Could a narrative review be a legitimate type of literature review when it critiques and summarizes a segment of literature and draws conclusions about an increasingly important issue which has yet to be investigated?
I would say, a legitimate type of "literature" does not include narrative reviews if that category is only there to attract the attention of the readers to the text itself "even when" it "inspires research ideas by identifying gaps in a segment of knowledge". This would be the very definition of "narrative review" legitimizing its very existence since the source of inspiration is the writer of the text himself.
اكيد السرد عنصر اساسي في نقل الوقاءع باستخدام الية الخيال لان الرواية في الحقيقة استعارة كبرى للواقع وهي تعبير عن الذات والواقع ومحاولة تغييره الى الافضل وتختلف وجهات النظر في ذلك
I would appreciate more specificity about the segment of literature with which the querant is concerned and what exactly is mesnt by the term “narrative review.”
The narrative review is useful for reading narrative texts in a contemporary and new way, and the so-called literature theory of reading i.e. multiple readings of narrative texts, and there are many techniques that are useful for exposing the implicit knowledge of the narrator and his coded message to be delivered to the recipient in the first place, narration is a basic pattern in Narration and fiction. With knowledge, the basics of narration are complete.
Narrative review if puts forth the gaps in the existing literature, then it is very much a legitmate literature review. And of course it also tells about the patterns that are being followed in the research, thus giving a scope to revisit the same problem with a different technique.