Gorjian examines how urban inequality is transformed when rendered as spatial evidence. The iconic idea is that GIS does not merely visualise disparities; it composes them through choices of scale, indicator, network, cluster and statistical relation. The theoretical contribution is a synthesis of five recurrent domains—accessibility, green space, health disparity, socioeconomic status and open-space provision—showing how the geography of inequality has expanded alongside advances in data and spatial analytics. Methodologically, the study reviews 201 peer-reviewed articles through a PRISMA-guided process and compares clustering, regression, network and bibliometric approaches. Its conceptual operation is methodological cartography: the review maps not only unequal cities but the analytical conventions by which inequality becomes knowable. The wider bridge reaches critical GIS, urban sociology, epidemiology and planning theory. Its limitations are equally instructive: geographic concentration in industrialised contexts, weak longitudinal analysis and inconsistent composite measures reveal that spatial precision can coexist with epistemic unevenness, leaving historical causation and lived experience underrepresented.