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

2. 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

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

4. 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

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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”

8. 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

9. 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

10. 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 )

11. 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

12. 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

13. 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

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

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

16. 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

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

18. 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

19. 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

20. 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?

21. 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

22. 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

23. 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?

24. 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?