ALiteratureReviewThatBuildsAnArgument.
One-to-one consulting on search strategy, source synthesis, and structure — for narrative, systematic, and scoping reviews. You research and write; we make sure it reads as a critical argument, not a list of summaries.
A weak literature review undermines the case for your entire study.
Examiners read the literature review to judge whether you actually understand the field and whether your study is needed. A review that only summarizes sources — without comparing, critiquing, or connecting them — rarely survives scrutiny.
What It Is
A literature review critically synthesizes existing research on a topic to establish context, surface disagreements, and justify why your study is needed.
You Stay The Author
This is consulting — you search, read, and write. We review your strategy and drafts and tell you exactly what's missing or unjustified.
Every Review Type
Narrative, systematic, scoping, and meta-analytic reviews — each has different rules, and using the wrong one is a common reason reviews get flagged.
Four review types, and which one your study needs.
| Type | Purpose | Best Fit |
|---|---|---|
| Narrative Review | Broad overview of a topic's key themes and debates | Most undergraduate and Master's dissertations |
| Systematic Review | Exhaustive, protocol-driven review answering a specific question | PhD chapters, evidence-based fields (health, education) |
| Scoping Review | Maps the breadth and nature of existing literature on an emerging topic | Underexplored or fast-moving research areas |
| Meta-Analysis | Statistically combines results across multiple quantitative studies | Fields with a large body of comparable quantitative studies |
Where reviews most often need a second pair of eyes.
Search Strategy Design
Building a defensible search string across the right databases (Scopus, Web of Science, PubMed, EBSCO) so you're not missing key studies.
Learn more about Search Strategy DesignSource Screening Guidance
Setting inclusion/exclusion criteria that examiners will accept as principled, not arbitrary.
Learn more about Source Screening GuidanceThematic Synthesis Review
Feedback on how you've organized sources — by theme, chronology, or methodology — and whether it actually builds an argument.
Learn more about Thematic Synthesis ReviewGap Identification
Working through what's already been studied to find where your research genuinely adds something new.
Learn more about Gap IdentificationPRISMA & Systematic Review Support
Guidance structuring a PRISMA flow diagram and protocol for systematic or scoping reviews.
Learn more about PRISMA & Systematic Review SupportReference Management Setup
Getting Zotero, Mendeley, or EndNote properly configured so citations stay consistent across a 60+ source review.
Learn more about Reference Management SetupFrom a topic to a defensible review.
Define the Search Strategy
We help you build search strings and pick databases that will actually surface the literature your field expects to see cited.
Screen & Select Sources
Guidance on applying inclusion/exclusion criteria consistently as you narrow hundreds of results to the sources that matter.
Synthesize by Theme
Feedback on organizing findings into a structure that builds toward your research gap, not just a list of summaries.
Structure & Write Critically
Review of drafted sections for critical analysis depth — examiners penalize reviews that only describe sources instead of evaluating them.
Terms worth knowing before your first session.
- Systematic Review
- A structured, protocol-driven review following an explicit, repeatable search and selection process to minimize bias.
- Scoping Review
- A review that maps the extent and nature of existing literature on a topic, rather than answering one narrow question.
- PRISMA
- A reporting standard (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) used to document search and selection decisions transparently.
- Grey Literature
- Research outputs not published in peer-reviewed journals — theses, conference papers, government reports, industry white papers.
- Thematic Synthesis
- Organizing and analyzing findings across sources by recurring theme rather than study-by-study.
- Citation Chaining
- Following a key source's reference list (backward) or citing articles (forward) to find related literature.
- Inclusion / Exclusion Criteria
- The explicit rules used to decide which sources are relevant enough to include in the review.
- Research Gap
- A question, population, context, or method the existing literature hasn't adequately addressed.
Common questions.
No — this is a consulting and review service. You do the searching, reading, and writing; we guide your search strategy, review your synthesis and structure, and flag what needs strengthening. You remain the author of everything submitted.
There's no universal number — it depends on your level and field. A Bachelor's review might draw on 20–40 sources; a PhD systematic review can involve screening thousands of records down to 50–150 included studies. We help you judge whether your source base is proportionate to your topic and level, rather than chasing an arbitrary count.
A narrative review synthesizes literature thematically with a search process that isn't necessarily exhaustive or fully documented. A systematic review follows an explicit, pre-registered protocol — defined search terms, databases, inclusion/exclusion criteria, and a PRISMA flow diagram — so another researcher could replicate your search and get the same results.
Yes — this is one of the most common reasons people book a consultation. We work through what your sources agree on, disagree on, and haven't addressed at all, and help you phrase that gap precisely enough to justify a new study.
We guide you on which databases fit your field and how to build an effective search string (Boolean operators, subject headings, filters) — you run the searches yourself, which also means you understand and can defend your search strategy later.
Yes — we help you structure and populate a PRISMA flow diagram (records identified, screened, excluded with reasons, and included) so it meets the reporting standard your journal or institution expects.
Yes. Undergraduate and Master's sessions typically focus on search strategy and synthesis structure. PhD-level sessions go deeper into methodological critique of the sources themselves, protocol design for systematic reviews, and defending your search strategy under examination.
Tell us about your topic.
Share your topic, field, and where you're stuck in the search or write-up — we'll respond within a few hours.