research method review paper

• View  PDF
• Download full issue

Journal of Business Research

Literature review as a research methodology: an overview and guidelines.

• Previous article in issue
• Next article in issue

Cited by (0)

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels and plays). When we say “literature review” or refer to “the literature,” we are talking about the research ( scholarship ) in a given field. You will often see the terms “the research,” “the scholarship,” and “the literature” used mostly interchangeably.

Where, when, and why would I write a lit review?

There are a number of different situations where you might write a literature review, each with slightly different expectations; different disciplines, too, have field-specific expectations for what a literature review is and does. For instance, in the humanities, authors might include more overt argumentation and interpretation of source material in their literature reviews, whereas in the sciences, authors are more likely to report study designs and results in their literature reviews; these differences reflect these disciplines’ purposes and conventions in scholarship. You should always look at examples from your own discipline and talk to professors or mentors in your field to be sure you understand your discipline’s conventions, for literature reviews as well as for any other genre.

A literature review can be a part of a research paper or scholarly article, usually falling after the introduction and before the research methods sections. In these cases, the lit review just needs to cover scholarship that is important to the issue you are writing about; sometimes it will also cover key sources that informed your research methodology.

Lit reviews can also be standalone pieces, either as assignments in a class or as publications. In a class, a lit review may be assigned to help students familiarize themselves with a topic and with scholarship in their field, get an idea of the other researchers working on the topic they’re interested in, find gaps in existing research in order to propose new projects, and/or develop a theoretical framework and methodology for later research. As a publication, a lit review usually is meant to help make other scholars’ lives easier by collecting and summarizing, synthesizing, and analyzing existing research on a topic. This can be especially helpful for students or scholars getting into a new research area, or for directing an entire community of scholars toward questions that have not yet been answered.

What are the parts of a lit review?

Most lit reviews use a basic introduction-body-conclusion structure; if your lit review is part of a larger paper, the introduction and conclusion pieces may be just a few sentences while you focus most of your attention on the body. If your lit review is a standalone piece, the introduction and conclusion take up more space and give you a place to discuss your goals, research methods, and conclusions separately from where you discuss the literature itself.

Introduction:

• An introductory paragraph that explains what your working topic and thesis is
• A forecast of key topics or texts that will appear in the review
• Potentially, a description of how you found sources and how you analyzed them for inclusion and discussion in the review (more often found in published, standalone literature reviews than in lit review sections in an article or research paper)
• 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 sentence to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.

Conclusion:

• Summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance
• Connect it back to your primary research question

How should I organize my lit review?

Lit reviews can take many different organizational patterns depending on what you are trying to accomplish with the review. Here are some examples:

• Chronological : The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time, which helps familiarize the audience with the topic (for instance if you are introducing something that is not commonly known in your field). If you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. Try to analyze the patterns, turning points, and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred (as mentioned previously, this may not be appropriate in your discipline — check with a teacher or mentor if you’re unsure).
• Thematic : If you have found some recurring central themes that you will continue working with throughout your piece, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic. For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women.
• Qualitative versus quantitative research
• Empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the research by sociological, historical, or cultural sources
• Theoretical : In many humanities articles, the literature review is the foundation for the theoretical framework. You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts. You can argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach or combine various theorical concepts to create a framework for your research.

What are some strategies or tips I can use while writing my lit review?

Any lit review is only as good as the research it discusses; make sure your sources are well-chosen and your research is thorough. Don’t be afraid to do more research if you discover a new thread as you’re writing. More info on the research process is available in our "Conducting Research" resources .

As you’re doing your research, create an annotated bibliography ( see our page on the this type of document ). Much of the information used in an annotated bibliography can be used also in a literature review, so you’ll be not only partially drafting your lit review as you research, but also developing your sense of the larger conversation going on among scholars, professionals, and any other stakeholders in your topic.

Usually you will need to synthesize research rather than just summarizing it. This means drawing connections between sources to create a picture of the scholarly conversation on a topic over time. Many student writers struggle to synthesize because they feel they don’t have anything to add to the scholars they are citing; here are some strategies to help you:

• It often helps to remember that the point of these kinds of syntheses is to show your readers how you understand your research, to help them read the rest of your paper.
• Writing teachers often say synthesis is like hosting a dinner party: imagine all your sources are together in a room, discussing your topic. What are they saying to each other?
• Look at the in-text citations in each paragraph. Are you citing just one source for each paragraph? This usually indicates summary only. When you have multiple sources cited in a paragraph, you are more likely to be synthesizing them (not always, but often
• Read more about synthesis here.

The most interesting literature reviews are often written as arguments (again, as mentioned at the beginning of the page, this is discipline-specific and doesn’t work for all situations). Often, the literature review is where you can establish your research as filling a particular gap or as relevant in a particular way. You have some chance to do this in your introduction in an article, but the literature review section gives a more extended opportunity to establish the conversation in the way you would like your readers to see it. You can choose the intellectual lineage you would like to be part of and whose definitions matter most to your thinking (mostly humanities-specific, but this goes for sciences as well). In addressing these points, you argue for your place in the conversation, which tends to make the lit review more compelling than a simple reporting of other sources.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• CAREER FEATURE
• 04 December 2020
• Correction 09 December 2020

How to write a superb literature review

Andy Tay is a freelance writer based in Singapore.

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Literature reviews are important resources for scientists. They provide historical context for a field while offering opinions on its future trajectory. Creating them can provide inspiration for one’s own research, as well as some practice in writing. But few scientists are trained in how to write a review — or in what constitutes an excellent one. Even picking the appropriate software to use can be an involved decision (see ‘Tools and techniques’). So Nature asked editors and working scientists with well-cited reviews for their tips.

Access options

Access Nature and 54 other Nature Portfolio journals

Get Nature+, our best-value online-access subscription

24,99 € / 30 days

cancel any time

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 51 print issues and online access

185,98 € per year

only 3,65 € per issue

Rent or buy this article

Prices vary by article type

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-020-03422-x

Interviews have been edited for length and clarity.

Updates & Corrections

Correction 09 December 2020 : An earlier version of the tables in this article included some incorrect details about the programs Zotero, Endnote and Manubot. These have now been corrected.

Hsing, I.-M., Xu, Y. & Zhao, W. Electroanalysis 19 , 755–768 (2007).

Article   Google Scholar  

Ledesma, H. A. et al. Nature Nanotechnol. 14 , 645–657 (2019).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Brahlek, M., Koirala, N., Bansal, N. & Oh, S. Solid State Commun. 215–216 , 54–62 (2015).

Choi, Y. & Lee, S. Y. Nature Rev. Chem . https://doi.org/10.1038/s41570-020-00221-w (2020).

Download references

Related Articles

• Research management

I botched my poster presentation — how do I perform better next time?

Career Feature 27 SEP 24

Researchers in Hungary raise fears of brain drain after ‘body blow’ EU funding suspension

Career News 26 SEP 24

How I apply Indigenous wisdom to Western science and nurture Native American students

Career Q&A 25 SEP 24

More measures needed to ease funding competition in China

Correspondence 24 SEP 24

Gender inequity persists among journal chief editors

The human costs of the research-assessment culture

Career Feature 09 SEP 24

Data integrity concerns flagged in 130 women’s health papers — all by one co-author

News 25 SEP 24

‘Substandard and unworthy’: why it’s time to banish bad-mannered reviews

Career Q&A 23 SEP 24

Faculty Positions& Postdoctoral Research Fellow, School of Optical and Electronic Information, HUST

Job Opportunities: Leading talents, young talents, overseas outstanding young scholars, postdoctoral researchers.

Wuhan, Hubei, China

School of Optical and Electronic Information, Huazhong University of Science and Technology

Faculty Positions in Neurobiology, Westlake University

We seek exceptional candidates to lead vigorous independent research programs working in any area of neurobiology.

Hangzhou, Zhejiang, China

School of Life Sciences, Westlake University

Full-Time Faculty Member in Molecular Agrobiology at Peking University

Faculty positions in molecular agrobiology, including plant (crop) molecular biology, crop genomics and agrobiotechnology and etc.

Beijing, China

School of Advanced Agricultural Sciences, Peking University

Faculty Positions Open, ShanghaiTech University

6 major schools are now hiring faculty members.

Shanghai, China

ShanghaiTech University

Faculty Positions at Great Bay University, China

We are now seeking outstanding candidates in Physics, Chemistry and Physical Sciences.

Dongguan, Guangdong, China

Great Bay University, China (GBU)

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Teaching and Research guides

Literature reviews.

• Introduction
• Plan your search
• Where to search
• Refine and update your search
• Finding grey literature
• Writing the review
• Referencing

Research methods overview

Finding literature on research methodologies, sage research methods online.

• Get material not at RMIT
• Further help

What are research methods?

Research methodology is the specific strategies, processes, or techniques utilised in the collection of information that is created and analysed.

The methodology section of a research paper, or thesis, enables the reader to critically evaluate the study’s validity and reliability by addressing how the data was collected or generated, and how it was analysed.

Types of research methods

There are three main types of research methods which use different designs for data collection.  

(1) Qualitative research

Qualitative research gathers data about lived experiences, emotions or behaviours, and the meanings individuals attach to them. It assists in enabling researchers to gain a better understanding of complex concepts, social interactions or cultural phenomena. This type of research is useful in the exploration of how or why things have occurred, interpreting events and describing actions.

Examples of qualitative research designs include:

• focus groups
• observations
• document analysis
• oral history or life stories  

(2) Quantitative research

Quantitative research gathers numerical data which can be ranked, measured or categorised through statistical analysis. It assists with uncovering patterns or relationships, and for making generalisations. This type of research is useful for finding out how many, how much, how often, or to what extent.

Examples of quantitative research designs include:

• surveys or questionnaires
• observation
• document screening
• experiments  

(3) Mixed method research

Mixed Methods research integrates both Qualitative research and Quantitative research. It provides a holistic approach combining and analysing the statistical data with deeper contextualised insights. Using Mixed Methods also enables triangulation, or verification, of the data from two or more sources.

Sometimes in your literature review, you might need to discuss and evaluate relevant research methodologies in order to justify your own choice of research methodology.

When searching for literature on research methodologies it is important to search across a range of sources. No single information source will supply all that you need. Selecting appropriate sources will depend upon your research topic.

Developing a robust search strategy will help reduce irrelevant results. It is good practice to plan a strategy before you start to search.

Search tips

(1) free text keywords.

Free text searching is the use of natural language words to conduct your search. Use selective free text keywords such as: phenomenological, "lived experience", "grounded theory", "life experiences", "focus groups", interview, quantitative, survey, validity, variance, correlation and statistical.

To locate books on your desired methodology, try LibrarySearch . Remember to use  refine  options such as books, ebooks, subject, and publication date.  

(2) Subject headings in Databases

Databases categorise their records using subject terms, or a controlled vocabulary (thesaurus). These subject headings may be useful to use, in addition to utilising free text keywords in a database search.

Subject headings will differ across databases, for example, the PubMed database uses 'Qualitative Research' whilst the CINHAL database uses 'Qualitative Studies.'  

(3) Limiting search results

Databases enable sets of results to be limited or filtered by specific fields, look for options such as Publication Type, Article Type, etc. and apply them to your search.  

(4) Browse the Library shelves

To find books on  research methods  browse the Library shelves at call number  001.42

• SAGE Research Methods Online SAGE Research Methods Online (SRMO) is a research tool supported by a newly devised taxonomy that links content and methods terms. It provides the most comprehensive picture available today of research methods (quantitative, qualitative and mixed methods) across the social and behavioural sciences.

SAGE Research Methods Overview  (2:07 min) by SAGE Publishing  ( YouTube ) 

• << Previous: Referencing
• Next: Get material not at RMIT >>

• Last Updated: Sep 14, 2024 4:19 PM
• URL: https://rmit.libguides.com/literature-review

Research Methods

• Getting Started
• Literature Review Research
• Research Design
• Research Design By Discipline
• SAGE Research Methods
• Teaching with SAGE Research Methods

Literature Review

• What is a Literature Review?
• What is NOT a Literature Review?
• Purposes of a Literature Review
• Types of Literature Reviews
• Literature Reviews vs. Systematic Reviews
• Systematic vs. Meta-Analysis

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.

Also, we can define a literature review as the collected body of scholarly works related to a topic:

• Summarizes and analyzes previous research relevant to a topic
• Includes scholarly books and articles published in academic journals
• Can be an specific scholarly paper or a section in a research paper

The objective of a Literature Review is to find previous published scholarly works relevant to an specific topic

• Help gather ideas or information
• Keep up to date in current trends and findings
• Help develop new questions

A literature review is important because it:

• Explains the background of research on a topic.
• Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area.
• Helps focus your own research questions or problems
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
• Suggests unexplored ideas or populations
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
• Tests assumptions; may help counter preconceived ideas and remove unconscious bias.
• Identifies critical gaps, points of disagreement, or potentially flawed methodology or theoretical approaches.
• Indicates potential directions for future research.

All content in this section is from Literature Review Research from Old Dominion University 

Keep in mind the following, a literature review is NOT:

Not an essay 

Not an annotated bibliography  in which you summarize each article that you have reviewed.  A literature review goes beyond basic summarizing to focus on the critical analysis of the reviewed works and their relationship to your research question.

Not a research paper   where you select resources to support one side of an issue versus another.  A lit review should explain and consider all sides of an argument in order to avoid bias, and areas of agreement and disagreement should be highlighted.

A literature review serves several purposes. For example, it

• provides thorough knowledge of previous studies; introduces seminal works.
• helps focus one’s own research topic.
• identifies a conceptual framework for one’s own research questions or problems; indicates potential directions for future research.
• suggests previously unused or underused methodologies, designs, quantitative and qualitative strategies.
• identifies gaps in previous studies; identifies flawed methodologies and/or theoretical approaches; avoids replication of mistakes.
• helps the researcher avoid repetition of earlier research.
• suggests unexplored populations.
• determines whether past studies agree or disagree; identifies controversy in the literature.
• tests assumptions; may help counter preconceived ideas and remove unconscious bias.

As Kennedy (2007) notes*, it is important to think of knowledge in a given field as consisting of three layers. First, there are the primary studies that researchers conduct and publish. Second are the reviews of those studies that summarize and offer new interpretations built from and often extending beyond the original studies. Third, there are the perceptions, conclusions, opinion, and interpretations that are shared informally that become part of the lore of field. In composing a literature review, it is important to note that it is often this third layer of knowledge that is cited as "true" even though it often has only a loose relationship to the primary studies and secondary literature reviews.

Given this, while literature reviews are designed to provide an overview and synthesis of pertinent sources you have explored, there are several approaches to how they can be done, depending upon the type of analysis underpinning your study. Listed below are definitions of types of literature reviews:

Argumentative Review      This form examines literature selectively in order to support or refute an argument, deeply imbedded assumption, or philosophical problem already established in the literature. The purpose is to develop a body of literature that establishes a contrarian viewpoint. Given the value-laden nature of some social science research [e.g., educational reform; immigration control], argumentative approaches to analyzing the literature can be a legitimate and important form of discourse. However, note that they can also introduce problems of bias when they are used to to make summary claims of the sort found in systematic reviews.

Integrative Review      Considered a form of research that reviews, critiques, and synthesizes representative literature on a topic in an integrated way such that new frameworks and perspectives on the topic are generated. The body of literature includes all studies that address related or identical hypotheses. A well-done integrative review meets the same standards as primary research in regard to clarity, rigor, and replication.

Historical Review      Few things rest in isolation from historical precedent. Historical reviews are focused on examining research throughout a period of time, often starting with the first time an issue, concept, theory, phenomena emerged in the literature, then tracing its evolution within the scholarship of a discipline. The purpose is to place research in a historical context to show familiarity with state-of-the-art developments and to identify the likely directions for future research.

Methodological Review      A review does not always focus on what someone said [content], but how they said it [method of analysis]. This approach provides a framework of understanding at different levels (i.e. those of theory, substantive fields, research approaches and data collection and analysis techniques), enables researchers to draw on a wide variety of knowledge ranging from the conceptual level to practical documents for use in fieldwork in the areas of ontological and epistemological consideration, quantitative and qualitative integration, sampling, interviewing, data collection and data analysis, and helps highlight many ethical issues which we should be aware of and consider as we go through our study.

Systematic Review      This form consists of an overview of existing evidence pertinent to a clearly formulated research question, which uses pre-specified and standardized methods to identify and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect, report, and analyse data from the studies that are included in the review. Typically it focuses on a very specific empirical question, often posed in a cause-and-effect form, such as "To what extent does A contribute to B?"

Theoretical Review      The purpose of this form is to concretely examine the corpus of theory that has accumulated in regard to an issue, concept, theory, phenomena. The theoretical literature review help establish what theories already exist, the relationships between them, to what degree the existing theories have been investigated, and to develop new hypotheses to be tested. Often this form is used to help establish a lack of appropriate theories or reveal that current theories are inadequate for explaining new or emerging research problems. The unit of analysis can focus on a theoretical concept or a whole theory or framework.

* Kennedy, Mary M. "Defining a Literature."  Educational Researcher  36 (April 2007): 139-147.

All content in this section is from The Literature Review created by Dr. Robert Larabee USC

Robinson, P. and Lowe, J. (2015),  Literature reviews vs systematic reviews.  Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 39: 103-103. doi: 10.1111/1753-6405.12393

What's in the name? The difference between a Systematic Review and a Literature Review, and why it matters . By Lynn Kysh from University of Southern California

Systematic review or meta-analysis?

A  systematic review  answers a defined research question by collecting and summarizing all empirical evidence that fits pre-specified eligibility criteria.

A  meta-analysis  is the use of statistical methods to summarize the results of these studies.

Systematic reviews, just like other research articles, can be of varying quality. They are a significant piece of work (the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination at York estimates that a team will take 9-24 months), and to be useful to other researchers and practitioners they should have:

• clearly stated objectives with pre-defined eligibility criteria for studies
• explicit, reproducible methodology
• a systematic search that attempts to identify all studies
• assessment of the validity of the findings of the included studies (e.g. risk of bias)
• systematic presentation, and synthesis, of the characteristics and findings of the included studies

Not all systematic reviews contain meta-analysis. 

Meta-analysis is the use of statistical methods to summarize the results of independent studies. By combining information from all relevant studies, meta-analysis can provide more precise estimates of the effects of health care than those derived from the individual studies included within a review.  More information on meta-analyses can be found in  Cochrane Handbook, Chapter 9 .

A meta-analysis goes beyond critique and integration and conducts secondary statistical analysis on the outcomes of similar studies.  It is a systematic review that uses quantitative methods to synthesize and summarize the results.

An advantage of a meta-analysis is the ability to be completely objective in evaluating research findings.  Not all topics, however, have sufficient research evidence to allow a meta-analysis to be conducted.  In that case, an integrative review is an appropriate strategy. 

Some of the content in this section is from Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: step by step guide created by Kate McAllister.

• << Previous: Getting Started
• Next: Research Design >>
• Last Updated: Jul 15, 2024 10:34 AM
• URL: https://guides.lib.udel.edu/researchmethods

• Search Menu

Sign in through your institution

• Advance Articles
• Editor's Choice
• CME Reviews
• Best of 2021 collection
• Abbreviated Breast MRI Virtual Collection
• Contrast-enhanced Mammography Collection
• Author Guidelines
• Submission Site
• Open Access
• Self-Archiving Policy
• Accepted Papers Resource Guide
• About Journal of Breast Imaging
• About the Society of Breast Imaging
• Guidelines for Reviewers
• Resources for Reviewers and Authors
• Editorial Board
• Advertising Disclaimer
• Advertising and Corporate Services
• Journals on Oxford Academic
• Books on Oxford Academic

• < Previous

A Step-by-Step Guide to Writing a Scientific Review Article

• Article contents
• Figures & tables
• Supplementary Data

Manisha Bahl, A Step-by-Step Guide to Writing a Scientific Review Article, Journal of Breast Imaging , Volume 5, Issue 4, July/August 2023, Pages 480–485, https://doi.org/10.1093/jbi/wbad028

• Permissions Icon Permissions

Scientific review articles are comprehensive, focused reviews of the scientific literature written by subject matter experts. The task of writing a scientific review article can seem overwhelming; however, it can be managed by using an organized approach and devoting sufficient time to the process. The process involves selecting a topic about which the authors are knowledgeable and enthusiastic, conducting a literature search and critical analysis of the literature, and writing the article, which is composed of an abstract, introduction, body, and conclusion, with accompanying tables and figures. This article, which focuses on the narrative or traditional literature review, is intended to serve as a guide with practical steps for new writers. Tips for success are also discussed, including selecting a focused topic, maintaining objectivity and balance while writing, avoiding tedious data presentation in a laundry list format, moving from descriptions of the literature to critical analysis, avoiding simplistic conclusions, and budgeting time for the overall process.

• narrative discourse

Society of Breast Imaging members

Personal account.

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code
• Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card.

• Sign in with username/password
• Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Short-term Access

To purchase short-term access, please sign in to your personal account above.

Don't already have a personal account? Register

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

• Recommend to your Librarian
• Journals Career Network

Affiliations

• Online ISSN 2631-6129
• Print ISSN 2631-6110
• Copyright © 2024 Society of Breast Imaging
• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

• Privacy Policy

Home » Literature Review – Types Writing Guide and Examples

Literature Review – Types Writing Guide and Examples

Table of Contents

Literature Review

Definition:

A literature review is a comprehensive and critical analysis of the existing literature on a particular topic or research question. It involves identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing relevant literature, including scholarly articles, books, and other sources, to provide a summary and critical assessment of what is known about the topic.

Types of Literature Review

Types of Literature Review are as follows:

• Narrative literature review : This type of review involves a comprehensive summary and critical analysis of the available literature on a particular topic or research question. It is often used as an introductory section of a research paper.
• Systematic literature review: This is a rigorous and structured review that follows a pre-defined protocol to identify, evaluate, and synthesize all relevant studies on a specific research question. It is often used in evidence-based practice and systematic reviews.
• Meta-analysis: This is a quantitative review that uses statistical methods to combine data from multiple studies to derive a summary effect size. It provides a more precise estimate of the overall effect than any individual study.
• Scoping review: This is a preliminary review that aims to map the existing literature on a broad topic area to identify research gaps and areas for further investigation.
• Critical literature review : This type of review evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of the existing literature on a particular topic or research question. It aims to provide a critical analysis of the literature and identify areas where further research is needed.
• Conceptual literature review: This review synthesizes and integrates theories and concepts from multiple sources to provide a new perspective on a particular topic. It aims to provide a theoretical framework for understanding a particular research question.
• Rapid literature review: This is a quick review that provides a snapshot of the current state of knowledge on a specific research question or topic. It is often used when time and resources are limited.
• Thematic literature review : This review identifies and analyzes common themes and patterns across a body of literature on a particular topic. It aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the literature and identify key themes and concepts.
• Realist literature review: This review is often used in social science research and aims to identify how and why certain interventions work in certain contexts. It takes into account the context and complexities of real-world situations.
• State-of-the-art literature review : This type of review provides an overview of the current state of knowledge in a particular field, highlighting the most recent and relevant research. It is often used in fields where knowledge is rapidly evolving, such as technology or medicine.
• Integrative literature review: This type of review synthesizes and integrates findings from multiple studies on a particular topic to identify patterns, themes, and gaps in the literature. It aims to provide a comprehensive understanding of the current state of knowledge on a particular topic.
• Umbrella literature review : This review is used to provide a broad overview of a large and diverse body of literature on a particular topic. It aims to identify common themes and patterns across different areas of research.
• Historical literature review: This type of review examines the historical development of research on a particular topic or research question. It aims to provide a historical context for understanding the current state of knowledge on a particular topic.
• Problem-oriented literature review : This review focuses on a specific problem or issue and examines the literature to identify potential solutions or interventions. It aims to provide practical recommendations for addressing a particular problem or issue.
• Mixed-methods literature review : This type of review combines quantitative and qualitative methods to synthesize and analyze the available literature on a particular topic. It aims to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the research question by combining different types of evidence.

Parts of Literature Review

Parts of a literature review are as follows:

Introduction

The introduction of a literature review typically provides background information on the research topic and why it is important. It outlines the objectives of the review, the research question or hypothesis, and the scope of the review.

Literature Search

This section outlines the search strategy and databases used to identify relevant literature. The search terms used, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and any limitations of the search are described.

Literature Analysis

The literature analysis is the main body of the literature review. This section summarizes and synthesizes the literature that is relevant to the research question or hypothesis. The review should be organized thematically, chronologically, or by methodology, depending on the research objectives.

Critical Evaluation

Critical evaluation involves assessing the quality and validity of the literature. This includes evaluating the reliability and validity of the studies reviewed, the methodology used, and the strength of the evidence.

The conclusion of the literature review should summarize the main findings, identify any gaps in the literature, and suggest areas for future research. It should also reiterate the importance of the research question or hypothesis and the contribution of the literature review to the overall research project.

The references list includes all the sources cited in the literature review, and follows a specific referencing style (e.g., APA, MLA, Harvard).

How to write Literature Review

Here are some steps to follow when writing a literature review:

• Define your research question or topic : Before starting your literature review, it is essential to define your research question or topic. This will help you identify relevant literature and determine the scope of your review.
• Conduct a comprehensive search: Use databases and search engines to find relevant literature. Look for peer-reviewed articles, books, and other academic sources that are relevant to your research question or topic.
• Evaluate the sources: Once you have found potential sources, evaluate them critically to determine their relevance, credibility, and quality. Look for recent publications, reputable authors, and reliable sources of data and evidence.
• Organize your sources: Group the sources by theme, method, or research question. This will help you identify similarities and differences among the literature, and provide a structure for your literature review.
• Analyze and synthesize the literature : Analyze each source in depth, identifying the key findings, methodologies, and conclusions. Then, synthesize the information from the sources, identifying patterns and themes in the literature.
• Write the literature review : Start with an introduction that provides an overview of the topic and the purpose of the literature review. Then, organize the literature according to your chosen structure, and analyze and synthesize the sources. Finally, provide a conclusion that summarizes the key findings of the literature review, identifies gaps in knowledge, and suggests areas for future research.
• Edit and proofread: Once you have written your literature review, edit and proofread it carefully to ensure that it is well-organized, clear, and concise.

Examples of Literature Review

Here’s an example of how a literature review can be conducted for a thesis on the topic of “ The Impact of Social Media on Teenagers’ Mental Health”:

• Start by identifying the key terms related to your research topic. In this case, the key terms are “social media,” “teenagers,” and “mental health.”
• Use academic databases like Google Scholar, JSTOR, or PubMed to search for relevant articles, books, and other publications. Use these keywords in your search to narrow down your results.
• Evaluate the sources you find to determine if they are relevant to your research question. You may want to consider the publication date, author’s credentials, and the journal or book publisher.
• Begin reading and taking notes on each source, paying attention to key findings, methodologies used, and any gaps in the research.
• Organize your findings into themes or categories. For example, you might categorize your sources into those that examine the impact of social media on self-esteem, those that explore the effects of cyberbullying, and those that investigate the relationship between social media use and depression.
• Synthesize your findings by summarizing the key themes and highlighting any gaps or inconsistencies in the research. Identify areas where further research is needed.
• Use your literature review to inform your research questions and hypotheses for your thesis.

For example, after conducting a literature review on the impact of social media on teenagers’ mental health, a thesis might look like this:

“Using a mixed-methods approach, this study aims to investigate the relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes in teenagers. Specifically, the study will examine the effects of cyberbullying, social comparison, and excessive social media use on self-esteem, anxiety, and depression. Through an analysis of survey data and qualitative interviews with teenagers, the study will provide insight into the complex relationship between social media use and mental health outcomes, and identify strategies for promoting positive mental health outcomes in young people.”

Reference: Smith, J., Jones, M., & Lee, S. (2019). The effects of social media use on adolescent mental health: A systematic review. Journal of Adolescent Health, 65(2), 154-165. doi:10.1016/j.jadohealth.2019.03.024

Reference Example: Author, A. A., Author, B. B., & Author, C. C. (Year). Title of article. Title of Journal, volume number(issue number), page range. doi:0000000/000000000000 or URL

Applications of Literature Review

some applications of literature review in different fields:

• Social Sciences: In social sciences, literature reviews are used to identify gaps in existing research, to develop research questions, and to provide a theoretical framework for research. Literature reviews are commonly used in fields such as sociology, psychology, anthropology, and political science.
• Natural Sciences: In natural sciences, literature reviews are used to summarize and evaluate the current state of knowledge in a particular field or subfield. Literature reviews can help researchers identify areas where more research is needed and provide insights into the latest developments in a particular field. Fields such as biology, chemistry, and physics commonly use literature reviews.
• Health Sciences: In health sciences, literature reviews are used to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments, identify best practices, and determine areas where more research is needed. Literature reviews are commonly used in fields such as medicine, nursing, and public health.
• Humanities: In humanities, literature reviews are used to identify gaps in existing knowledge, develop new interpretations of texts or cultural artifacts, and provide a theoretical framework for research. Literature reviews are commonly used in fields such as history, literary studies, and philosophy.

Role of Literature Review in Research

Here are some applications of literature review in research:

• Identifying Research Gaps : Literature review helps researchers identify gaps in existing research and literature related to their research question. This allows them to develop new research questions and hypotheses to fill those gaps.
• Developing Theoretical Framework: Literature review helps researchers develop a theoretical framework for their research. By analyzing and synthesizing existing literature, researchers can identify the key concepts, theories, and models that are relevant to their research.
• Selecting Research Methods : Literature review helps researchers select appropriate research methods and techniques based on previous research. It also helps researchers to identify potential biases or limitations of certain methods and techniques.
• Data Collection and Analysis: Literature review helps researchers in data collection and analysis by providing a foundation for the development of data collection instruments and methods. It also helps researchers to identify relevant data sources and identify potential data analysis techniques.
• Communicating Results: Literature review helps researchers to communicate their results effectively by providing a context for their research. It also helps to justify the significance of their findings in relation to existing research and literature.

Purpose of Literature Review

Some of the specific purposes of a literature review are as follows:

• To provide context: A literature review helps to provide context for your research by situating it within the broader body of literature on the topic.
• To identify gaps and inconsistencies: A literature review helps to identify areas where further research is needed or where there are inconsistencies in the existing literature.
• To synthesize information: A literature review helps to synthesize the information from multiple sources and present a coherent and comprehensive picture of the current state of knowledge on the topic.
• To identify key concepts and theories : A literature review helps to identify key concepts and theories that are relevant to your research question and provide a theoretical framework for your study.
• To inform research design: A literature review can inform the design of your research study by identifying appropriate research methods, data sources, and research questions.

Characteristics of Literature Review

Some Characteristics of Literature Review are as follows:

• Identifying gaps in knowledge: A literature review helps to identify gaps in the existing knowledge and research on a specific topic or research question. By analyzing and synthesizing the literature, you can identify areas where further research is needed and where new insights can be gained.
• Establishing the significance of your research: A literature review helps to establish the significance of your own research by placing it in the context of existing research. By demonstrating the relevance of your research to the existing literature, you can establish its importance and value.
• Informing research design and methodology : A literature review helps to inform research design and methodology by identifying the most appropriate research methods, techniques, and instruments. By reviewing the literature, you can identify the strengths and limitations of different research methods and techniques, and select the most appropriate ones for your own research.
• Supporting arguments and claims: A literature review provides evidence to support arguments and claims made in academic writing. By citing and analyzing the literature, you can provide a solid foundation for your own arguments and claims.
• I dentifying potential collaborators and mentors: A literature review can help identify potential collaborators and mentors by identifying researchers and practitioners who are working on related topics or using similar methods. By building relationships with these individuals, you can gain valuable insights and support for your own research and practice.
• Keeping up-to-date with the latest research : A literature review helps to keep you up-to-date with the latest research on a specific topic or research question. By regularly reviewing the literature, you can stay informed about the latest findings and developments in your field.

Advantages of Literature Review

There are several advantages to conducting a literature review as part of a research project, including:

• Establishing the significance of the research : A literature review helps to establish the significance of the research by demonstrating the gap or problem in the existing literature that the study aims to address.
• Identifying key concepts and theories: A literature review can help to identify key concepts and theories that are relevant to the research question, and provide a theoretical framework for the study.
• Supporting the research methodology : A literature review can inform the research methodology by identifying appropriate research methods, data sources, and research questions.
• Providing a comprehensive overview of the literature : A literature review provides a comprehensive overview of the current state of knowledge on a topic, allowing the researcher to identify key themes, debates, and areas of agreement or disagreement.
• Identifying potential research questions: A literature review can help to identify potential research questions and areas for further investigation.
• Avoiding duplication of research: A literature review can help to avoid duplication of research by identifying what has already been done on a topic, and what remains to be done.
• Enhancing the credibility of the research : A literature review helps to enhance the credibility of the research by demonstrating the researcher’s knowledge of the existing literature and their ability to situate their research within a broader context.

Limitations of Literature Review

Limitations of Literature Review are as follows:

• Limited scope : Literature reviews can only cover the existing literature on a particular topic, which may be limited in scope or depth.
• Publication bias : Literature reviews may be influenced by publication bias, which occurs when researchers are more likely to publish positive results than negative ones. This can lead to an incomplete or biased picture of the literature.
• Quality of sources : The quality of the literature reviewed can vary widely, and not all sources may be reliable or valid.
• Time-limited: Literature reviews can become quickly outdated as new research is published, making it difficult to keep up with the latest developments in a field.
• Subjective interpretation : Literature reviews can be subjective, and the interpretation of the findings can vary depending on the researcher’s perspective or bias.
• Lack of original data : Literature reviews do not generate new data, but rather rely on the analysis of existing studies.
• Risk of plagiarism: It is important to ensure that literature reviews do not inadvertently contain plagiarism, which can occur when researchers use the work of others without proper attribution.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Research Paper Conclusion – Writing Guide and...

Table of Contents – Types, Formats, Examples

Research Results Section – Writing Guide and...

Research Topics – Ideas and Examples

Informed Consent in Research – Types, Templates...

Tables in Research Paper – Types, Creating Guide...

Research Methods and Design

• Action Research
• Case Study Design

Literature Review

• Quantitative Research Methods
• Qualitative Research Methods
• Mixed Methods Study
• Indigenous Research and Ethics This link opens in a new window
• Identifying Empirical Research Articles This link opens in a new window
• Research Ethics and Quality
• Data Literacy
• Get Help with Writing Assignments

A literature review is a discussion of the literature (aka. the "research" or "scholarship") surrounding a certain topic. A good literature review doesn't simply summarize the existing material, but provides thoughtful synthesis and analysis. The purpose of a literature review is to orient your own work within an existing body of knowledge. A literature review may be written as a standalone piece or be included in a larger body of work.

You can read more about literature reviews, what they entail, and how to write one, using the resources below. 

Am I the only one struggling to write a literature review?

Dr. Zina O'Leary explains the misconceptions and struggles students often have with writing a literature review. She also provides step-by-step guidance on writing a persuasive literature review.

An Introduction to Literature Reviews

Dr. Eric Jensen, Professor of Sociology at the University of Warwick, and Dr. Charles Laurie, Director of Research at Verisk Maplecroft, explain how to write a literature review, and why researchers need to do so. Literature reviews can be stand-alone research or part of a larger project. They communicate the state of academic knowledge on a given topic, specifically detailing what is still unknown.

This is the first video in a whole series about literature reviews. You can find the rest of the series in our SAGE database, Research Methods:

Videos covering research methods and statistics

Identify Themes and Gaps in Literature (with real examples) | Scribbr

Finding connections between sources is key to organizing the arguments and structure of a good literature review. In this video, you'll learn how to identify themes, debates, and gaps between sources, using examples from real papers.

4 Tips for Writing a Literature Review's Intro, Body, and Conclusion | Scribbr

While each review will be unique in its structure--based on both the existing body of both literature and the overall goals of your own paper, dissertation, or research--this video from Scribbr does a good job simplifying the goals of writing a literature review for those who are new to the process. In this video, you’ll learn what to include in each section, as well as 4 tips for the main body illustrated with an example.

• Literature Review This chapter in SAGE's Encyclopedia of Research Design describes the types of literature reviews and scientific standards for conducting literature reviews.
• UNC Writing Center: Literature Reviews This handout from the Writing Center at UNC will explain what literature reviews are and offer insights into the form and construction of literature reviews in the humanities, social sciences, and sciences.
• Purdue OWL: Writing a Literature Review The overview of literature reviews comes from Purdue's Online Writing Lab. It explains the basic why, what, and how of writing a literature review.

Organizational Tools for Literature Reviews

One of the most daunting aspects of writing a literature review is organizing your research. There are a variety of strategies that you can use to help you in this task. We've highlighted just a few ways writers keep track of all that information! You can use a combination of these tools or come up with your own organizational process. The key is choosing something that works with your own learning style.

Citation Managers

Citation managers are great tools, in general, for organizing research, but can be especially helpful when writing a literature review. You can keep all of your research in one place, take notes, and organize your materials into different folders or categories. Read more about citations managers here:

• Manage Citations & Sources

Concept Mapping

Some writers use concept mapping (sometimes called flow or bubble charts or "mind maps") to help them visualize the ways in which the research they found connects.

There is no right or wrong way to make a concept map. There are a variety of online tools that can help you create a concept map or you can simply put pen to paper. To read more about concept mapping, take a look at the following help guides:

• Using Concept Maps From Williams College's guide, Literature Review: A Self-guided Tutorial

Synthesis Matrix

A synthesis matrix is is a chart you can use to help you organize your research into thematic categories. By organizing your research into a matrix, like the examples below, can help you visualize the ways in which your sources connect. 

• Walden University Writing Center: Literature Review Matrix Find a variety of literature review matrix examples and templates from Walden University.
• Writing A Literature Review and Using a Synthesis Matrix An example synthesis matrix created by NC State University Writing and Speaking Tutorial Service Tutors. If you would like a copy of this synthesis matrix in a different format, like a Word document, please ask a librarian. CC-BY-SA 3.0
• << Previous: Case Study Design
• Next: Quantitative Research Methods >>
• Last Updated: May 7, 2024 9:51 AM

CityU Home - CityU Catalog

Harvey Cushing/John Hay Whitney Medical Library

• Collections
• Research Help

YSN Doctoral Programs: Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

• Biomedical Databases
• Global (Public Health) Databases
• Soc. Sci., History, and Law Databases
• Grey Literature
• Trials Registers
• Data and Statistics
• Public Policy
• Google Tips
• Recommended Books
• Steps in Conducting a Literature Review

What is a literature review?

A literature review is an integrated analysis -- not just a summary-- of scholarly writings and other relevant evidence related directly to your research question.  That is, it represents a synthesis of the evidence that provides background information on your topic and shows a association between the evidence and your research question.

A literature review may be a stand alone work or the introduction to a larger research paper, depending on the assignment.  Rely heavily on the guidelines your instructor has given you.

Why is it important?

A literature review is important because it:

• Explains the background of research on a topic.
• Demonstrates why a topic is significant to a subject area.
• Discovers relationships between research studies/ideas.
• Identifies major themes, concepts, and researchers on a topic.
• Identifies critical gaps and points of disagreement.
• Discusses further research questions that logically come out of the previous studies.

APA7 Style resources

APA Style Blog - for those harder to find answers

1. Choose a topic. Define your research question.

Your literature review should be guided by your central research question.  The literature represents background and research developments related to a specific research question, interpreted and analyzed by you in a synthesized way.

• Make sure your research question is not too broad or too narrow.  Is it manageable?
• Begin writing down terms that are related to your question. These will be useful for searches later.
• If you have the opportunity, discuss your topic with your professor and your class mates.

2. Decide on the scope of your review

How many studies do you need to look at? How comprehensive should it be? How many years should it cover? 

• This may depend on your assignment.  How many sources does the assignment require?

3. Select the databases you will use to conduct your searches.

Make a list of the databases you will search. 

Where to find databases:

• use the tabs on this guide
• Find other databases in the Nursing Information Resources web page
• More on the Medical Library web page
• ... and more on the Yale University Library web page

4. Conduct your searches to find the evidence. Keep track of your searches.

• Use the key words in your question, as well as synonyms for those words, as terms in your search. Use the database tutorials for help.
• Save the searches in the databases. This saves time when you want to redo, or modify, the searches. It is also helpful to use as a guide is the searches are not finding any useful results.
• Review the abstracts of research studies carefully. This will save you time.
• Use the bibliographies and references of research studies you find to locate others.
• Check with your professor, or a subject expert in the field, if you are missing any key works in the field.
• Ask your librarian for help at any time.
• Use a citation manager, such as EndNote as the repository for your citations. See the EndNote tutorials for help.

Review the literature

Some questions to help you analyze the research:

• What was the research question of the study you are reviewing? What were the authors trying to discover?
• Was the research funded by a source that could influence the findings?
• What were the research methodologies? Analyze its literature review, the samples and variables used, the results, and the conclusions.
• Does the research seem to be complete? Could it have been conducted more soundly? What further questions does it raise?
• If there are conflicting studies, why do you think that is?
• How are the authors viewed in the field? Has this study been cited? If so, how has it been analyzed?

Tips: 

• Review the abstracts carefully.  
• Keep careful notes so that you may track your thought processes during the research process.
• Create a matrix of the studies for easy analysis, and synthesis, across all of the studies.
• << Previous: Recommended Books
• Last Updated: Jun 20, 2024 9:08 AM
• URL: https://guides.library.yale.edu/YSNDoctoral

Have a language expert improve your writing

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

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• Systematic Review | Definition, Example, & Guide

Systematic Review | Definition, Example & Guide

Published on June 15, 2022 by Shaun Turney . Revised on November 20, 2023.

A systematic review is a type of review that uses repeatable methods to find, select, and synthesize all available evidence. It answers a clearly formulated research question and explicitly states the methods used to arrive at the answer.

They answered the question “What is the effectiveness of probiotics in reducing eczema symptoms and improving quality of life in patients with eczema?”

In this context, a probiotic is a health product that contains live microorganisms and is taken by mouth. Eczema is a common skin condition that causes red, itchy skin.

Table of contents

What is a systematic review, systematic review vs. meta-analysis, systematic review vs. literature review, systematic review vs. scoping review, when to conduct a systematic review, pros and cons of systematic reviews, step-by-step example of a systematic review, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about systematic reviews.

A review is an overview of the research that’s already been completed on a topic.

What makes a systematic review different from other types of reviews is that the research methods are designed to reduce bias . The methods are repeatable, and the approach is formal and systematic:

• Formulate a research question
• Develop a protocol
• Search for all relevant studies
• Apply the selection criteria
• Extract the data
• Synthesize the data
• Write and publish a report

Although multiple sets of guidelines exist, the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews is among the most widely used. It provides detailed guidelines on how to complete each step of the systematic review process.

Systematic reviews are most commonly used in medical and public health research, but they can also be found in other disciplines.

Systematic reviews typically answer their research question by synthesizing all available evidence and evaluating the quality of the evidence. Synthesizing means bringing together different information to tell a single, cohesive story. The synthesis can be narrative ( qualitative ), quantitative , or both.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Systematic reviews often quantitatively synthesize the evidence using a meta-analysis . A meta-analysis is a statistical analysis, not a type of review.

A meta-analysis is a technique to synthesize results from multiple studies. It’s a statistical analysis that combines the results of two or more studies, usually to estimate an effect size .

A literature review is a type of review that uses a less systematic and formal approach than a systematic review. Typically, an expert in a topic will qualitatively summarize and evaluate previous work, without using a formal, explicit method.

Although literature reviews are often less time-consuming and can be insightful or helpful, they have a higher risk of bias and are less transparent than systematic reviews.

Similar to a systematic review, a scoping review is a type of review that tries to minimize bias by using transparent and repeatable methods.

However, a scoping review isn’t a type of systematic review. The most important difference is the goal: rather than answering a specific question, a scoping review explores a topic. The researcher tries to identify the main concepts, theories, and evidence, as well as gaps in the current research.

Sometimes scoping reviews are an exploratory preparation step for a systematic review, and sometimes they are a standalone project.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

A systematic review is a good choice of review if you want to answer a question about the effectiveness of an intervention , such as a medical treatment.

To conduct a systematic review, you’ll need the following:

• A precise question , usually about the effectiveness of an intervention. The question needs to be about a topic that’s previously been studied by multiple researchers. If there’s no previous research, there’s nothing to review.
• If you’re doing a systematic review on your own (e.g., for a research paper or thesis ), you should take appropriate measures to ensure the validity and reliability of your research.
• Access to databases and journal archives. Often, your educational institution provides you with access.
• Time. A professional systematic review is a time-consuming process: it will take the lead author about six months of full-time work. If you’re a student, you should narrow the scope of your systematic review and stick to a tight schedule.
• Bibliographic, word-processing, spreadsheet, and statistical software . For example, you could use EndNote, Microsoft Word, Excel, and SPSS.

A systematic review has many pros .

• They minimize research bias by considering all available evidence and evaluating each study for bias.
• Their methods are transparent , so they can be scrutinized by others.
• They’re thorough : they summarize all available evidence.
• They can be replicated and updated by others.

Systematic reviews also have a few cons .

• They’re time-consuming .
• They’re narrow in scope : they only answer the precise research question.

The 7 steps for conducting a systematic review are explained with an example.

Step 1: Formulate a research question

Formulating the research question is probably the most important step of a systematic review. A clear research question will:

• Allow you to more effectively communicate your research to other researchers and practitioners
• Guide your decisions as you plan and conduct your systematic review

A good research question for a systematic review has four components, which you can remember with the acronym PICO :

• Population(s) or problem(s)
• Intervention(s)
• Comparison(s)

You can rearrange these four components to write your research question:

• What is the effectiveness of I versus C for O in P ?

Sometimes, you may want to include a fifth component, the type of study design . In this case, the acronym is PICOT .

• Type of study design(s)
• The population of patients with eczema
• The intervention of probiotics
• In comparison to no treatment, placebo , or non-probiotic treatment
• The outcome of changes in participant-, parent-, and doctor-rated symptoms of eczema and quality of life
• Randomized control trials, a type of study design

Their research question was:

• What is the effectiveness of probiotics versus no treatment, a placebo, or a non-probiotic treatment for reducing eczema symptoms and improving quality of life in patients with eczema?

Step 2: Develop a protocol

A protocol is a document that contains your research plan for the systematic review. This is an important step because having a plan allows you to work more efficiently and reduces bias.

Your protocol should include the following components:

• Background information : Provide the context of the research question, including why it’s important.
• Research objective (s) : Rephrase your research question as an objective.
• Selection criteria: State how you’ll decide which studies to include or exclude from your review.
• Search strategy: Discuss your plan for finding studies.
• Analysis: Explain what information you’ll collect from the studies and how you’ll synthesize the data.

If you’re a professional seeking to publish your review, it’s a good idea to bring together an advisory committee . This is a group of about six people who have experience in the topic you’re researching. They can help you make decisions about your protocol.

It’s highly recommended to register your protocol. Registering your protocol means submitting it to a database such as PROSPERO or ClinicalTrials.gov .

Step 3: Search for all relevant studies

Searching for relevant studies is the most time-consuming step of a systematic review.

To reduce bias, it’s important to search for relevant studies very thoroughly. Your strategy will depend on your field and your research question, but sources generally fall into these four categories:

• Databases: Search multiple databases of peer-reviewed literature, such as PubMed or Scopus . Think carefully about how to phrase your search terms and include multiple synonyms of each word. Use Boolean operators if relevant.
• Handsearching: In addition to searching the primary sources using databases, you’ll also need to search manually. One strategy is to scan relevant journals or conference proceedings. Another strategy is to scan the reference lists of relevant studies.
• Gray literature: Gray literature includes documents produced by governments, universities, and other institutions that aren’t published by traditional publishers. Graduate student theses are an important type of gray literature, which you can search using the Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations (NDLTD) . In medicine, clinical trial registries are another important type of gray literature.
• Experts: Contact experts in the field to ask if they have unpublished studies that should be included in your review.

At this stage of your review, you won’t read the articles yet. Simply save any potentially relevant citations using bibliographic software, such as Scribbr’s APA or MLA Generator .

• Databases: EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, LILACS, and ISI Web of Science
• Handsearch: Conference proceedings and reference lists of articles
• Gray literature: The Cochrane Library, the metaRegister of Controlled Trials, and the Ongoing Skin Trials Register
• Experts: Authors of unpublished registered trials, pharmaceutical companies, and manufacturers of probiotics

Step 4: Apply the selection criteria

Applying the selection criteria is a three-person job. Two of you will independently read the studies and decide which to include in your review based on the selection criteria you established in your protocol . The third person’s job is to break any ties.

To increase inter-rater reliability , ensure that everyone thoroughly understands the selection criteria before you begin.

If you’re writing a systematic review as a student for an assignment, you might not have a team. In this case, you’ll have to apply the selection criteria on your own; you can mention this as a limitation in your paper’s discussion.

You should apply the selection criteria in two phases:

• Based on the titles and abstracts : Decide whether each article potentially meets the selection criteria based on the information provided in the abstracts.
• Based on the full texts: Download the articles that weren’t excluded during the first phase. If an article isn’t available online or through your library, you may need to contact the authors to ask for a copy. Read the articles and decide which articles meet the selection criteria.

It’s very important to keep a meticulous record of why you included or excluded each article. When the selection process is complete, you can summarize what you did using a PRISMA flow diagram .

Next, Boyle and colleagues found the full texts for each of the remaining studies. Boyle and Tang read through the articles to decide if any more studies needed to be excluded based on the selection criteria.

When Boyle and Tang disagreed about whether a study should be excluded, they discussed it with Varigos until the three researchers came to an agreement.

Step 5: Extract the data

Extracting the data means collecting information from the selected studies in a systematic way. There are two types of information you need to collect from each study:

• Information about the study’s methods and results . The exact information will depend on your research question, but it might include the year, study design , sample size, context, research findings , and conclusions. If any data are missing, you’ll need to contact the study’s authors.
• Your judgment of the quality of the evidence, including risk of bias .

You should collect this information using forms. You can find sample forms in The Registry of Methods and Tools for Evidence-Informed Decision Making and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations Working Group .

Extracting the data is also a three-person job. Two people should do this step independently, and the third person will resolve any disagreements.

They also collected data about possible sources of bias, such as how the study participants were randomized into the control and treatment groups.

Step 6: Synthesize the data

Synthesizing the data means bringing together the information you collected into a single, cohesive story. There are two main approaches to synthesizing the data:

• Narrative ( qualitative ): Summarize the information in words. You’ll need to discuss the studies and assess their overall quality.
• Quantitative : Use statistical methods to summarize and compare data from different studies. The most common quantitative approach is a meta-analysis , which allows you to combine results from multiple studies into a summary result.

Generally, you should use both approaches together whenever possible. If you don’t have enough data, or the data from different studies aren’t comparable, then you can take just a narrative approach. However, you should justify why a quantitative approach wasn’t possible.

Boyle and colleagues also divided the studies into subgroups, such as studies about babies, children, and adults, and analyzed the effect sizes within each group.

Step 7: Write and publish a report

The purpose of writing a systematic review article is to share the answer to your research question and explain how you arrived at this answer.

Your article should include the following sections:

• Abstract : A summary of the review
• Introduction : Including the rationale and objectives
• Methods : Including the selection criteria, search method, data extraction method, and synthesis method
• Results : Including results of the search and selection process, study characteristics, risk of bias in the studies, and synthesis results
• Discussion : Including interpretation of the results and limitations of the review
• Conclusion : The answer to your research question and implications for practice, policy, or research

To verify that your report includes everything it needs, you can use the PRISMA checklist .

Once your report is written, you can publish it in a systematic review database, such as the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews , and/or in a peer-reviewed journal.

In their report, Boyle and colleagues concluded that probiotics cannot be recommended for reducing eczema symptoms or improving quality of life in patients with eczema. Note Generative AI tools like ChatGPT can be useful at various stages of the writing and research process and can help you to write your systematic review. However, we strongly advise against trying to pass AI-generated text off as your own work.

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

• Student’s  t -distribution
• Normal distribution
• Null and Alternative Hypotheses
• Chi square tests
• Confidence interval
• Quartiles & Quantiles
• Cluster sampling
• Stratified sampling
• Data cleansing
• Reproducibility vs Replicability
• Peer review
• Prospective cohort study

Research bias

• Implicit bias
• Cognitive bias
• Placebo effect
• Hawthorne effect
• Hindsight bias
• Affect heuristic
• Social desirability 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.

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 .  

A systematic review is secondary research because it uses existing research. You don’t collect new data yourself.

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.

Turney, S. (2023, November 20). Systematic Review | Definition, Example & Guide. Scribbr. Retrieved September 27, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/systematic-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shaun Turney

Other students also liked, how to write a literature review | guide, examples, & templates, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, what is critical thinking | definition & examples, what is your plagiarism score.

• UWF Libraries

Literature Review: Conducting & Writing

• Sample Literature Reviews
• Steps for Conducting a Lit Review
• Finding "The Literature"
• Organizing/Writing
• APA Style This link opens in a new window
• Chicago: Notes Bibliography This link opens in a new window
• MLA Style This link opens in a new window

Sample Lit Reviews from Communication Arts

Have an exemplary literature review.

Note: These are sample literature reviews from a class that were given to us by an instructor when APA 6th edition was still in effect. These were excellent papers from her class, but it does not mean they are perfect or contain no errors. Thanks to the students who let us post!

• Literature Review Sample 1
• Literature Review Sample 2
• Literature Review Sample 3

Have you written a stellar literature review you care to share for teaching purposes?

Are you an instructor who has received an exemplary literature review and have permission from the student to post?

Please contact Britt McGowan at [email protected] for inclusion in this guide. All disciplines welcome and encouraged.

• << Previous: MLA Style
• Next: Get Help! >>
• Last Updated: Sep 11, 2024 1:37 PM
• URL: https://libguides.uwf.edu/litreview

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

The PMC website is updating on October 15, 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Turk J Urol
• v.39(Suppl 1); 2013 Sep

How to write a review article?

In the medical sciences, the importance of review articles is rising. When clinicians want to update their knowledge and generate guidelines about a topic, they frequently use reviews as a starting point. The value of a review is associated with what has been done, what has been found and how these findings are presented. Before asking ‘how,’ the question of ‘why’ is more important when starting to write a review. The main and fundamental purpose of writing a review is to create a readable synthesis of the best resources available in the literature for an important research question or a current area of research. Although the idea of writing a review is attractive, it is important to spend time identifying the important questions. Good review methods are critical because they provide an unbiased point of view for the reader regarding the current literature. There is a consensus that a review should be written in a systematic fashion, a notion that is usually followed. In a systematic review with a focused question, the research methods must be clearly described. A ‘methodological filter’ is the best method for identifying the best working style for a research question, and this method reduces the workload when surveying the literature. An essential part of the review process is differentiating good research from bad and leaning on the results of the better studies. The ideal way to synthesize studies is to perform a meta-analysis. In conclusion, when writing a review, it is best to clearly focus on fixed ideas, to use a procedural and critical approach to the literature and to express your findings in an attractive way.

The importance of review articles in health sciences is increasing day by day. Clinicians frequently benefit from review articles to update their knowledge in their field of specialization, and use these articles as a starting point for formulating guidelines. [ 1 , 2 ] The institutions which provide financial support for further investigations resort to these reviews to reveal the need for these researches. [ 3 ] As is the case with all other researches, the value of a review article is related to what is achieved, what is found, and the way of communicating this information. A few studies have evaluated the quality of review articles. Murlow evaluated 50 review articles published in 1985, and 1986, and revealed that none of them had complied with clear-cut scientific criteria. [ 4 ] In 1996 an international group that analyzed articles, demonstrated the aspects of review articles, and meta-analyses that had not complied with scientific criteria, and elaborated QUOROM (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses) statement which focused on meta-analyses of randomized controlled studies. [ 5 ] Later on this guideline was updated, and named as PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). [ 6 ]

Review articles are divided into 2 categories as narrative, and systematic reviews. Narrative reviews are written in an easily readable format, and allow consideration of the subject matter within a large spectrum. However in a systematic review, a very detailed, and comprehensive literature surveying is performed on the selected topic. [ 7 , 8 ] Since it is a result of a more detailed literature surveying with relatively lesser involvement of author’s bias, systematic reviews are considered as gold standard articles. Systematic reviews can be diivded into qualitative, and quantitative reviews. In both of them detailed literature surveying is performed. However in quantitative reviews, study data are collected, and statistically evaluated (ie. meta-analysis). [ 8 ]

Before inquring for the method of preparation of a review article, it is more logical to investigate the motivation behind writing the review article in question. The fundamental rationale of writing a review article is to make a readable synthesis of the best literature sources on an important research inquiry or a topic. This simple definition of a review article contains the following key elements:

• The question(s) to be dealt with
• Methods used to find out, and select the best quality researches so as to respond to these questions.
• To synthetize available, but quite different researches

For the specification of important questions to be answered, number of literature references to be consulted should be more or less determined. Discussions should be conducted with colleagues in the same area of interest, and time should be reserved for the solution of the problem(s). Though starting to write the review article promptly seems to be very alluring, the time you spend for the determination of important issues won’t be a waste of time. [ 9 ]

The PRISMA statement [ 6 ] elaborated to write a well-designed review articles contains a 27-item checklist ( Table 1 ). It will be reasonable to fulfill the requirements of these items during preparation of a review article or a meta-analysis. Thus preparation of a comprehensible article with a high-quality scientific content can be feasible.

PRISMA statement: A 27-item checklist

Contents and format

Important differences exist between systematic, and non-systematic reviews which especially arise from methodologies used in the description of the literature sources. A non-systematic review means use of articles collected for years with the recommendations of your colleagues, while systematic review is based on struggles to search for, and find the best possible researches which will respond to the questions predetermined at the start of the review.

Though a consensus has been reached about the systematic design of the review articles, studies revealed that most of them had not been written in a systematic format. McAlister et al. analyzed review articles in 6 medical journals, and disclosed that in less than one fourth of the review articles, methods of description, evaluation or synthesis of evidence had been provided, one third of them had focused on a clinical topic, and only half of them had provided quantitative data about the extend of the potential benefits. [ 10 ]

Use of proper methodologies in review articles is important in that readers assume an objective attitude towards updated information. We can confront two problems while we are using data from researches in order to answer certain questions. Firstly, we can be prejudiced during selection of research articles or these articles might be biased. To minimize this risk, methodologies used in our reviews should allow us to define, and use researches with minimal degree of bias. The second problem is that, most of the researches have been performed with small sample sizes. In statistical methods in meta-analyses, available researches are combined to increase the statistical power of the study. The problematic aspect of a non-systematic review is that our tendency to give biased responses to the questions, in other words we apt to select the studies with known or favourite results, rather than the best quality investigations among them.

As is the case with many research articles, general format of a systematic review on a single subject includes sections of Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion ( Table 2 ).

Structure of a systematic review

Preparation of the review article

Steps, and targets of constructing a good review article are listed in Table 3 . To write a good review article the items in Table 3 should be implemented step by step. [ 11 – 13 ]

Steps of a systematic review

The research question

It might be helpful to divide the research question into components. The most prevalently used format for questions related to the treatment is PICO (P - Patient, Problem or Population; I-Intervention; C-appropriate Comparisons, and O-Outcome measures) procedure. For example In female patients (P) with stress urinary incontinence, comparisons (C) between transobturator, and retropubic midurethral tension-free band surgery (I) as for patients’ satisfaction (O).

Finding Studies

In a systematic review on a focused question, methods of investigation used should be clearly specified.

Ideally, research methods, investigated databases, and key words should be described in the final report. Different databases are used dependent on the topic analyzed. In most of the clinical topics, Medline should be surveyed. However searching through Embase and CINAHL can be also appropriate.

While determining appropriate terms for surveying, PICO elements of the issue to be sought may guide the process. Since in general we are interested in more than one outcome, P, and I can be key elements. In this case we should think about synonyms of P, and I elements, and combine them with a conjunction AND.

One method which might alleviate the workload of surveying process is “methodological filter” which aims to find the best investigation method for each research question. A good example of this method can be found in PubMed interface of Medline. The Clinical Queries tool offers empirically developed filters for five different inquiries as guidelines for etiology, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis or clinical prediction.

Evaluation of the Quality of the Study

As an indispensable component of the review process is to discriminate good, and bad quality researches from each other, and the outcomes should be based on better qualified researches, as far as possible. To achieve this goal you should know the best possible evidence for each type of question The first component of the quality is its general planning/design of the study. General planning/design of a cohort study, a case series or normal study demonstrates variations.

A hierarchy of evidence for different research questions is presented in Table 4 . However this hierarchy is only a first step. After you find good quality research articles, you won’t need to read all the rest of other articles which saves you tons of time. [ 14 ]

Determination of levels of evidence based on the type of the research question

Formulating a Synthesis

Rarely all researches arrive at the same conclusion. In this case a solution should be found. However it is risky to make a decision based on the votes of absolute majority. Indeed, a well-performed large scale study, and a weakly designed one are weighed on the same scale. Therefore, ideally a meta-analysis should be performed to solve apparent differences. Ideally, first of all, one should be focused on the largest, and higher quality study, then other studies should be compared with this basic study.

Conclusions

In conclusion, during writing process of a review article, the procedures to be achieved can be indicated as follows: 1) Get rid of fixed ideas, and obsessions from your head, and view the subject from a large perspective. 2) Research articles in the literature should be approached with a methodological, and critical attitude and 3) finally data should be explained in an attractive way.

An experimental review of different methods for measuring the grounding resistance of OHTL towers

• August 2024
• Conference: 2024 IEEE International Conference on High Voltage Engineering and Applications (ICHVE)
• This person is not on ResearchGate, or hasn't claimed this research yet.

Discover the world's research

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

No full-text available

To read the full-text of this research, you can request a copy directly from the authors.

• Molli Dooley

• Xueling Zhu

• Mohd Solehin Mohd Nasir

• Silverio Visacro

• Guide for Measuring Earth Resistivity
• 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

Advertisement

Deep Learning Approaches for Early Prediction of Conversion from MCI to AD using MRI and Clinical Data: A Systematic Review

• Review article
• Published: 27 September 2024

Cite this article

• Gelareh Valizadeh 1 ,
• Reza Elahi 1 , 2 ,
• Zahra Hasankhani 3 ,
• Hamidreza Saligheh Rad 1 &
• Ahmad Shalbaf   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-1595-7281 4  

1 Altmetric

Due to the absence of definitive treatment for Alzheimer’s disease (AD), slowing its development is essential. Accurately predicting the conversion of mild cognitive impairment (MCI) -a potential early stage of AD- to AD is challenging due to the subtle distinctions between individuals who will develop AD and those who will not. As an increasing body of evidence in the literature suggests, advanced magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans, coupled with high-performance computing techniques and novel deep learning techniques, have revolutionized the ability to predict MCI to AD conversion. This study systematically reviewed the publications from 2013 to 2023 (July) to investigate the contribution of deep learning in predicting the MCI conversion to AD, concentrating on the MRI data (structural or functional) and clinical information. The search conducted across seven different databases yielded a total of 2273 studies. Out of these, 78 relevant studies were included, which were thoroughly reviewed, and their essential details and findings were extracted. Furthermore, this study comprehensively explores the challenges associated with predicting the conversion from MCI to AD using deep learning methods with MRI data. Also, it identifies potential solutions to address these challenges. The research field of predicting MCI to AD conversion from MRI data using deep learning techniques is constantly evolving. There is an increasing focus on employing explainable approaches to improve transparency in the analysis process. The paper concludes with an overview of future perspectives and recommends conducting further studies in MCI to AD conversion prediction using deep learning methods.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Explore related subjects

• Artificial Intelligence
• Medical Imaging

Yiannopoulou KG, Papageorgiou SG (2020) Current and future treatments in Alzheimer disease: an update. Journal of central nervous system disease 12:1179573520907397

Article   Google Scholar  

Mohammadian F, Zare Sadeghi A, Noroozian M, Malekian V, Abbasi Sisara M, Hashemi H, Mobarak Salari H, Valizadeh G, Samadi F, Sodaei F (2023) Quantitative assessment of resting-state functional connectivity MRI to differentiate amnestic mild cognitive impairment, late-onset Alzheimer’s disease from normal subjects. J Magn Reson Imaging 57(6):1702–1712

Mohammadian F, Noroozian M, Sadeghi AZ, Malekian V, Saffar A, Talebi M, Hashemi H, Mobarak Salari H, Samadi F, Sodaei F (2023) Effective connectivity evaluation of resting-state brain networks in Alzheimer’s disease, amnestic mild cognitive impairment, and normal aging: an exploratory study. Brain Sci 13(2):265

Illakiya T, Karthik R, Siddharth M, Mishra R, Udainiya A (2023) AHANet: adaptive hybrid attention network for Alzheimer’s disease classification using brain magnetic resonance imaging. Bioengineering 10(6):714

Hu C, Ju R, Shen Y, Zhou P, Li Q (2016) Clinical decision support for Alzheimer’s disease based on deep learning and brain network. In: 2016 IEEE international conference on communications (ICC). IEEE, pp 1–6

de la Torre JC (2010) Alzheimer’s disease is incurable but preventable. J Alzheimer’s Dis 20(3):861–870

De Strooper B, Karran E (2016) The cellular phase of Alzheimer’s disease. Cell 164(4):603–615

Ramzan F, Khan MUG, Rehmat A, Iqbal S, Saba T, Rehman A, Mehmood Z (2020) A deep learning approach for automated diagnosis and multi-class classification of Alzheimer’s disease stages using resting-state fMRI and residual neural networks. J Med Syst 44:1–16

World Health Organization (2021) Global status report on the public health response to dementia

Zhao Z, Chuah JH, Lai KW, Chow C-O, Gochoo M, Dhanalakshmi S, Wang N, Bao W, Wu X (2023) Conventional machine learning and deep learning in Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis using neuroimaging: a review. Front Comput Neurosci 17:10

Patterson C (2018) World Alzheimer Report 2018. The State of the Art of Dementia Research. New Frontiers.

Christina P (2018) The state of the art of dementia research: new frontiers (ADI). Alzheimer’s Disease International, London

Google Scholar  

Bahar-Fuchs A, Clare L, Woods B (2013) Cognitive training and cognitive rehabilitation for persons with mild to moderate dementia of the Alzheimer’s or vascular type: a review. Alzheimer’s Res Ther 5:1–14

Lee G, Nho K, Kang B, Sohn KA, Kim D (2019) Predicting Alzheimer’s disease progression using multi-modal deep learning approach. Sci Rep 9(1):1952

Petersen RC, Smith GE, Waring SC, Ivnik RJ, Tangalos EG, Kokmen E (1999) Mild cognitive impairment: clinical characterization and outcome. Arch Neurol 56(3):303–308

Reisberg B, Ferris SH, Kluger A, Franssen E, Wegiel J, De Leon MJ (2008) Mild cognitive impairment (MCI): a historical perspective. Int Psychogeriatr 20(1):18–31

Bolourchi P, Gholami M, Moradi M, Beheshti I, Demirel H (2023) MCI Conversion prediction using 3D zernike moments and the improved dynamic particle swarm optimization algorithm. Appl Sci 13(7):4489

Tábuas-Pereira M, Baldeiras I, Duro D, Santiago B, Ribeiro MH, Leitão MJ, Oliveira C, Santana I (2016) Prognosis of early-onset vs. late-onset mild cognitive impairment: comparison of conversion rates and its predictors. Geriatrics 1(2):11

Er F, Goularas D (2020) Predicting the prognosis of MCI patients using longitudinal MRI data. IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinf 18(3):1164–1173

As A (2019) 2019 Alzheimer’s disease facts and figures. Alzheimer’s Dement 15(3):321–387

Lowndes G, Savage G (2007) Early detection of memory impairment in Alzheimer’s disease: a neurocognitive perspective on assessment. Neuropsychol Rev 17:193–202

Beach TG, Monsell SE, Phillips LE, Kukull W (2012) Accuracy of the clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer disease at national institute on aging Alzheimer disease centers, 2005–2010. J Neuropathol Exp Neurol 71(4):266–273

Huang Y, Xu J, Zhou Y, Tong T, Zhuang X, AsDN I (2019) Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease via multi-modality 3D convolutional neural network. Front Neurosci 13:509

Acharya UR, Fernandes SL, WeiKoh JE, Ciaccio EJ, Fabell MKM, Tanik UJ, Rajinikanth V, Yeong CH (2019) Automated detection of Alzheimer’s disease using brain MRI images–a study with various feature extraction techniques. J Med Syst 43:1–14

Zhao YX, Zhang YM, Song M, Liu CL (2021) Region ensemble network for MCI conversion prediction with a relation regularized loss. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention–MICCAI 2021: 24th international conference, Strasbourg, September 27–October 1, 2021, Proceedings, Part V 24, 2021. Springer, pp 185-194

McKhann GM, Knopman DS, Chertkow H, Hyman BT, Jack CR Jr, Kawas CH, Klunk WE, Koroshetz WJ, Manly JJ, Mayeux R (2011) The diagnosis of dementia due to Alzheimer’s disease: recommendations from the national institute on aging-Alzheimer’s association workgroups on diagnostic guidelines for Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s Dement 7(3):263–269

Moscoso A, Silva-Rodríguez J, Aldrey JM, Cortés J, Fernández-Ferreiro A, Gómez-Lado N, Ruibal Á, Aguiar P, AsDN I (2019) Prediction of Alzheimer’s disease dementia with MRI beyond the short-term: implications for the design of predictive models. NeuroImag Clin 23:101837

Zhao Y, Ma B, Jiang P, Zeng D, Wang X, Li S (2020) Prediction of Alzheimer’s disease progression with multi-information generative adversarial network. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform 25(3):711–719

Marcus C, Mena E, Subramaniam RM (2014) Brain PET in the diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Clin Nucl Med 39(10):e413

Odusami M, Maskeliūnas R, Damaševičius R, Misra S (2023) Explainable deep-learning-based diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease using multimodal input fusion of PET and MRI images. J Med Biol Eng 79:1–12

Ren F, Yang C, Nanehkaran Y (2023) MRI-based model for MCI conversion using deep zero-shot transfer learning. J Supercomput 79(2):1182–1200

Hill DL, Schwarz AJ, Isaac M, Pani L, Vamvakas S, Hemmings R, Carrillo MC, Yu P, Sun J, Beckett L (2014) Coalition against major diseases/European medicines agency biomarker qualification of hippocampal volume for enrichment of clinical trials in predementia stages of Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s Dement 10(4):421–429

Killiany R, Hyman B, Gomez-Isla T, Moss M, Kikinis R, Jolesz F, Tanzi R, Jones K, Albert M (2002) MRI measures of entorhinal cortex vs hippocampus in preclinical AD. Neurology 58(8):1188–1196

Du A, Schuff N, Amend D, Laakso M, Hsu Y, Jagust W, Yaffe K, Kramer J, Reed B, Norman D (2001) Magnetic resonance imaging of the entorhinal cortex and hippocampus in mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 71(4):441–447

Devanand D, Pradhaban G, Liu X, Khandji A, De Santi S, Segal S, Rusinek H, Pelton G, Honig L, Mayeux R (2007) Hippocampal and entorhinal atrophy in mild cognitive impairment: prediction of Alzheimer disease. Neurology 68(11):828–836

Luo M, He Z, Cui H, Chen Y-PP, Ward P, AsDN I (2023) Class activation attention transfer neural networks for MCI conversion prediction. Comput Biol Med 156:106700

Liu M, Zhang J, Adeli E, Shen D (2018) Joint classification and regression via deep multi-task multi-channel learning for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 66(5):1195–1206

Hett K, Ta V-T, Oguz I, Manjón JV, Coupé P, AsDN I (2021) Multi-scale graph-based grading for Alzheimer’s disease prediction. Med Image Anal 67:101850

Park S, Hong CH, Lee D-g, Park K, Shin H, AsDN I (2023) Prospective classification of Alzheimer’s disease conversion from mild cognitive impairment. Neural Netw 164:335–344

Shen D, Wu G, Suk H-I (2017) Deep learning in medical image analysis. Annu Rev Biomed Eng 19:221–248

Basaia S, Agosta F, Wagner L, Canu E, Magnani G, Santangelo R, Filippi M, Initiative AsDN (2019) Automated classification of Alzheimer’s disease and mild cognitive impairment using a single MRI and deep neural networks. NeuroImag Clin 21:101645

Rathore S, Habes M, Iftikhar MA, Shacklett A, Davatzikos C (2017) A review on neuroimaging-based classification studies and associated feature extraction methods for Alzheimer’s disease and its prodromal stages. Neuroimage 155:530–548

Khojaste-Sarakhsi M, Haghighi SS, Ghomi SF, Marchiori E (2022) Deep learning for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis: a survey. Artif Intell Med 130:102332

Zhou Q, Wang J, Yu X, Wang S, Zhang Y (2023) A survey of deep learning for Alzheimer’s disease. Mach Learn Knowl Extr 5(2):611–668

Fathi S, Ahmadi M, Dehnad A (2022) Early diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease based on deep learning: a systematic review. Comput Biol Med 146:105634

Jo T, Nho K, Saykin AJ (2019) Deep learning in Alzheimer’s disease: diagnostic classification and prognostic prediction using neuroimaging data. Front Aging Neurosci 11:220

Niyas KM, Thiyagarajan P (2023) A systematic review on early prediction of mild cognitive impairment to alzheimers using machine learning algorithms. Int J Intell Netw 4:74–88

Grueso S, Viejo-Sobera R (2021) Machine learning methods for predicting progression from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer’s disease dementia: a systematic review. Alzheimer’s Res Ther 13:1–29

Arya AD, Verma SS, Chakarabarti P, Chakrabarti T, Elngar AA, Kamali A-M, Nami M (2023) A systematic review on machine learning and deep learning techniques in the effective diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Brain Inf 10(1):1–15

Frizzell TO, Glashutter M, Liu CC, Zeng A, Pan D, Hajra SG, D’Arcy RC, Song X (2022) Artificial intelligence in brain MRI analysis of Alzheimer’s disease over the past 12 years: a systematic review. Ageing Res Rev 77:101614

Zhao X, Ang CKE, Acharya UR, Cheong KH (2021) Application of Artificial Intelligence techniques for the detection of Alzheimer’s disease using structural MRI images. Biocybern Biomed Eng 41(2):456–473

Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, Shamseer L, Tetzlaff JM, Akl EA, Brennan SE (2021) The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int J Surg 88:105906

Suk HI, Shen D (2013) Deep learning-based feature representation for AD/MCI classification. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer-Assisted Intervention–MICCAI 2013: 16th International Conference, Nagoya, 22-26 September 2013, Proceedings, Part II 16, 2013. Springer, pp 583-590

Suk HI, Lee SW, Shen D, AsDN I (2014) Hierarchical feature representation and multimodal fusion with deep learning for AD/MCI diagnosis. Neuroimage 101:569–582

Suk HI, Lee S-W, Shen D, AsDN I (2015) Latent feature representation with stacked auto-encoder for AD/MCI diagnosis. Brain Struct Funct 220:841–859

Suk HI, Lee SW, Shen D, AsDN I (2016) Deep sparse multi-task learning for feature selection in Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. Brain Struct Funct 221:2569–2587

Suk H-I, Lee S-W, Shen D, AsDN I (2017) Deep ensemble learning of sparse regression models for brain disease diagnosis. Med Image Anal 37:101–113

Çitak-ER F, Goularas D, Ormeci B (2017) A novel convolutional neural network model based on voxel-based morphometry of imaging data in predicting the prognosis of patients with mild cognitive impairment. J Neurol Sci 34(1):52–69

Shi J, Zheng X, Li Y, Zhang Q, Ying S (2017) Multimodal neuroimaging feature learning with multimodal stacked deep polynomial networks for diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform 22(1):173–183

Lu D, Popuri K, Ding GW, Balachandar R, Beg MF (2018) Multimodal and multiscale deep neural networks for the early diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease using structural MR and FDG-PET images. Sci Rep 8(1):5697

Wang X, Cai W, Shen D, Huang H (2018) Temporal correlation structure learning for MCI conversion prediction. In: Medical image computing and computer assisted intervention–MICCAI 2018: 21st international conference, Granada, 16-20 September 2018, Proceedings, Part III, 2018. Springer, pp 446-454

Liu M, Zhang J, Adeli E, Shen D (2018) Landmark-based deep multi-instance learning for brain disease diagnosis. Med Image Anal 43:157–168

Wu C, Guo S, Hong Y, Xiao B, Wu Y, Zhang Q (2018) Discrimination and conversion prediction of mild cognitive impairment using convolutional neural networks. Quant Imaging Med Surg 8(10):992–1003. https://doi.org/10.21037/qims.2018.10.17

Lin W, Tong T, Gao Q, Guo D, Du X, Yang Y, Guo G, Xiao M, Du M, Qu X (2018) Convolutional neural networks-based MRI image analysis for the Alzheimer’s disease prediction from mild cognitive impairment. Front Neurosci 12:777

Shmulev Y, Belyaev M, Initiative AsDN ( 2018) Predicting conversion of mild cognitive impairments to Alzheimer’s disease and exploring impact of neuroimaging. In: Graphs in biomedical image analysis and integrating medical imaging and non-imaging modalities: second international workshop, GRAIL 2018 and first international workshop, beyond MIC 2018, held in conjunction with MICCAI 2018, Granada, 20 September 2018, Proceedings 2, 2018. Springer, pp 83-91

Lian C, Liu M, Zhang J, Shen D (2018) Hierarchical fully convolutional network for joint atrophy localization and Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis using structural MRI. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 42(4):880–893

Lee E, Choi J-S, Kim M, Suk H-I, AsDN I (2019) Toward an interpretable Alzheimer’s disease diagnostic model with regional abnormality representation via deep learning. Neuroimage 202:116113

Cui R, Liu M (2018) Hippocampus analysis by combination of 3-d densenet and shapes for alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform 23(5):2099–2107

Li F, Liu M, AsDN I (2019) A hybrid convolutional and recurrent neural network for hippocampus analysis in Alzheimer’s disease. J Neurosci Methods 323:108–118

Oh K, Chung YC, Kim KW, Kim WS, Oh IS (2019) Classification and visualization of Alzheimer’s disease using volumetric convolutional neural network and transfer learning. Sci Rep 9(1):1–16

Martinez-Murcia FJ, Ortiz A, Gorriz JM, Ramirez J, Castillo-Barnes D (2019) Studying the manifold structure of Alzheimer’s disease: a deep learning approach using convolutional autoencoders. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform 24(1):17–26

Li H, Habes M, Wolk DA, Fan Y, AsDN I (2019) A deep learning model for early prediction of Alzheimer’s disease dementia based on hippocampal magnetic resonance imaging data. Alzheimer’s Dement 15(8):1059–1070

Spasov S, Passamonti L, Duggento A, Liò P, Toschi N (2019) A parameter-efficient deep learning approach to predict conversion from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer’s disease. Neuroimage 189:276–287. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2019.01.031

Cui R, Liu M, AsDN I (2019) RNN-based longitudinal analysis for diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Comput Med Imaging Graph 73:1–10

Rana SS, Ma X, Pang W, Wolverson E (2020) A multi-modal deep learning approach to the early prediction of mild cognitive impairment conversion to Alzheimer’s disease. 2020 IEEE/ACM international conference on big data computing, applications and technologies (BDCAT). IEEE, New York, pp 9–18

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Mukhtar G, Farhan S (2020) Convolutional neural network based prediction of conversion from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer’s disease: a technique using hippocampus extracted from MRI. Adv Electr Comput Eng 20(2):113–122

Ramon-Julvez U, Hernandez M, Mayordomo E (2020) Adni analysis of the influence of diffeomorphic normalization in the prediction of stable vs progressive MCI conversion with convolutional neural networks. In: 2020 IEEE 17th international symposium on biomedical imaging (ISBI), 3–7 April 2020. pp 1120–1124. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISBI45749.2020.9098445

Abrol A, Bhattarai M, Fedorov A, Du Y, Plis S, Calhoun V, AsDN I (2020) Deep residual learning for neuroimaging: an application to predict progression to Alzheimer’s disease. J Neurosci Methods 339:108701

Pan Y, Liu M, Lian C, Xia Y, Shen D (2020) Spatially-constrained fisher representation for brain disease identification with incomplete multi-modal neuroimages. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 39(9):2965–2975

Gao F, Yoon H, Xu Y, Goradia D, Luo J, Wu T, Su Y, Initiative AsDN (2020) AD-NET: age-adjust neural network for improved MCI to AD conversion prediction. NeuroImag Clin 27:102290

Nanni L, Interlenghi M, Brahnam S, Salvatore C, Papa S, Nemni R, Castiglioni I, AsDN I (2020) Comparison of transfer learning and conventional machine learning applied to structural brain MRI for the early diagnosis and prognosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Front Neurol 11:576194

Pan D, Zeng A, Jia L, Huang Y, Frizzell T, Song X (2020) Early detection of Alzheimer’s disease using magnetic resonance imaging: a novel approach combining convolutional neural networks and ensemble learning. Front Neurosci 14:259

Lian C, Liu M, Pan Y, Shen D (2020) Attention-guided hybrid network for dementia diagnosis with structural MR images. IEEE transactions on cybernetics 52(4):1992–2003

Li A, Li F, Elahifasaee F, Liu M, Zhang L, Initiative AsDN (2021) Hippocampal shape and asymmetry analysis by cascaded convolutional neural networks for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. Brain Imag Behav 15:1–10

Bae J, Stocks J, Heywood A, Jung Y, Jenkins L, Hill V, Katsaggelos A, Popuri K, Rosen H, Beg MF (2021) Transfer learning for predicting conversion from mild cognitive impairment to dementia of Alzheimer’s type based on a three-dimensional convolutional neural network. Neurobiol Aging 99:53–64

Zhang X, Han L, Zhu W, Sun L, Zhang D (2021) An explainable 3D residual self-attention deep neural network for joint atrophy localization and Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis using structural MRI. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform 26(11):5289–5297

Ocasio E, Duong TQ (2021) Deep learning prediction of mild cognitive impairment conversion to Alzheimer’s disease at 3 years after diagnosis using longitudinal and whole-brain 3D MRI. PeerJ Comput Sci 7:e560. https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj-cs.560

Chen Y, Xia Y (2021) Iterative sparse and deep learning for accurate diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Pattern Recogn 116:107944. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2021.107944

Zhang J, Zheng B, Gao A, Feng X, Liang D, Long X (2021) A 3D densely connected convolution neural network with connection-wise attention mechanism for Alzheimer’s disease classification. Magn Reson Imaging 78:119–126

Guan H, Wang C, Cheng J, Jing J, Liu T (2022) A parallel attention-augmented bilinear network for early magnetic resonance imaging-based diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. Hum Brain Mapp 43(2):760–772

Er F, Goularas D (2021) Predicting the prognosis of MCI patients using longitudinal MRI data. IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinf 18(3):1164–1173. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCBB.2020.3017872

Guan H, Wang C, Tao D (2021) MRI-based Alzheimer’s disease prediction via distilling the knowledge in multi-modal data. Neuroimage 244:118586. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118586

Kang W, Lin L, Zhang B, Shen X, Wu S (2021) Multi-model and multi-slice ensemble learning architecture based on 2D convolutional neural networks for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. Comput Biol Med 136:104678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compbiomed.2021.104678

Alinsaif S, Lang J, AsDN I (2021) 3D shearlet-based descriptors combined with deep features for the classification of Alzheimer’s disease based on MRI data. Comput Biol Med 138:104879

Zhu W, Sun L, Huang J, Han L, Zhang D (2021) Dual attention multi-instance deep learning for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis with structural MRI. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 40(9):2354–2366

Bron EE, Klein S, Papma JM, Jiskoot LC, Venkatraghavan V, Linders J, Aalten P, De Deyn PP, Biessels GJ, Claassen JA (2021) Cross-cohort generalizability of deep and conventional machine learning for MRI-based diagnosis and prediction of Alzheimer’s disease. NeuroImag Clin 31:102712

Guan H, Liu Y, Yang E, Yap PT, Shen D, Liu M (2021) Multi-site MRI harmonization via attention-guided deep domain adaptation for brain disorder identification. Med Image Anal 71:102076

Gao X, Shi F, Shen D, Liu M (2021) Task-induced pyramid and attention GAN for multimodal brain image imputation and classification in alzheimer’s disease. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform 26(1):36–43

Zhang P, Lin S, Qiao J, Tu Y (2021) Diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease with ensemble learning classifier and 3D convolutional neural network. Sensors 21(22):7634

Yang L, Wang X, Guo Q, Gladstein S, Wooten D, Li T, Robieson WZ, Sun Y, Huang X, AsDN I (2021) Deep learning based multimodal progression modeling for Alzheimer’s disease. Stat Biopharm Res 13(3):337–343

Zheng G, Zhang Y, Zhao Z, Wang Y, Liu X, Shang Y, Cong Z, Dimitriadis SI, Yao Z, Hu B (2022) A transformer-based multi-features fusion model for prediction of conversion in mild cognitive impairment. Methods 204:241–248

Ghafoori S, Shalbaf A (2022) Predicting conversion from MCI to AD by integration of rs-fMRI and clinical information using 3D-convolutional neural network. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg 17(7):1245–1255

Ashtari-Majlan M, Seifi A, Dehshibi MM (2022) A multi-stream convolutional neural network for classification of progressive MCI in Alzheimer’s disease using structural MRI images. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform 26(8):3918–3926

Lu P, Hu L, Zhang N, Liang H, Tian T, Lu L (2022) A two-stage model for predicting mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer’s disease conversion. Front Aging Neurosci 14:826622

Zhang F, Pan B, Shao P, Liu P, Shen S, Yao P, Xu RX, AsDN I (2022) A single model deep learning approach for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. Neuroscience 491:200–214

Kwak K, Niethammer M, Giovanello KS, Styner M, Dayan E, AsDN I (2022) Differential role for hippocampal subfields in Alzheimer’s disease progression revealed with deep learning. Cereb Cortex 32(3):467–478

Zhang S, Chen X, Ren B, Yang H, Yu Z, Zhang XY, Zhou Y (2022) 3D Global Fourier Network for Alzheimer’s Disease Diagnosis Using Structural MRI. In: Medical Image Computing and Computer Assisted Intervention–MICCAI 2022: 25th International Conference, Singapore, 18–22 September 2022, Proceedings, Part I. Springer, pp 34-43

Chen L, Qiao H, Zhu F (2022) Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis with brain structural MRI using multiview-slice attention and 3D convolution neural network. Front Aging Neurosci 14:871706

Oh K, Yoon JS, Suk H-I (2022) Learn-explain-reinforce: counterfactual reasoning and its guidance to reinforce an Alzheimer’s Disease diagnosis model. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 45(4):4843–4857

Fan CC, Peng L, Wang T, Yang H, Zhou XH, Ni ZL, Chen S, Zhou YJ, Hou ZG (2022) TR-Gan: multi-session future MRI prediction with temporal recurrent generative adversarial Network. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 41(8):1925–1937

Sun H, Wang A, He S (2022) Temporal and spatial analysis of alzheimer’s disease based on an improved convolutional neural network and a resting-state FMRI brain functional network. Int J Environ Res Public Health 19(8):4508

Lao H, Zhang X (2022) Diagnose Alzheimer’s disease by combining 3D discrete wavelet transform and 3D moment invariants. IET Image Proc 16(14):3948–3964

Han K, He M, Yang F, Zhang Y (2022) Multi-task multi-level feature adversarial network for joint Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis and atrophy localization using sMRI. Phys Med Biol 67(8):085002

Li M, Jiang Y, Li X, Yin S, Luo H (2023) Ensemble of convolutional neural networks and multilayer perceptron for the diagnosis of mild cognitive impairment and Alzheimer’s disease. Med Phys 50(1):209–225

Guan H, Yue L, Yap P-T, Xiao S, Bozoki A, Liu M (2023) Attention-guided autoencoder for automated progression prediction of subjective cognitive decline with structural MRI. IEEE J Biomed Health Inf. https://doi.org/10.1109/JBHI.2023.3257081

Zhao Q, Huang G, Xu P, Chen Z, Li W, Yuan X, Zhong G, Pun C-M, Huang Z (2023) IDA-Net: inheritable deformable attention network of structural MRI for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. Biomed Signal Process Control 84:104787

Guan X, Ma L, Huang Y, Tang S, Li T (2023) An interpretable brain network atlas-based hybrid model for mild cognitive impairment progression prediction. In: Proceedings of the 2023 2nd Asia conference on algorithms, computing and machine learning. pp 424–428

Hu Z, Wang Z, Jin Y, Hou W (2023) VGG-TSwinformer: transformer-based deep learning model for early Alzheimer’s disease prediction. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 229:107291

Francis A, Pandian IA (2023) Ensemble learning approach for multi-class classification of Alzheimer’s stages using magnetic resonance imaging. TELKOMNIKA (Telecommun Comput Electr Control) 21(2):374–381

Cao G, Zhang M, Wang Y, Zhang J, Han Y, Xu X, Huang J, Kang G (2023) End-to-end automatic pathology localization for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis using structural MRI. Comput Biol Med 163:107110

Liu F, Wang H, Liang SN, Jin Z, Wei S, Li X, AsDN I (2023) MPS-FFA: A multiplane and multiscale feature fusion attention network for Alzheimer’s disease prediction with structural MRI. Comput Biol Med 157:106790

Gao X, Cai H, Liu M (2023) A Hybrid multi-scale attention convolution and aging transformer network for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. IEEE J Biomed Health Inf 27(7):3292–3301

Zheng B, Gao A, Huang X, Li Y, Liang D, Long X (2023) A modified 3D EfficientNet for the classification of Alzheimer’s disease using structural magnetic resonance images. IET Image Proc 17(1):77–87

Hoang GM, Kim UH, Kim JG (2023) Vision transformers for the prediction of mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer’s disease progression using mid-sagittal sMRI. Front Aging Neurosci 15:1102869

Mueller SG, Weiner MW, Thal LJ, Petersen RC, Jack C, Jagust W, Trojanowski JQ, Toga AW, Beckett L (2005) The Alzheimer’s disease neuroimaging initiative. Neuroimag Clin 15(4):869–877

Aisen PS, Petersen RC, Donohue MC, Gamst A, Raman R, Thomas RG, Walter S, Trojanowski JQ, Shaw LM, Beckett LA (2010) Clinical core of the Alzheimer’s disease neuroimaging initiative: progress and plans. Alzheimer’s Dement 6(3):239–246

Jack CR Jr, Barnes J, Bernstein MA, Borowski BJ, Brewer J, Clegg S, Dale AM, Carmichael O, Ching C, DeCarli C (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging in Alzheimer’s disease neuroimaging initiative 2. Alzheimer’s Dement 11(7):740–756

Weiner MW, Veitch DP, Aisen PS, Beckett LA, Cairns NJ, Green RC, Harvey D, Jack CR Jr, Jagust W, Morris JC (2017) The Alzheimer’s disease neuroimaging initiative 3: continued innovation for clinical trial improvement. Alzheimer’s Dement 13(5):561–571

Ellis KA, Bush AI, Darby D, De Fazio D, Foster J, Hudson P, Lautenschlager NT, Lenzo N, Martins RN, Maruff P (2009) The Australian imaging, biomarkers and lifestyle (AIBL) study of aging: methodology and baseline characteristics of 1112 individuals recruited for a longitudinal study of Alzheimer’s disease. Int Psychogeriatr 21(4):672–687

Sled JG, Zijdenbos AP, Evans AC (1998) A nonparametric method for automatic correction of intensity nonuniformity in MRI data. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 17(1):87–97

Tustison NJ, Avants BB, Cook PA, Zheng Y, Egan A, Yushkevich PA, Gee JC (2010) N4ITK: improved N3 bias correction. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 29(6):1310–1320

Kalavathi P, Prasath VS (2016) Methods on skull stripping of MRI head scan images—a review. J Digit Imaging 29:365–379

Liu Y, Dawant BM (2015) Automatic localization of the anterior commissure, posterior commissure, and midsagittal plane in MRI scans using regression forests. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform 19(4):1362–1374

Dora L, Agrawal S, Panda R, Abraham A (2017) State-of-the-art methods for brain tissue segmentation: a review. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng 10:235–249

Rana S, Ma X, Pang W, Wolverson E (2020) A multi-modal deep learning approach to the early prediction of mild cognitive impairment conversion to Alzheimer’s disease. 2020 IEEE/ACM international conference on big data computing, applications and technologies (BDCAT). IEEE, New York

Goodfellow I, Bengio Y, Courville A (2016) Deep learning. MIT press, Cambridge

Bengio Y, Goodfellow I, Courville A (2017) Deep learning. MIT press, Cambridge

Larochelle H, Bengio Y, Louradour J, Lamblin P (2009) Exploring strategies for training deep neural networks. J Mach Learn Res 10(1):1–40

Livni R, Shalev-Shwartz S, Shamir O (2013) An algorithm for training polynomial networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:13047045

Medsker LR, Jain L (2001) Recurrent neural networks. Design Appl 5(64–67):2

Salakhutdinov R, Hinton G Deep boltzmann machines. In: Artificial intelligence and statistics, 2009. PMLR, pp 448–455

Goodfellow I, Pouget-Abadie J, Mirza M, Xu B, Warde-Farley D, Ozair S, Courville A, Bengio Y (2020) Generative adversarial networks. Commun ACM 63(11):139–144

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

Vaswani A, Shazeer N, Parmar N, Uszkoreit J, Jones L, Gomez AN, Kaiser Ł, Polosukhin I (2017) Attention is all you need. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv1706.03762

Khan A, Sohail A, Zahoora U, Qureshi AS (2020) A survey of the recent architectures of deep convolutional neural networks. Artif Intell Rev 53:5455–5516

Singh SP, Wang L, Gupta S, Goli H, Padmanabhan P, Gulyás B (2020) 3D deep learning on medical images: a review. Sensors 20(18):5097

Mofrad FB, Valizadeh G (2023) DenseNet-based transfer learning for LV shape classification: introducing a novel information fusion and data augmentation using statistical shape/color modeling. Expert Syst Appl 213:119261

Valizadeh G, Mofrad FB (2023) Parametrized pre-trained network (PPNet): a novel shape classification method using SPHARMs for MI detection. Expert Syst Appl 228:120368

Lin CJ, Jeng SY, Chen MK (2020) Using 2D CNN with Taguchi parametric optimization for lung cancer recognition from CT images. Appl Sci 10(7):2591

Yildirim O, Talo M, Ay B, Baloglu UB, Aydin G, Acharya UR (2019) Automated detection of diabetic subject using pre-trained 2D-CNN models with frequency spectrum images extracted from heart rate signals. Comput Biol Med 113:103387

Sultana A, Nahiduzzaman M, Bakchy SC, Shahriar SM, Peyal HI, Chowdhury ME, Khandakar A, Arselene Ayari M, Ahsan M, Haider J (2023) A real time method for distinguishing COVID-19 utilizing 2D-CNN and transfer learning. Sensors 23(9):4458

Pereira M, Fantini I, Lotufo R, Rittner L (2020) An extended-2D CNN for multiclass Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis through structural MRI. Medical imaging 2020: computer-aided diagnosis. SPIE, Bellingham, pp 438–444

Müller MJ, Greverus D, Dellani PR, Weibrich C, Wille PR, Scheurich A, Stoeter P, Fellgiebel A (2005) Functional implications of hippocampal volume and diffusivity in mild cognitive impairment. Neuroimage 28(4):1033–1042

Thompson PM, Hayashi KM, De Zubicaray GI, Janke AL, Rose SE, Semple J, Hong MS, Herman DH, Gravano D, Doddrell DM (2004) Mapping hippocampal and ventricular change in Alzheimer disease. Neuroimage 22(4):1754–1766

Morra JH, Tu Z, Apostolova LG, Green AE, Avedissian C, Madsen SK, Parikshak N, Toga AW, Jack CR Jr, Schuff N (2009) Automated mapping of hippocampal atrophy in 1-year repeat MRI data from 490 subjects with Alzheimer’s disease, mild cognitive impairment, and elderly controls. Neuroimage 45(1):S3–S15

Wang S-H, Phillips P, Sui Y, Liu B, Yang M, Cheng H (2018) Classification of Alzheimer’s disease based on eight-layer convolutional neural network with leaky rectified linear unit and max pooling. J Med Syst 42:1–11

Chen T, Kornblith S, Norouzi M, Hinton GA (2020) simple framework for contrastive learning of visual representations. International conference on machine learning. PMLR, Seattle, pp 1597–1607

He K, Fan H, Wu Y, Xie S, Girshick R 2020) Momentum contrast for unsupervised visual representation learning. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, IEEE, New York, pp 9729–9738

Li K, O’Brien R, Lutz M, Luo S, AsDN I (2018) A prognostic model of Alzheimer’s disease relying on multiple longitudinal measures and time-to-event data. Alzheimer’s Dement 14(5):644–651

Barnes DE, Cenzer IS, Yaffe K, Ritchie CS, Lee SJ, AsDN I (2014) A point-based tool to predict conversion from mild cognitive impairment to probable Alzheimer’s disease. Alzheimer’s Dement 10(6):646–655

Kong D, Giovanello KS, Wang Y, Lin W, Lee E, Fan Y, Murali Doraiswamy P, Zhu H, AsDN I (2015) Predicting Alzheimer’s disease using combined imaging-whole genome SNP data. J Alzheimer’s Dis 46(3):695–702

Li S, Okonkwo O, Albert M, Wang M-C (2013) Variation in variables that predict progression from MCI to AD dementia over duration of follow-up. Am J Alzheimer’s Dis 2(1):12

Rumelhart DE, Hinton GE, Williams RJ (1986) Learning representations by back-propagating errors. Nature 323(6088):533–536

Ranzato MA, Poultney C, Chopra S, Cun Y (2006) Efficient learning of sparse representations with an energy-based model. Adv Neural Inf Process Syst 19:1137

Vincent P, Larochelle H, Bengio Y, Manzagol P-A (2008) Extracting and composing robust features with denoising autoencoders. In: Proceedings of the 25th international conference on Machine learning (ICML 2008), ACM (Association for Computing Machinery), New York, pp 1096–1103

Kingma DP, Welling M (2013) Auto-encoding variational bayes. arXiv preprint arXiv:13126114

Liu S, Liu S, Cai W, Pujol S, Kikinis R, Feng D (2014) Early diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease with deep learning. 2014 IEEE 11th international symposium on biomedical imaging (ISBI). IEEE, New York, pp 1015–1018

Liu S, Liu S, Cai W, Che H, Pujol S, Kikinis R, Feng D, Fulham MJ (2014) Multimodal neuroimaging feature learning for multiclass diagnosis of Alzheimer’s disease. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 62(4):1132–1140

Hosseini-Asl E, Gimel’farb G, El-Baz A (2016) Alzheimer’s disease diagnostics by a deeply supervised adaptable 3D convolutional network. arXiv preprint arXiv:160700556

Kruthika K, Maheshappa H, AsDN I (2019) CBIR system using capsule networks and 3D CNN for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. Inf Med Unlocked 14:59–68

Vu TD, Ho NH, Yang HJ, Kim J, Song HC (2018) Non-white matter tissue extraction and deep convolutional neural network for Alzheimer’s disease detection. Soft Comput 22:6825–6833

Zheng X, Shi J, Li Y, Liu X, Zhang Q (2016) Multi-modality stacked deep polynomial network based feature learning for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis. 2016 IEEE 13th international symposium on biomedical imaging (ISBI). IEEE, New York, pp 851–854

Shi J, Zhou S, Liu X, Zhang Q, Lu M, Wang T (2016) Stacked deep polynomial network based representation learning for tumor classification with small ultrasound image dataset. Neurocomputing 194:87–94

Shen L, Shi J, Dong Y, Ying S, Peng Y, Chen L, Zhang Q, An H, Zhang Y (2020) An improved deep polynomial network algorithm for transcranial sonography–based diagnosis of parkinson’s disease. Cogn Comput 12:553–562

Lei B, Yang M, Yang P, Zhou F, Hou W, Zou W, Li X, Wang T, Xiao X, Wang S (2020) Deep and joint learning of longitudinal data for Alzheimer’s disease prediction. Pattern Recogn 102:107247

Mwangi B, Tian TS, Soares JC (2014) A review of feature reduction techniques in neuroimaging. Neuroinformatics 12:229–244

Razzak MI, Naz S, Zaib A (2018) Deep learning for medical image processing: overview, challenges and the future. Classification in BioApps: automation of decision making. Springer, Berlin, pp 323–350

Book   Google Scholar  

Hochreiter S, Schmidhuber J (1997) Long short-term memory. Neural Comput 9(8):1735–1780

Cho K, Van Merriënboer B, Gulcehre C, Bahdanau D, Bougares F, Schwenk H, Bengio Y (2014) Learning phrase representations using RNN encoder-decoder for statistical machine translation. arXiv preprint arXiv:14061078

Cheng D, Liu M (2017) Combining convolutional and recurrent neural networks for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis using PET images. 2017 IEEE international conference on imaging systems and techniques (IST). IEEE, New York, pp 1–5

Cui R, Liu M, Li G (2018) Longitudinal analysis for Alzheimer’s disease diagnosis using RNN. 2018 IEEE 15th international symposium on biomedical imaging (ISBI 2018). IEEE, New York, pp 1398–1401

Litjens G, Kooi T, Bejnordi BE, Setio AAA, Ciompi F, Ghafoorian M, Van Der Laak JA, Van Ginneken B, Sánchez CI (2017) A survey on deep learning in medical image analysis. Med Image Anal 42:60–88

Hinton GE (2012) A practical guide to training restricted Boltzmann machines. Neural networks: tricks of the trade, 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin, pp 599–619

Hinton GE, Salakhutdinov RR (2006) Reducing the dimensionality of data with neural networks. Science 313(5786):504–507

Bengio Y (2009) Learning deep architectures for AI. Found Trends Mach Learn 2(1):1–127

Mohamed AR, Dahl GE, Hinton G (2011) Acoustic modeling using deep belief networks. IEEE Trans Audio Speech Lang Process 20(1):14–22

Zhou T, Li Q, Lu H, Cheng Q, Zhang X (2023) GAN review: models and medical image fusion applications. Information Fusion 91:134–148

Han C, Hayashi H, Rundo L, Araki R, Shimoda W, Muramatsu S, Furukawa Y, Mauri G, Nakayama H (2018) GAN-based synthetic brain MR image generation. 2018 IEEE 15th international symposium on biomedical imaging (ISBI 2018). IEEE, New York, pp 734–738

Tanner C, Ozdemir F, Profanter R, Vishnevsky V, Konukoglu E, Goksel O (2018) Generative adversarial networks for MR-CT deformable image registration. arXiv preprint arXiv:180707349

Tavse S, Varadarajan V, Bachute M, Gite S, Kotecha K (2022) A Systematic literature review on applications of GAN-synthesized images for brain MRI. Future Internet 14(12):351

Khan S, Naseer M, Hayat M, Zamir SW, Khan FS, Shah M (2022) Transformers in vision: a survey. ACM computing surveys (CSUR) 54(10s):1–41

Hossin M, Sulaiman MN (2015) A review on evaluation metrics for data classification evaluations. Int J Data Min knowl Manag Process 5(2):1

Powers DM (2020) Evaluation: from precision, recall and F-measure to ROC, informedness, markedness and correlation. arXiv preprint arXiv:201016061

Sokolova M, Lapalme G (2009) A systematic analysis of performance measures for classification tasks. Inf Process Manage 45(4):427–437

Valizadeh G, Babapour Mofrad F (2022) A comprehensive survey on two and three-dimensional fourier shape descriptors: biomedical applications. Arch Comput Methods Eng 29(7):4643–4681

Suk HI, Shen D (2013) Deep learning-based feature representation for AD/MCI classification. In: Mori K, Sakuma I, Sato Y, Barillot C, Navab N (eds) Medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention MICCAI 2013. Springer, Berlin, pp 583–590

Brodersen KH, Ong CS, Stephan KE, Buhmann JM (2010) The balanced accuracy and its posterior distribution. 2010 20th international conference on pattern recognition. IEEE, New York, pp 3121–3124

Matthews BW (1975) Comparison of the predicted and observed secondary structure of T4 phage lysozyme. Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) Protein Struct 405(2):442–451

Baldi P, Brunak S, Chauvin Y, Andersen CA, Nielsen H (2000) Assessing the accuracy of prediction algorithms for classification: an overview. Bioinformatics 16(5):412–424

Schuckers ME, Schuckers ME (2010) Receiver operating characteristic curve and equal error rate. Computational methods in biometric authentication: statistical methods for performance evaluation. Springer, Berlin, pp 155–204

Collobert R, Van Der Maaten L, Joulin A (2016) Torchnet: an open-source platform for (deep) learning research. In: Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML-2016). ACM, New York, NY, pp 19–24

Chollet F (2018) Keras: the python deep learning library. Astrophys Source Code Library:ascl 1806:1022

Abadi M, Barham P, Chen J, Chen Z, Davis A, Dean J, Devin M, Ghemawat S, Irving G, Isard M {TensorFlow}: a system for {Large-Scale} machine learning. In: 12th USENIX symposium on operating systems design and implementation (OSDI 16), 2016. pp 265–283

MathWorks MATLAB. https://www.mathworks.com . Accessed on 2024

Jia Y, Shelhamer E, Donahue J, Karayev S, Long J, Girshick R, Guadarrama S, Darrell T Caffe (2014) Convolutional architecture for fast feature embedding. In: Proceedings of the 22nd ACSM international conference on Multimedia. pp 675–678

Al-Rfou R, Alain G, Almahairi A, Angermueller C, Bahdanau D, Ballas N, Bastien F, Bayer J, Belikov A, Belopolsky A (2016) Theano: a python framework for fast computation of mathematical expressions. arXiv e-prints:arXiv: 1605.02688

Cheng B, Zhu B, Pu S (2022) Multi-auxiliary domain transfer learning for diagnosis of MCI conversion. Neurol Sci 1:1–19

Cheng B, Liu M, Zhang D, Munsell BC, Shen D (2015) Domain transfer learning for MCI conversion prediction. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 62(7):1805–1817

Singh A, Sengupta S, Lakshminarayanan V (2020) Explainable deep learning models in medical image analysis. J Imaging 6(6):52

Lombardi A, Diacono D, Amoroso N, Monaco A, Tavares JMR, Bellotti R, Tangaro S (2021) Explainable deep learning for personalized age prediction with brain morphology. Front Neurosci 15:578

de Vries BM, Zwezerijnen GJ, Burchell GL, van Velden FH, Boellaard R (2023) Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) in radiology and nuclear medicine: a literature review. Front Med 10:1180773

Simonyan K, Zisserman A (2014) Very deep convolutional networks for large-scale image recognition. arXiv preprint arXiv:14091556

Zhou B, Khosla A, Lapedriza A, Oliva A, Torralba A (2016) Learning deep features for discriminative localization. In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, pp 2921–2929

Selvaraju RR, Cogswell M, Das A, Vedantam R, Parikh D, Batra D Grad-cam (2017) Visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on computer vision. IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, pp 618–626

Chattopadhay A, Sarkar A, Howlader P, Balasubramanian VN (2018) Grad-cam++: generalized gradient-based visual explanations for deep convolutional networks. 2018 IEEE winter conference on applications of computer vision (WACV). IEEE, New York, pp 839–847

Wang H, Wang Z, Du M, Yang F, Zhang Z, Ding S, Mardziel P, Hu X (2020) Score-CAM: score-weighted visual explanations for convolutional neural networks. In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition workshops. pp 24–25

Zeiler MD, Fergus R (2014) Visualizing and understanding convolutional networks. In: Computer vision–ECCV 2014: 13th European conference, Zurich, 6-12 September 2014, Proceedings, Part I 13, 2014. Springer, pp 818-833

Simonyan K, Vedaldi A, Zisserman A (2013) Deep inside convolutional networks: visualising image classification models and saliency maps. arXiv preprint arXiv:13126034

Wachter S, Mittelstadt B, Russell C (2017) Counterfactual explanations without opening the black box: automated decisions and the GDPR. Harv JL Tech 31:841

Oh K, Chung Y-C, Kim KW, Kim W-S, Oh I-S (2019) Classification and visualization of Alzheimer’s disease using volumetric convolutional neural network and transfer learning. Sci Rep 9(1):18150

Ocasio E, Duong TQ (2021) Deep learning prediction of mild cognitive impairment conversion to Alzheimer’s disease at 3 years after diagnosis using longitudinal and whole-brain 3D MRI. PeerJ Comput Sci 7:e560

Yagis E, De Herrera AGS, Citi L (2019) Generalization performance of deep learning models in neurodegenerative disease classification. 2019 IEEE international conference on bioinformatics and biomedicine (BIBM). IEEE, New York, pp 1692–1698

Wen J, Thibeau-Sutre E, Diaz-Melo M, Samper-González J, Routier A, Bottani S, Dormont D, Durrleman S, Burgos N, Colliot O (2020) Convolutional neural networks for classification of Alzheimer’s disease: overview and reproducible evaluation. Med Image Anal 63:101694

Kepuska V, Bohouta G (2018) Next-generation of virtual personal assistants (microsoft cortana, apple siri, amazon alexa and google home). 2018 IEEE 8th annual computing and communication workshop and conference (CCWC). IEEE, New York, pp 99–103

Carneiro T, Da Nóbrega RVM, Nepomuceno T, Bian G-B, De Albuquerque VHC, Reboucas Filho PP (2018) Performance analysis of google colaboratory as a tool for accelerating deep learning applications. IEEE Access 6:61677–61685

Dosovitskiy A, Beyer L, Kolesnikov A, Weissenborn D, Zhai X, Unterthiner T, Dehghani M, Minderer M, Heigold G, Gelly S (2020) An image is worth 16x16 words: transformers for image recognition at scale. arXiv preprint arXiv:201011929

Li J, Chen J, Tang Y, Wang C, Landman BA, Zhou SK (2023) Transforming medical imaging with Transformers? A comparative review of key properties, current progresses, and future perspectives. Med Image Anal 85:102762

He K, Gan C, Li Z, Rekik I, Yin Z, Ji W, Gao Y, Wang Q, Zhang J, Shen D (2023) Transformers in medical image analysis. Intell Med 3(1):59–78

Tjoa E, Guan C (2020) A survey on explainable artificial intelligence (xai): toward medical xai. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst 32(11):4793–4813

Van der Velden BH, Kuijf HJ, Gilhuijs KG, Viergever MA (2022) Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) in deep learning-based medical image analysis. Med Image Anal 79:102470

Begoli E, Bhattacharya T, Kusnezov D (2019) The need for uncertainty quantification in machine-assisted medical decision making. Nat Mach Intell 1(1):20–23

Psaros AF, Meng X, Zou Z, Guo L, Karniadakis GE (2023) Uncertainty quantification in scientific machine learning: methods, metrics, and comparisons. J Comput Phys 477:111902

Zhang X, Chan FT, Mahadevan S (2022) Explainable machine learning in image classification models: an uncertainty quantification perspective. Knowl-Based Syst 243:108418

Gawlikowski J, Tassi CRN, Ali M, Lee J, Humt M, Feng J, Kruspe A, Triebel R, Jung P, Roscher R (2023) A survey of uncertainty in deep neural networks. Artif Intell Rev 56:1–77

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our appreciation to Dr. Soheil Zarie and Dr. Jafar Zamani for their insightful suggestions throughout the course of this research.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Quantitative MR Imaging and Spectroscopy Group, Advanced Medical Technologies and Equipment Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Gelareh Valizadeh, Reza Elahi & Hamidreza Saligheh Rad

School of Medicine, Zanjan University of Medical Sciences, Zanjan, Iran

Department of Para-Medicine, Medical School, Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Tabriz, Iran

Zahra Hasankhani

Department of Biomedical Engineering and Medical Physics, Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Ahmad Shalbaf

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Hamidreza Saligheh Rad or Ahmad Shalbaf .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

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

A. Summary of abbreviations/acronyms referenced in the paper

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Valizadeh, G., Elahi, R., Hasankhani, Z. et al. Deep Learning Approaches for Early Prediction of Conversion from MCI to AD using MRI and Clinical Data: A Systematic Review. Arch Computat Methods Eng (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-024-10176-6

Download citation

Received : 28 October 2023

Accepted : 12 July 2024

Published : 27 September 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s11831-024-10176-6

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

• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research