) but focuses on a level immediately below her ultraelite subjects. My definition is narrower than McDowell’s (1998) because it is clear in the context of my research that these people have significant decision-making influence within and outside of the firm and therefore present a unique challenge to interview. I deliberately use the term elite more broadly when drawing on examples from the theoretical literature in order to compare my experiences with those who have researched similar groups.

”Changing Dispositions among the Upwardly Mobile” by Curl, Lareau, and Wu ( 2018 )

There is growing interest in the role of cultural practices in undergirding the social stratification system. For example, Lamont et al. (2014) critically assess the preoccupation with economic dimensions of social stratification and call for more developed cultural models of the transmission of inequality. The importance of cultural factors in the maintenance of social inequality has also received empirical attention from some younger scholars, including Calarco (2011, 2014) and Streib (2015). Yet questions remain regarding the degree to which economic position is tied to cultural sensibilities and the ways in which these cultural sensibilities are imprinted on the self or are subject to change. Although habitus is a core concept in Bourdieu’s theory of social reproduction, there is limited empirical attention to the precise areas of the habitus that can be subject to change during upward mobility as well as the ramifications of these changes for family life.

In Bourdieu’s (1984) highly influential work on the importance of class-based cultural dispositions, habitus is defined as a “durable system of dispositions” created in childhood. The habitus provides a “matrix of perceptions” that seems natural while also structuring future actions and pathways. In many of his writings, Bourdieu emphasized the durability of cultural tastes and dispositions and did not consider empirically whether these dispositions might be changed or altered throughout one’s life (Swartz 1997). His theoretical work does permit the possibility of upward mobility and transformation, however, through the ability of the habitus to “improvise” or “change” due to “new experiences” (Friedman 2016:131). Researchers have differed in opinion on the durability of the habitus and its ability to change (King 2000). Based on marital conflict in cross-class marriages, for instance, Streib (2015) argues that cultural dispositions of individuals raised in working-class families are deeply embedded and largely unchanging. In a somewhat different vein, Horvat and Davis (2011:152) argue that young adults enrolled in an alternative educational program undergo important shifts in their self-perception, such as “self-esteem” and their “ability to accomplish something of value.” Others argue there is variability in the degree to which habitus changes dependent on life experience and personality (Christodoulou and Spyridakis 2016). Recently, additional studies have investigated the habitus as it intersects with lifestyle through the lens of meaning making (Ambrasat et al. 2016). There is, therefore, ample discussion of class-based cultural practices in self-perception (Horvat and Davis 2011), lifestyle (Ambrasat et al. 2016), and other forms of taste (Andrews 2012; Bourdieu 1984), yet researchers have not sufficiently delineated which aspects of the habitus might change through upward mobility or which specific dimensions of life prompt moments of class-based conflict.

Bourdieu (1999:511; 2004) acknowledged simmering tensions between the durable aspects of habitus and those aspects that have been transformed—that is, a “fractured” or “cleft” habitus. Others have explored these tensions as a “divided” or “fragmented” habitus (Baxter and Britton 2001; Lee and Kramer 2013). Each of these conceptions of the habitus implies that changes in cultural dispositions are possible but come with costs. Exploration of the specific aspects of one’s habitus that can change and generate conflict contributes to this literature.

Scholars have also studied the costs associated with academic success for working-class undergraduates (Hurst 2010; Lee and Kramer 2013; London 1989; Reay 2017; Rondini 2016; Stuber 2011), but we know little about the lasting effects on adults. For instance, Lee and Kramer (2013) point to cross-class tensions as family and friends criticize upwardly mobile individuals for their newly acquired cultural dispositions. Documenting the tension many working-class students experience with their friends and families of origin, they find that the source of their pain or struggle is “shaped not only by their interactions with non-mobile family and friends but also within their own minds, by their own assessments of their social positions, and by how those positions are interpreted by others” (Lee and Kramer 2013:29). Hurst (2010) also explores the experiences of undergraduates who have been academically successful and the costs associated with that success. She finds that decisions about “class allegiance and identity” are required aspects of what it means to “becom[e] educated” (4) and that working-class students deal with these cultural changes differently. Jack (2014, 2016) also argues that there is diversity among lower-income students, which yields varied college experiences. Naming two groups, the “doubly disadvantaged” and the “privileged poor,” he argues that previous experience with “elite environments” (2014:456) prior to college informs students’ ability to take on dominant cultural practices, particularly around engagement, such as help seeking or meeting with professors (2016). These studies shed light on the role college might play as a “lever for mobility” (2016:15) and discuss the pain and difficulty associated with upward mobility among undergraduates, but the studies do not illuminate how these tensions unfold in adulthood. Neither have they sufficiently addressed potential enduring tensions with extended family members as well as the specific nature of the difficulties.

Some scholars point to the positive outcomes upwardly mobile youth (Lehmann 2009) and adults (Stuber 2005) experience when they maintain a different habitus than their newly acquired class position, although, as Jack (2014, 2016) shows, those experiences may vary depending on one’s experience with elite environments in their youth. Researchers have not sufficiently explored the specific aspects of the habitus that upwardly mobile adults change or the conflicts that emerge with family and childhood friends as they reach adulthood and experience colliding social worlds. We contribute to this scholarship with clear examples of self-reported changes to one’s cultural dispositions in three specific areas: “horizons,” food and health, and communication. We link these changes to enduring tension with family members, friends, and colleagues and explore varied responses to this tension based on race.

Further Readings

Bloomberg, Linda Dale, and Marie F. Volpe. 2012. Completing Your Qualitative Dissertation: A Road Map from Beginning to End . 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. In keeping with its general approach to qualitative research, includes a “road map” for conducting a literature review.

Hart, Chris. 1998. Doing a Literature Review: Releasing the Social Science Research Imagination . London: SAGE. A how-to book dedicated entirely to conducting a literature review from a British perspective. Useful for both undergraduate and graduate students.

Machi, Lawrence A., and Brenda T. McEvoy. 2022. The Literature Review: Six Steps to Success . 4th ed. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin. A well-organized guidebook complete with reflection sections to prompt successful thinking about your literature review.

Ridley, Diana. 2008. The Literature Review: A Step-by-Step Guide for Students . London: SAGE. A highly recommended companion to conducting a literature review for doctoral-level students.

The process of systematically searching through pre-existing studies (“literature”) on the subject of research; also, the section of a presentation in which the pre-existing literature is discussed.

Follow-up questions used in a semi-structured interview  to elicit further elaboration.  Suggested prompts can be included in the interview guide  to be used/deployed depending on how the initial question was answered or if the topic of the prompt does not emerge spontaneously.

A tool for identifying relationships among ideas by visually representing them on paper.  Most concept maps depict ideas as boxes or circles (also called nodes), which are structured hierarchically and connected with lines or arrows (also called arcs). These lines are labeled with linking words and phrases to help explain the connections between concepts.  Also known as mind mapping.

The people who are the subjects of an interview-based qualitative study. In general, they are also known as the participants, and for purposes of IRBs they are often referred to as the human subjects of the research.

Introduction to Qualitative Research Methods Copyright © 2023 by Allison Hurst is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

Published on January 2, 2023 by Shona McCombes . Revised on September 11, 2023.

What is a literature review? A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research that you can later apply to your paper, thesis, or dissertation topic .

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

• Search for relevant literature
• Evaluate sources
• Identify themes, debates, and gaps
• Outline the structure
• Write your literature review

A good literature review doesn’t just summarize sources—it analyzes, synthesizes , and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

Table of contents

What is the purpose of a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1 – search for relevant literature, step 2 – evaluate and select sources, step 3 – identify themes, debates, and gaps, step 4 – outline your literature review’s structure, step 5 – write your literature review, free lecture slides, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions, introduction.

• Quick Run-through
• Step 1 & 2

When you write a thesis , dissertation , or research paper , you will likely have to conduct a literature review to situate your research within existing knowledge. The literature review gives you a chance to:

• Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and its scholarly context
• Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
• Position your work in relation to other researchers and theorists
• Show how your research addresses a gap or contributes to a debate
• Evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of the scholarly debates around your topic.

Writing literature reviews is a particularly important skill if you want to apply for graduate school or pursue a career in research. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

Receive feedback on language, structure, and formatting

Professional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on:

• Academic style
• Vague sentences
• Style consistency

See an example

Writing literature reviews can be quite challenging! A good starting point could be to look at some examples, depending on what kind of literature review you’d like to write.

• Example literature review #1: “Why Do People Migrate? A Review of the Theoretical Literature” ( Theoretical literature review about the development of economic migration theory from the 1950s to today.)
• Example literature review #2: “Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines” ( Methodological literature review about interdisciplinary knowledge acquisition and production.)
• Example literature review #3: “The Use of Technology in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Thematic literature review about the effects of technology on language acquisition.)
• Example literature review #4: “Learners’ Listening Comprehension Difficulties in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Chronological literature review about how the concept of listening skills has changed over time.)

You can also check out our templates with literature review examples and sample outlines at the links below.

Download Word doc Download Google doc

Before you begin searching for literature, you need a clearly defined topic .

If you are writing the literature review section of a dissertation or research paper, you will search for literature related to your research problem and questions .

Make a list of keywords

Start by creating a list of keywords related to your research question. Include each of the key concepts or variables you’re interested in, and list any synonyms and related terms. You can add to this list as you discover new keywords in the process of your literature search.

• Social media, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, TikTok
• Body image, self-perception, self-esteem, mental health
• Generation Z, teenagers, adolescents, youth

Search for relevant sources

Use your keywords to begin searching for sources. Some useful databases to search for journals and articles include:

• Your university’s library catalogue
• Google Scholar
• Project Muse (humanities and social sciences)
• Medline (life sciences and biomedicine)
• EconLit (economics)
• Inspec (physics, engineering and computer science)

You can also use boolean operators to help narrow down your search.

Make sure to read the abstract to find out whether an article is relevant to your question. When you find a useful book or article, you can check the bibliography to find other relevant sources.

You likely won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on your topic, so it will be necessary to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your research question.

For each publication, ask yourself:

• What question or problem is the author addressing?
• What are the key concepts and how are they defined?
• What are the key theories, models, and methods?
• Does the research use established frameworks or take an innovative approach?
• What are the results and conclusions of the study?
• How does the publication relate to other literature in the field? Does it confirm, add to, or challenge established knowledge?
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research?

Make sure the sources you use are credible , and make sure you read any landmark studies and major theories in your field of research.

You can use our template to summarize and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using. Click on either button below to download.

Take notes and cite your sources

As you read, you should also begin the writing process. Take notes that you can later incorporate into the text of your literature review.

It is important to keep track of your sources with citations to avoid plagiarism . It can be helpful to make an annotated bibliography , where you compile full citation information and write a paragraph of summary and analysis for each source. This helps you remember what you read and saves time later in the process.

Don't submit your assignments before you do this

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students. Free citation check included.

Try for free

To begin organizing your literature review’s argument and structure, be sure you understand the connections and relationships between the sources you’ve read. Based on your reading and notes, you can look for:

• Trends and patterns (in theory, method or results): do certain approaches become more or less popular over time?
• Themes: what questions or concepts recur across the literature?
• Debates, conflicts and contradictions: where do sources disagree?
• Pivotal publications: are there any influential theories or studies that changed the direction of the field?
• Gaps: what is missing from the literature? Are there weaknesses that need to be addressed?

This step will help you work out the structure of your literature review and (if applicable) show how your own research will contribute to existing knowledge.

• Most research has focused on young women.
• There is an increasing interest in the visual aspects of social media.
• But there is still a lack of robust research on highly visual platforms like Instagram and Snapchat—this is a gap that you could address in your own research.

There are various approaches to organizing the body of a literature review. Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time. However, if you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order.

Try to analyze patterns, turning points and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred.

If you have found some recurring central themes, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic.

For example, if you are reviewing literature about inequalities in migrant health outcomes, key themes might include healthcare policy, language barriers, cultural attitudes, legal status, and economic access.

Methodological

If you draw your sources from different disciplines or fields that use a variety of research methods , you might want to compare the results and conclusions that emerge from different approaches. For example:

• Look at what results have emerged in qualitative versus quantitative research
• Discuss how the topic has been approached by empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the literature into sociological, historical, and cultural sources

Theoretical

A literature review is often the foundation for a theoretical framework . You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts.

You might argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach, or combine various theoretical concepts to create a framework for your research.

Like any other academic text , your literature review should have an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion . What you include in each depends on the objective of your literature review.

The introduction should clearly establish the focus and purpose of the literature review.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you might want to divide the body into subsections. You can use a subheading for each theme, time period, or methodological approach.

As you write, you can follow these tips:

• Summarize and synthesize: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
• Analyze and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers — add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
• Critically evaluate: mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
• Write in well-structured paragraphs: use transition words and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts

In the conclusion, you should summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance.

When you’ve finished writing and revising your literature review, don’t forget to proofread thoroughly before submitting. Not a language expert? Check out Scribbr’s professional proofreading services !

This article has been adapted into lecture slides that you can use to teach your students about writing a literature review.

Scribbr slides are free to use, customize, and distribute for educational purposes.

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

• Sampling methods
• Simple random sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Cluster sampling
• Likert scales
• Reproducibility

 Statistics

• Null hypothesis
• Statistical power
• Probability distribution
• Effect size
• Poisson distribution

Research bias

• Optimism bias
• Cognitive bias
• Implicit bias
• Hawthorne effect
• Anchoring bias
• Explicit bias

A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources (such as books, journal articles, and theses) related to a specific topic or research question .

It is often written as part of a thesis, dissertation , or research paper , in order to situate your work in relation to existing knowledge.

There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:

• To familiarize yourself with the current state of knowledge on your topic
• To ensure that you’re not just repeating what others have already done
• To identify gaps in knowledge and unresolved problems that your research can address
• To develop your theoretical framework and methodology
• To provide an overview of the key findings and debates on the topic

Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.

The literature review usually comes near the beginning of your thesis or dissertation . After the introduction , it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology .

A literature review is a survey of credible sources on a topic, often used in dissertations , theses, and research papers . Literature reviews give an overview of knowledge on a subject, helping you identify relevant theories and methods, as well as gaps in existing research. Literature reviews are set up similarly to other  academic texts , with an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion .

An  annotated bibliography is a list of  source references that has a short description (called an annotation ) for each of the sources. It is often assigned as part of the research process for a  paper .  

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved August 12, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, get unlimited documents corrected.

✔ Free APA citation check included ✔ Unlimited document corrections ✔ Specialized in correcting academic texts

Qualitative Analysis Techniques for the Review of the Literature

• The Qualitative Report 17(28)

• University of Cambridge

• University of Colorado

• University of Arkansas

Abstract and Figures

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations

• Peter Troxler

• Małgorzata Wach-Kloskowska

• Asep Abdurahman
• Maslani Maslani
• Deden Sofwan Ismail
• Bimmo Dwi Baskoro
• Qinghai Chen
• Tingting Yang
• Sagar Shinde

• Dilek Tanrıseven

• Morteza Rezaei-Zadeh

• Kenedy Greyson
• Georgia Lugeiyamu
• Afidhu Yusufu

• Barney G. Glaser
• Anselm L. Strauss
• Y.S. Lincoln
• A.L. Strauss
• V.J. Caracelli
• W.F. Graham
• N.K. Denzin

• B Casagrande
• Recruit researchers
• Join for free
• Login Email Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google Welcome back! Please log in. Email · Hint Tip: Most researchers use their institutional email address as their ResearchGate login Password Forgot password? Keep me logged in Log in or Continue with Google No account? Sign up

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

A Guide to Writing a Qualitative Systematic Review Protocol to Enhance Evidence-Based Practice in Nursing and Health Care

Affiliations.

• 1 PhD candidate, School of Nursing and Midwifey, Monash University, and Clinical Nurse Specialist, Adult and Pediatric Intensive Care Unit, Monash Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
• 2 Lecturer, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
• 3 Senior Lecturer, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
• PMID: 26790142
• DOI: 10.1111/wvn.12134

Background: The qualitative systematic review is a rapidly developing area of nursing research. In order to present trustworthy, high-quality recommendations, such reviews should be based on a review protocol to minimize bias and enhance transparency and reproducibility. Although there are a number of resources available to guide researchers in developing a quantitative review protocol, very few resources exist for qualitative reviews.

Aims: To guide researchers through the process of developing a qualitative systematic review protocol, using an example review question.

Methodology: The key elements required in a systematic review protocol are discussed, with a focus on application to qualitative reviews: Development of a research question; formulation of key search terms and strategies; designing a multistage review process; critical appraisal of qualitative literature; development of data extraction techniques; and data synthesis. The paper highlights important considerations during the protocol development process, and uses a previously developed review question as a working example.

Implications for research: This paper will assist novice researchers in developing a qualitative systematic review protocol. By providing a worked example of a protocol, the paper encourages the development of review protocols, enhancing the trustworthiness and value of the completed qualitative systematic review findings.

Linking evidence to action: Qualitative systematic reviews should be based on well planned, peer reviewed protocols to enhance the trustworthiness of results and thus their usefulness in clinical practice. Protocols should outline, in detail, the processes which will be used to undertake the review, including key search terms, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and the methods used for critical appraisal, data extraction and data analysis to facilitate transparency of the review process. Additionally, journals should encourage and support the publication of review protocols, and should require reference to a protocol prior to publication of the review results.

Keywords: guidelines; meta synthesis; qualitative; systematic review protocol.

© 2016 Sigma Theta Tau International.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• How has the impact of 'care pathway technologies' on service integration in stroke care been measured and what is the strength of the evidence to support their effectiveness in this respect? Allen D, Rixson L. Allen D, et al. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2008 Mar;6(1):78-110. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-1609.2007.00098.x. Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2008. PMID: 21631815
• Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany. Bekkering GE, Kleijnen J. Bekkering GE, et al. Eur J Health Econ. 2008 Nov;9 Suppl 1:5-29. doi: 10.1007/s10198-008-0122-5. Eur J Health Econ. 2008. PMID: 18987905
• [Procedures and methods of benefit assessments for medicines in Germany]. Bekkering GE, Kleijnen J. Bekkering GE, et al. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2008 Dec;133 Suppl 7:S225-46. doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1100954. Epub 2008 Nov 25. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2008. PMID: 19034813 German.
• Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management, part I: introduction and general considerations. Manchikanti L. Manchikanti L. Pain Physician. 2008 Mar-Apr;11(2):161-86. Pain Physician. 2008. PMID: 18354710 Review.
• An example of the use of systematic reviews to answer an effectiveness question. Forbes DA. Forbes DA. West J Nurs Res. 2003 Mar;25(2):179-92. doi: 10.1177/0193945902250036. West J Nurs Res. 2003. PMID: 12666642 Review.
• Patients' experiences with musculoskeletal spinal pain: A qualitative systematic review protocol. El Chamaa A, Kowalski K, Parikh P, Rushton A. El Chamaa A, et al. PLoS One. 2024 Aug 8;19(8):e0306993. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0306993. eCollection 2024. PLoS One. 2024. PMID: 39116059 Free PMC article.
• Physical Activity Interventions in People with Diabetes: A Systematic Review of The Qualitative Evidence. Vilafranca-Cartagena M, Bonet-Augè A, Colillas-Malet E, Puiggrós-Binefa A, Tort-Nasarre G. Vilafranca-Cartagena M, et al. Healthcare (Basel). 2024 Jul 9;12(14):1373. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12141373. Healthcare (Basel). 2024. PMID: 39057516 Free PMC article. Review.
• Telemedicine in Advanced Kidney Disease and Kidney Transplant: A Qualitative Meta-Analysis of Studies of Patient Perspectives. Manko CD, Apple BJ, Chang AR, Romagnoli KM, Johannes BL. Manko CD, et al. Kidney Med. 2024 May 24;6(7):100849. doi: 10.1016/j.xkme.2024.100849. eCollection 2024 Jul. Kidney Med. 2024. PMID: 39040545 Free PMC article.
• Voices of Wisdom: Geriatric Interviews on Self-Management of Type 2 Diabetes in the United States-A Systematic Review and Metasynthesis. Lo DF, Gawash A, Shah KP, Emanuel J, Goodwin B, Shamilov DD, Kumar G, Jean N, White CP. Lo DF, et al. J Diabetes Res. 2024 Jul 13;2024:2673742. doi: 10.1155/2024/2673742. eCollection 2024. J Diabetes Res. 2024. PMID: 39035684 Free PMC article. Review.
• Factors affecting implementation of mindfulness in hospital settings: A qualitative meta-synthesis of healthcare professionals' experiences. Knudsen RK, Skovbjerg S, Pedersen EL, Nielsen CL, Storkholm MH, Timmermann C. Knudsen RK, et al. Int J Nurs Stud Adv. 2024 Mar 27;6:100192. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnsa.2024.100192. eCollection 2024 Jun. Int J Nurs Stud Adv. 2024. PMID: 38746813 Free PMC article. Review.
• Search in MeSH

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

• Ovid Technologies, Inc.

Other Literature Sources

• scite Smart Citations

• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

Dissertations and research projects

• Sessions and recordings
• Skill guide
• Finding the gap
• Developing research questions
• Epistemology
• Ethical approval
• Methodology and Methods
• Recruiting participants
• Planning your analysis
• Writing your research proposal
• Hypothesis testing
• Reliability and validity
• Approaches to quantitative research
• Developing a theoretical framework
• Reflecting on your position
• Extended literature reviews
• Presenting qualitative data
• Introduction
• Literature review
• Methodology
• Conclusions
• 5) Working with a supervisor
• e-learning and books
• Quick resources
• SkillsCheck This link opens in a new window
• Review this resource

Qualitative research

In this section on Qualitative Research  you can find out about:

You might also want to consult our other sections on  Planning your research ,  Quantitative research  and  Writing up research , and check out the Additional resources .

• << Previous: Approaches to quantitative research
• Next: Developing a theoretical framework >>

Adsetts Library

Collegiate library, sheffield hallam university, city campus, howard street, sheffield s1 1wb, contact us / live chat, +44 (0)114 225 2222, [email protected], accessibility, legal information, privacy and gdpr, login to libapps.

About Systematic Reviews

Are Systematic Reviews Qualitative or Quantitative?

Automate every stage of your literature review to produce evidence-based research faster and more accurately.

A systematic review is designed to be transparent and replicable. Therefore, systematic reviews are considered reliable tools in scientific research and clinical practice. They synthesize the results using multiple primary studies by using strategies that minimize bias and random errors. Depending on the research question and the objectives of the research, the reviews can either be qualitative or quantitative. Qualitative reviews deal with understanding concepts, thoughts, or experiences. Quantitative reviews are employed when researchers want to test or confirm a hypothesis or theory. Let’s look at some of the differences between these two types of reviews.

To learn more about how long it takes to do a systematic review , you can check out the link to our full article on the topic.

Differences between Qualitative and Quantitative Reviews

The differences lie in the scope of the research, the methodology followed, and the type of questions they attempt to answer. Some of these differences include:

Research Questions

As mentioned earlier qualitative reviews attempt to answer open-ended research questions to understand or formulate hypotheses. This type of research is used to gather in-depth insights into new topics. Quantitative reviews, on the other hand, test or confirm existing hypotheses. This type of research is used to establish generalizable facts about a topic.

Type of Sample Data

The data collected for both types of research differ significantly. For qualitative research, data is collected as words using observations, interviews, and interactions with study subjects or from literature reviews. Quantitative studies collect data as numbers, usually from a larger sample size.

Data Collection Methods

To collect data as words for a qualitative study, researchers can employ tools such as interviews, recorded observations, focused groups, videos, or by collecting literature reviews on the same subject. For quantitative studies, data from primary sources is collected as numbers using rating scales and counting frequencies. The data for these studies can also be collected as measurements of variables from a well-designed experiment carried out under pre-defined, monitored conditions.

Data Analysis Methods

Data by itself cannot prove or demonstrate anything unless it is analyzed. Qualitative data is more challenging to analyze than quantitative data. A few different approaches to analyzing qualitative data include content analysis, thematic analysis, and discourse analysis. The goal of all of these approaches is to carefully analyze textual data to identify patterns, themes, and the meaning of words or phrases.

Quantitative data, since it is in the form of numbers, is analyzed using simple math or statistical methods. There are several software programs that can be used for mathematical and statistical analysis of numerical data.

Presentation of Results

Learn more about distillersr.

(Article continues below)

Final Takeaway – Qualitative or Quantitative?

3 reasons to connect.

Log in using your username and password

• Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
• Latest content
• Current issue
• Write for Us
• BMJ Journals

You are here

• Volume 24, Issue 2
• Five tips for developing useful literature summary tables for writing review articles
• Article Text
• Article info
• Citation Tools
• Rapid Responses
• Article metrics

• http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0157-5319 Ahtisham Younas 1 , 2 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7839-8130 Parveen Ali 3 , 4
• 1 Memorial University of Newfoundland , St John's , Newfoundland , Canada
• 2 Swat College of Nursing , Pakistan
• 3 School of Nursing and Midwifery , University of Sheffield , Sheffield , South Yorkshire , UK
• 4 Sheffield University Interpersonal Violence Research Group , Sheffield University , Sheffield , UK
• Correspondence to Ahtisham Younas, Memorial University of Newfoundland, St John's, NL A1C 5C4, Canada; ay6133{at}mun.ca

https://doi.org/10.1136/ebnurs-2021-103417

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Introduction

Literature reviews offer a critical synthesis of empirical and theoretical literature to assess the strength of evidence, develop guidelines for practice and policymaking, and identify areas for future research. 1 It is often essential and usually the first task in any research endeavour, particularly in masters or doctoral level education. For effective data extraction and rigorous synthesis in reviews, the use of literature summary tables is of utmost importance. A literature summary table provides a synopsis of an included article. It succinctly presents its purpose, methods, findings and other relevant information pertinent to the review. The aim of developing these literature summary tables is to provide the reader with the information at one glance. Since there are multiple types of reviews (eg, systematic, integrative, scoping, critical and mixed methods) with distinct purposes and techniques, 2 there could be various approaches for developing literature summary tables making it a complex task specialty for the novice researchers or reviewers. Here, we offer five tips for authors of the review articles, relevant to all types of reviews, for creating useful and relevant literature summary tables. We also provide examples from our published reviews to illustrate how useful literature summary tables can be developed and what sort of information should be provided.

Tip 1: provide detailed information about frameworks and methods

• Download figure
• Open in new tab
• Download powerpoint

Tabular literature summaries from a scoping review. Source: Rasheed et al . 3

The provision of information about conceptual and theoretical frameworks and methods is useful for several reasons. First, in quantitative (reviews synthesising the results of quantitative studies) and mixed reviews (reviews synthesising the results of both qualitative and quantitative studies to address a mixed review question), it allows the readers to assess the congruence of the core findings and methods with the adapted framework and tested assumptions. In qualitative reviews (reviews synthesising results of qualitative studies), this information is beneficial for readers to recognise the underlying philosophical and paradigmatic stance of the authors of the included articles. For example, imagine the authors of an article, included in a review, used phenomenological inquiry for their research. In that case, the review authors and the readers of the review need to know what kind of (transcendental or hermeneutic) philosophical stance guided the inquiry. Review authors should, therefore, include the philosophical stance in their literature summary for the particular article. Second, information about frameworks and methods enables review authors and readers to judge the quality of the research, which allows for discerning the strengths and limitations of the article. For example, if authors of an included article intended to develop a new scale and test its psychometric properties. To achieve this aim, they used a convenience sample of 150 participants and performed exploratory (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the same sample. Such an approach would indicate a flawed methodology because EFA and CFA should not be conducted on the same sample. The review authors must include this information in their summary table. Omitting this information from a summary could lead to the inclusion of a flawed article in the review, thereby jeopardising the review’s rigour.

Tip 2: include strengths and limitations for each article

Critical appraisal of individual articles included in a review is crucial for increasing the rigour of the review. Despite using various templates for critical appraisal, authors often do not provide detailed information about each reviewed article’s strengths and limitations. Merely noting the quality score based on standardised critical appraisal templates is not adequate because the readers should be able to identify the reasons for assigning a weak or moderate rating. Many recent critical appraisal checklists (eg, Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool) discourage review authors from assigning a quality score and recommend noting the main strengths and limitations of included studies. It is also vital that methodological and conceptual limitations and strengths of the articles included in the review are provided because not all review articles include empirical research papers. Rather some review synthesises the theoretical aspects of articles. Providing information about conceptual limitations is also important for readers to judge the quality of foundations of the research. For example, if you included a mixed-methods study in the review, reporting the methodological and conceptual limitations about ‘integration’ is critical for evaluating the study’s strength. Suppose the authors only collected qualitative and quantitative data and did not state the intent and timing of integration. In that case, the strength of the study is weak. Integration only occurred at the levels of data collection. However, integration may not have occurred at the analysis, interpretation and reporting levels.

Tip 3: write conceptual contribution of each reviewed article

While reading and evaluating review papers, we have observed that many review authors only provide core results of the article included in a review and do not explain the conceptual contribution offered by the included article. We refer to conceptual contribution as a description of how the article’s key results contribute towards the development of potential codes, themes or subthemes, or emerging patterns that are reported as the review findings. For example, the authors of a review article noted that one of the research articles included in their review demonstrated the usefulness of case studies and reflective logs as strategies for fostering compassion in nursing students. The conceptual contribution of this research article could be that experiential learning is one way to teach compassion to nursing students, as supported by case studies and reflective logs. This conceptual contribution of the article should be mentioned in the literature summary table. Delineating each reviewed article’s conceptual contribution is particularly beneficial in qualitative reviews, mixed-methods reviews, and critical reviews that often focus on developing models and describing or explaining various phenomena. Figure 2 offers an example of a literature summary table. 4

Tabular literature summaries from a critical review. Source: Younas and Maddigan. 4

Tip 4: compose potential themes from each article during summary writing

While developing literature summary tables, many authors use themes or subthemes reported in the given articles as the key results of their own review. Such an approach prevents the review authors from understanding the article’s conceptual contribution, developing rigorous synthesis and drawing reasonable interpretations of results from an individual article. Ultimately, it affects the generation of novel review findings. For example, one of the articles about women’s healthcare-seeking behaviours in developing countries reported a theme ‘social-cultural determinants of health as precursors of delays’. Instead of using this theme as one of the review findings, the reviewers should read and interpret beyond the given description in an article, compare and contrast themes, findings from one article with findings and themes from another article to find similarities and differences and to understand and explain bigger picture for their readers. Therefore, while developing literature summary tables, think twice before using the predeveloped themes. Including your themes in the summary tables (see figure 1 ) demonstrates to the readers that a robust method of data extraction and synthesis has been followed.

Tip 5: create your personalised template for literature summaries

Often templates are available for data extraction and development of literature summary tables. The available templates may be in the form of a table, chart or a structured framework that extracts some essential information about every article. The commonly used information may include authors, purpose, methods, key results and quality scores. While extracting all relevant information is important, such templates should be tailored to meet the needs of the individuals’ review. For example, for a review about the effectiveness of healthcare interventions, a literature summary table must include information about the intervention, its type, content timing, duration, setting, effectiveness, negative consequences, and receivers and implementers’ experiences of its usage. Similarly, literature summary tables for articles included in a meta-synthesis must include information about the participants’ characteristics, research context and conceptual contribution of each reviewed article so as to help the reader make an informed decision about the usefulness or lack of usefulness of the individual article in the review and the whole review.

In conclusion, narrative or systematic reviews are almost always conducted as a part of any educational project (thesis or dissertation) or academic or clinical research. Literature reviews are the foundation of research on a given topic. Robust and high-quality reviews play an instrumental role in guiding research, practice and policymaking. However, the quality of reviews is also contingent on rigorous data extraction and synthesis, which require developing literature summaries. We have outlined five tips that could enhance the quality of the data extraction and synthesis process by developing useful literature summaries.

• Aromataris E ,
• Rasheed SP ,

Twitter @Ahtisham04, @parveenazamali

Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

Competing interests None declared.

Patient consent for publication Not required.

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Read the full text or download the PDF:

• eLibrary Home
• eLibrary Login

Home > Journals > AIS Journals > CAIS > Vol. 37 (2015)

Achieving Rigor in Literature Reviews: Insights from Qualitative Data Analysis and Tool-Support

Wasana Bandara , Queensland University of Technology Follow Elfi Furtmueller , Semantic Technology Institute, University of Innsbruck Elena Gorbacheva , Department of Information Systems, University of Münster Suraya Miskon , Faculty of Computing, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia Jenine Beekhuyzen , Australian Centre for Sustainable Business and Development, University of Southern Queensland

It is important for researchers to efficiently conduct quality literature studies. Hence, a structured and efficient approach is essential. We overview work that has demonstrated the potential for using software tools in literature reviews. We highlight the untapped opportunities in using an end-to-end tool-supported literature review methodology. Qualitative data-analysis tools such as NVivo are immensely useful as a means to analyze, synthesize, and write up literature reviews. In this paper, we describe how to organize and prepare papers for analysis and provide detailed guidelines for actually coding and analyzing papers, including detailed illustrative strategies to effectively write up and present the results. We present a detailed case study as an illustrative example of the proposed approach put into practice. We discuss the means, value, and also pitfalls of applying tool-supported literature review approaches. We contribute to the literature by proposing a four-phased tool-supported methodology that serves as best practice in conducting literature reviews in IS. By viewing the literature review process as a qualitative study and treating the literature as the “data set”, we address the complex puzzle of how best to extract relevant literature and justify its scope, relevance, and quality. We provide systematic guidelines for novice IS researchers seeking to conduct a robust literature review.

10.17705/1CAIS.03708

Recommended Citation

Bandara, W., Furtmueller, E., Gorbacheva, E., Miskon, S., & Beekhuyzen, J. (2015). Achieving Rigor in Literature Reviews: Insights from Qualitative Data Analysis and Tool-Support. Communications of the Association for Information Systems, 37, pp-pp. https://doi.org/10.17705/1CAIS.03708

Since August 15, 2015

When commenting on articles, please be friendly, welcoming, respectful and abide by the AIS eLibrary Discussion Thread Code of Conduct posted here .

• Journal Home
• About This Journal
• Editorial Board
• Submission Requirements
• Best of CAIS
• Past Editors-in-Chief
• Submit an Author-Video Here
• Most Popular Papers
• Receive Email Notices or RSS

Advanced Search

ISSN: 1529-3181

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.9(1); 2015 Feb

Qualitative systematic reviews: their importance for our understanding of research relevant to pain

This article outlines what a qualitative systematic review is and explores what it can contribute to our understanding of pain. Many of us use evidence of effectiveness for various interventions when working with people in pain. A good systematic review can be invaluable in bringing together research evidence to help inform our practice and help us understand what works. In addition to evidence of effectiveness, understanding how people with pain experience both their pain and their care can help us when we are working with them to provide care that meets their needs. A rigorous qualitative systematic review can also uncover new understandings, often helping illuminate ‘why’ and can help build theory. Such a review can answer the question ‘What is it like to have chronic pain?’ This article presents the different stages of meta-ethnography, which is the most common methodology used for qualitative systematic reviews. It presents evidence from four meta-ethnographies relevant to pain to illustrate the types of findings that can emerge from this approach. It shows how new understandings may emerge and gives an example of chronic musculoskeletal pain being experienced as ‘an adversarial struggle’ across many aspects of the person’s life. This article concludes that evidence from qualitative systematic reviews has its place alongside or integrated with evidence from more quantitative approaches.

Many of us use evidence of effectiveness for various interventions when working with people in pain. A good systematic review can be invaluable in bringing together research evidence to help inform our practice and help us understand what works. In addition to evidence of effectiveness, understanding how people with pain experience both their pain and their care can help us when we are working with them to provide care that meets their needs. A high-quality qualitative systematic review can also uncover new understandings, often helping illuminate ‘why’ and can help build theory. A qualitative systematic review could answer the question ‘What is it like to have chronic non-malignant pain?’

The purpose of this article is to outline what a qualitative systematic review is and explore what it can contribute to our understanding of pain. A qualitative systematic review brings together research on a topic, systematically searching for research evidence from primary qualitative studies and drawing the findings together. There is a debate over whether the search needs to be exhaustive. 1 , 2 Methods for systematic reviews of quantitative research are well established and explicit and have been pioneered through the Cochrane Collaboration. Methods for qualitative systematic reviews have been developed more recently and are still evolving. The Cochrane Collaboration now has a Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group, including a register of protocols, illustrating the recognition of the importance of qualitative research within the Cochrane Collaboration. In November 2013, an editorial described the Cochrane Collaboration’s first publication of a qualitative systematic review as ‘a new milestone’ for Cochrane. 3 Other editorials have raised awareness of qualitative systematic reviews in health. 4

Noblit and Hare 5 were pioneers in the area of synthesising qualitative data. They describe such reviews as aggregated or as interpretative. The aggregated review summarises the data, and Hannes and Pearson 6 provide a worked example of an aggregation approach. Interpretative approaches, as the name suggests, interpret the data, and from that interpretation, new understandings can develop that may lead to development of a theory that helps us to understand or predict behaviour. Types of interpretative qualitative systematic reviews include meta-ethnography, critical interpretative synthesis, realist synthesis and narrative synthesis. More details about these and other approaches can be found in other papers and books. 1 , 5 , 7 – 11 This article will describe one approach, meta-ethnography, as it was identified as the most frequently used approach, 1 and there are some examples using meta-ethnography that focus on pain. A meta-ethnographic approach can be used with a variety of qualitative methodologies, not only ethnography. The data for a meta-ethnography are the concepts or themes described by the authors of the primary studies.

Noblit and Hare 5 outlined the seven steps of a meta-ethnography: (1) getting started, (2) deciding what is relevant, (3) reading the studies, (4) determining how studies are related to each other, (5) translating studies into each other, (6) synthesising translations and (7) expressing the synthesis.

The first three might seem relatively straightforward, although Lee et al. 12 emphasised both the importance and nuances of the reading stage, and Toye et al. 13 discuss the complexities of making quality assessments of qualitative papers and searching for this type of study. You need to understand what data to extract from the papers and how you are going to do this.

You have to first identify what is a concept and what is purely descriptive. Toye et al. 2 describe a process for collaboratively identifying concepts. In determining how studies are related to each other and translating them into each other, the meta-ethnographer compares the concepts found in each study with each other and then groups similar concepts into conceptual themes. Translating studies into each other involves looking at where concepts between studies agree (reciprocal synthesis) and where they do not agree (refutational synthesis). Developing conceptual categories can be challenging as you need to judge the extent to which a concept from one study adequately reflects concepts from other studies and choose one that seems to fit best. This is discussed in more detail in Toye et al. 2 , 13

To synthesise the translation, a line of argument is then developed from the conceptual categories. How the concepts group and relate to each other are developed. This provides an overall interpretation of the findings, ensuring this is grounded in the data from the primary studies. You are aiming to explain, and new concepts and understandings may emerge, which can then go on to underpin development of theory. For example, a qualitative systematic review that explored medicine taking found that ‘resistance’ was a new concept, revealed through meta-ethnography, and this helped understanding of lay responses to medicine taking. 1 Hannes and Macaitis, 14 in a review of published papers, reported that over time, authors have become more transparent about searching and critical appraisal, but that the synthesis element of reviews is often not well described. Being transparent about decisions that are interpretative has its own challenges. Working collaboratively to challenge interpretations and assumptions can be helpful. 2 , 12 The next section will use examples of qualitative systematic reviews from the pain field to illuminate what this type of review can contribute to our understanding of pain.

What can a qualitative systematic review contribute to the field of pain – some examples

Toye et al. 2 , 15 undertook a meta-ethnography to look at patients’ experiences of chronic non-malignant musculoskeletal pain. At the time of this research, no other qualitative systematic reviews had been published in this area. Their review included 77 papers reporting 60 individual studies, resulting from searches of six electronic bibliographic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, AMED and HMIC) from inception until February 2012 and hand-searching key journals from 2001 to 2012.

They developed a new concept which they identified as an ‘adversarial struggle’. This struggle took place across five main dimensions: (1) there was a struggle to affirm themselves, where there was a tension between the ‘real me’ (without pain) and ‘not real me’ (me with pain). (2) The present and future were often unpredictable, and construction of time was altered and they struggled to reconstruct themselves in time. (3) People struggled to find an acceptable explanation for their pain and suffering. (4) There was a struggle to negotiate the healthcare system and (5) a struggle for pain to be seen as legitimate, including the need to be believed, and a struggle to know whether to show or hide their pain. Some people were able to move forward with pain. They saw their body as more integrated, they re-defined what was normal, they told people about their pain, they were part of a community of people with pain and they felt more expert on how their pain affected them and what they could do about it.

So, this meta-ethnography highlighted the adversarial nature of having chronic musculoskeletal pain and how this struggle pervaded many different areas of their life. It also illustrated how by showing patients their pain is understood and being alongside the person in pain, they can start to move forward. A short film based on the 77 papers in this meta-ethnography has been made and is available on YouTube. 16 This film was made as an attempt to disseminate the findings of a meta-ethnography in a way that is accessible to a range of people.

Snelgrove and Liossi 17 undertook a meta-ethnography of qualitative research in chronic low back pain (CLBP) using meta-ethnography. They included 33 papers of 28 studies published between 2000 and 2012. They identified three overarching themes of (1) the impact of CLBP on self, (2) relationships with others (health professionals and family and friends) and (3) coping with CLBP. They found that very few successful coping strategies were reported. Like Toye et al., 2 , 15 they also reported disruption to self, distancing their valued self from their painful self, legitimising pain, the struggle to manage daily living and the importance of social relationships alongside negotiation of their care in the health system.

MacNeela et al. 18 also undertook a meta-ethnography of experiences of CLBP. They included 38 articles published between 1994 and 2012 representing 28 studies. They identified four themes: (1) the undermining influence of pain, (2) the disempowering impact on all levels, (3) unsatisfying relationships with healthcare professionals and (4) learning to live with the pain. They reported the findings being dominated by ‘wide-ranging distress and loss’. They discussed the disempowering consequences of pain and a search for help. However, they also highlighted self-determination and resilience and suggested these could offer ‘pathways to endurance’. They emphasised self-management and adaptation, which resonates with the moving forward category reported by Toye et al. 2 , 15

Froud et al. 19 looked at the impact of low back pain on people’s lives. They describe their approach as meta-ethnographic and meta-narrative. They included 49 papers of about 42 studies from inception of databases searched until July 2011. They described five themes: activities, relationships, work, stigma and changing outlook, which they derived from ‘participant-level data’. They described their findings as showing patients wanted to be believed. They highlighted the importance of social factors when developing relevant outcome measures. There are other examples of qualitative systematic reviews relevant to pain. 20 – 23

Different qualitative systematic reviews on a similar subject may come up with overlapping but also some different findings. This could be, for example, because different search periods or different inclusion criteria are used, so different primary studies may be included in different reviews. In addition, undertaking a qualitative systematic review requires researchers to interpret concepts. This interpretation does not need to be a limitation. For example, to ensure rigour and transparency, Toye et al. 24 report a process of collaborative interpretation of concepts among a team of experienced qualitative researchers to ensure individual interpretations were challenged and remained grounded in the original studies. They also published a detailed audit trail of the processes and decisions made. 2 Campbell et al. 1 argue ‘Meta-ethnography is a highly interpretative method requiring considerable immersion in the individual studies to achieve a synthesis. It places substantial demands upon the synthesiser and requires a high degree of qualitative research skill’. It is important to be able to think conceptually when undertaking a meta-ethnography, and it can be a time-consuming process. However, the ability of a meta-ethnography to synthesise a large number of primary research studies, generate new conceptual understandings and thus increase our understanding of patients’ experiences of pain makes it a very useful resource for our evidence-based practice.

The way forward

A register of qualitative systematic reviews would be useful for researchers and clinicians, so there was a clear way of identifying existing qualitative reviews or reviews that are planned or underway. The Cochrane Collaboration does now have a register for protocols of qualitative systematic reviews being undertaken under the aegis of the Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group. It would help those wanting to undertake qualitative systematic reviews if reviews that were underway were registered and described more clearly to prevent duplication of effort, for example, using ‘qualitative systematic review’ and the methodological approach used (such as meta-ethnography) in the title and/or abstract. The Toye et al. 2 protocol 25 was accessible on the National Institutes for Health website from 2010. The Snelgrove and Liossi 17 study was done without external funding, so it would be difficult to pick up that it was underway. The MacNeela et al. 18 study was listed on the Irish Research Council for the Humanities and Social Sciences under their Research Development Initiative 2008–2009, but was described as ‘Motivation and Beliefs among People Experiencing Chronic Low Back Pain’, so it was not clearly identified at that stage as a qualitative systematic review. Finally, the Froud et al. 19 award details 26 do not mention qualitative systematic reviews or meta-ethnography. This highlights the difficulty of finding some of these reviews and the importance of a register of both completed and ongoing reviews.

This article has argued that qualitative systematic reviews have their place alongside or integrated with more quantitative approaches. There is an increasing body of evidence from qualitative systematic reviews. They can synthesise primary research, and this can be helpful for the busy practitioner. The methods for these approaches are still developing, and attention to rigour at each stage is crucial. It is important that each stage of the synthesis is reported transparently and that the researchers’ stance is clearly reported. 27 Meta-ethnographies published over the last year 2 , 15 , 17 – 19 have drawn together a wide range of primary studies and shown that people’s lives can be markedly changed by their pain across multiple dimensions of their life.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests: The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding: The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

• Skip to Guides Search
• Skip to breadcrumb
• Skip to main content
• Skip to footer
• Skip to chat link
• Report accessibility issues and get help
• Go to Penn Libraries Home
• Go to Franklin catalog
• Penn Libraries
• Research Data & Digital Scholarship

NVivo for Qualitative Data Analysis

• Literature Reviews
• Workshop Recordings
• Resources/Tutorials
• Keeping Notes in NVivo
• Understanding Queries
• References from reference management tools
• Import/Export Bibliographies
• Handout from Carleton College

The process of using NVivo for Literature Reviews can include:

• Collecting your articles, ideally using a Citation Manager
• Importing the citations from your citation manager or bibliography into NVivo
• Importing the full-text PDFs of your articles into NVivo
• Coding your article using themes and keywords
• Using NVivo's queries to auto-code segments of your articles
• Using Memos to annotate and manage your reading process
• Using codes to select sentences for quoting and paraphrasing
• Using memos to draft your literature review

Often the literature review process is inherently iterative, and will include importing and exporting to other formats. You may need to use OCR software to make some of your articles searchable by NVivo.

• NVivo and the Dissertation Literature Review Video on using NVivo for literature reviews
• Extending Your Literature Review With NVivo Blog post on advanced techniques for using NVivo with literature reviews.

Director of Research Data & Digital Scholarship

See schedule button for current dates and times. Appointments available in person and on zoom.

• << Previous: Overview
• Next: Workshop Recordings >>
• Last Updated: Aug 12, 2024 4:59 PM
• URL: https://guides.library.upenn.edu/nvivo

• Open access
• Published: 15 August 2024

A framework for health information governance: a scoping review

• Somayeh Ghaffari Heshajin 1 ,
• Shahram Sedghi   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6457-7464 1 ,
• Sirous Panahi 1 &
• Amirhossein Takian 2  

Health Research Policy and Systems volume  22 , Article number:  109 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

90 Accesses

Metrics details

As a newly emerged concept and a product of the twenty-first century, health information governance is expanding at a rapid rate. The necessity of information governance in the healthcare industry is evident, given the significance of health information and the current need to manage it. The objective of the present scoping review is to identify the dimensions and components of health information governance to discover how these factors impact the enhancement of healthcare systems and services.

PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest and the Google Scholar search engine were searched from inception to June 2024. Methodological study quality was assessed using CASP checklists for selected documents. Endnote 20 was utilized to select and review articles and manage references, and MAXQDA 2020 was used for content analysis.

A total of 37 documents, including 18 review, 9 qualitative and 10 mixed-method studies, were identified by literature search. Based on the findings, six core categories (including health information governance goals, advantages and applications, principles, components or elements, roles and responsibilities and processes) and 48 subcategories were identified to form a unified general framework comprising all extracted dimensions and components.

Conclusions

Based on the findings of this scoping review, health information governance should be regarded as a necessity in the health systems of various countries to improve and achieve their goals, particularly in developing and underdeveloped countries. Moreover, in light of the undesirable effects of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in various countries, the development and implementation of health information governance models at organizational, national and international levels are among the pressing concerns. Researchers can use the present findings as a comprehensive model for developing health information governance models. A possible limitation of this study is our limited access to some databases.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The value of information in the healthcare industry.

The healthcare industry is rapidly evolving while many new demands are emerging, among which there is a fundamental need for accurate and applicable information [ 1 ]. The value and importance of information in health organizations stem from their dual missions and goals. Health data and patient information are regarded as valuable sources for researchers to enhance healthcare provision in terms of efficiency, safety and quality [ 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 ]. It is acknowledged that high-quality data and information facilitate high-quality care, accurate research, favorable patient outcomes, cost-effective risk assessment and strategic decision-making [ 6 ]. Consequently, managing and controlling data and information in health organizations are regarded as the core fundamental requirement in these organizations.

What is information governance?

Timely and effective management of crucial information constitutes a pillar of support for any organization [ 7 ]. In this regard, most organizations have devoted time and resources to the development of information governance systems to provide specific solutions at any time or location [ 7 , 8 ]. The concept of information governance has been around since the early twentieth century when organizations began to develop effective and comprehensive management of data and information. Many consider it to be the effective management of knowledge assets [ 9 , 10 ]. Information governance is an enterprise-wide accountability framework that promotes appropriate behavior when handling information-related matters [ 8 , 10 , 11 ]. This concept encompasses the processes, rules, standards and criteria that guarantee an organization’s effective and efficient use of information to achieve its goals. Information governance also encompasses the entire information life cycle, including how information is created, stored, used, archived and discarded. In addition, this concept determines who should have access to specific information when and how [ 1 , 4 , 6 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ].

Health information governance (HIG)

Information governance in the healthcare industry is a relatively new concept. Primary efforts in this field date back to 1997, when the National Health Service of England (NHS) developed the Caldicott Principles [ 3 ]. They initiated the practice of information governance in the health sector in 2002 [ 16 ]. Legal, regulatory and information security requirements shape the primary drivers for developing information governance programs in various organizations [ 16 , 17 ]. In healthcare organizations, however, quality control and confidentiality of the ever-increasing volumes of information are crucial. Therefore, creating information governance programs is essential to improve care quality and achieve satisfactory results for patients and other stakeholders [ 1 , 16 ].

The necessity of HIG

According to Smallwood: “Bad information [in health] means people could die.” [ 16 ]. The United States has the most expensive healthcare in the world; however, medical mistakes are the third reason for death in this country [ 18 ]. To explain the necessity of HIG, it is important to consider some experts’ opinions; Smallwood explained in 2019 that one possible reason for the over 250,000 people dying from medical mistakes each year in the U.S. [ 18 ] is poor information governance [ 16 ]. Moreover, Riegner believes that the cause of major failures and problems during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic is the lack of global information governance [ 19 ]. Conversely, a recent book published by OCED Library highlights South Korea, one of the countries with the best results against COVID-19, has one of the strongest health data and information governance [ 20 ].

Information governance is essential for enhancing healthcare outcomes in several ways; accurate, reliable and current information greatly benefits population health and care provision by enabling better clinical decision-making and reducing medical mistakes [ 8 , 16 , 21 ]. An example is the electronic health record system that assists medical specialists in accessing information about a patient’s medications, allergies and more [ 22 ]. In addition, HIG enables seamless sharing of patient data among different healthcare providers, facilitating better care coordination, especially for patients with complex or chronic conditions who may see multiple specialists [ 23 ]. Furthermore, HIG can lead to (1) more efficient healthcare delivery through effective data management [ 24 ], (2) enhanced population health management by analyzing big data to identify trends, risk factors and opportunities for preventive care [ 25 ], (3) advancements in medical research and treatment protocols [ 26 ] and (4) empowerment of patients to play a more active role in their healthcare decisions [ 21 , 24 ].

HIG best practices

Despite the brief history of HIG, numerous studies have emphasized its significance [ 16 , 27 ]. In addition to England, some other countries, such as Canada, Australia and the United States, have developed and implemented HIG models [ 2 ]. Information Governance Principles for Healthcare (IGPHC) and the associated maturity model, developed in 2014 by the American Health Information Management Association (AHIMA), are among the most recent and comprehensive efforts in this field. IGPHC is a framework that includes eight fundamental principles for HIG [ 8 , 28 ]. In addition, various models of HIG have been developed based on research reports. Each model introduces specific dimensions and components, mostly built upon the fundamental principles proposed by AHIMA. Slight nuances depend on the study background, aim and geographical location.

Apart from the models presented and used by the pioneering countries, no other comprehensive resources were found for studying and obtaining ideas for using or developing novel models of HIG; indeed, despite the booming growth of the healthcare industry, concerns have been raised about the lack of information governance programs [ 2 , 10 , 16 ]. Therefore, the present study aims to:

Map the existing literature on HIG models to identify the types of models used by pioneering counties and explore the available resources for developing novel models.

Identify the dimensions and components of existing HIG models and identify any potential knowledge gaps.

Explore the relationship between HIG factors and the enhancement of healthcare systems and services.

By achieving these objectives, this scoping review will provide a clear understanding of the current landscape of HIG models and their impact on healthcare. It will also identify areas for further research and development of more comprehensive and effective HIG programs.

Methodology

This scoping review was conducted based on the five steps outlined by Arksey and O’Malley [ 29 ]: (1) formulating the research question, (2) searching for relevant literature, (3) selection of eligible studies, (4) data extraction and (5) analysing and describing the results. In addition, we followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) reporting guidelines [ 30 ]. No protocol was registered for this review. The scoping review methodology was selected due to its relevance to the clarification of key concepts in literature and identifying key characteristics or factors related to the concept of HIG [ 31 ].

Search strategy and information sources

The search strategy for electronic databases was developed, piloted and refined by the team’s librarians. After finalizing our search in PubMed through an iterative process involving pilot tests, we completed a systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ProQuest and Google Scholar for relevant published articles up to July 2022 and updated until June 2024; there was no time constraints for publications and records. Furthermore, the reference lists of all included studies were manually scanned to identify any relevant investigations suitable for inclusion. Search strategies by the following two categories of keywords using Boolean operators are presented in ‘Supplementary Table 1, Additional file 1 ’:

(1) (‘information governance’ OR ‘data governance’ OR ‘knowledge governance’ OR ‘information policy’).

AND (2) (health* OR medical OR clinical OR hospital*).

Eligibility criteria

The criteria for the inclusion and exclusion of articles are listed below (Table  1 ).

Study selection

After conducting a literature search, we imported the results into Endnote 20 (Thomson Reuters, New York, NY). Two reviewers used Endnote 20 to screen the articles. After removing duplicates, two reviewers independently read and reviewed the title and abstract of each document to determine if it met the inclusion criteria. Publications that were deemed potentially relevant were retrieved in full text and screened by two independent reviewers. Any disagreements between the reviewers were resolved through discussion. If consensus could not be reached, a third reviewer made the final decision.

Data quality assessment

After the selected articles were rechecked, two independent authors assessed each document using the CASP quality assessment checklists. We have used CASP checklists for review articles, case–control articles and qualitative research, which have 10, 12 and 10 questions, respectively. The validity, results and clinical relevance are the three main areas covered by CASP checklists [ 32 ]. We changed the possible answers for each item from yes or no to yes and no or unclear to reflect methodological quality (Supplementary Fig. 1, Additional file 1 ). All documents with a total score of six or more were considered as the research population. Two of the articles, which scored five, did not meet the required score. However, to prevent potential bias and to include a diverse range of related literature, the reviewers decided to include these articles in the final collection of selected articles.

Data extraction

Eventually, 37 articles underwent in-depth analysis and information extraction after their quality was confirmed. A data charting form was developed and the first 10 articles were piloted by the reviewers. Data extracted included study characteristics (first author, year, country of affiliation, article type, study setting), type of health governance investigated and the summary of the findings. Excel-formatted integrated data charting form was used to compare, combine and classify the results and findings. Data were extracted by a single reviewer and validated by the second reviewer. If any disagreement happened, it was resolved by discussion.

Statistical analysis

The content analysis results of the reviewed articles were arranged in chronological order, and the qualitative data analysis software MAXQDA 2020 was used for the thematic analysis of the findings to achieve more accurate results and to extract valid and documented themes. MAXQDA is suitable for content analysis due to its strong coding capabilities, powerful visual tools, advanced search features and sharing and collaboration features [ 33 ]. We primarily have used this software for its ability to share data among reviewers, visually organize codes (especially important due to the wide range and complexity of our study’s data) and help to identify key themes. To prevent any bias, we manually coded the literature and did not use electronic coding tools in MAXQDA to generate the codes. The codes were generated based on the concepts in the text. Then, related codes were grouped together based on their similarities and differences and labelled to form descriptive themes. The main themes were then identified. Data analysis and grouping were independently carried out by two reviewers. Any discrepancies were resolved through discussion with a third reviewer.

Search results

The initial database search resulted in the retrieval of 3955 records. After eliminating inappropriate documents, remaining 37 titles aligned with the objectives were chosen for in-depth inspection, extraction of the dimensions and components and content analysis (see Fig.  1 ).

PRISMA flow diagram of included studies

Publication characteristics

The characteristics of the articles reviewed are summarized in ‘Supplementary Table 2, Additional file 1 .’ The publication date of the chosen articles fell between 2003 and 2024 despite the absence of a certain time limit during the document search phase. The majority of the articles (over 70%) were published between 2011 and 2020. Additionally, the fewest articles were published between 2003 and 2010. The document types were review, mixed-methods and qualitative, respectively. In a scoping review, a wide range of articles can be included, such as review articles, as selected sources. Using a variety of sources can help provide a more comprehensive and in-depth view of the topic under discussion [ 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 ]. In most articles, the data collection tool was a literature review, an interview guide, a questionnaire, a data collection (charting) form, or a combination of these. Furthermore, there were eight articles where no information was available about the data collection tool, and these were labelled as ‘not specified’. More than 60% of the articles analysed their data using the content analysis method. Descriptive statistics, inferential statistics, framework analysis and thematic analysis were the other used data analysis methods. Additionally, seven articles did not demonstrate their analysing method, labelled as ‘not specified’ in the table. Sixteen of the Included studies dealt with information governance, 12 with data governance, and the remaining nine examined various aspects of health-related IT governance, digital data governance, indigenous data governance, clinical governance and information security governance.

The process of classifying and codifying the results yielded six themes or main components (including information governance goals, applications of information governance, principles, components or elements, roles and responsibilities and information governance processes) (Fig.  2 ).

HIG main components

The goals of information governance in the health system

The first theme extracted from the literature review introduced ‘the goals of HIG’ based on the needs of the health system and information governance stakeholders (see Table  2 ).

According to the results, ‘providing high-quality health care’ is the primary goal of health information governance. This goal can subsume and serve as a precondition for the other goals. Effective and efficient management leads to high-quality care, which in turn generates high-quality data, boosts productivity and lowers healthcare costs [ 6 , 38 , 39 , 40 ]. Numerous studies have emphasized that access, security and privacy of highly sensitive health data and information are among the most important goals of HIG [ 6 , 22 , 40 , 41 , 44 , 47 ]. According to our findings, the common objectives of HIG programs in various contexts are aligned with the organizational objectives of healthcare systems, which ultimately lead to client satisfaction and trust. Several studies have stated that gaining and maintaining the clients’ trust is the ultimate goal of HIG and its effectiveness [ 22 , 41 , 42 , 44 , 45 , 48 ].

Advantages and applications of HIG

The second theme derived from the review includes their ‘advantages and applications’, which are related to the system goals and contribute to the realization of those goals. Table 3 presents five primary applications of the HIG systems and their respective constituents.

Cost reduction and economic improvement

The first identified category in the theme of advantages and applications of HIG, can be viewed as an application and primary goal not only in health organizations but in all organizations that use information governance programs. This theme is divided into eight subcategories, such as ‘savings in service provision, resource allocation and procurement, time and information costs’ [ 8 , 22 , 38 , 39 , 49 , 51 , 52 ]. These categories ultimately emerge within the eighth subcategory labelled ‘business intelligence’ [ 38 ]. In fact, business intelligence can be viewed as a concept encompassing the seven preceding subcategories.

Improved quality of and access to healthcare services

According to the second category identified under the advantages and applications, HIG can improve the quality of service delivery in diverse ways within health organizations: planning for the management and optimization of community health by increasing the potential for high-quality health service delivery and fair access to services for different segments of society, improving the ability to follow up on high-quality results, increasing cooperation and interaction with doctors and, thus, reducing medical errors, improving and optimizing the health services received by patients, enhancing the efficiency and effectiveness from various perspectives as regards the health organizations services and interaction with all potential stakeholders, as well as identifying defects and risk management [ 8 , 22 , 38 , 39 , 49 ].

Management and policymaking at different levels of healthcare organizations

The present study divided the levels of health care organizations for managing and policymaking into macro levels, inter-organizational and organizational levels. At the macro-organizational level, HIG leads to the planning, determination and implementation of rules, policies and standards. Moreover, the specification of roles and responsibilities, approaches related to medical equipment management, restrictions on information access and decision-making processes are among the additional advantages of information governance at the macro level of healthcare organizations [ 8 , 22 , 38 , 39 ]. One of the benefits of HIG in inter-organizational management is the monitoring and assessing compliance with rules, as well as the cooperation and competition between organizations [ 22 , 40 , 49 ]. Finally, issues such as improving organizational performance, supporting strategic decisions, resource management, reducing repetitive actions and enhancing patient interaction have been cited as benefits of HIG at the basic organizational level [ 8 , 22 , 45 , 51 ].

‘Creation of a culture of trust’ and ‘Information and knowledge management’

These are the last two categories identified in relation to the advantages and applications in the present study. Among the subcategories associated with the theme of establishing a ‘culture of trust’ are the ‘sharing of data and information’ and the ‘consideration of privacy, security and reliability’ [ 8 , 40 , 45 , 51 ]. In the realm of ‘information and knowledge management’, data and knowledge are treated as assets, and their potential benefits to an organization are discussed at length. These benefits include, but are not limited to, increased productivity, better decision-making and new avenues for health research [ 8 , 22 , 51 , 52 ].

In reviewing the selected studies, we found a consensus regarding the applications of HIG programs; in fact, most studies have mentioned all five applications listed in the table, along with the corresponding components, the only differences being in their scope and depth. The compatibility of applications with the stated HIG goals and definitions is one of the most important aspects of this section’s findings. Gartner’s definition pertains to the applications of information management and the establishment of a culture of trust, which includes roles, policies, standards and criteria that considers effective use of information as a prerequisite for ensuring the achievement of organizational goals [ 22 , 55 ]. Smallwood also included the accuracy and security of the data in his definition [ 6 , 16 ]. Donaldson and Walker introduced information governance in 2004 as an organization-wide movement towards confidentiality, integrity and secure access to information [ 55 ]. In addition, Panian’s (2010) definition emphasizes adopting management and policy applications, fostering a culture of trust and enhancing the quality and accessibility of healthcare services [ 43 ]. The Association of Records Managers and Administrators (ARMA) highlights the policy and management aspects of information governance [ 39 ]. Additionally, the AHIMA has pinpointed the importance of information management in the health sector, as reflected in Briggs’ (2013) definition [ 39 ].

HIG principles

The principles of HIG, comprising 13 components, emerged as the third theme in this analysis. In this regard, the majority of reviewed studies reflected a consensus. These principles are presented in Table  4 .

The eight IGPHC principles developed by AHIMA are accountability, transparency, integrity, protection, compliance, availability, retention and disposal [ 6 , 8 , 49 , 56 , 57 , 59 , 65 ]. In addition to these eight principles, the developed HIG programs have also developed concepts such as consent, participation, continuous quality improvement, independence and justice and effectiveness and efficiency. In practice, however, there are minor differences in the principles based on the goals and approaches of the programs.

Transparency

The first category under the principles theme is transparency, which presents all decisions, policies and measures related to the use of data in a way that is accessible to stakeholders and the public in an effort to gain and maintain trust [ 6 , 8 , 40 , 44 , 56 ]. However, it is emphasized that maintaining the confidentiality and controlling access to confidential information does not conflict with transparency, and healthcare organizations should consider their obligations in this regard [ 56 ].

Accountability

‘Accountability’ is predicated on the presence of a senior leader who should assist various groups in developing, implementing and updating a comprehensive HIG program [ 56 ]. Two applicable digital health governance principles, noted by Marcelo et al. [ 38 ], are ‘responsibility and accountability’, where an accountable person is defined as someone who is responsible for making decisions and taking actions related to digital health. The principle of accountability also involves digital health responsiveness to the health system priorities and its ability to balance the competing needs of various stakeholders [ 38 ]. Laurie and Sethi have defined responsibility and accountability as fundamental principles in the framework of good health governance. According to their view, this principle refers to the responsible use of health data in scientific studies directed by the goals of the relevant organizations and includes 15 key subareas [ 46 ].

The third principle of HIG identified in this study is ‘integrity’, ensuring a reasonable and adequate level of information authenticity and reliability for the organization. This principle seeks to ensure the accuracy of information through the design and implementation of governance processes and procedures that govern the production, use and maintenance of information [ 40 , 57 , 58 ].

‘Protection’ is the fourth category under the theme of HIG principles. It involves ensuring the confidentiality and security of sensitive information, which is essential for strong information governance programs. In various studies, it is emphasized as protection [ 6 , 40 , 57 , 61 , 62 , 65 ], confidentiality [ 38 ] or security and confidentiality [ 58 ]. According to the principle of protection, information has varying degrees of sensitivity that must be classified and safeguarded throughout its lifetime. Additionally, this information must be protected at the source and throughout the ecosystem of the healthcare organization [ 57 ]. The six principles developed by the Caldicott Committee address the use of patients’ personal data and compliance with their security and confidentiality, demonstrating the significance of health data protection [ 60 , 66 ]. Also, protection is regarded as an essential component of the digital health governance [ 38 , 64 ].

The next principle is ‘compliance’, which requires the information governance system to operate legally and ethically. Neglecting compliance can result in the organization’s inability to deliver quality services [ 59 ]. In line with the compliance principle, Willison et al. developed the principle of obedience to the rule of law to gain and maintain public trust [ 44 ]. The same definition further highlights the importance of compliance with the rule of law in digital health governance [ 38 ].

Availability

In theory, the most important goal of availability is to gain the organization’s trust, as a lack of access to the right information at the right time can put patient care at risk [ 59 ]. Marcelo et al. believe that timely access to reliable and high-quality health data improves the surveillance of infectious diseases, enables more targeted allocation of health resources, expedites the response to the community’s healthcare needs and facilitates the monitoring of care quality [ 38 ].

Retention and disposal

The ‘retention’ principle can contribute significantly to the success of HIG programs. An organization’s ability to maintain all the necessary information is of utmost importance in light of the fact that organizations produce and store vast amounts of data (mostly electronically) [ 65 ]. Retention is one of the accentuated principles in NHS’s HOURS model [ 58 ]. Part of the principles of digital data governance refers to the establishment of an independent, long-term data storage and management program [ 64 ], which contrasts with HIG’s principle of retention in certain ways. To reduce potential losses and expenses, IGPHC states that certain types of data must be deleted after their retention periods have expired [ 65 ]. This highlights the importance of ‘disposal’ as the next HIG principle. Based on this principle, information has a shelf life, and when the organization no longer requires it, it becomes a burden and must be disposed of in accordance with the rules of the retention plan [ 65 ].

‘Consent’ is a route for voicing preferences and the need for being treated with dignity [ 40 ]. If consent cannot be obtained for the use of personal data, according to Laurie and Sethi, two specific actions can be taken: anonymizing the data as much reasonably as possible and obtaining permission from an appropriate regulatory body [ 46 ]. Anonymization involves removing clients’ identity information from data sets to protect privacy so that they can be used legally for other legitimate purposes [ 47 ].

Participation

‘Participation’ is a further category identified in this review under the principles theme, by which anyone affected by the health sector decisions can make their own contributions to this process [ 38 ]. When individuals are unable to make decisions about their personal information, it is crucial for them, including patients and other stakeholders, to have the opportunity to have input throughout the governance process [ 44 ]. The primary objective is to gain and maintain the stakeholders’ trust.

Continuous quality improvement, independence and effectiveness

According to the ‘continuous quality improvement’ principle, the process of information governance deals with the provision of accurate and up-to-date data and services to establish and uphold trust [ 44 , 51 , 64 ]. Impartiality, fairness, independence and inclusiveness, with the same objective as the quality improvement principle, are intertwined with the fair presentation of the information governance program’s benefits [ 38 , 44 ]. Finally, ‘effectiveness and efficiency’ were the last category identified in the theme of principles in HIG, which deals with ensuring the fulfilment of the organization’s comprehensive goals and its efficiency in obtaining the highest efficiency as a result of its activities. The ultimate goal of this principle is to gain and maintain the stakeholders’ trust and achieve the organization’s business goals [ 38 , 44 ].

HIG components or elements

The fourth theme resulting from the study review (i.e. HIG components or elements) consists of 11 components that characterize the fundamental components of information governance models according to the established principles (Table  5 ).

Rules, standards and policies

The focus of HIG programs is on the categories of laws, standards and policies, which have been occasionally discussed either as distinct categories or complementary components in some studies. Due to their fundamental proximity and alignment, ‘laws and standards’ were determined to be the first category in this study, followed by ‘policies and guidelines’. Legal requirements and standards are also introduced as the fundamental components of information governance in the ARMA and AHIMA definitions [ 39 , 49 ]. The Data Governance Institute (DGI) has introduced the laws and rules of interaction, which include policies and standards, as one of its three core categories of governance components in data governance [ 6 ]. In addition, other studies have identified legal requirements, policies, standards and implementation of standards as the principal components of HIG programs [ 48 , 54 , 61 , 62 ].

Compliance with information governance policies and procedures enables healthcare organizations to meet legal and regulatory requirements and ensures the safety and quality of patient care [ 57 ]. Consequently, policies and strategies may be conceived as including rules and standards, the prominent aspects of which may include data protection, freedom of information, confidentiality and information security. Other categories of interest are document and records management, policy for determining the responsibilities of key stakeholders, operational and training directives, the framework for organizational costs, policies related to setting objectives and developing strategic plans [ 6 , 40 , 49 , 53 , 62 , 63 , 67 ].

Information management

‘Information management’ addresses the management of the life cycle of information, from production to disposal, which is a crucial issue for health organizations and all organizations. Information management can handle the entire life cycle of information, including how to create, store, use and archive information. In addition, information management determines who should have access to particular information, when and how [ 6 ]. Notably, ‘document management’ and ‘quality assurance’ are listed as one of the subcategories of information management in the current study, because information management can also encompass documents. In addition, information life cycle management comprises the following steps: generation and collection, analysis, access and use, storage and organization, dissemination, disposal, exchange, quality management and integrity of information [ 22 , 39 , 50 ].

The remaining three categories in the current study introduced as essential categories for HIG elements are the governance program types. Due to the expansive nature of the concept of information governance, data governance, IT governance and information security governance are introduced as the subsets of information governance in several studies. Moreover, it has been acknowledged that the umbrella term ‘information governance’ subsumes these three governance concepts [ 22 , 40 , 49 , 58 , 62 ].

Data governance

Data governance is the processes, policies, standards and technologies necessary for an organization to manage and ensure data availability, quality, consistency, auditability and security [ 43 ]. Data managers establish policies and procedures governing the definition, accessibility, protection, archiving, ownership and integrity of data to ensure the precision and security of them [ 6 , 16 , 52 ]. Furthermore, since health data is the foundation of any governance process, it is logical to prioritize data governance as one of the primary categories within the HIG elements theme.

Information technology governance

Dong et al. have emphasized that information governance and information technology governance are inseparable in nature. Effective information governance programs require IT assistance to manage information governance policies and processes, engage stakeholders and guarantee data quality. Additionally, information in the IT sector is crucial for identifying the appropriate technology that can support information governance, and technology investments should support the mission and vision of information governance [ 6 ]. According to Datskovsky et al., information cannot be trusted unless the technology infrastructure on which it is created, used, maintained and stored is reliable by itself [ 57 ]. The category of information technology governance in this study differs from other studies [ 40 , 57 ] in treating information technology management as a subcategory of information technology governance. This is because the information technology governance category encompasses all other aspects of the concept of information technology management.

Information security governance and risk management

‘Information security governance’ is the third aspect of governance patterns identified in the current study as one of the categories related to the theme of HIG elements. The objective of information security governance in healthcare is to safeguard all health-related data to ensure their confidentiality, availability and integrity. This is crucial to maintain business continuity, reduce risks and demonstrate best practices and compliance [ 62 ]. Furthermore, information security governance tended to fully incorporate information security management in an attempt to comply with legal and professional requirements [ 62 ]. The first part of the Information Security Management Standard in the NHS HOURS series highlights the information security best practices such as security policy, security organization, asset classification, control, communication, operations, management, access control, systems development and maintenance, business management and compliance. Numerous studies have repeatedly referred to information security aspects, either as a separate category or in conjunction with such categories as laws, policies and standards [ 39 , 51 , 58 , 60 , 62 , 66 ]. Some studies have also recommended information security as a subcategory of risk management [ 22 , 39 , 40 , 49 , 53 , 57 , 60 , 62 , 66 ]. Information security is ascertained as a distinct category from risk management in the present investigation due to its high rate of sensitivity and salience as well as the increasing emphasis on these two facets of information governance. Risk assessment is a security process that entails considering potential threats and risks to data, creating policies and procedures for security officials and other staff to follow and designing appropriate protective measures in the healthcare sector [ 62 ]. Recommended methods for risk management involve clear reporting culture, regular risk recording, risk reduction in patient-related processes, quality impact assessments, continuous risk reduction, service speed and scale development and innovation and transformation [ 53 ].

Human resource

‘Human resource management’ is another category identified as an element of HIG models that encompasses all processes related to employees and human resources; it is also regarded as an essential and valuable aspect for both the health sector and other organizations. Among the significant issues that must be addressed in this category are employee knowledge and skills, knowledge expansion and training and strategic orientation [ 50 , 53 , 54 , 62 ]. In addition, time management and the optimal utilization of employees’ knowledge, skills and competencies are considered as important factors in this field [ 53 ]. This category has a direct relationship with the principle of compliance, as workforce training enables individuals to align their activities with policies and help appreciate their significance [ 57 ]. Alternatives for participation and consensus may include open meetings, public workshops, national associations, advisory committees, satisfaction surveys, conferences and national health associations [ 53 ].

Quality management

In light of the significance of assuring the quality and integrity of healthcare information [ 22 ], the next theme of the elements of HIG patterns is ‘the quality management’, which can be characterized by factors such as reducing and adjusting mortality data, improving clinical results, improving research results, positive patient feedback, providing fruitful services and enhancing the treatment goals for appropriate and timely care [ 53 ]. Notably, adhering to information governance policies and procedures can assist the organizations in meeting legal requirements and ensuring the safety and quality of patient care [ 57 ].

Project and change management

Since the modern era necessitates routine monitoring of the organizational structures and infrastructures [ 57 ] to identify and modify possible shortcomings and lower the rate of related risks, ‘the project management and change’ category emerged in the present study as a defining category within the elements of HIG. This category is a combination of ‘the monitoring category’ and ‘audit and change management category’ Rouzbahani et al. [ 40 ] reported in their study; in the present study, it is merged into a single component due to overlapping major themes.

‘The audit category’ is the final category mentioned in the theme of the elements of HIG patterns identified in the current review. In addition to emphasizing the financial and commercial aspects of the organization, this category documents the information-related activities, thereby enhancing the reliability and integrity of the desired information [ 57 ]. Better system performance and gaining the satisfaction and trust of stakeholders are the end results of audit cycles in the areas of service provision, financial affairs, research results and information assets, as well as audits of changes adopted in practice.

Roles and responsibilities (of individuals) in HIG programs

Officials, policymakers and executives make up the backbone of ‘the roles and responsibilities’ theme. Table 6 describes the levels and responsibilities of each official, as well as their respective duties.

Based on the present study, the roles and responsibilities of HIG are presented separately at three organizational levels, as shown in Figs.  3 , 4 and 5 .

Roles and responsibilities at the organizational senior level

Roles and responsibilities at the organizational middle level

Roles and responsibilities at the organizational operational level

Senior level

The executive director is the first and most crucial role at the senior level. This position is central to the accountability principle of the HIG program and is regarded as the primary position accountable for the program’s design and implementation [ 56 ]. Baskaran et al. believe that information governance principles should be communicated downward through a more robust leadership structure than at the board level [ 68 ]. The key responsibilities of executive director include: ensuring timely and budget-conscious project completion, taking responsibility for regulatory compliance policies and, most importantly, overseeing the development, implementation and revision of policies and procedures to maintain the organization’s integrity [ 22 , 40 , 69 ]. Chief Executive Officers, Chief Information Officers, Chief Legal Officers and Chief Medical Officers are examples of executive directors who may be accountable for smaller task-related departments [ 56 ].

In most cases, the second role and responsibility at the organization’s senior level falls on the senior director of the information governance program. In some studies, this position is referred to as the Caldicott guardian [ 66 , 67 ], who is typically a senior expert in the health field and has the most significant responsibility for protecting the confidentiality of patient information.

The third senior-level role is the core team with executive leadership, composed of representatives from clinical, business and technology domains. This group is responsible for making final decisions on proposed policy or procedure changes and ensuring the proper resolution of operational or data issues [ 22 , 40 ]. Principal members oversee the decision-making principles and protocols, organizational barriers, expansion and strengthening of partnerships and interaction with institutions, the needs of stakeholders, as well as the implementation of governance mechanisms [ 52 , 70 ].

Senior information risk management is the final role identified in the present study for the organization’s senior level. This role, also known as the manager of information-threatening risks, is highly reliant on the regulations and policies of countries. There is a critical emphasis on the importance of stressing context-specific confidentiality and information security protection [ 49 , 67 ].

Middle-level

Managers of organizational information governance must foster an environment conducive to change and provide employees with precise descriptions of individual responsibilities and penalties for violations. In addition, these managers are responsible for assessing the efficacy of training on information governance and identifying the training needs of employees [ 68 ]. Data steward [ 22 , 69 ], data manager or controller [ 40 ] and data protection officer [ 66 , 67 ] are all terms that have been used to refer to the role of data manager. The data manager or steward reports to superiors on all matters concerning data protection. Among these factors, we can mention information governance risks for the organization, privacy concerns and suggestions for potential changes or updates involving personal data processing [ 67 ]. Management of information assets or owners of information assets deals specifically with managing people’s information assets and ensures compliance with policies and laws pertaining to their protection.

Information technology management [ 22 , 67 ], managing the legal and financial department [ 22 , 68 ] and quality and compliance management [ 22 ] are a few examples of roles at the middle level of an organization sporadically mentioned in various studies. The definition of each responsibility depends on each organization’s context and target policies. Information technology management is responsible for developing and implementing appropriate information security methods and protocols to ensure compliance with data protection laws [ 67 ].

Operational-level

The operational level is the third and final organizational level identified in this review, which consists of operations managers and employees who, in practice, must abide by the laws and policies of HIG in conducting their tasks and execute and implement the principles of information governance at this organizational level [ 40 , 67 , 68 ].

Processes in HIG programs

‘The process’, as the final theme emerging from the present review, is a lesser-studied and less-mentioned component of HIG programs. What appears to be the root cause of this phenomenon is the dependence of the process dimensions to the geographical, activity, goal and organizational contexts in which the HIG program is being developed. Renaud’s point of view can be used to corroborate this assertion; he thinks the process is more similar to a delicate tool that needs to be built with care, deployed selectively and used under close supervision in a supportive setting so that human elements are not dehumanized [ 55 ]. Therefore, one could argue that the definition of a process and procedure in information governance and HIG programs depends on the activity’s context, the desired field and the organization’s policies. Indeed, it is impossible to determine a fixed and specific procedure for all programs of HIG. The current review has identified four core categories and nine subcategories within the theme of HIG processes based on different processes narrowly developed and reported in previous studies (Table 7 ). These core categories and subcategories have specified the development and implementation of the information governance program in a comprehensive manner. Policy making, decision-making, planning and implementation begin with an objective assessment of relevant factors such as assets, risk, capability and criteria and progress by a logical sequence that culminates in the monitoring of outcomes following policy implementation and outcome monitoring [ 6 , 38 , 55 , 62 ].

This review compiled and analysed previous research on HIG-related programs in an effort to unravel its various facets and constituents. The objective was providing a comprehensive picture of the studies conducted and the programs developed, as well as suggesting a framework encompassing all existing dimensions. The study was conducted with 37 articles selected from the review of related studies, and the results led to the development of six core categories and 48 subcategories for HIG programs. Figure  6 provides a summary of the findings from the review of the articles.

Summary of dimensions and components of HIG programs

The first theme derived from the review of studies identifies ‘the HIG goals’, comprising six subcategories: providing quality healthcare, providing affordable health services, ensuring equitable access to healthcare information and services, preserving data security, meeting legal obligations and fostering trust. Smallwood defines information governance as ‘comprehensive policies and processes to optimize and use information while keeping it secure and complying with legal and privacy obligations, in line with stated organizational business goals.’ [ 16 ] Moreover, according to Willison et al., the three primary objectives of HIG are to optimize the use of data to achieve business objectives, to maintain data security and to comply with legal and privacy requirements. In addition, gaining and maintaining the trust of patients, stakeholders, data providers and the general public are described as the objectives for using data in public interest research [ 44 ]. According to Kadlec, the main objective of HIG programs is to proactively and effectively manage the increasing volume of information collected and maintained daily [ 22 ]. Various studies have pointed to broader goals for HIG programs, such as improving and maintaining the health of the community [ 38 ], establishing effective and efficient management of information, improving productivity and effectiveness of services [ 39 ], enhancing the desire to maintain a competitive advantage, ensuring better performance and results of organizations and promptly responding to information requests [ 22 ]. As reflected by the focal points of the studies as well as goals focused on local and specific fields and after eliminating some overlaps, the current study has identified six comprehensive goals as categories associated with this theme.

The second theme derived from the studies analysed in this review is ‘the advantages and applications of HIG’, comprised five core categories and 39 subcategories. The core areas of focus for this theme are ‘cost containment and economic growth’, ‘healthcare quality and availability’, ‘healthcare management and policymaking at the macro, inter-organizational and organizational levels’, ‘trust building’ and ‘knowledge management’. It is conceivable that the benefits and applications of HIG are logically consistent with the goals of these programs, and the existence of some overlap between these two primary categories is not unanticipated. In his study, Kloss argues that improving organizational performance, reducing costs, and minimizing risks are the true benefits of information governance in organizations [ 71 ]. Moreover, according to Willison and colleagues, the expectations and, consequently, the applications of HIG programs from the users’ perspective fall into three primary categories: meeting expectations regarding how to perform and provide services, gaining trust in institutions and individuals, and creating belief in the accuracy and value of health services [ 44 ]. Rouzbahani et al. categorized the applications of HIG programs into six categories: improving healthcare and patient safety, reducing costs, enhancing the quality of health information, improving the security and confidentiality of health information, enhancing health information management and boosting the management of healthcare organizations [ 39 ]. Additionally, the results of AHIMA’s case studies identified some other applications of the HIG program’s used by the investigated centres [ 52 ]. The review of the current literature and the examination of the extracted categories indicate the breadth and frequency of applications and benefits of HIG. Given the young age of governance programs in the health field, it can be acknowledged that some potential benefits have not yet been identified. Therefore, it is anticipated that by expanding the application and use of this important strategy, additional benefits will be identified and implemented over time.

The third theme identified from the present review concerns ‘HIG principles’, with 13 categories as follows: transparency, accountability, integrity, protection, compliance, availability, retention, disposal, consent, participation, continuous quality improvement, independence and justice and effectiveness and efficiency. It is acknowledged that the theme of principles and related categories provide a comprehensive set of common speech and behavioural points for a diverse range of HIG program beneficiaries, allowing everyone to progress in line with the information governance project [ 8 ]. The first eight categories were those developed by AHIMA, regarded as fundamental principles in most of the previous studies; the rest of the categories were cumulatively added to literature over time. These principles are among the fundamental topics that have been investigated by research and developed as models of information governance. Accountability, participation and transparency have been cited as principles of health governance by Ibrahimova and Korjonen [ 53 ]. Likewise, Lauriea et al. emphasized the principles of transparency and consent as obvious criteria for protecting privacy [ 47 ]. Informed by the conceptual work of Lauriea and Sethi, Willison et al. developed eight principles for their governance model: transparency, accountability, obedience to the rule of law, honesty, participation and inclusion, impartiality and independence, effectiveness and accountability and continuous quality improvement [ 44 ]. In addition, Rouzbahani et al. have presented a model comprising 12 HIG principles [ 40 ]. In the present study, the categories associated with the theme of HIG principles are presented as exhaustively as possible by incorporating all categories highlighted in literature and models developed, as well as by eliminating their likely overlaps with other categories close to other themes or specific domains. Notably, ethical principles are emphasized alongside professional principles in HIG models, with no weighting or differentiation between the categories presented [ 56 , 59 , 67 ].

‘Components or elements of HIG programs’ is the fourth theme identified in the present review, with 11 distinct categories: laws and standards, policies and guidelines, information management, data governance, information technology governance, information security governance, management risk, human resource management, quality management, project and change management and auditing. In his article, Kadlec introduced several HIG components considered by AHIMA, including quality management, regulations, risk reduction, patient participation and business intelligence [ 22 ]. Williams considered audit and control, risk management and compliance to be essential components of information governance [ 62 ]. Rouzbahani et al. have introduced 13 elements as HIG model components [ 40 ]. Ibrajimova and Korjonen noted seven components of clinical governance, including patient participation, staff management, clinical effectiveness, use of information and information technology, education, risk management and audit, in relation to other governance programs [ 53 ]. In the present review, an attempt was made to consider all these categories associated with elements of HIG programs, and it appeared that all these elements indeed played a determining role. Given the scope of the introduced elements, it is reasonable to conclude that HIG, as an all-encompassing strategy and umbrella term, embraces other governance programs.

The fifth theme associated with HIG programs is ‘the roles and responsibilities’, denoting the introduction of HIG officials and policymakers at three organizational levels: senior, middle and operational levels. At the senior level, four categories and their respective responsibilities are identified: executive director, senior information governance program manager, core team and senior information risk manager. The middle organizational level includes the categories of the information asset manager, data manager and organizational information governance manager. The operational level of an organization consists of operations managers and employees. According to the model proposed and developed by Baskaran et al., the information governance hierarchy consists of six levels: executive director, financial and functional manager, information governance manager, team leaders of operations management, line managers and employees [ 68 ]. Rouzbahani et al. developed a model for Iran’s HIG and incorporated 14 roles and responsibilities into this model, with the Minister of Health assuming the highest role [ 40 ]. Haarbrandt et al. introduced the HiGHmed governance platform, where some of the roles considered included the executive board, supervisory board, technical coordination board, project management office, educational board, support and access committee, ethics working group, advisory board and the general assembly [ 70 ]. With a different view, Ibragimova and Korjonen detailed three groups of library activities that supported clinical and health governance in healthcare organizations: infrastructure (staff and resources); program management (library products and services); and direct participation (needs assessment, committees, audits, HTA, etc.) [ 53 ]. Given that the introduced studies developed their models in distinct domains, the disparity in the hierarchy of responsibilities seems reasonable. The current literature review introduces three levels and nine roles for HIG officials and policymakers, which are the sets of categories introduced in the reviewed studies after eliminating duplicate items and merging the overlapping items.

The final theme introduced in this literature review is that of ‘the processes’ by which HIG programs are developed, implemented and monitored. The associated categories are assessing strategic options, formulating policies, developing plans and tracking progress. In addition, nine subcategories were identified, including asset assessment, risk assessment, capability assessment, criterion assessment, policy development and implementation, internal and external validation, monitoring and change management, stakeholder support, results assessment and reporting. Several studies have described various processes linked to the developed programs in a very limited manner. Governance processes identified in the study by Marcelo et al. include policy and decision-making, planning, resource allocation, coordination and monitoring and evaluation [ 38 ]. While asset identification, risk assessment, policy implementation, capability assessment, procedure development, protection and compatibility, criteria assessment and possible external validation are among the six processes introduced by Williams [ 62 ], Dong et al. have introduced eight further key processes for information governance: data element definition, data integration, information sharing and accountability, information to information and information from information [ 6 ]. Although ‘the processes’ constitute an integral part of HIG programs, it has received less attention than other principles in academic research, because ‘the process’ is highly dependent on the location, activity, goals and overall vision of the organization in which the HIG program is being developed and implemented.

Despite its short history, health information governance has been the focus of several studies which have emphasized its significance, value and necessity. In fact, the development and implementation of national HIG models, particularly in developed nations, is evidence of this claim. The conclusions drawn from a review of the present articles reflect a number of specific aspects. Primarily, the extent and diversity of HIG-related dimensions and components are quite extensive, due to the fact that information governance encompasses the entire health system in the desired area, taking into account all advantages and disadvantages, with the goal of improving the system. Therefore, it requires the experts’ consideration in order to develop impeccable models that function as comprehensively as possible. Second, due to the unique significance and sensitivity of the information within the health organizations, the need to develop HIG models and programs becomes evident, particularly in the present age. Therefore, it can be concluded that developing and underdeveloped nations require the development of information governance models to manage and optimally utilize their health data and information to achieve the national health system goals. Finally, as the COVID-19 pandemic has led to unprecedented death toll since 2020, it appears logical to develop HIG models in order to maintain health system preparation for potential crises in future and to help prevent such tragic outbreaks. For the development of organizational, national and international models, it is our hope that the current literature review serve as a tentative road map and a comprehensive overview by describing the general framework of existing HIG models developed by experts and scientists.

Limitations

Although the scoping review is a valuable tool for comprehensively examining a broad topic such as HIG, it is essential to note the following possible limitations:

A scoping review provides an overview of the dimensions and components of the subject. However, a deeper understanding of these dimensions and components may require more focused studies.

The findings from the scoping review may not directly address a specific problem or answer a focused question.

We encountered difficulties for accessing some databases, but we made a comprehensive effort to search for articles in as many databases as possible.

The study tried to include different types of articles to prevent potential bias.

Additionally, it is important to consider that various factors such as technology, policy, regulation and health system structure influence the HIG landscape and related definitions. Therefore, these definitions may vary depending on the context.

The statistical analysis tool used in the study was not considered a limitation, as our purpose was to organize and structure the studies to more accurately identify the concepts. It is also worth noting that the authors manually coded the entire process in the software.

Availability of data and materials

All data generated or analysed during this study are included in this published article [and its supplementary information files].

Kadlec L. Coming soon to your healthcare facility: Information governance. A look at healthcare information governance trends through practical case studies. J AHIMA. 2014;85(8):26–32.

PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hovenga EJ, Grain H. Health information governance in a digital environment. Ios Press; 2013. ( ISBN: 97816149929162912 ).

Google Scholar  

Caldicott F. Information: To share or not to share. Information governance review. Health Do; 2013. http://collections.crest.ac.uk/id/eprint/9560

Warner D. IG 101: What is information governance? Jurnal Of AHIMA; 2013. https://journal.ahima.org/page/ig-101-what-is-information-governance

Pierotti D, Meehan A. Information governance: an interview with Ann Meehan. RHIA Home Healthc Now. 2017;35(7):402–3. https://doi.org/10.1097/nhh.0000000000000566 .

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Dong L, Keshavjee K. Why is information governance important for electronic healthcare systems? A Canadian experience. J Adv Hum Soc Sci. 2016;2(5):250–60. https://doi.org/10.20474/jahss-2.5.1 .

Article   Google Scholar  

Dogiparthi H. History of information governance. Cumberlands: University of the Cumberlands; 2018. p. 1–20.

Empel S. The way forward. AIHMA develops information governance principles to lead healthcare toward better data management. J Ahima. 2014;85(10):30–2 ( quiz 4 ).

Butler M. Keeping information clean: new information governance efforts challenge HIM to sort out dirty data. J AHIMA. 2013;84(11):28–31.

Ellington NN. Impact information governance has on healthcare organizations: University of Tennessee Health Science Center; 2018. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/234018953.pdf

Beach T, Rana O, Rezgui Y, Parashar M. Governance model for cloud computing in building information management. IEEE Trans Serv Comput. 2013;8(2):314–27. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSC.2013.50 .

Kwan H, Riley M, Prasad N, Robinson K. An investigation of the status and maturity of hospitals’ health information governance in Victoria. Aust Health Inf Manag J. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1177/1833358320938309 .

Kooper MN, Maes R, Lindgreen ER. On the governance of information: introducing a new concept of governance to support the management of information. Int J Inf Manage. 2011;31(3):195–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2010.05.009 .

Proença D, Vieira R, Borbinha J. Information governance maturity model. Springer International Publishing Switzerland; 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-43997-6_2 .

Book   Google Scholar  

Bunker D, Ehnis C, Seltsikas P, Levine L, editors. Crisis management and social media: Assuring effective information governance for long term social sustainability. In: IEEE international conference on technologies for homeland security (HST) . IEEE; 2013. https://doi.org/10.1109/THS.2013.6699008

Smallwood RF. Information governance for healthcare professionals: a practical approach. Boca Raton: Routledge/CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2019. ( 978-0-203-70524-7 ).

Maxcer C. Measuring success of an information governance program not so simple: IronMountain; 2011. http://docs.media.bitpipe.com/io_10x/io_105560/item_570545/Iron%20Mountain_sContentMgt_IO%23105560_EGuide_082012.pdf .

Christensen J, Cohen E. Medical errors may be third leading cause of death in the U.S.: cnn.com; 2016. https://edition.cnn.com/2016/05/03/health/medical-error-a-leading-cause-of-death .

Riegner M. Global information governance in pandemic times: in the geopolitics of global health information, international institutional law is more important than ever. Völkerrechtsblog; 2020. https://doi.org/10.17176/20200410-152747-0 .

OECD. Towards an integrated health information system in Korea. OECD; 2022.

Mastaneh Z, Mouseli L. Information governance in heath sector. J Health Manag. 2012;3(3):29–36.

Kadlec L. Coming soon to your healthcare facility: information governance. J Ahima. 2014;85(8):26–32.

Buckbee M. Data governance in healthcare: Your complete guide; 2022. https://www.varonis.com/blog/data-governance-in-healthcare .

Tinker A. The top seven healthcare outcome measures and three measurement essentials; 2019. https://www.healthcatalyst.com/insights/top-7-healthcare-outcome-measures .

Seditas K, Dobson H. Data access systems in NHS Scotland: experiences of cancer data utilisation projects. Scotland: Innovative Healthcare Delivery Programme(IHDP); 2019. https://www.ed.ac.uk/usher/ihdp/our-work/information-governance/information-governance-case-studies

Bougnague S. Cloudficient; 2023. https://www.cloudficient.com/blog/what-is-information-governance-in-healthcare-an-overview .

Donaldson A, Walker P. Information governance—a view from the NHS. Int J Med Inf. 2004;73(3):281–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2003.11.009 .

Rouzbahani F. Developing a model of health information governance program for healthcare system of Iran [PhD Thesis]. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences; 2018.

Arksey H, O’Malley L. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2005;8(1):19–32. https://doi.org/10.1080/1364557032000119616 .

Tricco AC, Lillie E, Zarin W, O’Brien KK, Colquhoun H, Levac D, Moher D. PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation. Ann Intern Med. 2018;169(7):467–73. https://doi.org/10.7326/M18-0850 .

Munn Z, Peters MD, Stern C, Tufanaru C, McArthur A, Aromataris E. Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018;18:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x .

Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. Critical appraisal tools and resources; 2023. https://casp-uk.net/critical-appraisal-tools-and-resources/ .

Literature Review with MAXQDA: VERBI GmbH; 2024. https://www.maxqda.com/literature-review .

Verdejo C, Tapia-Benavente L, Schuller-Martínez B, Vergara-Merino L, Vargas-Peirano M, Silva-Dreyer AM. What you need to know about scoping reviews. Medwave. 2021. https://doi.org/10.5867/medwave.2021.02.8144 .

Kazi MR, Chowdhury N, Chowdhury M, Turin TC. Conducting comprehensive scoping reviews to systematically capture the landscape of a subject matter. Popul Med. 2021;3:1–9. https://doi.org/10.18332/popmed/143831 .

Gottlieb M, Haas MRC, Daniel M, Chan TM. The scoping review: a flexible, inclusive, and iterative approach to knowledge synthesis. AEM Educ Train. 2021;5(3): e10609. https://doi.org/10.1002/aet2.10609 .

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Peters MDJ, Marnie C, Colquhoun H, Garritty CM, Hempel S, Horsley T, et al. Scoping reviews: reinforcing and advancing the methodology and application. Syst Rev. 2021;10(1):263. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-021-01821-3 .

Marcelo A, Medeiros D, Ramesh K, Roth S, Wyatt P. Transforming health systems through good digital health governance. Asian Development Bank; 2018. Contract No.: 51. https://doi.org/10.22617/WPS189244-2

Rouzbahani F, Rabiei R, Asadi F, Moghaddasi H, Emami H. Information governance program: a review of applications in healthcare. J Paramed Sci. 2019;10(1):47–55. https://doi.org/10.22037/jps.v9i1.16927 .

Rouzbahani F, Asadi F, Rabiei R, Moghaddasi H, Emami H. Developing a model for national health information governance program in Iran. J Med Life. 2020;13(4):510–6. https://doi.org/10.25122/jml-2020-0036 .

Holly L, Thom S, Elzemety M, Murage B, Mathieson K, Iñigo Petralanda MI. Strengthening health data governance: new equity and rights-based principles. Int J Health Governance. 2023;28(3):225–37. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHG-11-2022-0104 .

Foy M, Martyn D, Daly D, Byrne A, Aguneche C, Brennan R. Blockchain-based governance models for COVID-19 digital health certificates: a legal, technical, ethical and security requirements analysis. Procedia Comput Sci. 2022;198:662–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2021.12.303 .

Bruhn J. Identifying useful approaches to the governance of indigenous data. Int Indigenous Policy J. 2014;5(2):1–32. https://doi.org/10.18584/iipj.2014.5.2.5 .

Willison DJ, Trowbridge J, Greiver M, Keshavjee K, Mumford D, Sullivan F. Participatory governance over research in an academic research network: the case of Diabetes Action Canada. BMJ Open. 2019;9(4):1–9. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026828 .

Were V, Moturi C. Toward a data governance model for the Kenya health professional regulatory authorities. TQM J. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1108/TQM-10-2016-0092 .

Laurie G, Sethi N. Towards principles-based approaches to governance of health-related research using personal data. Eur J Risk Regul. 2013;4(1):43–57. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1867299X00002786 .

Laurie G, Ainsworth J, Cunningham J, Dobbs C, Jones KH, Kalra D, et al. On moving targets and magic bullets: Can the UK lead the way with responsible data linkage for health research? Int J Med Inform. 2015;84(11):933–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2015.08.011 .

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Li Q, Lan L, Zeng N, You L, Yin J, Zhou X, Meng Q. A framework for big data governance to advance RHINs: a case study of China. IEEE Access. 2019;7:50330–8. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2019.2910838 .

Rabiei R, Rouzbahani F, Asadi F, Moghaddasi H, Emami H, Rahimi F. Health information governance program: a review on components and principles. Crescent J Med Biol Sci. 2021;8(1):10–4.

Tumulak A, Tin J, Keshavjee K. Towards a unified framework for information and interoperability governance. In: The role of digital health policy and leadership. IOS Press; 2024. https://doi.org/10.3233/shti231310 .

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Paolino AR, McGlynn EA, Lieu T, Nelson AF, Prausnitz S, Horberg MA, et al. Building a governance strategy for CER: the patient outcomes research to advance learning (PORTAL) network experience. Generat Evid Methods Improve Patient Outcomes. 2016;4(2):17. https://doi.org/10.13063/2327-9214.1216 .

Nunn S. Driving compliance through data governance. J Am Health Inf Manag Assoc. 2009;80(3):50–1.

Ibragimova I, Korjonen MH. The value of librarians for clinical and health governance (a view from Europe). Int J Health Governance. 2019;24(1):66–88. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHG-11-2018-0062 .

Faridoon A, Kechadi MT. Healthcare Data Governance, Privacy, and Security-A Conceptual Framework. arXiv preprint arXiv:240317648; 2024. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2403.17648

Renaud K. Clinical and information governance proposes; human fallibility disposes. Clin Governance. 2014;19(2):94–109. https://doi.org/10.1108/CGIJ-01-2014-0001 .

Datskovsky G, Hedges R, Empel S. Evaluating the Information governance principles for healthcare: accountability and transparency. J Ahima. 2015;86(2):52–3.

Datskovsky G, Hedges R, Empel S, Washington L. Evaluating the information governance principles for healthcare: integrity and protection. J Ahima. 2015;86(4):48–9.

Lillywhite TP. Implementing BS7799 in the UK National Health Service. Comput Fraud Secur. 2004;2004(2):4–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1361-3723(04)00027-2 .

Datskovsky G, Hedges R, Empel S, Washington L. Evaluating the information governance principles for healthcare: compliance and availability. J Ahima. 2015;86(6):54–5.

Ryan FS, Cedro MK, Pabari S, Davenport-Jones L, Noar JH. Clinicians’ knowledge and practice of data protection legislation and information management. Br Dent J. 2009;206(2):E4. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2009.53 . ( discussion 90-1 ).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Welle Donker F, van Loenen B. How to assess the success of the open data ecosystem? Int J Digital Earth. 2017;10(3):284–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/17538947.2016.1224938 .

Williams P. Information governance: a model for security in medical practice. J Dig For Secur Law. 2007;2(1):57–74.

Stahl BC, Rainey S, Harris E, Fothergill BT. The role of ethics in data governance of large neuro-ICT projects. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018;25(8):1099–107. https://doi.org/10.1093/jamia/ocy040 .

Tiffin N, George A, LeFevre AE. How to use relevant data for maximal benefit with minimal risk: digital health data governance to protect vulnerable populations in low-income and middle-income countries. BMJ Glob Health. 2019;4(2): e001395. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2019-001395 .

Datskovsky G, Hedges R, Empel S, Washington L. Evaluating the information governance principles for healthcare: retention and disposition. J Ahima. 2015;86(9):50–1.

Roch-Berry C. What is a Caldicott guardian? Postgrad Med J. 2003;79(935):516–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/pmj.79.935.516 .

Corporate Information Governance. Information governance policy; 2019. https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/information-governance-policy-v5.1.pdf

Baskaran V, Davis K, Bali RK, Naguib RN, Wickramasinghe N. Managing information and knowledge within maternity services: privacy and consent issues. Inform Health Soc Care. 2013;38(3):196–210. https://doi.org/10.3109/17538157.2012.735732 .

Shaw-Taylor Y. Making quality improvement programs more effective. Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2014;27(4):264–70. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJHCQA-02-2013-0017 .

Haarbrandt B, Schreiweis B, Rey S, Sax U, Scheithauer S, Rienhoff O, et al. HiGHmed–an open platform approach to enhance care and research across institutional boundaries. Methods Inf Med. 2018;57(S01):e66–81.

PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Kloss LL. Leading innovation in enterprise information governance. J Am Health Inf Manag Assoc. 2013;84(9):34–8.

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is part of a PhD thesis in Medical Library and Information Science supported and founded by the Iran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran. The ethical code is IR.IUMS.REC.1400.1158. We thank Iran University of Medical Science for supporting this research.

The present study is the funded by Iran University of Medical Sciences(IUMS) (IR.IUMS.REC.1400.1158).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Medical Library and Information Science, School of Health Management and Information Sciences, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Somayeh Ghaffari Heshajin, Shahram Sedghi & Sirous Panahi

Department of Global Health & Public Policy, School of Public Health, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Amirhossein Takian

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

S.G.H. performed several tasks, including conceptualization, methodology development, using software, formal analysis, investigation, resource allocation, original draft writing and data curation. S.S. undertakes various activities and roles, including supervision, project administration, funding acquisition and writing reviews. S.P. is involved in various activities, including writing – review and editing, as well as validation, conceptualization, data curation and methodology development. A.T. undertakes various activities and roles, including methodology development, conceptualization and writing – review and editing.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shahram Sedghi .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Competing interests.

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary material 1, supplementary material 2, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Ghaffari Heshajin, S., Sedghi, S., Panahi, S. et al. A framework for health information governance: a scoping review. Health Res Policy Sys 22 , 109 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01193-9

Download citation

Received : 10 February 2024

Accepted : 20 July 2024

Published : 15 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12961-024-01193-9

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Health information governance
• Scoping review
• Healthcare industry
• Health information

Health Research Policy and Systems

ISSN: 1478-4505

• Submission enquiries: Access here and click Contact Us
• General enquiries: [email protected]

MAXQDA vs. ATLAS.ti | Best Qualitative Data Analysis Software

Undecided about which computer-assisted qualitative data analysis software (CAQDAS) to use for your qualitative data? Let's compare the differences between ATLAS.ti and MAXQDA so you can make an informed decision about your ideal qualitative data analysis (QDA) platform.

Choosing the right QDA platform

Qualitative researchers have a number of options to choose from when deciding what data analysis platform is best for them. Let's look at some of the important considerations that factor into the decision-making process, and why ATLAS.ti has advantages in all of these aspects.

Intuitive interface

QDA platforms should be easy to use. Qualitative research can be complicated enough in terms of theory, study design, and data collection and analysis.

A QDA program that promises complex analyses but demands a high learning curve can end up wasting more time and effort than is necessary to generate critical insights. Conversely, an intuitive platform makes data organization, coding, and visualization simple and empowers researchers to make the most of their data.

Data organization

As the needs of qualitative researchers have evolved, so have the types of data they are likely to handle. An effective QDA platform should handle not just textual data, but also multimedia, social media data, and even geographic data.

Moreover, researchers rely on a QDA platform to organize data, especially when their research collects large numbers of documents that require substantive management.

Coding capabilities

Qualitative research invariably means coding data to provide structure necessary for data analysis. Researchers need to be able to code quickly and efficiently to ensure a robust and rigorous research process.

An effective QDA program makes coding easy and organizing codes effortless. Moreover, advanced QDA platforms enable researchers to conduct manual coding and rely on artificial intelligence to assist them in coding the data.

Visualizations of data analysis

Once researchers generate key insights from their research, they need to persuade their audience through visualizations that represent their data analysis. This allows researchers to illustrate their data in ways that even an extended text description cannot.

A good QDA platform should be capable of producing persuasive visualizations aimed at delivering core insights to their research audience, while empowering researchers to quickly and easily create those visualizations.

Working with other software

Researchers tend to rely on a variety of software programs in addition to QDA software to conduct their research. From spreadsheet tools to reference manager software, there is a range of platforms that a good QDA program should work with as seamlessly as possible.

CAQDAS should be flexible and ensure the researcher remains in full control of the analysis so that the use of the software can be adapted according to the methodology guiding the research and the tools they already use in their research.

Support and guidance

A network of continuous and comprehensive support is necessary in any endeavor, but especially in qualitative research. Researchers should be able to count on the support network behind a QDA platform to provide them with the best answers for how to conduct their research.

These resources include not only technical support and guidance on program usage, but also methodological support and project optimization. A QDA platform that offers this level of support enables researchers to draw the insights they need to persuade their research audience.

MAXQDA vs. ATLAS.ti: What's the difference?

Let's look a little more deeply into the key features of both QDA platforms where ATLAS.ti has clear distinctions over MAXQDA.

Conducting Literature Reviews

• Auto-coding with Text Search

AI-powered Data Analysis

Data analysis, visualizations, research notes in memos, interface and ease-of-use, organizing data, collaboration with team members, cloud storage for project sharing, compatible data types, comprehensive support system, overall benefits.

When it comes to choosing a CAQDAS, you may be flooded with a whole host of choices for computer-based solutions to analyze qualitative data. Because qualitative data often eludes easy analysis (e.g., what are the emergent themes in this data set relevant to my research question?), you may understandably look for a CAQDAS package to help you code your data and provide a structure useful for data analysis.

To a certain extent, all major QDA platforms provide the capability to code data. Both ATLAS.ti and MAXQDA will provide you with the basic ability to code and structure your data to rigorously generate key insights.

In ATLAS.ti, manual coding is simply a matter of highlighting text and choosing from existing codes or creating new ones to apply to the data. A pop-up window that displays your code list near your text makes the coding process quick and easy. Quick Coding allows users to apply the most recently used code to any data segment with just a few clicks, while the Code In Vivo option creates codes directly from the text.

All of the major QDA platforms can read and import reference manager data from programs such as Zotero and EndNote, which is useful for moving your research library into your project so that your literature review can seamlessly inform your data analysis. However, only ATLAS.ti Web's Paper Search gives researchers the ability to directly build a useful library of journal articles and research papers in their project. With Paper Search, users can search from over 200 million articles available through Semantic Scholar and choose the papers that are most relevant to their research. Unlike with MAXQDA, users can utilize ATLAS.ti to look for the most insightful research and import it into their project to complement and jump start their literature review.

ATLAS.ti Web's Paper Search 2.0 lets users tailor their search for literature to a particular research question, get the relevant literature complete with tailored AI summaries of the most important papers in their inquiry, and integrate the results in their research projects. Paper Search provides the capability to conduct literature reviews and shape their research in ways not seen in other major QDA platforms.

Auto-coding Tools

Various features in ATLAS.ti facilitate the automation of the coding process with greater flexibility than what MAXQDA provides. The Concepts tool looks for commonly occurring phrases that a simple word cloud can't provide, while Opinion Mining conducts a sentiment analysis on those phrases, allowing researchers to separate positive and negative sentiments while coding.

Tools such as Focus Group Coding and Named Entity Recognition can help users save time by automatically adding codes to indicate who in an interview or a focus group is speaking or to identify people, places, and organizations named in the data, respectively. Using these codes in conjunction with codes from Sentiment Analysis and Opinion Mining can help generate rich insights on how the data frames the discussion of various topics of interest in a positive, negative, or neutral light.

Text Search is more powerful in ATLAS.ti, allowing for searches of synonyms and more complex queries to get the most relevant data. The flexibility of the Text Search tool allows users to construct a single search with multiple keywords to narrow the scope of the data to a specific set of text segments that can be coded, regardless of where the data is in your project.

The Word Frequencies tool has greater flexibility than MAXQDA's Word Cloud in filtering parts of speech and providing options for stop and go lists to tailor your content analysis. As a result, users have more options for developing visualizations of their qualitative data and content analysis in ATLAS.ti.

Artificial intelligence is also a major part of coding and analyzing data in ATLAS.ti and MAXQDA. MAXQDA has an AI Assist feature to summarize and explain data, but its automated coding capabilities are different from and more limited than ATLAS.ti's AI-powered tools. For example, ATLAS.ti's Conversational AI allows users to employ a chatbot that can give insights on multiple documents in one project, while MAXQDA's equivalent can only chat with one document at a time. The broader capabilities in ATLAS.ti are ideal for synthesizing information from multiple interview respondents, survey records, or other groups of text documents, allowing users to explore overarching patterns and trends in their research inquiry.

In terms of coding, ATLAS.ti gives you the flexibility to choose the extent to which AI codes your data, whether you want your entire data set coded to suit your research inquiry or you just need a little inspiration during the coding process. Users of ATLAS.ti can code a discrete data segment with AI Suggested Codes or entire documents with AI Coding or Intentional AI Coding, both of which also create a coding structure complete with category codes and sub-codes to keep your codes organized and manageable. In contrast, MAXQDA's AI capabilities can only code one segment of data at a time, rather than entire documents, and can only suggest sub-codes of already existing codes.

AI-powered tools in both platforms can code for the general meaning of your textual data, but only ATLAS.ti's Intentional AI Coding allows users to direct the AI to code data based on specific research questions. Other AI tools will simply provide answers but largely devoid of any other context to help researchers understand where the results came from; ATLAS.ti's Intentional AI Coding provides a rich coding structure that facilitates transparent analysis, and researchers can always simply double-click on any quotation to see it in its original context, allowing researchers to begin to "open the black box" of artificial intelligence and see the whole picture provided by their data.

ATLAS.ti's Intentional AI Coding creates coding structures that are tailored to your research inquiry with category codes and sub-codes that are more relevant to your data analysis. Importantly, researchers can tell the AI how it should code their data, including specifying guiding questions and relevant codes. No other CAQDAS offers researchers this level of control over how AI-driven tools should automatically code the data.

Of course, we recommend that researchers always review the results provided to them by artificial intelligence, but the time savings between manual coding and coding with AI-powered tools will undoubtedly prove consequential to the research process.

Most importantly, ATLAS.ti users have unlimited access to our AI tools, no matter the size of their dataset. MAXQDA users can use AI tools on a limited set of data per day before paying for additional usage. This can be problematic when you need to sift through large sets of data.

On the other hand, a full license to ATLAS.ti has no restrictions on the use of any AI tools, including AI Suggested Codes, AI Coding, and Intentional AI Coding. This means that, unlike with MAXQDA, projects of all sizes can take advantage of the artificial intelligence capabilities in ATLAS.ti without incurring extra costs.

The Query Tool can easily find patterns in the data, no matter in what document the insights are located. In one interface, users in ATLAS.ti can construct detailed queries of their coded data in a manner that may require the use of multiple tools in MAXQDA. Instead of conducting multiple and sequential analyses in MAXQDA's Code Explorer or Complex Coding Query, ATLAS.ti's Query Tool can accommodate multiple criteria for codes with any combination of Boolean and proximity operators that suit your research inquiry.

Analyzing data is also easy with other tools such as Code Co-Occurrence Analysis and Code-Document Analysis, creating useful visualizations of code-code and code-document relationships more quickly in ATLAS.ti than in the equivalent MAXQDA features. Both of these tools in ATLAS.ti have a simple interface that allows users to quickly create tables to analyze potential relationships between codes, and between codes and documents, respectively. While users in MAXQDA have to navigate complicated dialog boxes for the analysis tools, many key analyses in ATLAS.ti are created by simply selecting codes and/or documents to cross examine in a table. Moreover, viewing the data supporting the analysis is easier in ATLAS.ti with an elegant interface where tables, figures, and relevant quotations are shown in the same window rather than splitting each part of the analysis in separate tools with their own set-up processes and multiple windows that can clutter your screen and analysis.

Once created, tables from Code Co-Occurrence Analaysis and Code-Document Analysis can be used to provide visualizations in the form of force-directed graphs and Sankey diagrams, visualizations that are only available in ATLAS.ti.

The Network View in ATLAS.ti provides tools for researchers to create illustrative conceptual maps and in-depth visualizations of their data. Links between different codes, quotations, memos, groups, and documents can be displayed in a visualization of theory that reflects a rich qualitative analysis of the project's data. Unlike in MAXQDA where the Network View's equivalent provides only a simple set of visualization capabilities, users can define links in an ATLAS.ti network by the nature of the relationship between codes to develop their theory and propose insights.

A fully coded project in ATLAS.ti can be analyzed qualitatively, like in Networks to help visualize theories arising from your coding structure, or quantitatively, like in the Treemap view that visualizes the most frequently occurring codes and themes. The fully integrated coding system in ATLAS.ti ultimately accommodates all kinds of research paradigms in an accessible and user-friendly manner. With automatic layout options, editable links to define the relationships in your theory, and full integration with the rest of your project, you can use Networks to visualize your theory and guide further analysis.

Other visualizations such as Sankey diagrams, force-directed graphs, and Treemaps are available in ATLAS.ti to visualize your research in multiple ways. ATLAS.ti can help researchers turn their qualitative data into insightful illustrations of code distributions, themes, and much more, to persuade audiences with informative and appealing visuals.

One area where ATLAS.ti excels over MAXQDA is the tools that facilitate the development of theoretical insights. This is undoubtedly one of those tasks that a researcher can't automate or delegate to artificial intelligence, but QDA software can make this job easier and more insightful.

Memos are an often overlooked feature in qualitative research, but are integral to many rigorous studies.A space for research memos is integrated into ATLAS.ti, allowing for useful notes, reflections, and insights on potential theoretical developments that users can jot down as insights arise. ATLAS.ti memos are intuitive and can be linked to quotations, documents, codes, and groups for organized reference. Unlike in MAXQDA, quotations in ATLAS.ti can be inserted directly into memos to facilitate seamless and integrated analysis connecting key data exemplars to critical reflections.

The complexity of MAXQDA's memo system, with different types of memos, can prove limiting to researchers if their notes relate to different entities in their project. On the other hand, ATLAS.ti allows researchers to create standalone memos or link those memos to any part of their research without restrictions, offering greater flexibility in tailoring a project to any research inquiry.

ATLAS.ti is designed to ensure that the learning curve required for qualitative data analysis is as easy as possible. Organization and coding are easier in ATLAS.ti while still providing the capabilities to generate critical insights from qualitative data. This means that you can spend less time on the menial tasks of qualitative research and more time devoted to rich analysis that is accessible to you and your research audience.

ATLAS.ti has a clean interface with a clear organization of functions and capabilities. Project entities likes documents and codes are clearly delineated, while the main analysis tools are organized in one place (either in the Analysis menu in Mac or in the Analysis tab in Windows) for easy access.

Moreover, the interface allows you to organize your research in a single window and switch between multiple tabs to view your research through multiple angles. MAXQDA only has the option of undocking document windows from the main screen, a setup which can easily get cluttered without the necessary level of organization.

In-depth research projects of all sizes will undoubtedly require organization to facilitate data analysis. Even researchers with small research projects can get bogged down in the tedious tasks of categorizing documents by different data types, data collection methods, research sites, and even research participant demographics.

As cumbersome as this challenge is, organization within an entire project is necessary because the greater the level of organization the QDA platform can provide, the richer the analysis. Creswell and Poth (2018), when comparing ATLAS.ti, MAXQDA, NVivo, and HyperRESEARCH, point out ATLAS.ti's ability to quickly search and find data, which is integral to data analysis that is easy and accessible to users.

ATLAS.ti excels in data organization with an intuitive Document Manager, allowing you to sort documents by multiple categories represented by document groups. Document groups provide a level of flexibility not seen in MAXQDA, which provides a traditional file system for documents that might limit the organization of data if your documents simultaneously belong to multiple categories or analyses.

In ATLAS.ti, document groups are not mutually exclusive, meaning you can organize data by any number of analytical or organizational categories depending on your research inquiry, facilitating analysis of your data from multiple angles. This is useful when you need to, for example, sort respondent data by gender, age, ethnicity, income level, or any other category useful to your research inquiry.

Teamwork on qualitative research projects requires a QDA platform that ensures easy integration of project work. Both ATLAS.ti and MAXQDA have tools to help organize coders' efforts in a collaborative research project and calculate intercoder agreement.

However, ATLAS.ti offers various features that facilitate project sharing among team members, such as ATLAS.ti Web's real-time collaboration for team-based coding. ATLAS.ti is the only QDA software that offers full access to all platforms, including the online ATLAS.ti Web, giving researchers ultimate flexibility in deciding where and how they want to collaborate with others.

ATLAS.ti Desktop also allows for collaboration between users through asynchronous project storage. ATLAS.ti users can store their projects in our cloud storage space and share them effortlessly with other users, who can download projects onto their own devices and continue the work of coding and analysis.

Moreover, while MAXQDA limits team access to projects to up to five users, ATLAS.ti has no limits, meaning all ATLAS.ti users can join a project, regardless of what type of license each person has or where in the world they are located. This allows researchers of different institutions and countries to collaborate on the same research project without restriction.

ATLAS.ti's platform can also accommodate a greater variety of qualitative data than MAXQDA. As the needs of qualitative researchers have evolved over the years, the typical project workflow has included various forms of data, including PDF files, multimedia files for images, audio, and video, and files containing geographical data. In-depth research projects rely on various forms of data, all of which can be included in an ATLAS.ti project.

Both ATLAS.ti and MAXQDA are capable of reading commonly used file formats such as text files, GIF files, and PDF files. However, ATLAS.ti is compatible with other file types such as BMP files for images, MOBI files for eBooks, and documents handling geographic data. The wider array of file formats compatible in ATLAS.ti benefits more researchers in more research fields.

Social media research is also more flexible in ATLAS.ti. MAXQDA only allows users to import Tweets from Twitter/X, limiting researchers who want to analyze trends in social media. On the other hand, researchers can import data from any social media post, such as comments from YouTube videos, TikTok posts, Instagram posts, and more into any ATLAS.ti project.

ATLAS.ti users enjoy a greater degree of flexibility with PDF files. Comments in PDF files are preserved as quotations, which can be useful for literature reviews and smoothly transferring initial qualitative analyses from raw PDFs straight into ATLAS.ti.

The differences between ATLAS.ti and MAXQDA don't stop at the software platform. ATLAS.ti has devoted significant time and effort to building an entire ecosystem around the platform to support qualitative researchers at all stages of the research process.

License purchasing and user management are easy with ATLAS.ti. There are no hidden charges or fees for extra features; unlike in MAXQDA, a Desktop+Web license entitles users to a fully functional QDA platform in ATLAS.ti with no restrictions, no matter the size and scope of the research project. In addition, multi-user ATLAS.ti licenses can be shared with as many people as desired anywhere in the world, with no limitations on the number of software installations, devices that can use ATLAS.ti, access to Windows, Mac, or Web platforms.

In other words, an ATLAS.ti multi-user license offers ultimate flexibility, so license admins can share access with anyone else and easily manage the license users in their personal ATLAS.ti admin account. The license management system automatically frees up a seat in the license as soon as one person logs out of their session, allowing anyone else to occupy that seat when they log into ATLAS.ti Windows, Mac, or Web.

ATLAS.ti has a whole host of online trainings and written resources to guide users on qualitative research methodology and the ATLAS.ti platform. All of these resources, written by experts in ATLAS.ti, are created with the goal of instilling users with greater expertise in qualitative research.

ATLAS.ti users enjoy free perpetual access to a support team of experts who can answer technical and methodological questions, 24 hours a day, 5 days a week. Through email, telephone, and live chat, ATLAS.ti users can take advantage of a level of user support that isn't available with other QDA platforms.

While ATLAS.ti and MAXQDA serve qualitative researchers in all the core aspects of data organization and data analysis, ATLAS.ti has a number of distinct advantages that add up to overall benefits that make the research process easier and more insightful.

User-Friendly Interface

Users turn to ATLAS.ti for its intuitive and user-friendly interface. The platform is designed to make the research process as easy as possible, enabling researchers to quickly grasp its functionalities and focus more on their data analysis rather than software navigation. With a clean and organized layout, ATLAS.ti provides clear delineation of project entities such as documents, codes, and memos, making it easy to manage and analyze data efficiently.

Unlike MAXQDA's interface, which can become cluttered with undocked windows, ATLAS.ti's single-window interface with multiple tabs ensures a streamlined workflow. This ease of use allows researchers to dedicate more time to generating critical insights from their qualitative data.

Handling Qualitative Data

ATLAS.ti offers significant flexibility in data handling, accommodating a broader range of file types and data formats than MAXQDA. Whether dealing with text files, PDFs, multimedia files, or even geographical data, ATLAS.ti seamlessly integrates these diverse data sources into a cohesive project. Researchers can also import data from various social media platforms, not just limited to Twitter/X like in MAXQDA.

Additionally, ATLAS.ti’s ability to preserve PDF comments as quotations enhances the literature review process, making it easier to transfer initial qualitative analyses directly into the platform. This extensive compatibility ensures that researchers can include all relevant data in their analysis, providing a more comprehensive understanding of their research topic.

Easy and Effortless Collaboration

ATLAS.ti excels in facilitating collaboration among research team members, providing tools that enable real-time and asynchronous teamwork. With ATLAS.ti Web's real-time collaboration feature, multiple coders can work on the same project simultaneously, ensuring consistent coding and consensus among team members. In contrast, MAXQDA limits team access to projects to up to five users, which can hinder large, multi-institutional research efforts.

Furthermore, ATLAS.ti offers cloud storage for easy project sharing and collaboration without any restrictions on the number of users or licenses. This robust collaboration capability allows researchers from different locations and institutions to work together seamlessly, enhancing the overall research process and ensuring more comprehensive and rigorous data analysis.

Licensing Options

ATLAS.ti offers transparent licensing options with no hidden fees, allowing individuals and organizations to fully utilize its capabilities without unexpected financial burdens. The software is available on multiple platforms, including desktop, online, and free mobile versions. Each version of ATLAS.ti is natively designed for its specific operating system, ensuring optimal functionality and performance. Researchers can seamlessly move their projects across ATLAS.ti Desktop, Web, and Mobile, enjoying 100% compatibility between ATLAS.ti Windows and Mac. This flexibility enables researchers to work efficiently from the office, at home, or in the field, and allows teams to collaborate smoothly, even when using a mix of Windows and Mac computers. This comprehensive accessibility supports a dynamic research environment and caters to the modern researcher’s mobility needs.

More Powerful AI Tools

ATLAS.ti offers unparalleled artificial intelligence capabilities not seen in other QDA platforms, suiting researchers of all backgrounds and preferences. With the flexibility afforded by the various AI-powered tools in ATLAS.ti, users can code a little bit or a lot of their data with AI, which is made more powerful with the capability to tailor the coding process to specific research questions defined by the researcher. You can also engage in critical reflections with Conversational AI or just get to the salient points of the data with AI Summaries.

Most importantly, researchers can always easily access the exact data segments from which any AI results are generated, offering researchers greater transparency and control over how AI analyzes their data. Moreover, ATLAS.ti's AI capabilities come with a paid license, requiring none of the extra fees or restrictions found with the use of MAXQDA's AI tools. Regardless of the size of your data set, you can take full advantage of ATLAS.ti's AI-powered features and make the most of your qualitative data.

Make ATLAS.ti your qualitative data analysis solution

Take advantage of powerful analysis tools found nowhere else. Download a free trial of ATLAS.ti today.

To read this content please select one of the options below:

Please note you do not have access to teaching notes, examining gastronomy festivals, a type of event tourism, within the scope of the united nations sustainable development goals.

Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes

ISSN : 1755-4217

Article publication date: 15 August 2024

The aim of this study is to analyze the gastronomy festivals in Türkiye within the scope of the United Nations sustainable development goals.

Design/methodology/approach

In line with this purpose, a systematic review approach, which is a qualitative research method, was adopted as the method of the study. In the study, the data was collected with document analysis technique by accessing secondary sources. Systematic literature review was used to analyze the data.

When the gastronomy-themed festivals in Türkiye are analyzed, it is seen that 23 of them are in line with at least one of the United Nations sustainable development goals. The number of festivals organized in accordance with more than one of these goals is 18. The number of festivals organized in accordance with at least one goal is 5. The fact that only 23 of the 351 festivals in the research universe are organized in accordance with the United Nations sustainable development goals reveals that festivals are insufficient in terms of sustainability.

Research limitations/implications

This study adopts theoretical approaches such as the experience economy, as it provides unforgettable consumption experiences for both producers and consumers participating in gastronomy festivals, and stakeholder theory, as festivals involve many stakeholders. The study also presents practical approaches, such as supporting local development, which is one of the primary objectives of festivals.

Originality/value

This study has revealed the sustainability status of gastronomy festivals in Türkiye which have been taken into consideration more frequently in recent years. It may also contribute to the literature to examine the organized gastronomy festivals within the scope of the UN sustainable development goals.

• Gastronomy festivals
• Event tourism
• United Nations sustainable development goals

Kabacık, M. (2024), "Examining gastronomy festivals, a type of event tourism, within the scope of the United Nations sustainable development goals", Worldwide Hospitality and Tourism Themes , Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/WHATT-07-2024-0170

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2024, Emerald Publishing Limited

Related articles

All feedback is valuable.

Please share your general feedback

Report an issue or find answers to frequently asked questions

Contact Customer Support