In finding gaps you have to be careful.

B works on b;

C works on c;

D works on d.

All 3 authors B, C, and D neglect topics x, y and z -- the very gaps which you found that B, C, and D did not address. So you now have to actively search out and hunt down authors X, Y and Z, who happen to have addressed the topics you thought were missing from the literature.

Repeat.

As per my understanding of your query, If it is a critical review , the gaps  ought to be addressed with a background of sound scientific literature and it should be included in your citations ( citations as they include article references and any other sources that you have referred to in your search ), additional benefit is you can also prepare a letter to the editor outlining those lapses, involving  those citations .. 

In finding gaps you have to be careful.

B works on b;

C works on c;

D works on d.

All 3 authors B, C, and D neglect topics x, y and z -- the very gaps which you found that B, C, and D did not address. So you now have to actively search out and hunt down authors X, Y and Z, who happen to have addressed the topics you thought were missing from the literature.

Repeat.

Can you: Yes.

An analysis should go beyond the obvious what is presented and if you observe a gap then you should stress that point and utilise other literature to address it.

To me, this would show the student understood the task, thought independently and made the effort to come up with a solution to a perceived problem.

Kind Regards

Roland

We must cite those all researchers, who has contributed, whether we quoted or did not quote in review. This will support the observations anyway.

Regards

Hi Patricia,

For me it depends on context. In the 'good old days' when I doing my Bachelors and Master's degrees - there was often an unwritten rule. The reference list listed the cited material that was integrated into the main body of the thesis text. A bibliographical (bibliography) list was 'additional' material that you had read that you didn't integrate into the main body i.e. more 'peripheral' or dated material and/or wanting to keep the reference list to a manageable or specified amount - but that you felt would be useful to the reader if they wanted to read wider on the topic.

Nowadays - I tend to find that the terms are used interchangeably (usually to just include integrated, cited material) - but the older convention may still apply to your institution. If it does - it would address your issue.

Give my regards to York - an old 'hunting ground of mine'. I worked in Hull for some time and did my MPH at Leeds - so often frequented York.