How to Write a Nursing Literature Review

A nursing literature review is rarely hard because of the writing. It is hard because of everything that should happen before you write.

Choosing databases, running searches that return a manageable set of results, deciding what is in scope and organizing what you find all come first. This guide covers that process end to end. To see what the finished write-up looks like, read the nursing literature review example.

Step 1: Define the Review Question First

It is tempting to start searching as soon as you have a topic such as "fall prevention". A search that broad returns thousands of results, most of them irrelevant.

Before opening a database, write one or two sentences stating what the review must establish. For a capstone this is usually your PICOT question or a close variant; for a standalone assignment, the prompt sets the scope.

A focused question does two jobs. It tells you what to search for, and later it tells you what to exclude, because an interesting source still does not belong if it does not answer your question.

Step 2: Choose Databases Deliberately

Searching only Google Scholar tends to miss nursing-specific literature and makes your search hard to report. Use two or three subject databases instead.

CINAHL plus PubMed is a strong default for most nursing topics. Add a third database only when your topic clearly needs it.

Step 3: Build the Search String

Break your question into its main concepts, usually population, intervention and outcome. List synonyms for each, then combine them with Boolean operators.

• OR joins synonyms within a concept and widens the search.
• AND joins different concepts and narrows it.
• Quotation marks keep a phrase together, such as "older adult".
• Truncation (*) catches word endings, so fall* finds fall, falls and falling.

Applying Limits

Most databases let you filter by date, language, peer review and study type. Many programs expect sources from the last five to seven years for evidence-based practice work, and some insist on five.

Older landmark studies can still belong if they remain central to the topic. Check your program's rule before relying on them, and record every limit you apply.

Step 4: Set Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria

Write your criteria down before you screen a single result. Deciding case by case leads to inconsistent choices that are hard to defend.

Screen titles first, then abstracts, then full texts. Keep a simple count at each stage; if your review is systematic, these counts feed a PRISMA 2020 flow diagram.

Step 5: Set up Citation Management Early

Retrofitting citations at the end is one of the most time-consuming parts of revision. Set up your system before you start screening.

• Choose a citation manager such as Zotero or Mendeley (both free) and save sources straight from the database.
• Tag each source by theme as you save it.
• Export your APA 7th reference list from the manager, then check every entry for missing DOIs and wrong capitalization.
• Note page or paragraph numbers for any quotation as you read.

Step 6: Extract Data into a Table

Read the full text of every included source and record the same details for each. This table becomes the backbone of your synthesis.

Avoid citing from abstracts alone. Abstracts often leave out sample details and limitations, so use your library or interlibrary loan for full texts, or substitute another source.

Appraise as You Extract

Rate each study's level and quality while it is fresh. Many programs use the Johns Hopkins evidence appraisal tools or the Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt hierarchy, so check which one your rubric names and apply it to every source the same way.

Appraisal lets you weigh studies fairly in the draft. A well-run trial and a small pilot can both belong in a theme, but they should not carry equal weight in your conclusions.

Step 7: Organize and Draft by Theme

Read across your table for shared outcomes, agreements, contradictions and gaps. Each strong pattern becomes a theme and a subheading.

1. Introduction: the problem, why it matters and the review question.
2. Search methods: databases, terms, limits and criteria, briefly.
3. Themes: one section per theme, comparing studies within it.
4. Synthesis and gap: what the evidence shows overall and what remains unanswered.
5. Conclusion: how the gap leads to your project or recommendation.

Discuss method differences where they might explain different results. That comparison is what lifts a themed review into a real synthesis.

Planning Your Time

Students often budget for writing and forget that searching and reading take longer. A rough split for a capstone-length review looks like this.

If your deadline is close, protect the reading and extraction stage. A review drafted from skimmed abstracts is the hardest kind to fix later.

Keep a Search Log

Record the date, database, exact string, limits and number of results for every search. It takes a minute per search and lets you write your methods paragraph accurately.

Common Mistakes and Fixes

How NurseCapstone Helps with Literature Reviews

Send your review question or PICOT, your rubric, your program's date window and any sources you have already found. A writer matched to your level can run and document the search, screen against your criteria, build the extraction table and write a model themed review.

You can hand over any stage, from search strategy to final synthesis. The work is written from scratch and plagiarism-checked, with free revisions within the scope of your original request.