A bibliography with each study listed in date order and with paragraphs is a review that walks through studies in date order. Passing reviews organize the field by disagreement: who, what evidence, and why two careful teams reached the opposite conclusions.
The reorganization is the main task and it cannot be done only from abstracts. Reading methods sections is needed to notice subtle differences in the way something was measured in one study. Then you should state this in a way your supervisor cannot refute.
This will determine if you have a working knowledge of this field or if you’ve only skimmed its surface. That’s the tell. Ten summaries? Boring. Doing this assessment shows you have what it takes to work in this field. Explaining how the results are contradictory, and why, because the papers sampled are different? That’s deductive reasoning. That’s not hard.
Generated reviews average the field. Every study contributes valuable insight, contradictions dissolve into on the other hand, and the gap paragraph says more research is needed without naming what kind. Supervisors read that paragraph first and know at once.
A matrix is built before writing the first word: study, design, sample, measure, find, limit. When you build a matrix, structures and patterns appear that are not visible in a reading pile. From the matrix, a review is written and grouped by method, instead of in the order that it was done.
A review written specifically for you is a reference document, not a chapter for you to copy. Your supervisor will expect you to present your search log and answer questions about the papers you have prepared so be prepared. Keep the correspondence showing what you actually commissioned if research support is part of your institution’s commissioned research program.
One rate, whatever the format: $10 per 100 words. You are paying for the writer’s time and judgement, so the price scales with the words rather than with a package tier.
| Typical literature review | Words | Writing | Fee (1%) | You pay |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Summary report | 1,200 | $120 | $1.20 | $121.20 |
| Standard report | 3,000 | $300 | $3 | $303 |
| In-depth report | 6,000 | $600 | $6 | $606 |
The writer receives 100% of the writing price. Our 1% fee is added on top of it, and 0.5% is donated to tree planting. Full pricing breakdown.
Ask on the contact page and a person will answer, usually the same working day. For a live order, reply to your confirmation email and it reaches whoever is handling it.
Ask on the contact page and a person will answer, usually the same working day. For a live order, reply to your confirmation email and it reaches whoever is handling it.
This is more about the breadth and scope of the field than the word count. A narrowly focused clinical scenario may involve eleven relevant study trials. A broad social science scenario can be looking at two hundred. We agree to set the inclusion criteria first and mention how many we screened and included.
Yes, for systematic and scoping reviews, tell us the name of the protocol and we will provide the rest of the work, including the flow diagram, screening records, and extraction tables along with the narrative. This allows you to complete your methodological section, step by step, with actual data.
Completely. Copyright transfers to you on delivery, with no attribution requirement and no licence back to us. Nothing written for you is resold, repurposed or republished.
Reviews from completed, paid orders in this category.
I’ve been reading in this area for a year and a half. This review found three new papers for me, including one from 2019 that completely contradicts what I’ve been saying. Annoying, but useful, and it’s what I paid for.
I had hit a wall on two papers behind paywalls. Rather than skipping them or paraphrasing the abstracts, the writer found the accessible preprints, used those, and said so in a note. Small thing. It is the thing that told me a person did this.
Coverage was really great. The synthesis section really nailed the hard part of this section. Half of our requested references came back in APA format when we asked for Vancouver, which cost me an hour to change rather than sending it back. Everything else was correct.
We do not ask you to take the no-AI promise on trust. Each draft is run through these platforms and the reports are attached to your delivery email.
Originality.aiAI detection + plagiarism
GPTZeroAI detection
TurnitinAI detection + similarity
CopyleaksAI detection + plagiarism
Winston AIAI detection
ZeroGPTAI detection
SaplingAI detection
Content at ScaleAI detection
Send the brief, get a human draft back within 3 days. No account, no subscription, no AI.
$10 per 100 words · all of it to the writer · 0.5% to trees