NURSING RESEARCH “THE LITERATURE REVIEW” Professor Lisa High University of Windsor January 22nd, 2007

Why - Literature Review? Generate a picture of what is “KNOWN” and “NOT KNOWN” Sources that are important to providing “in-depth” knowledge needed to make changes: In nursing practice To study a selected problem

What is the “PURPOSE?” PRIMARY PURPOSE = Why is this important? (2 major reasons)

Researchers & Literature Reviews Relevant literature helps with: Research problem identification, development or refinement of research questions Orientation to what is “known” and “not known” Identify gaps or inconsistencies in a body of research Need for replication of a study with a different population

Researchers & Literature Reviews Identification/development of new/refined clinical interventions to test empirically Identification of relevant theoretical/conceptual frameworks for a research problem Development of a hypotheses to be tested Identification of designs & data collection methods for a study Interpretation of study findings, developing implications & recommendations

What’s the point? Literature review: - lays the foundation for a study - identifies the significance to nursing So What? Therefore, the reader can: - background of the current knowledge - highlights the significance for the study

Literature Review The end product of a literature review is: “the generation of a written report that summarizes what is known and not known about a phenomenon”

Non-researchers & Literature Review Not exclusive to doing a study Specific purpose of the literature review depends on the “reviewer’s role” For example: To gain evidence-based knowledge on a subject/topic Critique existing nursing practices, to make recommendations for changes

Non-researchers & Literature Review To develop research-based protocols & interventions to improve clinical practice To develop a theory/conceptual framework To develop and revise nursing curricula To develop policy statements & practice guidelines

SCOPE OF A LITERATURE REVIEW To determine the scope: The types of information & sources available The approximate depth and breadth of the review needed The time frame for conducting the review What is the difference b/w quantitative and qualitative literature reviews? (Burns & Grove, 1997, p. 120-121)

Scope of a Literature Review Types of Information & Sources: 2 types: (a) theoretical (b) empirical literature Published literature includes: Primary source Secondary source Opinion articles & anecdotal & other non-research articles

Scope of a Literature Review Depth and breadth of the review: Depth – refers to the number & quality of the sources that are examined Breadth – is determined by number of different topics examined

Scope of a Literature Review The time frame for conducting the review: influenced by the problem studied, sources available, and the goals of the researcher No set length of time

PROCESS OF REVIEWING THE LITERATURE PROCESS INVOLVES: LOCATING RELEVANT LITERATURE IDENTIFYING SOURCES LOCATING SOURCES READING SOURCES CRITIQUING SOURCES

LOCATING RELEVANT LITERATURE PUBLIC LIBRARIES ACADEMIC LIBRARIES ELECTRONIC DATABASES ONLINE CATALOGUE SYSTEMS THE CINAHL DATABASE PRINT RESOURCES PRINT INDEXES ABSTRACT JOURNALS

Preparing Written Literature Reviews Screening references – relevance & appropriateness Relevance – judged quickly by reading the abstract or introduction - description of study findings - need to rely on “primary sources” “Secondary sources” – good to start - to get references - do not substitute for primary sources

Abstracting & Recording Notes TAKING NOTES OR WRITING A SUMMARY OF THE REPORT IDENTIFYING STRENGTHS IDENTIFYING LIMITATIONS

Organizing the Review Prepare a summary table Review has to have a meaningful flow Overall goal = presentation is logical, demonstrates meaningful integration and leads to a conclusion of what is “KNOWN” and “NOT KNOWN” about the topic

Content of the Written Review Provide the reader with an objective and thorough summary of the current state of knowledge Central tasks: Point out consistencies Point out contradictions Possible explanations for inconsistencies Make note of gaps or areas of research inactivity

Style of a Research Review Should keep in mind no one theory or hypothesis can be proved or disproved by empirical testing Can one research question be definitely answered in a single study? Are hypothesis proved or supported? Do the writer’s opinions belong in the review?

Length of a Review No one formula Depends on several factors: Complexity of the research question Extent of prior research Purpose the review is being prepared Space allowed

Reading & Using Existing Research Reviews May be no need to review if a recent literature review on the topic has been published TYPES of reviews that support evidence-base practice: - Traditional Narrative Reviews - Meta-analysis - Qualitative Metasynthesis

CRITIQUING LITERATURE REVIEWS Understand scope and evaluate thoroughness: Does the coverage of the literature seem thorough? Does it appear that the review includes all or most of the major studies that have been conducted on the topic of interest? Are recent research reports cited? Does the review rely on appropriate materials? (use of primary sources or secondary?) Is the review organized in such a way that the development of ideas is clear?

CRITIQUING LITERATURE REVIEWS If the review is part of a new research study, does the review support the need for the new study? If the review is designed to guide clinical practice , does the review of the evidence support the need for practice change? Does the review conclude with a synopsis of the state-to-the-art knowledge on the topic? Is the style of the review appropriate? Does the reviewer paraphrase, or is there an over reliance on quotes? Is the reviewer unbiased? Use of appropriate language?