research gap explanation

• Privacy Policy

Home » Research Gap – Types, Examples and How to Identify

Research Gap – Types, Examples and How to Identify

Table of Contents

Research Gap

Definition:

Research gap refers to an area or topic within a field of study that has not yet been extensively researched or is yet to be explored. It is a question, problem or issue that has not been addressed or resolved by previous research.

How to Identify Research Gap

Identifying a research gap is an essential step in conducting research that adds value and contributes to the existing body of knowledge. Research gap requires critical thinking, creativity, and a thorough understanding of the existing literature . It is an iterative process that may require revisiting and refining your research questions and ideas multiple times.

Here are some steps that can help you identify a research gap:

• Review existing literature: Conduct a thorough review of the existing literature in your research area. This will help you identify what has already been studied and what gaps still exist.
• Identify a research problem: Identify a specific research problem or question that you want to address.
• Analyze existing research: Analyze the existing research related to your research problem. This will help you identify areas that have not been studied, inconsistencies in the findings, or limitations of the previous research.
• Brainstorm potential research ideas : Based on your analysis, brainstorm potential research ideas that address the identified gaps.
• Consult with experts: Consult with experts in your research area to get their opinions on potential research ideas and to identify any additional gaps that you may have missed.
• Refine research questions: Refine your research questions and hypotheses based on the identified gaps and potential research ideas.
• Develop a research proposal: Develop a research proposal that outlines your research questions, objectives, and methods to address the identified research gap.

Types of Research Gap

There are different types of research gaps that can be identified, and each type is associated with a specific situation or problem. Here are the main types of research gaps and their explanations:

Theoretical Gap

This type of research gap refers to a lack of theoretical understanding or knowledge in a particular area. It can occur when there is a discrepancy between existing theories and empirical evidence or when there is no theory that can explain a particular phenomenon. Identifying theoretical gaps can lead to the development of new theories or the refinement of existing ones.

Empirical Gap

An empirical gap occurs when there is a lack of empirical evidence or data in a particular area. It can happen when there is a lack of research on a specific topic or when existing research is inadequate or inconclusive. Identifying empirical gaps can lead to the development of new research studies to collect data or the refinement of existing research methods to improve the quality of data collected.

Methodological Gap

This type of research gap refers to a lack of appropriate research methods or techniques to answer a research question. It can occur when existing methods are inadequate, outdated, or inappropriate for the research question. Identifying methodological gaps can lead to the development of new research methods or the modification of existing ones to better address the research question.

Practical Gap

A practical gap occurs when there is a lack of practical applications or implementation of research findings. It can occur when research findings are not implemented due to financial, political, or social constraints. Identifying practical gaps can lead to the development of strategies for the effective implementation of research findings in practice.

Knowledge Gap

This type of research gap occurs when there is a lack of knowledge or information on a particular topic. It can happen when a new area of research is emerging, or when research is conducted in a different context or population. Identifying knowledge gaps can lead to the development of new research studies or the extension of existing research to fill the gap.

Examples of Research Gap

Here are some examples of research gaps that researchers might identify:

• Theoretical Gap Example : In the field of psychology, there might be a theoretical gap related to the lack of understanding of the relationship between social media use and mental health. Although there is existing research on the topic, there might be a lack of consensus on the mechanisms that link social media use to mental health outcomes.
• Empirical Gap Example : In the field of environmental science, there might be an empirical gap related to the lack of data on the long-term effects of climate change on biodiversity in specific regions. Although there might be some studies on the topic, there might be a lack of data on the long-term effects of climate change on specific species or ecosystems.
• Methodological Gap Example : In the field of education, there might be a methodological gap related to the lack of appropriate research methods to assess the impact of online learning on student outcomes. Although there might be some studies on the topic, existing research methods might not be appropriate to assess the complex relationships between online learning and student outcomes.
• Practical Gap Example: In the field of healthcare, there might be a practical gap related to the lack of effective strategies to implement evidence-based practices in clinical settings. Although there might be existing research on the effectiveness of certain practices, they might not be implemented in practice due to various barriers, such as financial constraints or lack of resources.
• Knowledge Gap Example: In the field of anthropology, there might be a knowledge gap related to the lack of understanding of the cultural practices of indigenous communities in certain regions. Although there might be some research on the topic, there might be a lack of knowledge about specific cultural practices or beliefs that are unique to those communities.

Examples of Research Gap In Literature Review, Thesis, and Research Paper might be:

• Literature review : A literature review on the topic of machine learning and healthcare might identify a research gap in the lack of studies that investigate the use of machine learning for early detection of rare diseases.
• Thesis : A thesis on the topic of cybersecurity might identify a research gap in the lack of studies that investigate the effectiveness of artificial intelligence in detecting and preventing cyber attacks.
• Research paper : A research paper on the topic of natural language processing might identify a research gap in the lack of studies that investigate the use of natural language processing techniques for sentiment analysis in non-English languages.

How to Write Research Gap

By following these steps, you can effectively write about research gaps in your paper and clearly articulate the contribution that your study will make to the existing body of knowledge.

Here are some steps to follow when writing about research gaps in your paper:

• Identify the research question : Before writing about research gaps, you need to identify your research question or problem. This will help you to understand the scope of your research and identify areas where additional research is needed.
• Review the literature: Conduct a thorough review of the literature related to your research question. This will help you to identify the current state of knowledge in the field and the gaps that exist.
• Identify the research gap: Based on your review of the literature, identify the specific research gap that your study will address. This could be a theoretical, empirical, methodological, practical, or knowledge gap.
• Provide evidence: Provide evidence to support your claim that the research gap exists. This could include a summary of the existing literature, a discussion of the limitations of previous studies, or an analysis of the current state of knowledge in the field.
• Explain the importance: Explain why it is important to fill the research gap. This could include a discussion of the potential implications of filling the gap, the significance of the research for the field, or the potential benefits to society.
• State your research objectives: State your research objectives, which should be aligned with the research gap you have identified. This will help you to clearly articulate the purpose of your study and how it will address the research gap.

Importance of Research Gap

The importance of research gaps can be summarized as follows:

• Advancing knowledge: Identifying research gaps is crucial for advancing knowledge in a particular field. By identifying areas where additional research is needed, researchers can fill gaps in the existing body of knowledge and contribute to the development of new theories and practices.
• Guiding research: Research gaps can guide researchers in designing studies that fill those gaps. By identifying research gaps, researchers can develop research questions and objectives that are aligned with the needs of the field and contribute to the development of new knowledge.
• Enhancing research quality: By identifying research gaps, researchers can avoid duplicating previous research and instead focus on developing innovative research that fills gaps in the existing body of knowledge. This can lead to more impactful research and higher-quality research outputs.
• Informing policy and practice: Research gaps can inform policy and practice by highlighting areas where additional research is needed to inform decision-making. By filling research gaps, researchers can provide evidence-based recommendations that have the potential to improve policy and practice in a particular field.

Applications of Research Gap

Here are some potential applications of research gap:

• Informing research priorities: Research gaps can help guide research funding agencies and researchers to prioritize research areas that require more attention and resources.
• Identifying practical implications: Identifying gaps in knowledge can help identify practical applications of research that are still unexplored or underdeveloped.
• Stimulating innovation: Research gaps can encourage innovation and the development of new approaches or methodologies to address unexplored areas.
• Improving policy-making: Research gaps can inform policy-making decisions by highlighting areas where more research is needed to make informed policy decisions.
• Enhancing academic discourse: Research gaps can lead to new and constructive debates and discussions within academic communities, leading to more robust and comprehensive research.

Advantages of Research Gap

Here are some of the advantages of research gap:

• Identifies new research opportunities: Identifying research gaps can help researchers identify areas that require further exploration, which can lead to new research opportunities.
• Improves the quality of research: By identifying gaps in current research, researchers can focus their efforts on addressing unanswered questions, which can improve the overall quality of research.
• Enhances the relevance of research: Research that addresses existing gaps can have significant implications for the development of theories, policies, and practices, and can therefore increase the relevance and impact of research.
• Helps avoid duplication of effort: Identifying existing research can help researchers avoid duplicating efforts, saving time and resources.
• Helps to refine research questions: Research gaps can help researchers refine their research questions, making them more focused and relevant to the needs of the field.
• Promotes collaboration: By identifying areas of research that require further investigation, researchers can collaborate with others to conduct research that addresses these gaps, which can lead to more comprehensive and impactful research outcomes.

Disadvantages of Research Gap

While research gaps can be advantageous, there are also some potential disadvantages that should be considered:

• Difficulty in identifying gaps: Identifying gaps in existing research can be challenging, particularly in fields where there is a large volume of research or where research findings are scattered across different disciplines.
• Lack of funding: Addressing research gaps may require significant resources, and researchers may struggle to secure funding for their work if it is perceived as too risky or uncertain.
• Time-consuming: Conducting research to address gaps can be time-consuming, particularly if the research involves collecting new data or developing new methods.
• Risk of oversimplification: Addressing research gaps may require researchers to simplify complex problems, which can lead to oversimplification and a failure to capture the complexity of the issues.
• Bias : Identifying research gaps can be influenced by researchers’ personal biases or perspectives, which can lead to a skewed understanding of the field.
• Potential for disagreement: Identifying research gaps can be subjective, and different researchers may have different views on what constitutes a gap in the field, leading to disagreements and debate.

About the author

Muhammad Hassan

Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer

You may also like

Data Analysis – Process, Methods and Types

Data Interpretation – Process, Methods and...

Limitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Delimitations in Research – Types, Examples and...

Research Problem – Examples, Types and Guide

Research Report – Example, Writing Guide and...

Identifying Research Gaps to Pursue Innovative Research

This article is an excerpt from a lecture given by my Ph.D. guide, a researcher in public health. She advised us on how to identify research gaps to pursue innovative research in our fields.

What is a Research Gap?

Today we are talking about the research gap: what is it, how to identify it, and how to make use of it so that you can pursue innovative research. Now, how many of you have ever felt you had discovered a new and exciting research question , only to find that it had already been written about? I have experienced this more times than I can count. Graduate studies come with pressure to add new knowledge to the field. We can contribute to the progress and knowledge of humanity. To do this, we need to first learn to identify research gaps in the existing literature.

A research gap is, simply, a topic or area for which missing or insufficient information limits the ability to reach a conclusion for a question. It should not be confused with a research question, however. For example, if we ask the research question of what the healthiest diet for humans is, we would find many studies and possible answers to this question. On the other hand, if we were to ask the research question of what are the effects of antidepressants on pregnant women, we would not find much-existing data. This is a research gap. When we identify a research gap, we identify a direction for potentially new and exciting research.

How to Identify Research Gap?

Considering the volume of existing research, identifying research gaps can seem overwhelming or even impossible. I don’t have time to read every paper published on public health. Similarly, you guys don’t have time to read every paper. So how can you identify a research gap?

There are different techniques in various disciplines, but we can reduce most of them down to a few steps, which are:

• Identify your key motivating issue/question
• Identify key terms associated with this issue
• Review the literature, searching for these key terms and identifying relevant publications
• Review the literature cited by the key publications which you located in the above step
• Identify issues not addressed by  the literature relating to your critical  motivating issue

It is the last step which we all find the most challenging. It can be difficult to figure out what an article is  not  saying. I like to keep a list of notes of biased or inconsistent information. You could also track what authors write as “directions for future research,” which often can point us towards the existing gaps.

Different Types of Research Gaps

Identifying research gaps is an essential step in conducting research, as it helps researchers to refine their research questions and to focus their research efforts on areas where there is a need for more knowledge or understanding.

1. Knowledge gaps

These are gaps in knowledge or understanding of a subject, where more research is needed to fill the gaps. For example, there may be a lack of understanding of the mechanisms behind a particular disease or how a specific technology works.

2. Conceptual gaps

These are gaps in the conceptual framework or theoretical understanding of a subject. For example, there may be a need for more research to understand the relationship between two concepts or to refine a theoretical framework.

3. Methodological gaps

These are gaps in the methods used to study a particular subject. For example, there may be a need for more research to develop new research methods or to refine existing methods to address specific research questions.

4. Data gaps

These are gaps in the data available on a particular subject. For example, there may be a need for more research to collect data on a specific population or to develop new measures to collect data on a particular construct.

5. Practical gaps

These are gaps in the application of research findings to practical situations. For example, there may be a need for more research to understand how to implement evidence-based practices in real-world settings or to identify barriers to implementing such practices.

Examples of Research Gap

Limited understanding of the underlying mechanisms of a disease:.

Despite significant research on a particular disease, there may be a lack of understanding of the underlying mechanisms of the disease. For example, although much research has been done on Alzheimer’s disease, the exact mechanisms that lead to the disease are not yet fully understood.

Inconsistencies in the findings of previous research:

When previous research on a particular topic has inconsistent findings, there may be a need for further research to clarify or resolve these inconsistencies. For example, previous research on the effectiveness of a particular treatment for a medical condition may have produced inconsistent findings, indicating a need for further research to determine the true effectiveness of the treatment.

Limited research on emerging technologies:

As new technologies emerge, there may be limited research on their applications, benefits, and potential drawbacks. For example, with the increasing use of artificial intelligence in various industries, there is a need for further research on the ethical, legal, and social implications of AI.

How to Deal with Literature Gap?

Once you have identified the literature gaps, it is critical to prioritize. You may find many questions which remain to be answered in the literature. Often one question must be answered before the next can be addressed. In prioritizing the gaps, you have identified, you should consider your funding agency or stakeholders, the needs of the field, and the relevance of your questions to what is currently being studied. Also, consider your own resources and ability to conduct the research you’re considering. Once you have done this, you can narrow your search down to an appropriate question.

Tools to Help Your Search

There are thousands of new articles published every day, and staying up to date on the literature can be overwhelming. You should take advantage of the technology that is available. Some services include  PubCrawler ,  Feedly ,  Google Scholar , and PubMed updates. Stay up to date on social media forums where scholars share new discoveries, such as Twitter. Reference managers such as  Mendeley  can help you keep your references well-organized. I personally have had success using Google Scholar and PubMed to stay current on new developments and track which gaps remain in my personal areas of interest.

The most important thing I want to impress upon you today is that you will struggle to  choose a research topic  that is innovative and exciting if you don’t know the existing literature well. This is why identifying research gaps starts with an extensive and thorough  literature review . But give yourself some boundaries.  You don’t need to read every paper that has ever been written on a topic. You may find yourself thinking you’re on the right track and then suddenly coming across a paper that you had intended to write! It happens to everyone- it happens to me quite often. Don’t give up- keep reading and you’ll find what you’re looking for.

Class dismissed!

How do you identify research gaps? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.

Frequently Asked Questions

A research gap can be identified by looking for a topic or area with missing or insufficient information that limits the ability to reach a conclusion for a question.

Identifying a research gap is important as it provides a direction for potentially new research or helps bridge the gap in existing literature.

Gap in research is a topic or area with missing or insufficient information. A research gap limits the ability to reach a conclusion for a question.

Thank u for your suggestion.

Very useful tips specially for a beginner

Thank you. This is helpful. I find that I’m overwhelmed with literatures. As I read on a particular topic, and in a particular direction I find that other conflicting issues, topic a and ideas keep popping up, making me more confused.

I am very grateful for your advice. It’s just on point.

The clearest, exhaustive, and brief explanation I have ever read.

Thanks for sharing

Thank you very much.The work is brief and understandable

Thank you it is very informative

Thanks for sharing this educative article

Thank you for such informative explanation.

Great job smart guy! Really outdid yourself!

Nice one! I thank you for this as it is just what I was looking for!😃🤟

Thank you so much for this. Much appreciated

Thank you so much.

Thankyou for ur briefing…its so helpful

Thank you so much .I’ved learn a lot from this.❤️

Very exciting and useful piece for researchers.

Your are awesome, it’s a great article.

Rate this article Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Enago Academy's Most Popular Articles

• Reporting Research

Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for data interpretation

In research, choosing the right approach to understand data is crucial for deriving meaningful insights.…

Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right approach

The process of choosing the right research design can put ourselves at the crossroads of…

• Career Corner

Unlocking the Power of Networking in Academic Conferences

Embarking on your first academic conference experience? Fear not, we got you covered! Academic conferences…

Research Recommendations – Guiding policy-makers for evidence-based decision making

Research recommendations play a crucial role in guiding scholars and researchers toward fruitful avenues of…

• AI in Academia

Disclosing the Use of Generative AI: Best practices for authors in manuscript preparation

The rapid proliferation of generative and other AI-based tools in research writing has ignited an…

Avoiding the AI Trap: Pitfalls of relying on ChatGPT for PhD applications

10 Ways to Help Students Restore Focus on Learning

Switching Your Major As a Researcher: Things to Consider Before Making the Decision

Sign-up to read more

Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including:

• 2000+ blog articles
• 50+ Webinars
• 10+ Expert podcasts
• 50+ Infographics
• 10+ Checklists
• Research Guides

We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you.

• Industry News
• Publishing Research
• Promoting Research
• Diversity and Inclusion
• Infographics
• Expert Video Library
• Other Resources
• Enago Learn
• Upcoming & On-Demand Webinars
• Peer Review Week 2024
• Open Access Week 2023
• Conference Videos
• Enago Report
• Journal Finder
• Enago Plagiarism & AI Grammar Check
• Editing Services
• Publication Support Services
• Research Impact
• Translation Services
• Publication solutions
• AI-Based Solutions
• Thought Leadership
• Call for Articles
• Call for Speakers
• Author Training
• Edit Profile

I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission:

In your opinion, what is the most effective way to improve integrity in the peer review process?

How To Find A Research Gap, Quickly

A step-by-step guide for new researchers

By: Derek Jansen (MBA) | Reviewer: Eunice Rautenbach (DTech) | April 2023

If you’ve got a dissertation, thesis or research project coming up, one of the first (and most important) things you’ll need to do is find a suitable research gap . In this post, we’ll share a straightforward process to help you uncover high-quality, original research gaps in a very time-efficient manner.

Overview: Finding Research Gaps

• What exactly is a research gap?
• Research gap vs research topic
• How to find potential research gaps
• How to evaluate research gaps (and topics)
• Key takeaways

What is a research gap?

As a starting point, it’s useful to first define what we mean by research gap, to ensure we’re all on the same page. The term “research gap” gets thrown around quite loosely by students and academics alike, so let’s clear that up.

Simply put, a research gap is any space where there’s a lack of solid, agreed-upon research regarding a specific topic, issue or phenomenon. In other words, there’s a lack of established knowledge and, consequently, a need for further research.

Let’s look at a hypothetical example to illustrate a research gap.

Within the existing research regarding factors affect job satisfaction , there may be a wealth of established and agreed-upon empirical work within a US and UK context , but very little research within Eastern nations such as Japan or Korea . Given that these nations have distinctly different national cultures and workforce compositions compared to the West, it’s plausible that the factors that contribute toward job satisfaction may also be different. Therefore, a research gap emerges for studies that explore this matter.

This example is purely hypothetical (and there’s probably plenty of research covering this already), but it illustrates the core point that a research gap reflects a lack of firmly established knowledge regarding a specific matter . Given this lack, an opportunity exists for researchers (like you) to go on and fill the gap.

So, it’s the same as a research topic?

Not quite – but they are connected. A research gap refers to an area where there’s a lack of settled research , whereas a research topic outlines the focus of a specific study . Despite being different things, these two are related because research gaps are the birthplace of research topics. In other words, by identifying a clear research gap, you have a foundation from which you can build a research topic for your specific study. Your study is unlikely to resolve the entire research gap on it’s own, but it will contribute towards it .

If you’d like to learn more, we’ve got a comprehensive post that covers research gaps (including the different types of research gaps), as well as an explainer video below.

How to find a research gap

Now that we’ve defined what a research gap is, it’s time to get down to the process of finding potential research gaps that you can use as a basis for potential research topics. Importantly, it’s worth noting that this is just one way (of many) to find a research gap (and consequently a topic). We’re not proposing that it’s the only way or best way, but it’s certainly a relatively quick way to identify opportunities.

Step 1: Identify your broad area of interest

The very first step to finding a research gap is to decide on your general area of interest . For example, if you were undertaking a dissertation as part of an MBA degree, you may decide that you’re interested in corporate reputation, HR strategy, or leadership styles. As you can see, these are broad categories – there’s no need to get super specific just yet. Of course, if there is something very specific that you’re interested in, that’s great – but don’t feel pressured to narrow it down too much right now.

Equally important is to make sure that this area of interest is allowed by your university or whichever institution you’ll be proposing your research to. This might sound dead obvious, but you’ll be surprised how many times we’ve seen students run down a path with great excitement, only to later learn that their university wants a very specific area of focus in terms of topic (and their area of interest doesn’t qualify).

Step 2: Do an initial literature scan

Once you’ve pinned down your broad area (or areas) of interest, the next step is to head over to Google Scholar to undertake an initial literature scan . If you’re not familiar with this tool, Google Scholar is a great starting point for finding academic literature on pretty much any topic, as it uses Google’s powerful search capabilities to hunt down relevant academic literature. It’s certainly not the be-all and end-all of literature search tools, but it’s a useful starting point .

Within Google Scholar, you’ll want to do a few searches using keywords that are relevant to your area of interest. Sticking with our earlier example, we could use the key phrase “job satisfaction”, or we may want to get a little more specific – perhaps “job satisfaction for millennials” or “job satisfaction in Japan”.

It’s always a good idea to play around with as many keywords/phrases as you can think up.  Take an iterative approach here and see which keywords yield the most relevant results for you. Keep each search open in a new tab, as this will help keep things organised for the next steps.

Once you’ve searched for a few different keywords/phrases, you’ll need to do some refining for each of the searches you undertook. Specifically, you’ll need to filter the results down to the most recent papers . You can do this by selecting the time period in the top left corner (see the example below).

Filtering to the current year is typically a good choice (especially for fast-moving research areas), but in some cases, you may need to filter to the last two years . If you’re undertaking this task in January or February, for example, you’ll likely need to select a two-year period.

Need a helping hand?

Step 3: Review and shortlist articles that interest you

Once you’ve run a few searches using different keywords and phrases, you’ll need to scan through the results to see what looks most relevant and interesting to you. At this stage, you can just look at the titles and abstracts (the description provided by Google Scholar) – don’t worry about reading the actual article just yet.

Next, select 5 – 10 articles that interest you and open them up. Here, we’re making the assumption that your university has provided you with access to a decent range of academic databases. In some cases, Google Scholar will link you directly to a PDF of the article, but in most cases, you’ll need paid access. If you don’t have this (for example, if you’re still applying to a university), you can look at two options:

Open-access articles – these are free articles which you can access without any journal subscription. A quick Google search (the regular Google) will help you find open-access journals in your area of interest, but you can also have a look at DOAJ and Elsevier Open Access.

DeepDyve – this is a monthly subscription service that allows you to get access to a broad range of journals. At the time of shooting this video, their monthly subscription is around $50 and they do offer a free trial, which may be sufficient for your project.

Step 4: Skim-read your article shortlist

Now, it’s time to dig into your article shortlist and do some reading. But don’t worry, you don’t need to read the articles from start to finish – you just need to focus on a few key sections.

Specifically, you’ll need to pay attention to the following:

• The abstract (which you’ve probably already read a portion of in Google Scholar)
• The introduction – this will give you a bit more detail about the context and background of the study, as well as what the researchers were trying to achieve (their research aims)
• The discussion or conclusion – this will tell you what the researchers found

By skimming through these three sections for each journal article on your shortlist, you’ll gain a reasonable idea of what each study was about, without having to dig into the painful details. Generally, these sections are usually quite short, so it shouldn’t take you too long.

Step 5: Go “FRIN hunting”

This is where the magic happens. Within each of the articles on your shortlist, you’ll want to search for a few very specific phrases , namely:

• Future research
• Further research
• Research opportunities
• Research directions

All of these terms are commonly found in what we call the “FRIN” section . FRIN stands for “further research is needed”. The FRIN is where the researchers explain what other researchers could do to build on their study, or just on the research area in general. In other words, the FRIN section is where you can find fresh opportunities for novel research . Most empirical studies will either have a dedicated FRIN section or paragraph, or they’ll allude to the FRIN toward the very end of the article. You’ll need to do a little scanning, but it’s usually pretty easy to spot.

It’s worth mentioning that naturally, the FRIN doesn’t hand you a list of research gaps on a platter. It’s not a silver bullet for finding research gaps – but it’s the closest thing to it. Realistically, the FRIN section helps you shortcut the gap-hunting process  by highlighting novel research avenues that are worth exploring.

This probably sounds a little conceptual, so let’s have a look at a few examples:

The impact of overeducation on job outcomes: Evidence from Saudi Arabia (Alzubaidi, 2020)

If you scroll down to the bottom of this article, you’ll see there’s a dedicated section called “Limitations and directions for future research”. Here they talk about the limitations of the study and provide suggestions about how future researchers could improve upon their work and overcome the limitations.

Perceived organizational support and job satisfaction: a moderated mediation model of proactive personality and psychological empowerment (Maan et al, 2020)

In this article, within the limitations section, they provide a wonderfully systematic structure where they discuss each limitation, followed by a proposal as to how future studies can overcome the respective limitation. In doing so, they are providing very specific research opportunities for other researchers.

Medical professionals’ job satisfaction and telemedicine readiness during the COVID-19 pandemic: solutions to improve medical practice in Egypt (El-Mazahy et al, 2023)

In this article, they don’t have a dedicated section discussing the FRIN, but we can deduct it based on the limitations section. For example, they state that an evaluation of the knowledge about telemedicine and technology-related skills would have enabled studying their independent effect on the perception of telemedicine.

Follow this FRIN-seeking process for the articles you shortlisted and map out any potentially interesting research gaps . You may find that you need to look at a larger number of articles to find something interesting, or you might find that your area of interest shifts as you engage in the reading – this is perfectly natural. Take as much time as you need to develop a shortlist of potential research gaps that interest you.

Importantly, once you’ve developed a shortlist of potential research gaps, you need to return to Google Scholar to double-check that there aren’t fresh studies that have already addressed the gap. Remember, if you’re looking at papers from two years ago in a fast-moving field, someone else may have jumped on it . Nevertheless, there could still very well be a unique angle you could take – perhaps a contextual gap (e.g. a specific country, industry, etc.).

Ultimately, the need for originality will depend on your specific university’s requirements and the level of study. For example, if you’re doing an undergraduate research project, the originality requirements likely won’t be as gruelling as say a Masters or PhD project. So, make sure you have a clear understanding of what your university’s expectations are. A good way to do this is to look at past dissertations and theses for your specific programme. You can usually find these in the university library or by asking the faculty.

How to evaluate potential research gaps

Once you’ve developed a shortlist of potential research gaps (and resultant potential research topics) that interest you, you’ll need to systematically evaluate  them  to choose a winner. There are many factors to consider here, but some important ones include the following:

• Originality and value – is the topic sufficiently novel and will addressing it create value?
• Data access – will you be able to get access to the sample of interest?
• Costs – will there be additional costs involved for data collection and/or analysis?
• Timeframes – will you be able to collect and analyse the data within the timeframe required by your university?
• Supervisor support – is there a suitable supervisor available to support your project from start to finish?

To help you evaluate your options systematically, we’ve got a topic evaluation worksheet that allows you to score each potential topic against a comprehensive set of criteria. You can access the worksheet completely free of charge here .

Recap: Key Takeaways

We’ve covered quite a lot of ground in this post. Here are the key takeaways:

• A research gap is any space where there’s a lack of solid, agreed-upon research regarding a specific topic/issue/phenomenon.
• Unique research topics emerge from research gaps , so it’s essential to first identify high-quality research gaps before you attempt to define a topic.
• To find potential research gaps, start by seeking out recent journal articles on Google Scholar and pay particular attention to the FRIN section to identify novel opportunities.
• Once you have a shortlist of prospective research gaps and resultant topic ideas, evaluate them systematically using a comprehensive set of criteria.

If you’d like to get hands-on help finding a research gap and research topic, be sure to check out our private coaching service , where we hold your hand through the research journey, step by step.

Psst... there’s more!

This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...

Very useful for me, but i am still confusing review of literature review, how to find out topic related previous research.

Powerful notes! Thanks a lot.

This is helpful. Thanks a lot.

Thank you very much for this. It is really a great opportunity for me to learn the research journey.

Very Useful

It nice job

You have sharpened my articulations of these components to the core. Thanks so much.

It’s educative and an inspiring way of impacting research knowledge…

Thanks to the writer

Submit a Comment Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

• Print Friendly

• Link to facebook
• Link to linkedin
• Link to twitter
• Link to youtube
• Writing Tips

How to Identify a Research Gap

5-minute read

• 10th January 2024

If you’ve been tasked with producing a thesis or dissertation, one of your first steps will be identifying a research gap. Although finding a research gap may sound daunting, don’t fret! In this post, we will define a research gap, discuss its importance, and offer a step-by-step guide that will provide you with the essential know-how to complete this critical step and move on to the rest of your research project.

What Is a Research Gap?

Simply put, a research gap is an area that hasn’t been explored in the existing literature. This could be an unexplored population, an untested method, or a condition that hasn’t been investigated yet. 

Why Is Identifying a Research Gap Important?

Identifying a research gap is a foundational step in the research process. It ensures that your research is significant and has the ability to advance knowledge within a specific area. It also helps you align your work with the current needs and challenges of your field. Identifying a research gap has many potential benefits.

1. Avoid Redundancy in Your Research

Understanding the existing literature helps researchers avoid duplication. This means you can steer clear of topics that have already been extensively studied. This ensures your work is novel and contributes something new to the field.

2. Guide the Research Design

Identifying a research gap helps shape your research design and questions. You can tailor your studies to specifically address the identified gap. This ensures that your work directly contributes to filling the void in knowledge.

3. Practical Applications

Research that addresses a gap is more likely to have practical applications and contributions. Whether in academia, industry, or policymaking, research that fills a gap in knowledge is often more applicable and can inform decision-making and practices in real-world contexts.

4. Field Advancements

Addressing a research gap can lead to advancements in the field . It may result in the development of new theories, methodologies, or technologies that push the boundaries of current understanding.

5. Strategic Research Planning

Identifying a research gap is crucial for strategic planning . It helps researchers and institutions prioritize areas that need attention so they can allocate resources effectively. This ensures that efforts are directed toward the most critical gaps in knowledge.

6. Academic and Professional Recognition

Researchers who successfully address significant research gaps often receive peer recognition within their academic and professional communities. This recognition can lead to opportunities for collaboration, funding, and career advancement.

How Do I Identify a Research Gap?

1. clearly define your research topic .

Begin by clearly defining your research topic. A well-scoped topic serves as the foundation for your studies. Make sure it’s not too broad or too narrow; striking the right balance will make it easier to identify gaps in existing literature.

Find this useful?

Subscribe to our newsletter and get writing tips from our editors straight to your inbox.

2. Conduct a Thorough Literature Review

A comprehensive literature review is a vital step in any research. Dive deep into the existing research related to your topic. Look for patterns, recurring themes, and consensus among scholars. Pay attention to areas where conflicting opinions or gaps in understanding emerge.

3. Evaluate Existing Studies

Critically evaluate the studies you encounter during your literature review. Assess the paradigms , methodologies, findings, and limitations of each. Note any discrepancies, unanswered questions, or areas where further investigation is warranted. These are potential indicators of research gaps.

4. Identify Unexplored Perspectives

Consider the perspectives presented in the existing literature. Are there alternative viewpoints or marginalized voices that haven’t been adequately explored? Identifying and incorporating diverse perspectives can often lead to uncharted territory and help you pinpoint a unique research gap.

Additional Tips

Stay up to date with emerging trends.

The field of research is dynamic, with new developments and emerging trends constantly shaping the landscape. Stay up to date with the latest publications, conferences, and discussions in your field and make sure to regularly check relevant academic search engines . Often, identifying a research gap involves being at the forefront of current debates and discussions.

Seek Guidance From Experts

Don’t hesitate to reach out to experts in your field for guidance. Attend conferences, workshops, or seminars where you can interact with seasoned researchers. Their insights and experience can provide valuable perspectives on potential research gaps that you may have overlooked. You can also seek advice from your academic advisor .

Use Research Tools and Analytics

Leverage tech tools to analyze patterns and trends in the existing literature. Tools like citation analysis, keyword mapping, and data visualization can help you identify gaps and areas with limited exploration.

Identifying a research gap is a skill that evolves with experience and dedication. By defining your research topic, meticulously navigating the existing literature, critically evaluating studies, and recognizing unexplored perspectives, you’ll be on your way to identifying a research gap that will serve as the foundation for your paper, thesis, or dissertation topic .

If you need any help with proofreading your research paper , we can help with our research paper editing services . You can even try a sample of our services for free . Good luck with all your research!

Share this article:

Post A New Comment

Got content that needs a quick turnaround? Let us polish your work. Explore our editorial business services.

Free email newsletter template.

Promoting a brand means sharing valuable insights to connect more deeply with your audience, and...

6-minute read

How to Write a Nonprofit Grant Proposal

If you’re seeking funding to support your charitable endeavors as a nonprofit organization, you’ll need...

9-minute read

How to Use Infographics to Boost Your Presentation

Is your content getting noticed? Capturing and maintaining an audience’s attention is a challenge when...

8-minute read

Why Interactive PDFs Are Better for Engagement

Are you looking to enhance engagement and captivate your audience through your professional documents? Interactive...

7-minute read

Seven Key Strategies for Voice Search Optimization

Voice search optimization is rapidly shaping the digital landscape, requiring content professionals to adapt their...

4-minute read

Five Creative Ways to Showcase Your Digital Portfolio

Are you a creative freelancer looking to make a lasting impression on potential clients or...

Make sure your writing is the best it can be with our expert English proofreading and editing.

How to identify research gaps

Anthony Newman

About this video

Researching is an ongoing task, as it requires you to think of something nobody else has thought of before. This is where the research gap comes into play.

We will explain what a research gap is, provide you with steps on how to identify these research gaps, as well as provide you several tools that can help you identify them.

About the presenter

Senior Publisher, Life Sciences, Elsevier

Anthony Newman is a Senior Publisher with Elsevier and is based in Amsterdam. Each year he presents numerous Author Workshops and other similar trainings worldwide. He is currently responsible for fifteen biochemistry and laboratory medicine journals, he joined Elsevier over thirty years ago and has been Publisher for more than twenty of those years. Before then he was the marketing communications manager for the biochemistry journals of Elsevier.  By training he is a polymer chemist and was active in the surface coating industry before leaving London and moving to Amsterdam in 1987 to join Elsevier.

Researcher Academy on Twitter

• Research Process
• Manuscript Preparation
• Manuscript Review
• Publication Process
• Publication Recognition
• Language Editing Services
• Translation Services

What is a Research Gap

• 3 minute read
• 293.9K views

Table of Contents

If you are a young researcher, or even still finishing your studies, you’ll probably notice that your academic environment revolves around certain research topics, probably linked to your department or to the interest of your mentor and direct colleagues. For example, if your department is currently doing research in nanotechnology applied to medicine, it is only natural that you feel compelled to follow this line of research. Hopefully, it’s something you feel familiar with and interested in – although you might take your own twists and turns along your career.

Many scientists end up continuing their academic legacy during their professional careers, writing about their own practical experiences in the field and adapting classic methodologies to a present context. However, each and every researcher dreams about being a pioneer in a subject one day, by discovering a topic that hasn’t been approached before by any other scientist. This is a research gap.

Research gaps are particularly useful for the advance of science, in general. Finding a research gap and having the means to develop a complete and sustained study on it can be very rewarding for the scientist (or team of scientists), not to mention how its new findings can positively impact our whole society.

How to Find a Gap in Research

How many times have you felt that you have finally formulated THAT new and exciting question, only to find out later that it had been addressed before? Probably more times than you can count.

There are some steps you can take to help identify research gaps, since it is impossible to go through all the information and research available nowadays:

• Select a topic or question that motivates you: Research can take a long time and surely a large amount of physical, intellectual and emotional effort, therefore choose a topic that can keep you motivated throughout the process.
• Find keywords and related terms to your selected topic: Besides synthesizing the topic to its essential core, this will help you in the next step.
• Use the identified keywords to search literature: From your findings in the above step, identify relevant publications and cited literature in those publications.
• Look for topics or issues that are missing or not addressed within (or related to) your main topic.
• Read systematic reviews: These documents plunge deeply into scholarly literature and identify trends and paradigm shifts in fields of study. Sometimes they reveal areas or topics that need more attention from researchers and scientists.

Keeping track of all the new literature being published every day is an impossible mission. Remember that there is technology to make your daily tasks easier, and reviewing literature can be one of them. Some online databases offer up-to-date publication lists with quite effective search features:

• Elsevier’s Scope
• Google Scholar

Of course, these tools may be more or less effective depending on knowledge fields. There might be even better ones for your specific topic of research; you can learn about them from more experienced colleagues or mentors.

Find out how FINER research framework can help you formulate your research question.

Literature Gap

The expression “literature gap” is used with the same intention as “research gap.” When there is a gap in the research itself, there will also naturally be a gap in the literature. Nevertheless, it is important to stress out the importance of language or text formulations that can help identify a research/literature gap or, on the other hand, making clear that a research gap is being addressed.

When looking for research gaps across publications you may have noticed sentences like:

…has/have not been… (studied/reported/elucidated) …is required/needed… …the key question is/remains… …it is important to address…

These expressions often indicate gaps; issues or topics related to the main question that still hasn’t been subject to a scientific study. Therefore, it is important to take notice of them: who knows if one of these sentences is hiding your way to fame.

Language Editing Services by Elsevier Author Services:

Systematic Review VS Meta-Analysis

Literature Review in Research Writing

You may also like.

Descriptive Research Design and Its Myriad Uses

Five Common Mistakes to Avoid When Writing a Biomedical Research Paper

Making Technical Writing in Environmental Engineering Accessible

To Err is Not Human: The Dangers of AI-assisted Academic Writing

When Data Speak, Listen: Importance of Data Collection and Analysis Methods

Choosing the Right Research Methodology: A Guide for Researchers

Why is data validation important in research?

Writing a good review article

Input your search keywords and press Enter.

Text for Mobile

What Is A Research Gap? (With Tips + Examples)

A research gap is a specific area within a field of study that remains unexplored or under-explored. Identifying a research gap involves recognizing where existing research is lacking or where there are unanswered questions that could provide opportunities for further investigation. Understanding research gaps is crucial for advancing knowledge, as it helps scholars and researchers focus their efforts on areas that can contribute significantly to their field.

What Is A Research Gap?

It is actually a question or any issue that needs to be solved by any pre-existing work or research in your area of study. A research gap can also exist where some new idea still needs to be studied.

Tips on Identifying Research Gap

Research always plays an essential role in acquiring more knowledge and addressing the gaps in different fields. When you are identifying a research gap, you are taking a very important step in the whole research process. This aids the researchers in contributing meaningful insights and triggers the knowledge boundaries.

Understanding the Literature You Are Studying: In order to identify any research gap, it is essential to have an excellent advertising of the preexisting literature in your study field.

Here, you need to conduct a review of many books, scholarly articles, conferences, and other relevant sources. In this way, you can get a good foundation as well as insights into any present state of in-depth knowledge in your own study area.

Defining Your Own Research Question: After getting a good knowledge of the pre-existing literature, you need to define a concise and clear idea of the research question. This research question needs to be very specific, attainable, measurable, time-bound and relevant. An acronym for this entire thing is known as SMART. This also needs to address any significant issue that still needs to be fully solved or adequately answered.

Identifying Your Study Objectives: Here, you need to identify the major objectives of your research paper. All these objectives need to be aligned with the identified research gap. These objectives always guide the researcher and aid you in determining the direction and scope of your research study.

Analyze the Existing Studies: Here, you need to analyze very carefully all the existing studies that are related to your research question. Here, it would help if you looked at the most common recurring findings, themes, and patterns of the discussed literature. Here, you also need to pay a lot of attention to the conflicted areas with the results, unanswered questions, and contradictory theories. These areas show the research gaps that can be explored later.

Consider The Practical Relevance: You always need to evaluate the very practical relevance of the research question as well as its potential impact on society. Here, it would help if you always considered the importance of addressing your own research gap as you identified it.

Here, you also need to assess whether your findings can contribute to the original theoretical framework and offer all the practical solutions for leading to the policy recommendations. These practical ads are relevant to the research paper and trigger its impact.

Consulting With the Experts and Peers: You always need to engage you’re discussing with your mentors, peers, and experts in your own field of study. Here, you always need to seek their opinions and perspectives on the research question to identify potential research gaps.

These can provide valuable insights into assumption challenges, and this helps you refine your research work. Your peers and experts can give you a new idea and help you identify the errors in your thinking.

Conducting Your Pilot Study: You need to conduct it to test the viability and feasibility of the research question. This pilot study provides you with feedback and data on the research design, approach and methodology.

This also helps you identify the potential limitations or challenges that need to be solved before conducting the full research studies.

Reflecting and Refining: You need to vividly reflect on the research progress to refine your research preferences. You need to add the objectives. As you go deeper into your research process, additional research gaps may be uncovered to refine your own research needs.

If you follow this process, you can adapt your own approach to ensure the research gaps.

As per the example of the research gap, identifying your research gap allows your research to contribute to gaining more knowledge to address the pre-existing limitations.

This way, you will understand the existing literature to define a crystal clear research statement. You can identify the research gaps by analyzing the existing studies to consider their relevance. According to the research gap finder, if you consult with your peers, doing all the pilot studies reflects on your research process progress.

If you follow the guide mentioned above, you can always embark on meaningful research studies to trigger your knowledge in your subject area and make a prominent contribution to your field.

Also Read: Struggling with Research Paper Writing?

Different Types of Research Gaps

Identifying research gaps is essential for advancing knowledge in any field. Research gaps are areas where more information is available or existing research needs to be more consistent or conclusive. Here are different types of research gaps:

• Evidence Gap

This gap occurs when no empirical evidence supports certain theories, practices, or interventions. It can also refer to areas where existing studies need to sufficiently cover the topic or lack rigorous methodological approaches.

Example: A need for randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness of a new drug.

• Knowledge Gap

This gap refers to areas where there is a deficiency in understanding or awareness about a particular topic. It can be due to outdated information, incomplete research, or the absence of research on emerging issues.

Example: Limited knowledge about the long-term effects of exposure to new environmental pollutants.

• Theoretical Gap

Theoretical gaps arise when existing theories do not fully explain certain phenomena or when there is a lack of theoretical frameworks to guide research in a particular area.

Example: More theoretical models need to be developed to explain the psychological impacts of social media usage on teenagers.

• Methodological Gap

Methodological gaps exist when current research methods are inadequate for addressing certain research questions or when there is a need for new or improved methodologies.

Example: More robust qualitative methods are needed to study the experiences of marginalized communities.

• Population Gap

This type of gap occurs when certain populations are underrepresented in research. It can involve demographics like age, gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, or geographic location.

Example: Lack of research on the mental health of older adults living in rural areas.

Geographical Gap

Geographical gaps refer to areas or regions that are under-researched. These gaps highlight the need for studies in different geographic contexts to understand local issues better.

Example: Limited studies on the effects of climate change in the Arctic regions.

Strategies to Identify Research Gaps:

• Literature Reviews: Comprehensive reviews can help identify where current research is lacking or inconsistent.
• Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: These methods provide a structured approach to synthesize existing research and identify gaps.
• Expert Consultations: Discussions with experts in the field can uncover areas that require further investigation.
• Research Databases: Utilizing databases and citation analysis tools to track research trends and identify under-researched areas.
• Interdisciplinary Approaches: Engaging with multiple disciplines can reveal gaps that are not apparent within a single field.

Understanding and addressing these gaps is crucial for advancing research and knowledge across various domains.

Read More: How To Get A+ Grade In Research Paper?

What is a Research Gap Example?

A Research Paper Example gives you a very clear idea of how to find your research gaps and examples in textual forms. A few examples are given below:

• Context Healthcare: Although there have been enough researchers on the management of diabetes, there has been a research gap in understanding the impact of digital health interventions in the rural areas of Europe.
• Content environmental science: In a wealth of research regarding the huge environmental pollution caused by the use of plastics, there are fewer findings of how the plastic material really accumulates in certain areas like lakes, rivers, etc. and why these materials are never biodegradable.
• Context Education: The empirical research surrounding the online mode has become tremendously popular over the past few years. However, there needs to be more solid studies regarding the impact of the online learning process on the students who need special education. In each of these examples, you can see that the writer begins by acknowledging the preexisting reach results and then explains thoroughly the present area where the research gap really exists.

Also Read: Why Research Is Essential For Students? 20 Common Reasons!

How to Find a Research Gap?

After getting a very clear idea of various types of research gaps, the vet’s next question comes to mind is how to find a research gap. There is a basic 2 step strategy to find the research gap.

In the beginning, you need to find a lot of literature reviews, meta-analyses, and systematic reviews covering your research area of interest. Moreover, it would help if you dug into the very recent journals for wrapping your head in your own knowledge area.

Here, you can also study the current theses and dissertations, especially those in the doctoral degree courses. A number of dissertation databases, such as Open Access, EBSCO, Pro-Quest, etc., are very useful in this regard. Here. You also need to ensure that you are always looking for the most recent sources.

After gathering a good collection of these resources, you need to focus on further research opportunities. In this section, you need to state explicitly where more studies are needed. It would help if you also looked at the present research study’s limitation areas and where the research gaps might exist.

Following this procedure will help you become oriented to the present research area. This can serve as a foundation for finding the potential research gaps. Then, you need to shortlist the main ideas and evaluate them as per the given topic. It would help if you also looked only for the recent articles here.

Also Read:  Expert Literature Review Writing Services

How to Deal with Literature Gap?

In any project, a literature review is always very important. It helps you in identifying your excusing knowledge, methods and theories in your own field. However, conducting a literature review has its own challenges.

• Defiling your research question: The very first step is to define your own research question very clearly and briefly. It will help you narrow your scope and focus on the crucial sources. It would help if you used less information here. Your research must always be very specific, answerable, and original. The research project always needs to have real objectives and a purpose.
• Searching and selecting the sources: Your next step is to search and select the sources. That is very much reliable and relevant to your research field. There are a number of databases, like keywords, search engines, etc., related to your study field. However, there are also a lot of limitations to these tools, like currency, coverage, and quality of the sources. Here, certain criteria have to be applied to filter the sources, such as relevance, authority, timeline, and accuracy of the information.
• Analyzing and synthesizing the literature: This is the third step, where you need to analyze and synthesize the literature you selected. Here, you need to summarize the sources and compare, contrast and critique them. In this section, you also need to look for the similarities and differences, the strengths and weaknesses, and the gaps and inconsistencies of the literature review paper. The writers can also identify the major trends, themes, and debates in the discussed field. These should also be related to your research question.
• Fill in the gaps after identifying them: This is the 4th step to filling the literature review research paper. This gap needs to be addressed or is under the researched area and is to be addressed by you with the help of your knowledge. These gaps can be filled by looking for the limitations, contradictions or controversies in the review. You can also do this by asking new questions or proposing new ideas. The gaps can also be filled by providing the newest evidence, arguments or even insights related to your field of study.
• Organizing and structuring the literature review: This is the 5th step of your review, where you need to organize and structure the whole paper in a compact and logical manner. Here, you always need to follow certain guidelines as given by your institute and use the best style and font. Proper headings, subheading citations, and traditions should also be used here. This will help your readers follow your arguments and understand what you want to say. A very clear introduction should also be written, along with a good conclusion and summary to highlight your writing.
• Refining and Revising: The literature review is the final step of writing your literature review. Here, you need to ensure that your review is quite accurate, concise and clear. You must check your literature review thoroughly to make it free from errors, gaps, or inconsistencies in language, content, or presentation. Here, you can also seek feedback from your peers, experts or supervisors in your own field. Their suggestions will help you in performing well. The whore literature review should be thoroughly proofread and edited before the final submission.

Last but not least, never copy from any source; it will be considered plagiarism, and your paper will be cancelled then and there. Thus, write only from your own creativity and not from the writing and articles of other writers.

Read More: Dissertation Literature Review For Masters & PhD

Final Words

Writing a research paper is a challenging task. It would help if you had a lot of Research Skills to accomplish it. You will be given a Research topic on which you have to write. Your ultimate aim in writing the research paper is to get the top grade. This can be done by availing of the best online Case Study Help Service from a reliable provider. The Casestudyhelp is the best choice for you in this respect.

Why CaseStudyHelp?

• We will provide you with the best research gap example in the thesis
• Top online Research Paper Writing Service is provided by us with the most reasonable service charges
• Top grades are always assured by the online Dissertation Help service provided by us
• Our experts provide 24/7 hours of online help and support
• We have the top experts to work with us
• We provide a hundred per cent original and plagiarism-free research paper
• Our papers are also free from any errors

Clients all over the world are very happy and satisfied with our services. Thus, join us soon.

Author Bio:

Hi, I am Lyana Jones, the author of this blog. I am a well-experienced academic writer. We’ll help make your writing shine.

Please contact us anytime, tell us about your topic, and receive a 100% plagiarism-free paper with impeccable grammar and formatting.

View All Post

RELATED POST:

145+ Best Social Work Research Topics and Ideas to Use

130+ education research topics & ideas you must know, top 100+ accounting dissertation topics ideas for student, 7 advantages of dissertation writing you must know, 120+ tourism and hospitality dissertation topics.

Educational resources and simple solutions for your research journey

How to Identify Gaps in Research: Tips to Speed Up the Process

If you have ever wondered how to identify research gaps, well, you’re not alone. All researchers looking to make a solid contribution to their field need to start by identifying a topic or issue that hasn’t been tackled before and coming up with possible solutions for it. This is where learning what is a research gap, knowing about some research gap examples, and knowing how to identify research gaps becomes important. Through this article, we will try answering these questions for you.

Table of Contents

What is a research gap ?  

Research gaps are areas requiring more studies or research. 1  They can be:   

• an unsolved question or problem within your field.   
• a case where inconclusive or contradictive results exist.   
• a new concept or idea that hasn’t been studied.   
• a new/updated research to replace the outdated existing research.   
• a specific demographic or location that has not been well studied.   

Why is it important to identify research gaps ?  

Identifying and prioritizing research gaps  is an essential part of any research for the following reasons. 2  This can help you:  

• ensure the rapid generation of subsequent research that is informed by input from previous research studies.    
• understand areas of uncertainty within the research problem.   
• establish the research problem and scope of the study.   
• determine the scope of funding opportunities.   

Identifying research gaps : A challenge for early researchers  

Coming up with original, innovative ideas in your chosen area of research can be tricky, especially if you are an early career researcher, for the following reasons: 3,4

• Enormous information available : The introduction, discussion, and future research sections in published research articles provide information about gaps in the research field. It is easy to get overwhelmed and feel confused about which one to address. Using digital tools can help you seek out popular topics or the most cited research papers.   
• Difficulty in organizing the data : One can quickly lose ideas if not appropriately noted. Mapping the question to the resource and maintaining a record can help narrow research gap s.  
• Fear of challenging the existing knowledge : Beginner researchers may not feel confident to question established norms in their field. A good plan of action would be discussing such ideas with your advisor and proceeding according to their feedback or suggestions.   
• Lack of direction and motivation : Early researchers have reported negative emotions regarding academic research, including feeling directionless or frustrated with the effort required in identifying research topics. Again a good advisor can help you stay focused. Mentors can help novice researchers avoid cases with a high risk of failure, from misunderstanding the literature, weak design, or too many unknowns. Talking with other fellow researchers can also help overcome some of the anxiety.

How to identify research gaps  in the literature  

More than 7 million papers get published annually. 5  Considering the volume of existing research, identifying research gaps  from existing literature may seem a daunting task. While there are no hard rules for identifying research gaps, the literature has provided some guidelines for identifying problems worth investigating.   

1. Observe : Personal interests and experiences can provide insight into possible research problems. For example, a researcher interested in teaching may start with a simple observation of students’ classroom behavior and observe the link with learning theories. Developing the habit of reading literature using smart apps like  R Discovery   can keep you updated with the latest trends and developments in the field.   

2. Search : Exploring existing literature will help to identify if the observed problem is documented. One approach is identifying the independent variables used to solve the researcher’s topic of interest (i.e., the dependent variable). Databases such as Emerald, ProQuest, EbscoHost, PubMed, and ScienceDirect can help potential researchers explore existing research gaps. The following steps can help with optimizing the search process once you decide on the key research question based on your interests.

-Identify key terms.

-Identify relevant articles based on the keywords.

-Review selected articles to identify gaps in the literature.  

3. Map : This involves mapping key issues or aspects across the literature. The map should be updated whenever a researcher comes across an article of interest.   

4. Synthesize : Synthesis involves integrating the insights of multiple but related studies. A research gap is identified by combining results and findings across several interrelated studies. 6

5. Consult:  Seeking expert feedback will help you understand if the  research gaps identified are adequate and feasible or if improvements are required.  

6. Prioritize : It is possible that you have identified multiple questions requiring answers. Prioritize the question that can be addressed first, considering their relevance, resource availability, and your research strengths.  

7. Enroll : Research Skills Development Programs, including workshops and discussion groups within or outside the research institution, can help develop research skills, such as framing the research problem. Networking and corroborating in such events with colleagues and experts might help you know more about current issues and problems in your research domain.   

While there is no well-defined process to identify gaps in knowledge, curiosity, judgment, and creativity can help you in identifying these research gaps . Regardless of whether the  research gaps identified are large or small, the study design must be sufficient to contribute toward advancing your field of research.    

References  

• Dissanayake, D. M. N. S. W. (2013). Research, research gap and the research problem.  
• Nyanchoka, L., Tudur-Smith, C., Porcher, R., & Hren, D. Key stakeholders’ perspectives and experiences with defining, identifying and displaying gaps in health research: a qualitative study.  BMJ open ,  10 (11), e039932 (2020).  
• Müller-Bloch, C., & Kranz, J. (2015). A framework for rigorously identifying research gaps in qualitative literature reviews.  
• Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2017).  Designing and conducting mixed methods research . Sage publications.  
• Fire, M., & Guestrin, C. Over-optimization of academic publishing metrics: observing Goodhart’s Law in action.  GigaScience ,  8 (6), giz053 (2019).  
• Ellis, T. J., & Levy, Y. Framework of problem-based research: A guide for novice researchers on the development of a research-worthy problem.  Informing Science: the International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline Volume 11, 2008 ). 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Question: How can research gaps be addressed?

Research gaps can be addressed by conducting further studies, experiments, or investigations that specifically target the areas where knowledge is lacking or incomplete. This involves conducting a thorough literature review to identify existing gaps, designing research methodologies to address these gaps, and collecting new data or analyzing existing data to fill the void. Collaboration among researchers, interdisciplinary approaches, and innovative research designs can also help bridge research gaps and contribute to the advancement of knowledge in a particular field.

Question: Can research gaps change over time?

Yes, research gaps can change over time. As new studies are conducted, technologies advance, and societal needs evolve, gaps in knowledge may be identified or existing gaps may become more pronounced. Research gaps are dynamic and subject to shifts as new discoveries are made, new questions arise, and priorities change. It is crucial for researchers to continuously assess and update their understanding of the field to identify emerging research gaps and adapt their research efforts accordingly.

Question: Are research gaps specific to a particular discipline or field?

Research gaps can exist within any discipline or field. Each discipline has its own unique body of knowledge and areas where understanding may be limited. Research gaps can arise from unanswered questions, unexplored phenomena, conflicting findings, practical challenges, or new frontiers of knowledge. They are not limited to a specific discipline or field, as gaps can exist in natural sciences, social sciences, humanities, engineering, or any other area of study.

Question: How can research gaps contribute to the research proposal?

Research gaps play a significant role in the development of research proposals. They help researchers identify a clear rationale and justification for their study. By addressing identified gaps in knowledge, researchers can demonstrate the significance and relevance of their proposed research. Research proposals often include a literature review section that highlights existing gaps and positions the proposed study as a contribution to the field. By explicitly addressing research gaps, researchers can strengthen the credibility and importance of their research proposal, as well as its potential impact on advancing knowledge and addressing critical questions or challenges.

R Discovery is a literature search and research reading platform that accelerates your research discovery journey by keeping you updated on the latest, most relevant scholarly content. With 250M+ research articles sourced from trusted aggregators like CrossRef, Unpaywall, PubMed, PubMed Central, Open Alex and top publishing houses like Springer Nature, JAMA, IOP, Taylor & Francis, NEJM, BMJ, Karger, SAGE, Emerald Publishing and more, R Discovery puts a world of research at your fingertips.  

Try R Discovery Prime FREE for 1 week or upgrade at just US$72 a year to access premium features that let you listen to research on the go, read in your language, collaborate with peers, auto sync with reference managers, and much more. Choose a simpler, smarter way to find and read research – Download the app and start your free 7-day trial today !  

Related Posts

Research in Shorts: R Discovery’s New Feature Helps Academics Assess Relevant Papers in 2mins 

How Does R Discovery’s Interplatform Capability Enhance Research Accessibility 

•   [email protected]
• Shapiro Library
• SNHU Library Frequently Asked Questions

FAQ: What is a research gap and how do I find one?

• 7 Academic Integrity & Plagiarism
• 61 Academic Support, Writing Help, & Presentation Help
• 28 Access/Remote Access
• 7 Accessibility
• 8 Building/Facilities
• 6 Career/Job Information
• 25 Catalog/Print Books
• 25 Circulation
• 134 Citing Sources
• 14 Copyright
• 306 Databases
• 23 Directions/Location
• 19 Faculty Resources/Needs
• 7 Hours/Contacts
• 2 Innovation Lab & Makerspace/3D Printing
• 25 Interlibrary Loan
• 43 IT/Computer/Printing Support
• 3 Library Instruction
• 37 Library Technology Help
• 6 Multimedia
• 16 Online Programs
• 20 Periodicals
• 24 Policies
• 8 RefWorks/Citation Managers
• 4 Research Guides (LibGuides)
• 213 Research Help
• 22 University Services

Last Updated: Aug 26, 2024 Views: 494466

What is a research gap.

A research gap is a question or a problem that has not been answered by any of the existing studies or research within your field. Sometimes, a research gap exists when there is a concept or new idea that hasn't been studied at all. Sometimes you'll find a research gap if all the existing research is outdated and in need of new/updated research (studies on Internet use in 2001, for example). Or, perhaps a specific population has not been well studied (perhaps there are plenty of studies on teenagers and video games, but not enough studies on toddlers and video games, for example). These are just a few examples, but any research gap you find is an area where more studies and more research need to be conducted. Please view this video clip from our Sage Research Methods database for more helpful information: How Do You Identify Gaps in Literature?

How do I find one?

It will take a lot of research and reading.  You'll need to be very familiar with all the studies that have already been done, and what those studies contributed to the overall body of knowledge about that topic. Make a list of any questions you have about your topic and then do some research to see if those questions have already been answered satisfactorily. If they haven't, perhaps you've discovered a gap!  Here are some strategies you can use to make the most of your time:

• One useful trick is to look at the “suggestions for future research” or conclusion section of existing studies on your topic. Many times, the authors will identify areas where they think a research gap exists, and what studies they think need to be done in the future.
• As you are researching, you will most likely come across citations for seminal works in your research field. These are the research studies that you see mentioned again and again in the literature.  In addition to finding those and reading them, you can use a database like Web of Science to follow the research trail and discover all the other articles that have cited these. See the FAQ: I found the perfect article for my paper. How do I find other articles and books that have cited it? on how to do this. One way to quickly track down these seminal works is to use a database like SAGE Navigator, a social sciences literature review tool. It is one of the products available via our SAGE Knowledge database.
• In the PsycINFO and PsycARTICLES databases, you can select literature review, systematic review, and meta analysis under the Methodology section in the advanced search to quickly locate these. See the FAQ: Where can I find a qualitative or quantitative study? for more information on how to find the Methodology section in these two databases.
• In CINAHL , you can select Systematic review under the Publication Type field in the advanced search. 
• In Web of Science , check the box beside Review under the Document Type heading in the “Refine Results” sidebar to the right of the list of search hits.
• If the database you are searching does not offer a way to filter your results by document type, publication type, or methodology in the advanced search, you can include these phrases (“literature reviews,” meta-analyses, or “systematic reviews”) in your search string.  For example, “video games” AND “literature reviews” could be a possible search that you could try.

Please give these suggestions a try and contact a librarian for additional assistance.

Content authored by: GS

• Share on Facebook

Was this helpful? Yes 398 No 155

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) are a self-serve option for users to search and find answers to their questions. 

Use the search box above to type your question to search for an answer or browse existing FAQs by group, topic, etc.

Tell Me More

Link to Question Form

More assistance.

Submit a Question

Related FAQs

Types of Research Gaps

• September 2021

• University of Dhaka

Discover the world's research

• 25+ million members
• 160+ million publication pages
• 2.3+ billion citations
• Lidzikirllah Fannayu Putri
• Misti Hariasih
• 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

Welcome to the new OASIS website! We have academic skills, library skills, math and statistics support, and writing resources all together in one new home.

• Walden University
• Faculty Portal

Library Guide to Capstone Literature Reviews: Find a Research Gap

Find a research gap: tips to get started.

Finding a research gap is not an easy process and there is no one linear path. These tips and suggestions are just examples of possible ways to begin. 

In Ph.D. dissertations, students identify a gap in research. In other programs, students identify a gap in practice. The literature review for a gap in practice will show the context of the problem and the current state of the research. 

Research gap definition

A research gap exists when:

• a question or problem has not been answered by existing studies/research in the field 
• a concept or new idea has not been studied at all
• all the existing literature on a topic is outdated 
• a specific population/location/age group etc has not been studied 

A research gap should be:

• grounded in the literature
• amenable to scientific study
• Litmus Test for a Doctoral-Level Research Problem (Word) This tool helps students determine if they have identified a doctoral level research problem.

Identify a research gap

To find a gap you must become very familiar with a particular field of study. This will involve a lot of research and reading, because a gap is defined by what does (and does not) surround it.

• Search the research literature and dissertations (search all university dissertations, not just Walden!).
• Understand your topic! Review background information in books and encyclopedias . 
• Look for literature reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses.
• Take notes on concepts, themes, and subject terms . 
• Look closely at each article's limitations, conclusions, and recommendations for future research. 
• Organize, analyze, and repeat! 

• Quick Answer: How do I find dissertations on a topic?

Start with broad searches

Use the Library Search (formerly Thoreau)  to do a broad search with just one concept at a time . Broad searches give you an idea of the academic conversation surrounding your topic.

• Try the terms you know (keywords) first.
• Look at the Subject Terms (controlled language) to brainstorm terms. 
• Subject terms help you understand what terms are most used, and what other terms to try.
• No matter what your topic is, not every researcher will be using the same terms. Keep an eye open for additional ways to describe your topic.
• Guide: Subject Terms & Index Searches: Index Overview

Keep a list of terms

• Create a list of terms
• Example list of terms

This list will be a record of what terms are: 

• related to or represent your topic
• synonyms or antonyms
• more or less commonly used
• keywords (natural language) or subject terms (controlled language)
• Synonyms & antonyms (database search skills)
• Turn keywords into subject terms

Term I started with:

culturally aware 

Subject terms I discovered:

cultural awareness (SU) 

cultural sensitivity (SU) 

cultural competence (SU) 

Search with different combinations of terms

• Combine search terms list
• Combine search terms table
• Video: Search by Themes

Since a research gap is defined by the absence of research on a topic, you will search for articles on everything that relates to your topic. 

• List out all the themes related to your gap.
• Search different combinations of the themes as you discover them 

For example, suppose your research gap is on the work-life balance of tenured and tenure-track women in engineering professions. In that case, you might try searching different combinations of concepts, such as: 

• women and STEM 
• STEM or science or technology or engineering or mathematics
• female engineering professors 
• tenure-track women in STEM
• work-life balance and women in STEM
• work-life balance and women professors
• work-life balance and tenure 

Topic adapted from one of the award winning Walden dissertations. 

• Walden University Award Winning Dissertations
• Gossage, Lily Giang-Tien, "Work-Life Balance of Tenured and Tenure-Track Women Engineering Professors" (2019). Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies. 6435.

Break your topic into themes and try combining the terms from different themes in different ways. For example: 

Theme 1 and Theme 4

Theme 2 and Theme 1

Theme 3 and Theme 4

Video: Search by Themes (YouTube)

(2 min 40 sec) Recorded April 2014 Transcript

Track where more research is needed

Most research articles will identify where more research is needed. To identify research trends, use the literature review matrix to track where further research is needed. 

• Download or create your own Literature Review Matrix (examples in links below).
• Do some general database searches on broad topics.
• Find an article that looks interesting.
• When you read the article, pay attention to the conclusions and limitations sections.
• Use the Literature Review Matrix to track where  'more research is needed' or 'further research needed'. NOTE:  you might need to add a column to the template.
• As you fill in the matrix you should see trends where more research is needed.

There is no consistent section in research articles where the authors identify where more research is needed. Pay attention to these sections: 

• limitations
• conclusions
• recommendations for future research 
• Literature Review Matrix Templates: learn how to keep a record of what you have read
• Literature Review Matrix (Excel) with color coding Sample template for organizing and synthesizing your research
• Previous Page: Scope
• Next Page: Get & Stay Organized
• Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

• Academic Residencies
• Academic Skills
• Career Planning and Development
• Customer Care Team
• Field Experience
• Military Services
• Student Success Advising
• Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

• Center for Social Change
• Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
• Office of Degree Acceleration
• Office of Research and Doctoral Services
• Office of Student Affairs

Student Resources

• Doctoral Writing Assessment
• Form & Style Review
• Quick Answers
• ScholarWorks
• SKIL Courses and Workshops
• Walden Bookstore
• Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
• Student Safety/Title IX
• Legal & Consumer Information
• Website Terms and Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Accessibility
• Accreditation
• State Authorization
• Net Price Calculator
• Cost of Attendance
• Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

An official website of the United States government

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

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

• Publications
• Account settings

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

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Lippincott Open Access

Identifying Research Gaps and Prioritizing Psychological Health Evidence Synthesis Needs

Susanne hempel.

* RAND Corporation, Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC), Santa Monica

† University of Southern California, Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA

Kristie Gore

‡ RAND, National Security Research Division, Arlington

Bradley Belsher

§ Defense Health Agency, Psychological Health Center of Excellence (PHCoE), Falls Church, VA

Associated Data

Supplemental Digital Content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the printed text and are provided in the HTML and PDF versions of this article on the journal's website, www.lww-medicalcare.com .

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

Background:

Evidence synthesis is key in promoting evidence-based health care, but it is resource-intense. Methods are needed to identify and prioritize evidence synthesis needs within health care systems. We describe a collaboration between an agency charged with facilitating the implementation of evidence-based research and practices across the Military Health System and a research center specializing in evidence synthesis.

Scoping searches targeted 15 sources, including the Veterans Affairs/Department of Defense Guidelines and National Defense Authorization Acts. We screened for evidence gaps in psychological health management approaches relevant to the target population. We translated gaps into potential topics for evidence maps and/or systematic reviews. Gaps amenable to evidence synthesis format provided the basis for stakeholder input. Stakeholders rated topics for their potential to inform psychological health care in the military health system. Feasibility scans determined whether topics were ready to be pursued, that is, sufficient literature exists, and duplicative efforts are avoided.

We identified 58 intervention, 9 diagnostics, 12 outcome, 19 population, and 24 health services evidence synthesis gaps. Areas included: posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (19), suicide prevention (14), depression (9), bipolar disorder (9), substance use (24), traumatic brain injury (20), anxiety (1), and cross-cutting (14) synthesis topics. Stakeholder input helped prioritize 19 potential PTSD topics and 22 other psychological health topics. To date, 46 topics have undergone feasibility scans. We document lessons learned across clinical topics and research methods.

Conclusion:

We describe a transparent and structured approach to evidence synthesis topic selection for a health care system using scoping searches, translation into evidence synthesis format, stakeholder input, and feasibility scans.

Evidence synthesis is an essential step in promoting evidence-based medicine across health systems; it facilitates the translation of research to practice. A systematic review of the research literature on focused review questions is a key evidence synthesis approach that can inform practice and policy decisions. 1 However, systematic reviews are resource-intense undertakings. In a resource-constrained environment, before an evidence review is commissioned, the need and the feasibility of the review must be established.

Establishing the need for the review can be achieved through a research gap analysis or needs assessment. Identification of a gap serves as the first step in developing a new research question. 2 Research gaps in health care do not necessarily align directly with research needs. Research gaps are only critical where knowledge gaps substantially inhibit the decision-making ability of stakeholders such as patients, health care providers, and policymakers, thus creating a need to fill the knowledge gap. Evidence synthesis enables the assessment of whether a research gap continues to exist or whether there is adequate evidence to close the knowledge gap.

Furthermore, a gap analysis often identifies multiple, competing gaps that are worthwhile to be pursued. Given the resource requirements of formal evidence reviews, topic prioritization is needed to best allocate resources to those areas deemed the most relevant for the health system. Regardless of the topic, the prioritization process is likely to be stakeholder-dependent. Priorities for evidence synthesis will vary depending on the mission of the health care system and the local needs of the health care stakeholders. A process of stakeholder input is an important mechanism to ensure that the evidence review will meet local needs as well to identify a receptive audience of the review findings.

In addition to establishing the need for an evidence review, the feasibility of conducting the review must also be established. In conducting primary research, feasibility is often mainly a question of available resources. For evidence reviews, the resources, the availability of primary research, and the presence of existing evidence reviews on the topic need to be explored. Not all topics are amenable for a systematic review which focus on a specific range of research questions and rely heavily on published literature. Furthermore, evidence review synthesizes the existing evidence; hence, if there is insufficient evidence in the primary research literature, an evidence review is not useful. Establishing a lack of evidence is a worthwhile exercise since it identifies the need for further research. However, most health care delivery organizations will be keen to prioritize areas that can be synthesized, that is, investing in synthesizing a body of research sizable enough to derive meaningful results. For evidence reviews, the presence of existing evidence syntheses is also an important consideration, in particular, to determine the incremental validity of a new review. Although primary research benefits profoundly by replication, secondary literature, in particular in the context of existing high-quality reviews and/or limited evidence, may not add anything to our knowledge base. 3

This work describes a structured and transparent approach to identify and prioritize areas of psychological health that are important and that can be feasibly addressed by a synthesis of the research literature. It describes a collaboration between an agency charged with facilitating the implementation of evidence-based research and practices across the Military Health System (MHS) and a research center specializing in evidence synthesis.

This project is anchored in the relationship between the Defense Health Agency Psychological Health Center of Excellence (PHCoE) and the RAND Corporation’s National Defense Research Institute (NDRI), one of the Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDC) dedicated to providing long-term analytic support to the Defense Health Agency. PHCoE, an agency charged with facilitating the implementation of evidence-based research and practices across the Military Health System funded a series of systematic reviews and evidence maps synthesizing psychological research. The project draws on the expertise of the Southern California Evidence-based Practice Center (EPC) located at RAND, a center specializing in evidence synthesis. The project included scoping searches, stakeholder input, and feasibility scans. The project is ongoing; this manuscript describes methods and results from June 2016 to September 2018. The project was assessed by our Human Subject Protection staff and determined to be exempt (date July 7, 2016, ID ND3621; August 6, 2017, ID ND3714).

The following describes the process, Figure ​ Figure1 1 provides a visual overview.

Process of identifying research gaps and prioritizing psychological health evidence synthesis needs.

Scoping Searches to Identify Evidence Synthesis Gaps

Scoping searches targeted pertinent sources for evidence gaps. The searches focused on clinical conditions and interventions relevant to psychological health, including biological psychiatry, health care services research, and mental health comorbidity. Proposed topics and study populations were not limited by deployment status or deployment eligibility, but the topic section considered the prevalence of clinical conditions among Department of Defense active duty military personnel managed by the MHS. The scoping searches excluded evidence gaps addressing children and adolescents and clinical conditions exclusively relevant to veterans managed by the Department of Veterans Affairs.

Scoping Search Sources

We screened 15 sources in total for evidence synthesis gaps.

Veterans Affairs/Department of Defense clinical practice guidelines were a key source for documented evidence gaps. 4 – 9 Recently updated guidelines were screened only for evidence gaps that indicated a lack of synthesis of existing research or content areas that were outside the scope of that guideline (guidelines rely primarily on published systematic reviews and can only review a limited number of topic areas).

We consulted the current report of the committee on armed services of the House of Representatives regarding the proposed National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and the report for the upcoming fiscal year. 10 , 11 We specifically screened the report for research priorities identified for psychological health. We also screened the published National Research Action Plan designed to improve access to mental health services for veterans, service members, and military families. 12

We conducted a literature search for publications dedicated to identifying evidence gaps and research needs for psychological health and traumatic brain injury. We searched for publications published since 2000–2016 in the most relevant databases, PubMed and PsycINFO, that had the words research gap, knowledge gap, or research priority in the title and addressed psychological health (Supplemental Digital Content, http://links.lww.com/MLR/B836 ). The search retrieved 203 citations. Six publications were considered potentially relevant and obtained as full text, 1 source was subsequently excluded because the authors conducted a literature search <3 years ago and it was deemed unlikely that a new review would identify substantially more eligible studies. 13 – 19

We also used an analysis of the utilization of complementary and alternative medicine in the MHS 20 to identify interventions that were popular with patients but for which potentially little evidence-based guidance exists. We focused our scoping efforts on complementary approaches such as stress management, hypnotherapy, massage, biofeedback, chiropractic, and music therapy to align with the funding scope. In the next step, we reviewed the existing clinical practice guidelines to determine whether clinicians have guidance regarding these approaches. The Department of Defense Health Related Behaviors Survey of Active Duty Military Personnel 21 is an anonymous survey conducted every 3 years on service members with the aim of identifying interventions or health behaviors patients currently use. To address evidence gaps most relevant to patients, we screened the survey results, and then matched the more prevalent needs identified with guidance provided in relevant clinical practice guidelines.

We consulted the priority review list assembled by the Cochrane group to identify research needs for systematic reviews. We screened the 2015–2017 lists for mental health topics that are open to new authors, that is, those that do not have an author team currently dedicated to the topic. None of the currently available topics appeared relevant to psychological health and no topics were added to the table. We also consulted with ongoing federally funded projects to identify evidence gaps that were beyond the scope of the other projects. In addition, we screened a list of psychological health research priorities developed at PHCoE for knowledge gaps that could be addressed in systematic reviews or evidence maps. Finally, we screened resources available on MHS web sites for evidence gaps.

Gap Analysis Procedure and Approach to Translating Gaps into Evidence Review Format

We first screened these sources for knowledge gaps, regardless of considerations of whether the gap is amenable to evidence review. However, we did not include research gaps where the source explicitly indicated that the knowledge gap is due to the lack of primary research. We distinguished 5 evidence gap domains and abstracted gaps across pertinent areas: interventions or diagnostic questions, treatment outcomes or specific populations, and health services research and health care delivery models.

We then translated the evidence gaps into potential topics for evidence maps and/or systematic reviews. Evidence maps provide a broad overview of large research areas using data visualizations to document the presence and absence of evidence. 22 Similar to scoping reviews, evidence maps do not necessarily address the effects of interventions but can be broader in scope. Systematic reviews are a standardized research methodology designed to answer clinical and policy questions with published research using meta-analysis to estimate effect sizes and formal grading of the quality of evidence. We considered systematic reviews for effectiveness and comparative effectiveness questions regarding specific intervention and diagnostic approaches.

Stakeholder Input

Evidence synthesis gaps that were determined to be amenable to systematic review or evidence map methods provided the basis for stakeholder input. Although all topics were reviewed by project personnel, we also identified psychological health service leads for Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines within the Defense Health Agency as key stakeholders to be included in the topic selection process. To date, 2 rounds of formal ratings by stakeholders have been undertaken.

The first round focused on the need for systematic review covering issues related to posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The second round focused on other potential psychological health topics determined to be compatible with the MHS mission. Represented clinical areas were suicide prevention and aftercare, depressive disorders, anxiety disorders, traumatic brain injury, substance use disorder including alcohol and opioid use disorder, and chronic pain. All of the potential topics addressed either the effects of clinical interventions or health service research questions.

Stakeholders rated the topics based on their potential to inform psychological health care in the military health system. The raters used a scale 5-point rating scale ranging from “No impact” to “Very high impact.” In addition, stakeholders were able to add additional suggestions for evidence review. We analyzed the mean, the mode, and individual stakeholder rating indicating “high impact” for individual topics.

Feasibility Scans

Feasibility scans provided an estimate of the volume and the type of existing research literature which is informative for 3 reasons. First, this process determined whether sufficient research was available to inform a systematic review or an evidence map. Second, feasibility scans can provide an estimate of the required resources for an evidence review by establishing whether only a small literature base or a large number of research studies exists. Finally, feasibility scans identify existing high-profile evidence synthesis reports that could make a new synthesis obsolete.

Feasibility scans for potential evidence maps concentrated on the size of the body of research that would need to be screened and the relevant synthesis questions that can inform how this research should be organized in the evidence map. Feasibility scans for systematic reviews aimed to determine the number of relevant studies, existing high-quality reviews, and the number of studies not covered in existing reviews. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the focus of most of the systematic review topics, that is, strong research evidence that could inform clinical practice guideline committees to recommend either for or against interventions. An experienced systematic reviewer used PubMed, a very well-maintained and user-friendly database for biomedical literature, developed preliminary search strategies, and applied database search filters (eg, for RCTs or systematic reviews) in preliminary literature searches to estimate the research volume for each topic.

Scans also identified any existing high-quality evidence review published by agencies specializing in unbiased evidence syntheses such as the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)’s Evidence-based Practice Center program, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Campbell Collaboration, the Evidence Synthesis Program of the Department of Veterans Affairs, and the Federal Health Technology Assessment program. We used the databases PubMed and PubMed Health to identify reports. We appraised the scope, relevance and publication year of the existing high-profile evidence reviews. The research base for psychological health develops rapidly and evidence syntheses need to ensure that current clinical policies reflect the best available evidence. When determining the feasibility and appropriateness of a new systematic review, we took the results of the original review and any new studies that had been published subsequent to the systematic review on the same topic into account.

The following results are described: the results of the scoping searches and gap analysis, the translation of gaps into evidence synthesis format, the stakeholder input ratings, and the feasibility scans.

Scoping Searches and Gap Analysis Results

The scoping search and gap analysis identified a large number of evidence gaps as documented in the gap analysis table in the Appendix (Supplemental Digital Content, http://links.lww.com/MLR/B836 ). Across sources, we identified 58 intervention, 9 diagnostics, 12 outcome, 19 population, and 24 health services evidence synthesis gaps. The evidence gaps varied considerably with regard to scope and specificity, for example, highlighting knowledge gaps in recommendations for medications for specific clinical indications or treatment combinations 4 to pointing out to gaps in supporting caregivers. 11 The largest group of evidence gaps were documented for interventions. This included open questions for individual interventions (eg, ketamine) 12 as well as the best format and modality within an intervention domain (eg, use of telehealth). 6 Diagnostic evidence gaps included open questions regarding predictive risk factors that could be used in suicide prevention 8 and the need for personalized treatments. 12 Outcome evidence gaps often pointed to the lack of measured outcomes to include cost-effectiveness as well as the lack of knowledge on hypothesized effects, such as increased access or decreased stigma associated with technology-based modalities. 23 Population evidence gaps addressed specific patient populations such as complex patients 5 and family members of service members. 11 The health services evidence gaps addressed care support through technology (eg, videoconferencing 23 ) as well as treatment coordination within health care organizations such as how treatment for substance use disorder should be coordinated with treatment for co-occurring conditions. 4

Potential Evidence Synthesis Topics

The gaps were translated into potential evidence map or systematic review topics. This translation process took into account that some topics cannot easily be operationalized as an evidence review. For example, knowledge gaps regarding prevalence or utilization estimates were hindered by the lack of publicly available data. In addition, we noted that some review questions may require an exhaustive search and a full-text review of the literature because the information cannot be searched for directly, and hence were outside the budget restraints.

The clinical areas and number of topics were: PTSD (n=19), suicide prevention (n=14), depression (n=9), bipolar disorder (n=9), substance use (n=24), traumatic brain injury (n=20), anxiety (n=1), and cross-cutting (n=14) evidence synthesis topics. All topic areas are documented in the Appendix (Supplemental Digital Content, http://links.lww.com/MLR/B836 ).

Stakeholder Input Results

Stakeholders rated 19 PTSD-related research gaps and suggested an additional 5 topics for evidence review, addressing both preventions as well as treatment topics. Mean ratings for topics ranged from 1.75 to 3.5 on a scale from 0 (no impact potential) to 4 (high potential for impact). Thus, although identified as research gaps, the potential of an evidence review to have an important impact on the MHS varied across the topics. Only 2 topics received a mean score of ≥3 (high potential), including predictors of PTSD treatment retention and response and PTSD treatment dosing, duration, and sequencing . In addition, raters’ opinions varied considerably across some topics with SDs ranging from 0.5 to 1.5 across all topics.

The stakeholders rated 22 other psychological health topics, suggested 2 additional topics for evidence review, and revised 2 original topics indicating which aspect of the research gap would be most important to address. Mean scores for the rated topics ranged from 0.25 to 3.75, with the SDs for each item ranging from 0 to 1.4. Six topics received an average score of ≥3, primarily focused on the topics of suicide prevention, substance use disorders, and telehealth interventions. Opinions on other topics varied widely across service leads.

Feasibility Scan Results

Evidence review topics that were rated by stakeholders as having some potential for impact (using a rating cutoff score>1) within the MHS were selected for formal feasibility scans. To date, 46 topics have been subjected to feasibility scans. Of these, 11 were evaluated as potential evidence map, 17 as a systematic review, and 18 as either at the time of the topic suggestion. The results of the feasibility scans are documented in the table in the Appendix (Supplemental Digital Content, http://links.lww.com/MLR/B836 ).

The feasibility scan result table shows the topic, topic modification suggestions based on literature reviews, and the mean stakeholder impact rating. The table shows the employed search strategy to determine the feasibility; the estimated number of RCTs in the database PubMed; the number and citation of Cochrane, Evidence Synthesis Program, and Health Technology Assessment reviews, that is, high-quality syntheses; and the estimated number of RCTs published after the latest existing systematic review that had been published on the topic.

Each potential evidence review topic was discussed in a narrative review report that documented the reason for determining the topic to be feasible or not feasible. Reasons for determining the topic to be not feasible included the lack of primary research for an evidence map or systematic review, the presence of an ongoing research project that may influence the evidence review scope, and the presence of an existing high-quality evidence review. Some topics were shown to be feasible upon further modification; this included topics that were partially addressed in existing reviews or topics where the review scope would need to be substantially changed to result in a high-impact evidence review. Topics to be judged feasible met all outlined criteria, that is, the topic could be addressed in a systematic review or evidence map, there were sufficient studies to justify a review, and the review would not merely replicate an existing review but make a novel contribution to the evidence base.

The project describes a transparent and structured approach to identify and prioritize evidence synthesis topics using scoping reviews, stakeholder input, and feasibility scans.

The work demonstrates an approach to establishing and evaluating evidence synthesis gaps. It has been repeatedly noted that research gap analyses often lack transparency with little information on analytic criteria and selection processes. 24 , 25 In addition, research need identification may not be informed by systematic literature searches documenting gaps but primarily rely on often unstructured content expert input. 26 , 27 Evidence synthesis needs assessment is a new field that to date has received very little attention. However, as health care delivery organizations move towards providing evidence-based treatments and the existing research continue to grow, both evidence reviews and evidence review gap identification and prioritization will become more prominent.

One of the lessons learned is that the topic selection process added to the timeline and required additional resources. The scoping searches, translation into evidence synthesis topics, stakeholder input, and feasibility scans each added time and the project required a longer period of performance compared to previous evidence synthesis projects. The project components were undertaken sequentially and had to be divided into topic areas. For example, it was deemed too much to ask for stakeholder input for all 122 topics identified as potential evidence review topics. Furthermore, we needed to be flexible to be able to respond to unanticipated congressional requests for evidence reviews. However, our process of identifying synthesis gaps, checking whether topics can be translated into syntheses, obtaining stakeholder input to ensure that the gaps are meaningful and need filling, and estimating the feasibility and avoiding duplicative efforts, has merit considering the alternative. More targeted funding of evidence syntheses ensures relevance and while resources need to be spent on the steps we are describing, these are small investments compared to the resources required for a full systematic review or evidence map.

The documented stakeholder engagement approach was useful for many reasons, not just for ensuring that the selection of evidence synthesis topics was transparent and structured. The stakeholders were alerted to the evidence synthesis project and provided input for further topic refinement. This process also supported the identification of a ‘customer’ after the review was completed, that is, a stakeholder who is keen on using the evidence review is likely to take action on its results and ready to translate the findings into clinical practice. The research to practice gap is substantial and the challenges of translating research to practice are widely documented. 28 – 30 Inefficient research translation delays delivery of proven clinical practices and can lead to wasteful research and practice investments.

The project had several strengths and limitations. The project describes a successful, transparent, and structured process to engage stakeholders and identifies important and feasible evidence review topics. However, the approach was developed to address the specific military psychological health care system needs, and therefore the process may not be generalizable to all other health care delivery organizations. Source selection was tailored to psychological health synthesis needs and process modifications (ie, sources to identify gaps) are needed for organizations aiming to establish a similar procedure. To keep the approach manageable, feasibility scans used only 1 database and we developed only preliminary, not comprehensive searches. Hence, some uncertainty about the true evidence base for the different topics remained; feasibility scans can only estimate the available research. Furthermore, the selected stakeholders were limited to a small number of service leads. A broader panel of stakeholders would have likely provided additional input. In addition, all evaluations of the literature relied on the expertise of experienced systematic reviewers; any replication of the process will require some staff with expertise in the evidence review. Finally, as outlined, all described processes added to the project timeline compounding the challenges of providing timely systematic reviews for practitioners and policymakers. 31 , 32

We have described a transparent and structured approach to identify and prioritize areas of evidence synthesis for a health care system. Scoping searches and feasibility scans identified gaps in the literature that would benefit from evidence review. Stakeholder input helped ensure the relevance of review topics and created a receptive audience for targeted evidence synthesis. The approach aims to advance the field of evidence synthesis needs assessment.

Supplementary Material

Acknowledgments.

The authors thank Laura Raaen, Margaret Maglione, Gulrez Azhar, Margie Danz, and Thomas Concannon for content input and Aneesa Motala and Naemma Golshan for administrative assistance.

Supported by the Office of the Secretary of Defense, Psychological Health Center of Excellence. The findings and conclusions in this manuscript are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Psychological Health Center of Excellence, the Office of the Secretary of Defense, or the United States government.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Write Like a Scientist

A Guide to Scientific Communication

Gap Statements

  A gap is something that remains to be done or learned in an area of research; it’s a gap in the knowledge of the scientists in the field of research of your study. Every research project must, in some way, address a gap–that is, attempt to fill in some piece of information missing in the scientific literature. Otherwise, it is not novel research and is therefore not contributing to the overall goals of science.

Identify the gap.

  A gap statement is found in the Introduction section of a journal article or poster or in the Goals and Importance section of a research proposal and succinctly identifies for your audience the gap that you will attempt to address in your project.

A gap might be a lack of understanding about how well a particular instrument works in a certain situation. It could be introducing a new method that needs to be tested. Or it could be that you are studying a whole new organism, system, or part of a process. Your project may also address multiple gaps, in which case you should be sure to identify each of them clearly!

In a class, you might not always be studying something brand “new.” But, in most cases, you should still try to come up with something unique about your project, however small. Talk to your professor about what they expect for your gap statement if nothing seems to work.

Here, the authors signal to us that this is a gap because they use the words “has not yet been clarified.” Other phrases that might help you identify (or form!) a gap statement are:

• …has/have not been… (studied/reported/elucidated)
• …is required/needed…
• …the key question is/remains…
• …it is important to address…

Fill the gap.

  Once you identify the gap in the literature, you must tell your audience how you attempt to at least somewhat address in your project this lack of knowledge or understanding . In a journal article or poster, this is often done in a new paragraph and should be accomplished in one summary statement, such as:

Therefore, the purpose of this study was to determine the effects of lead on the hepatobiliary system, especially on the liver and on the gallbladder (adapted from Sipos et al. 2003 ).

You’ll often find that the first sentence of the last paragraph in a paper’s introduction will start somewhat like this, indicating the gap fill.  

Remember–always keep your voice professional! Colloquial phrases such as “we looked into” or “we checked if” should be avoided when introducing your gap fill.

So let’s look at this idea in context by looking at some examples from a couple of types of papers. The gap statements are underlined; the fills are italicized.  

In the second and third examples, the gap may be a little less obvious–it doesn’t use any phrases to signal to you that there’s something missing, such as “has not been clarified” or “have not been reported.” But because of the way the paragraph is laid out–following the conventions of our move structures–we can see that the underlined section of text is indeed the missing information in the literature that the group sought to address in their project.

Log in using your username and password

• Search More Search for this keyword Advanced search
• Latest content
• Supplements
• BMJ Journals

You are here

• Volume 9, Issue 9
• Adolescent and youth-friendly health interventions in low-income and middle-income countries: a scoping review
• Article Text
• Article info
• Citation Tools
• Rapid Responses
• Article metrics

• Cecilia Jakobsson 1 , 2 ,
• Rhea Sanghavi 3 ,
• Joseph Nyamiobo 4 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7925-9298 Caitlin Maloy 5 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0421-0377 Arnold Mwanzu 6 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3559-2491 Katherine Venturo-Conerly 2 , 7 ,
• Cyprian Mostert 8 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7203-3096 Stefan Peterson 9 ,
• http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9773-8014 Manasi Kumar 4 , 10
• 1 Sussex Partnership NHS Foundation Trust , Worthing , UK
• 2 Shamiri Institute , Nairobi , Kenya
• 3 School of Public Health , University of Washington , Seattle , Washington , USA
• 4 Psychiatry , University of Nairobi , Nairobi , Kenya
• 5 University of Washington , Seattle , Washington , USA
• 6 The Aga Khan University Hospital Nairobi , Nairobi , Kenya
• 7 Harvard University , Cambridge , Massachusetts , USA
• 8 Aga Khan University, Kenya , Nairobi , Kenya
• 9 Department of Global Public Health , Karolinska Institutet , Stockholm , Sweden
• 10 Institute for Excellence in Health Equity , New York University Grossman School of Medicine , New York , New York , USA
• Correspondence to Dr Manasi Kumar; Manasi.Kumar{at}nyulangone.org

Background Adolescents comprise one-sixth of the world’s population, yet there is no clear understanding of the features that promote adolescent-friendly services (AFS). The lack of clarity and consistency around a definition presents a gap in health services.

Methods The review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed empirical studies to explore AFS in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) published between January 2000 and December 2022. The databases searched were CAB Direct (n=11), CINAHL (n=50), Cochrane Databases (n=1103), Embase (n=1164), Global Health Medicus (n=3636) and PsycINFO (n=156). The title, abstract and full text were double screened by three independent reviewers. Three independent reviewers assessed the study’s quality using the Joanna Briggs Initiative Quality Appraisal and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tools.

Results We identified the key components, barriers and facilitators of AFS. The following emerged from our review: a non-judgmental environment, culturally appropriate and responsive interventions and a focus on supporting marginalised communities often living in high-poverty settings. Using these components, we have extended guidance around a possible framework and tool assessing quality of AFS.

Interpretation As LMICs are heterogeneous and unique, it was assumed that the operational definition of ‘adolescent-friendly’ might vary depending on different contexts, but there must be core components that remain consistent. Possible limitations of our review include a lack of grey literature. Potential future implications include training healthcare providers, testing these attributes for service improvement and future development and localisation of policy guidelines.

Key highlights Our review has mapped the research framing of AFS and provided a comprehensive review of barriers and facilitators to implementing a holistic outlook of AFS set-up in a tightly controlled research and real-world context. Our paper is one of the few efforts to synthesise behavioural and mental health elements underpinning AFS.

• Health systems

Data availability statement

All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information. This is a review and all data have been presented in the paper.

This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See:  http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ .

https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2023-013393

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request permissions.

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

What is already known on this topic

Adolescent friendly services (AFS) are recognized as being central to making services accessible and acceptable to young people. However, distillation of evidence-informed adolescent friendly services and how mental health or behavioral components, and strategies inform and underpin these services is not clearly understood. Our scoping addresses this gap.

What this study adds

Our study provides in-depth examination of the barriers and facilitators of AFS while mapping the findings of key research studies from LMICs that address AFS in their intervention implementation and pulls together recommendations of key international adolescent health and development agencies. Our review findings are that AFS is about fostering a welcoming and non-judgmental environment, providing culturally appropriate and responsive services, and focused support for marginalised communities as it is especially needed within high-poverty settings. We would like to underscore that these services need strong and well-planned mental and behavioral health strengthening within LMICs to empower adolescents and youth.

How this study might affect research, practice or policy

There remains a gap between how academic research, policy guidelines and existing practices focus on implementation of AFS. Our review points to synergies that the fields need to create for effective and engaged adolescent friendly services in LMICs. Without cross-sectoral evidence-synthesis, service barriers in low resource settings and vulnerable adolescents youth cannot benefit.

Lessons from adolescent health fields suggest that adolescent mortality causes, especially in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs), are largely preventable and treatable. 1 Thus, providing interventions during adolescence can promote positive health behaviours, which can equips individuals to maintain healthy lifestyles into adulthood. 1 Thus, health services that meet specific and differentiated needs of adolescents are increasingly relevant. 2 This scoping review is a partnership between a group of mental health researchers interested in investigating how responsive adolescent health services are to youth’s needs in LMIC contexts. We are also interested in identifying behavioural rubrics that define this responsive practice.

To address the increasing need for targeted youth interventions, WHO has outlined several characteristics and components to inform the implementation of targeted adolescent-friendly health services and interventions. In general, under the universal health coverage mandate, it has been recommended that the health services are fundamentally equitable, accessible, acceptable, appropriate and effective. The United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) established ‘Four Keys’ for guiding the framework for action on adolescents and youth that entails: creating a supportive policy environment; facilitating gender-sensitive, life skills-based sexual and reproductive health (SRH) education; promoting a core package of SRH services; and fostering young people’s leadership and participation. The UNFPA framework aligns with global initiatives such as the International Planned Parenthood Fund (IPPF) and its guidance. IPPF’s definition of youth responsive service is defined as effective youth-oriented service, that is offered with trained providers; it is confidential and non-judgmental. 3 Furthermore, adolescent-friendly services should be available during times convenient for and accessible to all youths, such as after school, evenings or weekends. Another key recommendation of this guidance, especially Global Accelerated Action for the Health of Adolescents (WHO AA-HA), is to have services that are acceptable and engage adolescents and youth in behavioural change and health literacy as well as promotion effectively. The services should also have an effective referral system and encourage service users’ and carers’ involvement in the service development and intervention delivery. 1

Additionally, the WHO suggests the following eight global standard activities that ensure high-quality adolescent-friendly interventions: adolescents’ health literacy, community support, appropriate packages of services, providers’ competencies, facility characteristics, equity and non-discrimination, data and quality improvement, and adolescent participation. 1 Further, WHO has issued guidance for member states to carry out the implementation of adolescent programmes used in WHO AA-HA. 1 This guidance includes information for national policy-makers and programme managers when creating and implementing national-level programming aimed at adolescent health.

By comparing our review findings to the existing guidelines and scientific evidence on adolescent-friendly services, we aim to provide a rubric of adolescent-responsive components embedded within interventions within peer-reviewed empirical research studies. We will also compare these to commonly known global guidance on adolescent mental health programming, to address the needs of young people and improve health outcomes. The review will also aim to highlight commonly experienced barriers and facilitators in delivering such interventions in LMICs. As mentioned earlier, we are interested in knowing characteristics, strategies and conditions that were considered part of these services that made these adolescents friendly and those connected to mental or behavioural areas of health treatment, prevention or promotion.

The following research questions were central to this inquiry.

What are the key components of adolescent-friendly health interventions in LMICs?

What are the barriers and facilitators of adolescent-friendly health interventions in LMICs?

Materials and methods

The search strategy to address definitions and exemplars of barriers and facilitators of adolescent-friendly intervention was designed with the help of a research librarian (CM) at the University of Washington. The search was completed on 22nd July 2021 using the following seven databases: CAB Direct, CINAHL, Cochrane Databases, Embase, Global Health Medicus, PsycINFO and PubMed. The search was updated on 15th December 2022 using the same search strategy. The retrieved articles were exported to Zotero referencing software, where duplicate records were deleted before the articles were uploaded to Rayyan.

Title and abstract screening

The prescreening process involved using the WHO age criteria for adolescents, which included studies where participants were 12–24 years old. A study with a broader age range could be included if the participants were divided by age and the mean average age fell within the prespecified WHO age range. The search yielded studies published between January 2000 and November 2022. Only studies published in English were included as all the screeners (CJ, RS and JN) were fluent. The search included studies that involved participants residing in LMICs, as defined by the World Bank. The type of services described in the paper required some amount of meaningful human contact, which the authors defined as an intervention that was either delivered virtually or in person but not cash transfers only. The included studies required active youth involvement and needed youth to be the primary intervention target, so family-based interventions were not included. To attain a variety of adolescent-friendly interventions, studies based on the type of health problem were excluded; instead, a range of health interventions were investigated. The studies needed to include a health problem or related risk/protective factors of a specified health condition.

Full-text screening

During the full-text screening, the inclusion and exclusion criteria expanded on the abstract and title exclusion criteria document. The additional criteria specified that the authors did not restrict based on the study design. Studies that described their intervention as ‘adolescent-friendly’ intervention by outlining features of the intervention that targeted youths were included. As this review aimed to extract descriptive data in narrative form, purely quantitative papers were excluded from the study as they did not include relevant outcomes. Studies required information on the barriers and/or facilitators of delivering an adolescent-friendly intervention in LMICs. The adolescent population included in the study needed to be living in an LMIC, not in a High Income Countries (HIC), as there would likely be significant contextual differences.

Study selection

Each article was double screened during the title, abstract and full-text screening stage. After the screenings, the reviewers discussed the results and resolved discrepancies. The reasons for exclusion were noted for the full-text screening, which can be found in the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) flow chart (see figure 1 ). Collectively, the reviewers coproduced a data extraction form, which gathered information on each study with a focus on distilling the adolescent-friendly features and identifying barriers and facilitators to the study’s implementation. The data extraction form ensured that similar information was summarised for each article. The PRISMA flow diagram outlines the selection process (see figure 1 ). A total of 6103 articles were identified. Once duplicates were removed, 4870 articles were included in the title and abstract screening process. This resulted in a further 4699 articles being excluded from the review. The remaining 171 studies were further screened in their full-text form, which removed an additional 165 studies. As a result, 14 articles were included in this systematic review.

• Download figure
• Open in new tab
• Download powerpoint

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow chart. LMICs, low-income and middle-income countries.

Quality appraisal

The quality of each included study was evaluated with the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 (ROB) Tools. We used the specific JBI and ROB 2 tools for the randomised control trials (RCT) and quasi-experimental study designs. The data extraction process was completed before the quality appraisal to allow the reviewers to familiarise themselves with the included studies. All the appraisals were conducted independently by two reviewers. Reviewers discussed the overall quality of each study and resolved discrepancies in the critical appraisal rating through consensus.

Study characteristics

Tables 1 and 2 summarise the characteristics of the 14 studies in the scoping review. The studies were conducted in a range of geographical regions: Africa Region (n=6), South-East Asian Region (n=4), Eastern Mediterranean Region (n=2) and Region of the Americas (n=2). Interestingly, the included studies conducted in the Americas 4 5 and the Mediterranean 6 7 investigated interventions aimed at mental health and behavioural problems, while the studies from Africa focused on SRH. The included studies followed either an RCT (n=10) or quasi-experimental (n=4) study design. While most (n=11) of the studies focused on physical health, specifically pertaining to SRH (n=5), four studies addressed mental health topics, including resilience, 8 psychosocial well-being 9 and general mental health. 10 Moreover, two studies explored health behaviours, including nutrition 7 and diabetes. 4 One study involved education around communicable diseases, specifically hygiene and sanitation. 11 The studies varied greatly in the amount of participant information they reported. For example, the sample sizes ranged from 90 participants to 9654 participants; in total, there were data including 23 174 participants in this scoping review. Further, in one study, Flanagan et al did not report the number of participants included in their study; instead, the authors reported the number of clinic visits as 63 183 during the 6-month intervention period. Four of the included reported a mean age for participants. 4 7 10 12 For the remaining nine studies, the authors either reported the school grade equivalent or the age range of the participants in their study. 5 6 8 9 11 13–16

• View inline

Key characteristics of the included studies

Characteristics of youth-friendly interventions

Theory of change and theoretical model

Seven studies adopted a theory of change model, where the authors evaluated an adaptation and modification to a particular intervention, envisioning how it would be delivered and sustained. 4 11 12 14 15

Seven of the studies followed a theoretical model, which aimed to explore theoretical rationale or mechanisms underlying the constructs further and evaluated the effectiveness of an intervention keeping those in sight. 5 7 10 12 14–16 The most common intervention delivery setting was a school (n=10), though two studies were conducted in a clinical setting. Hayes et al conducted their study in multiple settings: schools, community health units and community contexts. 15 Of the studies conducted at schools, four specified that the study was delivered in a classroom 5 8 9 11 ; however, six did not provide specific details on the delivery location 4 6 7 12 14 16 (see table 2 ).

Duration and delivery of intervention

Many of the studies (n=8) did not record the duration of training that the delivery agents received. 4 6 7 10 11 14–16 The remaining studies showed some variance ranging from 2 days to 2 weeks. 5 8 9 12 13 17 Mathews et al specified that the delivery agents received weekly supervision and support with session preparation after the 2-week training. 12 Furthermore, only Mathews et al indicated that the delivery agents received supervision. 12

The duration of the intervention delivery ranged from 1 session 6 to 10–15 sessions per year for 3 years. 15 Most studies reported the number of sessions and the duration in months or weeks. However, five studies only reported the number of sessions or duration of the intervention, such as the number of months or years. The minimal detail made it difficult to establish the comprehensiveness and intensiveness of the intervention. 4 7 8 10 11 One limitation of the included studies was uneven reporting of the number of sessions, the duration of each session and the length of the entire intervention. It made it challenging to compare resources, time and funding for the implementation of interventions in this setting.

Identification of barriers, facilitators and key components of adolescent-friendly interventions

The included studies highlighted components of their intervention that could be extracted to help develop a theme and consensus around a definition. The studies provided elements of a definition compatible with the guidelines established by the WHO 1 and UNICEF. 18 The peer-reviewed literature did not discuss the parameters presented in the grey literature but did incorporate key elements for adolescent-friendly services.

Components of an adolescent-friendly intervention

Table 3 illustrates how the policy directives from WHO and UNICEF map onto the specific adolescent-friendly interventions included in our review. The authors found that most (n=10) of the interventions met all of the criteria for the WHO Quality Assessment Guidebook. This suggests that most of the studies designed interventions that were equitable, accessible, acceptable, appropriate and effective for adolescents. Specifically, the studies described components of their interventions that meet the WHO guidelines. Hayes et al emphasised the need for local health workers to introduce school services to ensure medical support was ‘welcoming’ and ‘non-judgmental’. Several authors mentioned the importance of considering the specific cultural context. Jordans et al summarised the need for large-scale interventions to account for cultural differences. 9 Naghashpour et al also emphasised the need for an appropriate intervention to address cultural and traditional habits. 7 Similarly, Al-Sheyab et al spoke about a programme targeting healthy lifestyle barriers to tailor an intervention effectively. 6 Further, Mehreen et al ’s study described an intervention that relied on two theoretical models to understand the complex interplay of factors that impact adolescent health. 14 Specific to LMICs, the authors highlight the need for rigorous evaluation within resource-constraint, complex emergency settings. 9 Leventhal et al also expressed a need for greater support of marginalised populations and especially in high-poverty settings to strengthen assets. 8 Two studies, Mathews et al and Rockiki et al discussed the interventions’ aims of aligning with government policy. 12 16 Similarly, five studies involved collaborative research processes. 5 8 10 11 16 Finally, Rockiki et al and Ivanova et al used focus groups with youths to help inform their intervention development seeking adolescent feedback. 10 16

Assessing the included studies against the key policy framework recommendations

Pathfinder International’s Clinical Assessment of Youth-Friendly Services 19 is more specific than the WHO Quality Assessment Guidebook in distilling components of these services. 20 It includes the following 12 criteria: location, facility hours, facility environment, staff preparedness, service provided, peer education/counselling programmes, educational activities, youth involvement, supportive policies, administrative procedures, publicity/recruitment and fees. 19 Several of these criteria should have been discussed in the studies, for example, supportive policies, administration procedures and fees, which may be important considerations for the sustainability of an intervention that were missing in our identified studies. However, according to the WHO Quality Assessment Guidebook, 20 nearly all studies (n=10) met the criteria.

Similarly, several studies did not meet the WHO AA-HA 1 (n=4) and UNICEF Programmes 18 (n=6) criteria. These policy documents focused on supporting meaningful adolescent involvement, and the level of youth participation varied considerably across the studies. One intervention was as ‘peer-led’, which is an integral component of the WHO AA-HA recommendations for ‘Together’. 1 6 This recommendation defines ‘Together’ as a youth working for youth. 1 Additionally, a separate study by Ivanova et al included peer volunteers to help facilitate their intervention. 10 The authors emphasise the importance of involving individuals with experiences of living with HIV in developing their online platform, ELIMIKA, which aims to improve adherence to antiretroviral medication. 10 Similarly, Mehreen et al included peer leaders who acted as facilitators for delivering their intervention, and Flanagan et al used peers as an integral part of their referral system. 14 17 Morales et al highlighted that participants’ feedback was considered and incorporated into the implementation process. 4 This is similar to Hayes et al that used ‘short dramas’ and ‘role plays’ in delivering their intervention. 15 Mathews et al also included a theatrical component, which intended to lend youth an opportunity to share and communicate their knowledge. 12

Barriers to conducting adolescent-friendly health intervention studies in LMICs

The limitations of the studies identified fall into two categories: research design and set-up and participation-level barriers (see figure 2 and table 4 ). The research-level barriers included short study duration 10 16 ; small sample size 5 ; small geographical region; limited data collection, non-random allocation 15 ; and poor reliability of the psychometric instruments. 5 9 In contrast, the participant-levels outlined were poor literacy levels 8 ; COVID-19 restrictions impact social distancing and data collection; familial and personal barriers 6 ; limited access to technological resources 4 ; little input from students 11 and poor attrition due to negative attitudes. 15

Figure to visualise the barriers to studying a youth health intervention in low-income and middle-income countries.

Identification of barriers, facilitators and key features of adolescent-friendly interventions

Facilitators to conducting adolescent health intervention studies in LMICs

The key facilitators included contextual considerations and emphasised meaningful stakeholder involvement (see figure 3 and table 4 ). Specifically, the facilitators highlighted: conducting community-based studies in rural areas 15 ; peer involvement; understanding the political and social environment 5 ; using a longitudinal study that provides visual aids 7 ; culturally adapting information for dissemination; and piloting to ensure that it is meaningful for participants. 8 The authors mentioned the importance of incorporating input from key stakeholders 4 11 ; ensuring accessibility 6 such as adopting a text messaging intervention 16 ; increasing knowledge of the topic 9 ; using school-based programmes as teachers can act as role models and schools can become healthier environments for adolescents. 14

Figure to visualise the facilitators of studying an adolescent health intervention in low-income and middle-income countries.

The JBI and the Cochrane RoB 2 tools were used to appraise the quality of the studies included in this scoping review ( tables 5 and 6 and 8 ). Of the 14 included studies, 10 were RCT, and 4 were quasi-experimental. The authors selected appropriate outcome measures for the context and samples selected in their studies. Eight included a participant follow-up measure to highlight the long-term effect of their intervention. Nearly all the RCTs and experimental studies (n=7) randomly allocate the participants to treatment groups and control groups. Four of the studies had a low risk of bias, while the other 10 had some concerns. The 10 studies that had some concerns regarding bias did not include information about concealment or discussed interventions in which concealment would not be possible or practical.

Johanna Briggs quasi-experimental quality appraisal

Johanna Briggs randomised control trials (RCT) quality appraisal

Cochrane risk-of-bias tool

One quasi-experimental study described a detailed follow-up process and analysed the data appropriately, and all the quasi-experimental designs included multiple outcome measures. Both the RCTs and quasi-experimental studies lacked the concealment of participants, delivery agents and outcome assessors which could impact the validity and reliability of the results. The RoB tool found that all 14 studies had a low risk of being biased by missing outcomes.

The consistent absence of concealment suggests a need to improve measures to counteract potential bias at all stages of the research process. Moreover, quasi-experiment studies included multiple outcomes of the interventions and provided robust information, which enabled a better understanding of the impact of the interventions. Additionally, the loss to follow-up may suggest attrition bias.

The included peer-reviewed studies incorporated key elements of adolescent-friendly interventions in line with the WHO 1 and UNICEF 18 standards (see figure 4 and table 8 ). Although not all the key recommendations were described in each included study, every paper discussed at least one key element from the WHO 1 or UNICEF 18 guidelines. One of the key elements extracted from the studies included a non-judgmental approach with an emphasis on privacy and confidentiality. 15 21 Additionally, interventions that were responsive and considerate of cultural differences were preferred. 7 9 This aligns with findings from previous reviews that identify confidential and culturally responsive care as an important consideration for adolescent-friendly services. 22–25 For a service to be sustainable, it may require collaboration with local and national governments, as demonstrated by both Mathews et al and Rockiki et al . 11 14 Peer support was also identified as a feature that augments youth’s experiences, specifically those living in high-poverty settings. 8 The importance of peer involvement in development aligns with the frameworks discussed and the findings of other reviews. 26–28 However, across the included studies, limited peer involvement was observed in the intervention design and delivery, despite the involvement of youth being considered an important element in nearly all the frameworks discussed in this review. 22 29 Although this appears to be a gap in the studies included in our review, we believe that the engagement of adolescents is critical in developing equitable policies programmes, and service systems, including evolving a framework and codesign for peer-to-peer support and facilitating youth-led interventions.

Network comparison of included studies and policy recommendations. The diagram illustrates how the included studies met the criteria outlined in the policy documents: Global Accelerated Action for the Health of Adolescents (WHO AA-HA), WHO Quality Assessment, UNICEF Second Decade and Path Finder Clinic Assessment. If all the criteria were met, we noted this relationship with a green line if all the criteria were met. If some criteria were met, we illustrated the relationship with a yellow line. As seen in the diagram, the WHO Quality Assessment and UNICEF Second Decade were most compatible with the included studies.

Key recommendations from the policy guidelines

One example of a country-level stance on youth engagement is from the UK’s National Health Service England which has outlined ‘key principles for effective peer support’. These include shared experience; accessible and inclusive; recognising strengths, values, needs and feelings of the individual; safe and authentic space; reciprocal relationship; support to find solutions, flexible and adaptive; and encouraging accessing to clinical advice and ensuring the person receives the right kind of support. 30 Organisations in LMICSs that embody these principles include the Naguru Teenage Information and Health Centre in Kampala, Uganda which trains peer health educators to connect with their peers through a call-in radio programme and Ogun State Adolescent Sexual and Reproductive Health Technical Working Group, through which youth representatives participate in the planning and implementation of ASRH-related policies, programmes and activities. 31

Moreover, meaningful engagement of adolescents is a critical component of WHO AA-HA principles and guidelines, which did not appear to be found in the included studies. Other reviews evaluating adolescent-friendly services determined that adolescent involvement in the development, delivery and evaluation is important in improving the acceptability of interventions targeted at youth, challenging social and cultural norms and promoting behaviours associated with help-seeking. 22 29 32

The elements extracted from the included studies contained the following WHO principles—focus on prevention and treatment. 33 This definition also confers with the WHO-AA-HA guidelines of confidentiality/non-judgmental, training of providers and accessibility, which includes community or school-based intervention. Although all four of these guidelines refer to the state and national levels of public health planning, the authors saw the benefit of including specific guidelines for individual community-level interventions. The noted discrepancy in the number of young people enrolled in schools in LMICs limits the reach of these interventions. 34 This may advocate for expanding adolescent-friendly services in settings beyond the classroom, to communities and spaces where adolescents are likely studying, working or generally found. Out-of-school adolescents are one neglected, vulnerable population that would need more tailored community-based intervention. 35

Additionally, we found that the studies varied in their structures for adolescent engagement, for example, the duration and number of sessions; we were unable to draw conclusions about the quality of these interventions. However, an important consideration of working in LMICs, and in mental health in general, is the resource constraints, which advocate for task-sharing approaches. A previous review identified both intersectoral collaboration and task-sharing approaches as facilitators of youth-friendly services LMICs. 36 Further, the feasibility and practicality of implementing a service might highlight trade-offs, that is, the barriers identified in our review, for example, short study duration, 10 16 poor reliability of the psychometric instruments, 5 9 poor literacy levels 8 and familial and personal barriers. 6 Thus, future researchers may need to adapt to their setting to ensure the sustainability of their interventions.

Moreover, our review identified the barriers and facilitators to service delivery and interventions in LMICs. The key facilitators included contextual considerations (ie, political and social environment) emphasised meaningful stakeholder involvement and made information culturally adapted. These facilitators emphasise the need to understand the context and involve key stakeholders from the project’s onset. To ensure a sustainable youth-responsive intervention, future researchers must use a dual approach combining bottom-up and top-down approaches to support the targeted health concerns.

The authors conclude that additional research is needed to evaluate strategies to support the scale-up and sustainability of adolescent-friendly interventions in resource-constrained settings. Previous literature has outlined the following challenges to implementing adolescent-friendly services in LMICs, including training, infrastructure, service user involvement, evaluation strategies and support for healthcare providers. 26 These considerations resonate with the findings of our scoping review, as several studies also reported the short research duration of the intervention. 5 7 9–12 16 It would be critical for future research to explore ways key stakeholders, including service users, could be involved in the research process, from proposal drafting to implementation.

The WHO’s AA-HA outlines guiding priorities for adolescent health on the level of national policy-making. 1 The development of a tool based on the core components outlined in this review to create a standardised baseline of requirements for adolescent-friendly care could be a reasonable next step to parse further which additional features are barriers and facilitators for adolescent-friendly care. Figure 5 presents some guidance on development of a tool keeping our review and policy guidelines in mind. The attributes of ‘together’ with and for adolescents, through relevant contextual ‘priority setting’ and ‘leadership’ driven processes can enable a system that can transform adolescent health across generations to blend into population health. Figure 5 also provides pointers to a checklist that this tool must cover in terms of cross-sectoral domains of adolescent health programming. While such a standard would necessitate the consideration of geographical and service-type specific factors, it could act as a starting point for defining positive and negative features of care.

Key attributes and guidance for a possible tool assessing adolescent-friendly services and/or intervention development.

Limitations

Possible limitations of this review include an absence of information extracted from grey literature and frameworks that were not formally published and publicly available on this theme. This may have resulted in missing features of adolescent interventions. Conversely, the reporting of the methodology appeared to have influenced the quality of the studies and the detail of data available.

This scoping review attempted to identify an operational definition for an ‘adolescent-friendly’ intervention. To synthesise the literature to an operational definition, we created a rubric based on the similarities across studies. The included studies contained key features of adolescent-friendly interventions; these components included fostering a welcoming and non-judgmental environment, providing culturally appropriate and responsive services, and focused support for marginalised communities within high-poverty settings. 4–12 15 16 Furthermore, the included studies did not detail the barriers and facilitators of developing or implementing their intervention; instead, they appeared to focus on the strengths and weaknesses of their study. The implementation of the interventions including youth-friendly services needs to become a guiding principle to evaluate acceptability, effectiveness and sustainment of interventions.

Ethics statements

Patient consent for publication.

Not applicable.

Ethics approval

Acknowledgments.

MK would like to acknowledge the support of Dr Ogedegbe and IEHE towards publication of this paper.

• García-Bello LA ,
• Heredia-Pi IB ,
• Zavala-Arciniega L , et al
• International Planned Parenthood Federation
• Morales A ,
• Garcia-Montaño E ,
• Barrios-Ortega C , et al
• Isolan LR ,
• Bosa VL , et al
• Al-Sheyab NA ,
• Alomari MA ,
• Hayajneh AA , et al
• Naghashpour M ,
• Shakerinejad G ,
• Lourizadeh MR , et al
• Leventhal KS ,
• Gillham J ,
• DeMaria L , et al
• Jordans MJD ,
• Komproe IH ,
• Tol WA , et al
• Ivanova O ,
• Mwaisaka J , et al
• Gerbaba M , et al
• Mathews C ,
• Eggers SM ,
• de Vries PJ , et al
• Amudhan S ,
• Mani K , et al
• Mehreen TS ,
• Jagannathan N ,
• Pandiyan D , et al
• Changalucha J ,
• Ross DA , et al
• Rokicki S ,
• Salomon JA , et al
• Flanagan S ,
• Gorstein A ,
• Nicholson M , et al
• Senderowitz J ,
• Hainsworth G
• World Health Organization
• Brindis CD ,
• Ambresin A-E ,
• Bennett K ,
• Patton GC , et al
• Quinlan-Davidson M ,
• Roberts KJ ,
• Devakumar D , et al
• Ngwenya N ,
• Mchunu LS , et al
• Clarke AM ,
• Jenkins R , et al
• Lassi ZS , et al
• Molelekeng G , et al
• Obiezu-Umeh C ,
• Nwaozuru U ,
• Mason S , et al
• Aguirre Velasco A ,
• Billings J , et al
• Local Burden of Disease Educational Attainment Collaborators
• Babatunde GB ,
• van Rensburg AJ ,

CJ and RS are joint first authors.

Handling editor Helen J Surana

X @manasikumar229

Contributors MK conceptualised the review. KV-C, CJ, RS, JN and MK designed the detailed search strategy with support from CMa and AM. CJ, RS and MK developed the first draft and subsequently all authors including CMo and SP reviewed and edited the final review. All authors read, commented and agreed with the final version. CJ and RS act as guarantor and MK is responsible for the overall content of the review.

Funding RS’ work on the review was funded by the Mary Gates Endowment at the University of Washington. MK was supported by NIMH/FIC R33MH124149-03 and K43TW010716-05.

Competing interests None declared.

Patient and public involvement Patients and/or the public were not involved in the design, or conduct, or reporting, or dissemination plans of this research.

Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.

Read the full text or download the PDF: