1. Review of the Literature

2. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE “The systematic identification, location, scrutiny and summary of written materials that pertain to a research problem”.

3. PURPOSE OF ROL n SOURCES OF IDEAS (primary review) n ORIENTATION TO WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN n REVEALS GAPS AND INCONSISTENCIES n PROVISION OF A CONCEPTUAL CONTEXT n ASSESSMENT OF FEASIBILITY n INFORMATION ON RESEARCH APPROACH/DESIGN/LIMITATION n SUPPORTS REPLICATION

4. What a ROL does n Reveals data-based knowledge on a topic n Leads to new knowledge to support theories n Leads to research questions, problems n Serves nursing education n Leads to research based practice protocols

5. Designs--Literature review for qualitative and quantitative Phenomenological-ROL compares findings Ethnographic-provides conceptual framework Historical-literature is data source Grounded theory- compares study data with literature on an ongoing basis The review of the literature supports development of the steps of the research process

6. Steps in the ROL n Identify problem n Identify variables n Conduct computerized search (CINAHL) Compu. index to Nur and Al.Hlth. Lit. n Choose relevant sources n Retrieve articles n Critically read and summarize n Synthesize articles

7. Content of the ROL

8. FACTS, STATISTICS, FINDINGS n Textbooks n Encyclopedia n Reports n Conference Proceedings n Publications n Scholarly Journals (refereed, vs non refereed)

9. THEORY OR INTERPRETATION n Books by Theorist n Journals

10. METHODOLOGY

11. OPINIONS, BELIEFS, POINTS OF VIEW n (Not useful in Quantitative Research) n Anecdotal Articles (“How we do it at our place Articles”) n Narration n Diaries

12. n PRIMARY SOURCES n SECONDARY SOURCES n TERTIARY SOURCES

13. Primary Sources n The person who conducted the study, developed the theory or model, or prepared the scholarly discussion presents the material for publication or dissemination by other means

14. Secondary Sources n Someone other than the author of the original work writes or presents the author’s work with an interpretation, synopsis, critique and/or summary.

15. Tertiary Sources n Compendia of research findings from primary or secondary sources. e.g. textbooks or reference volumes

16. Primary sources should prevail! n While secondary and even tertiary sources are often written by experts in the field they ofen lack: –all of the concepts, definitions, and interpretations of the original study –a scientifically skeptical but unbiased evaluation of the original data

17. Writing the ROL n 1. Problem Statement n 2. Definition of Theoretical Constructs n 3. Review of Studies n 4. Discussion/Comparison of Results n 5. Conclusions/Implications of Studies n 6. Summary n 7. Bibliography

18. n Not a series of quotes but paraphrase n Relevant studies described in detail n Like findings grouped together n Objectivity n Include studies in conflict with hypothesis n Identify “state of the art” n Point out gaps n Appropriate wording n Attend to ethical issues:documentation

19. Format of the ROL n Important articles described individually and in detail n Less relevant articles summarized in a general synopsis n Methodology of other studies described, especially if similar to the current research. n Should answer the “so what” question

20. Wording of the ROL n Never state that researchers “found” or “proved” something. Rather state that the research “supports” or “suggests” or “leads one to the belief that...” Scientific Skepticism