Ch. 31: Writing a Literature Review

Structure for Literature review

-Introduction: focus and scope -Discussion of each specific concept, principle, or theory in current literature on topic -brief overview of key studies, compared in parallel rather than serially, to achieve a critical appraisal of current research -Integration of the work reviewed, identifying the relationships, inconsistencies among findings across studies, controversies, and gaps in literature. -Identification of the niche in the current knowledge base that your research fills -Justification/rationale for the study and the design

Intro to your lit review includes:

-area and topic -impact or significance of the problem to society -nature of the problem or issue -relevance of the review to the professional/or scientific community that is assumed to be the audience for the paper

Central aims of unsystematic review:

-demonstrate advanced knowledge of the topic area -establish the impact and relevance of the research question -build a rationale for future research and/or the proposed study to be conducted or reported

Critical Appraisal will:

-identify current trends and ways of thinking about the topic and how to research it -Identify the boundaries of the literature -Illuminate the gaps in current knowledge base and the way in which it has developed -evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of existing research approaches to studying the topc -Make an argument for why any conflicting or differing research findings exist (if they do)

Two types of literature reviews:

-systematic reviews -general literature reviews

Hierarchy of writing tasks

1. Overall coherence and focus 2. logical flow of info b/t and within sections 3. Matching tables and graphs with text 4. links b/t paragraphs/sentences, headings 5. jargon, abstract words, grammar 6. spelling, capitalization, page layout, punctuation

Steps in systematic review

1. The first step of a systematic review is to thoroughly search and collect all relevant literature on the topic 2. check all of the articles against the pre identified criteria for relevance, inclusion, and exclusion

Questions that should be answered

1. why is this topic important? 2. what is known about the topic? 3. what is unknown about this topic? 4. why are some things unknown? 5. Why should the gaps be filled? 6. Which gaps does one propose to fill? 7. How does one propose to fill them?

Literature review

A critical evaluation of existing literature relevant to the topic under study

True

A good literature review informs, evaluates, and integrates relevant existing literature. T/F?

True

An often underestimated element is finding the right context for writing. T/F

systematic review

Focus to eliminate bias in the review by using an objective and transparent methodological approach to information synthesis that can be replicated easily Ex: meta-analysis

True

It is important to read one's own writing and rewriting from the perspective of the intended audience T/F

True

It is more effective to take a top-down approach to writing, attending to the more complex tasks earlier in the writing process. T/F

True

Priorities identified in the mind-map often yield the section headings and subheadings for an outline. T/F

True

Unsystematic reviews are at risk for more bias than systematic because its aim is to show how the existing literature progresses toward your topic (rather than to evaluate the methodological quality and level of evidence of that literature) T/F?

True

Your process of writing should begin when your topic is first conceived and should continue throughout the research process. T/F

critical appraisal

an essential component of every literature review and a means of evaluating key aspects of the literature on a topic

Systematic review

an exhaustive and thorough research effort that focuses on assessing and evaluating the quality of all other research studies of a strictly defined scientific topic or question.

draft abstract via mind-mapping

functions as a mission statement that guides one's writing process

Mind-mapping

generating and refining a visual representation of the ideas to be contained in a paper -lay out all of the facts, ideas, questions, etc. -then decide on most important parts (assign priorities) -can also help to define boundaries of paper, and let you know what NOT to include

Unsystematic review

not typically considered to be a stand-alone work of research in itself does not adhere rigidly to a specific protocol practical piece of writing that builds an evidence-based story, acting as a precursor to planned research or as an intro to an executed study

boilerplates

previously written materials that are edited and incorporated into papers

Finding one's story

telling the story of how one came up with the research question and went about answering it use layman's terms to simplify linking together parts becomes easier this way, creating a more effective and integrated outline once one is more clear about underlying story.

Scoping review

type of systematic review focuses on the rapid collection of as much evidence as possible in a much broader clinical or policy-related area.