I'm writing a thesis and I'm supposed to find existing mechanisms about a topic.
The literature review papers can be called B and the primary literature B uses is called A.
I have found 2 literature reviews [B] that cover more than 30 state of the art mechanisms and I use their papers to list all the mechanisms. I basically mention all the mechanisms they mention and explain them briefly, and of course I give credit to the [B] papers. And those mechanisms I want to test out my self I will go to the primary source [A] to write in more depth about them and give credit to the [A] papers.
I have listed more than 30 mechanisms. If I were not to use these [B] articles I'd have to go trough 30+ [A] papers and basically recreate [B] papers and recreate a redundant literature review of said mechanisms that already exist in earlier papers.
Is this the correct way of using a literature review, or should I read it, and use the original [A]? I will later take the ones that fit my domain and make my own review. So I use existing reviews and use the primary sources [A] to make my own review.