Review of literature A literature review involves the systematic identification, location, scrutiny, and summary of written materials that contain information on a research problem. Purposes of A literature Review Source of research ideas

A scrutiny of previous work acquaints the researcher with what has been done in a field, there by minimizing the possibility of duplication and increase the probability that a new study will make a distinctive contribution to knowledge. Information on research approach

Assessment of feasibility: Scope of a literature reviews I- Types of information to seek. A-Research findings C-Methodological information. D-Opinions and view points. E- Anecdotes and clinical descriptions. H- Depth and breadth of literature coverage.

The extensiveness of the literature review depends on a number of factors:- a- The nature of the document being prepared. b- The researcher’s own level of knowledge. c- Relevancy . Sources for the literature review

“How to access previous work on a topic”. A primary source is a description of a research stydy that is written by the original researcher (s) Secondary resource: IS a description of a study prepared by some one other than the original researcher.

Locating literature sources: Card catalog Indexes Example: Nursing intervention and pain relief for post operative patients, (Restick), north Am. 11 (2): 283-95. Nursing intervention and pain relief for post operative pts (article title). -(Restick) (author). -North Am (Journal number). -11 (volume number). -(2) (issue number). -283-95 (page number). -Jun. 76 (date of issues). -(research) (type of article).

Examples of indexes useful to nurse researchers are the:- International nursing index. A rticles from more than 275 nursing Journals, more that 2700 non nursing journals covers form 1966 to the present (quarterly) Index medicus. Nursing research index Nursing studies index Current index to journals in education

3. Abstracts: provide a summary of a study rather than just a title. The abstract is a brief description of the study placed at the beginning of the journal article. In about 100 to 200 words. The abstract answers the following questions, what were the research questions? What methods did the researcher use in answering those questions? And what did the researcher discover?

The summary : presents the high lights of the findings of a study and is placed at the end. 4.Computer searches: able to produce an immediate search, this is called on –line search. - MEDLINE covers all areas of biomedical literature with added coverage of nursing and dental literature.

Preparing and writing the literature review. Identifying and locating relevant references. Abstracting and recording notes: Examine the abstract or summary of a report in order to determine its potential value. 3. Once the document is considered relevant, the entire report should be read critically.

4. Use index cards:- Separate cards should be used for each new reference to facilitate organization and sorting. Direct quotes should be avoided. It is important to paraphrase. If the refernce is a research reports the following kinds of information should usually be recorded:- 1- The problem statement or hypothodology.

2- the procedures and methodology. 3- The results and conclusions. 4- The researcher’s own criticism or comments. The review should point out both consistencies and contradictions in the literature. Studies that are relevant to your study should be described in detail. The summary should point out ay gaps or areas of research inactivity.

The review should be as objective as possible. The literature review should conclude with a summary or overview. The critical summary should demonstrate the need for the new study.

Guidelines for critiquing Research Reviews: Does the review 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? Does the review include recent literature? Is there an overdpendence on secondary sources when primary sources could have been obtained?

3. Is there an overreliance on opinion articles or anecdotes and an underemphasis on research studies? 4. Is the review a summary of past work, or does it critically appraise the continuations of key studies? Does it discuss weaknesses in existing studies and identify important gaps in the literature?

5. Does the review conclude with a brief synopsis of the state of the art of the research on the ropic? 6. Is the review organized in such a way that the development of ideas is clear? If review is part of anew study, is the material organized in such a way that the review builds a case for conducting the new study?

7.Is the review paraphrase adequately, or is it a string of quotations from the original sources? 8. Does the review use appropriate language, suggesting the tentativeness of prior findings? 9. Does the review appear to be sufficiently objective?