what is considered to be essential to a thorough and relevant review of the literature?
J Grad Med Educ. 2016 Jul; 8(3): 297–303.
The Literature Review: A Foundation for High-Quality Medical Education Research
a These are subscription resource. Researchers should bank check with their librarian to determine their access rights.
Despite a surge in published scholarship in medical teaching one and rapid growth in journals that publish educational research, manuscript acceptance rates go along to autumn. two Failure to comport a thorough, authentic, and up-to-engagement literature review identifying an important problem and placing the study in context is consistently identified as one of the top reasons for rejection. 3,4 The purpose of this editorial is to provide a road map and practical recommendations for planning a literature review. Past agreement the goals of a literature review and post-obit a few basic processes, authors can enhance both the quality of their educational inquiry and the likelihood of publication in the Journal of Graduate Medical Instruction (JGME) and in other journals.
The Literature Review Defined
In medical education, no organization has articulated a formal definition of a literature review for a research paper; thus, a literature review can take a number of forms. Depending on the type of commodity, target journal, and specific topic, these forms will vary in methodology, rigor, and depth. Several organizations accept published guidelines for conducting an intensive literature search intended for formal systematic reviews, both broadly (eg, PRISMA) 5 and within medical education, 6 and there are excellent commentaries to guide authors of systematic reviews. 7,8
Such work is outside the telescopic of this article, which focuses on literature reviews to inform reports of original medical instruction research. We define such a literature review as a synthetic review and summary of what is known and unknown regarding the topic of a scholarly torso of work, including the current work'southward identify within the existing knowledge. While this blazon of literature review may not require the intensive search processes mandated past systematic reviews, information technology merits a thoughtful and rigorous approach.
Purpose and Importance of the Literature Review
An understanding of the current literature is disquisitional for all phases of a research written report. Lingard 9 recently invoked the "journal-as-conversation" metaphor as a way of agreement how one's research fits into the larger medical instruction chat. As she described it: "Imagine yourself joining a chat at a social event. After you hang about eavesdropping to get the drift of what's being said (the conversational equivalent of the literature review), y'all bring together the conversation with a contribution that signals your shared interest in the topic, your knowledge of what'due south already been said, and your intention." ix
The literature review helps any researcher "join the conversation" by providing context, informing methodology, identifying innovation, minimizing duplicative research, and ensuring that professional standards are met. Understanding the current literature likewise promotes scholarship, as proposed by Boyer, ten past contributing to 5 of the vi standards by which scholarly work should be evaluated. 11 Specifically, the review helps the researcher (1) articulate clear goals, (two) prove evidence of adequate training, (iii) select appropriate methods, (4) communicate relevant results, and (v) engage in reflective critique.
Failure to bear a high-quality literature review is associated with several problems identified in the medical educational activity literature, including studies that are repetitive, non grounded in theory, methodologically weak, and neglect to expand noesis beyond a unmarried setting. 12 Indeed, medical education scholars complain that many studies echo work already published and contribute little new knowledge—a likely cause of which is failure to conduct a proper literature review. 3,iv
Likewise, studies that lack theoretical grounding or a conceptual framework make report design and interpretation difficult. 13 When theory is used in medical didactics studies, it is frequently invoked at a superficial level. As Norman 14 noted, when theory is used appropriately, it helps articulate variables that might be linked together and why, and it allows the researcher to make hypotheses and define a study's context and scope. Ultimately, a proper literature review is a first critical step toward identifying relevant conceptual frameworks.
Some other problem is that many medical didactics studies are methodologically weak. 12 Adept research requires trained investigators who can clear relevant research questions, operationally ascertain variables of interest, and choose the best method for specific research questions. Conducting a proper literature review helps both novice and experienced researchers select rigorous research methodologies.
Finally, many studies in medical education are "one-offs," that is, unmarried studies undertaken considering the opportunity presented itself locally. Such studies frequently are not oriented toward progressive cognition building and generalization to other settings. A firm grasp of the literature tin encourage a programmatic approach to research.
Approaching the Literature Review
Considering these issues, journals have a responsibility to demand from authors a thoughtful synthesis of their study's position within the field, and information technology is the authors' responsibility to provide such a synthesis, based on a literature review. The aforementioned purposes of the literature review mandate that the review occurs throughout all phases of a study, from conception and design, to implementation and analysis, to manuscript grooming and submission.
Planning the literature review requires understanding of journal requirements, which vary profoundly by journal ( table 1). Authors are advised to accept note of mutual problems with reporting results of the literature review. Table 2 lists the most common problems that nosotros take encountered as authors, reviewers, and editors.
Table 1
Sample of Journals' Writer Instructions for Literature Reviews Conducted as Function of Original Research Articlea
Table two
Common Problem Areas for Reporting Literature Reviews in the Context of Scholarly Articles
Locating and Organizing the Literature
Three resources may facilitate identifying relevant literature: human resources, search tools, and related literature. As the process requires time, it is important to brainstorm searching for literature early in the process (ie, the study design stage). Identifying and understanding relevant studies will increase the likelihood of designing a relevant, adjustable, generalizable, and novel report that is based on educational or learning theory and tin can maximize impact.
Human Resources
A medical librarian can help translate research interests into an constructive search strategy, familiarize researchers with available information resource, provide information on organizing data, and innovate strategies for keeping current with emerging inquiry. Often, librarians are likewise enlightened of research across their institutions and may be able to connect researchers with like interests. Reaching out to colleagues for suggestions may help researchers quickly locate resources that would not otherwise exist on their radar.
During this process, researchers volition likely identify other researchers writing on aspects of their topic. Researchers should consider searching for the publications of these relevant researchers (come across table 3 for search strategies). Additionally, institutional websites may include curriculum vitae of such relevant faculty with access to their entire publication record, including hard to locate publications, such as volume chapters, dissertations, and technical reports.
Tabular array 3
Strategies for Finding Related Researcher Publications in Databases and Search Engines
Search Tools and Related Literature
Researchers will locate the majority of needed data using databases and search engines. Excellent resources are available to guide researchers in the mechanics of literature searches. xv,sixteen
Because medical education research draws on a variety of disciplines, researchers should include search tools with coverage across medicine (eg, psychology, nursing, education, and anthropology) and that cover several publication types, such every bit reports, standards, conference abstracts, and volume capacity (run across the box for several data resource). Many search tools include options for viewing citations of selected articles. Examining cited references provides additional manufactures for review and a sense of the influence of the selected commodity on its field.
Once relevant articles are located, it is useful to mine those articles for boosted citations. One strategy is to examine references of key articles, especially review manufactures, for relevant citations.
Getting Organized
Every bit the aforementioned resources will likely provide a tremendous amount of information, organization is crucial. Researchers should determine which details are nigh of import to their study (eg, participants, setting, methods, and outcomes) and generate a strategy for keeping those details organized and attainable. Increasingly, researchers utilize digital tools, such as Evernote, to capture such information, which enables accessibility across digital workspaces and search capabilities. Use of citation managers can also be helpful equally they store citations and, in some cases, tin generate bibliographies ( tabular array four).
Table four
Commendation Managers
Knowing When to Say When
Researchers oft ask how to know when they have located enough citations. Unfortunately, at that place is no magic or ideal number of citations to collect. One strategy for checking coverage of the literature is to inspect references of relevant manufactures. Every bit researchers review references they will first noticing a repetition of the same articles with few new articles appearing. This tin signal that the researcher has covered the literature base on a particular topic.
Putting It All Together
In preparing to write a research paper, it is of import to consider which citations to include and how they will inform the introduction and word sections. The "Instructions to Authors" for the targeted journal volition oftentimes provide guidance on structuring the literature review (or introduction) and the number of full citations permitted for each article category. Reviewing articles of similar blazon published in the targeted periodical tin also provide guidance regarding structure and average lengths of the introduction and word sections.
When selecting references for the introduction consider those that illustrate core background theoretical and methodological concepts, as well as recent relevant studies. The introduction should be brief and present references non every bit a laundry list or narrative of available literature, but rather as a synthesized summary to provide context for the electric current study and to identify the gap in the literature that the study intends to fill. For the give-and-take, citations should be thoughtfully selected to compare and contrast the present study's findings with the current literature and to indicate how the present study moves the field forward.
To facilitate writing a literature review, journals are increasingly providing helpful features to guide authors. For case, the resources available through JGME include several articles on writing. 17 The periodical Perspectives on Medical Education recently launched "The Writer's Craft," which is intended to help medical educators improve their writing. Additionally, many institutions have writing centers that provide spider web-based materials on writing a literature review, and some even have writing coaches.
Conclusion
The literature review is a vital part of medical education research and should occur throughout the research process to help researchers design a strong written report and effectively communicate study results and importance. To achieve these goals, researchers are advised to plan and execute the literature review carefully. The guidance in this editorial provides considerations and recommendations that may improve the quality of literature reviews.
References
1. Lee K, Whelan JS, Tannery NH, Kanter SL, Peters AS. 50 years of publication in the field of medical didactics. Med Teach . 2013; 35 7: 591– 598. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. Norman G. Taking stock. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2014; xix 4: 465– 467. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
3. Artino AR, Jr, West DC, Gusic ME. Foreword: the more things alter, the more they stay the aforementioned. Acad Med . 2015; ninety suppl eleven: Si– Siii. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
iv. Bordage Thou. Reasons reviewers reject and accept manuscripts: the strengths and weaknesses in medical education reports. Acad Med . 2001; 76 9: 889– 896. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
v. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med . 2009; half-dozen 7: e1000097. [PMC gratuitous article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
six. Harden R, Grant J, Buckley G, Hart I. BEME. Guide No. i: best testify medical education. Med Teach . 1999; 21 6: 553– 562. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. Cook DA, Due west CP. Conducting systematic reviews in medical education: a stepwise arroyo. Med Educ . 2012; 46 10: 943– 952. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
eight. Hammick M, Dornan T, Steinert Y. Conducting a best evidence systematic review. Part 1: from idea to information coding. BEME Guide No. thirteen. Med Teach . 2010; 32 1: three– 15. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
nine. Lingard L. Joining a chat: the trouble/gap/hook heuristic. Perspect Med Educ . 2015; 4 v: 252– 253. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
x. Boyer EL. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate . San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2016. [Google Scholar]
11. Hofmeyer A, Newton M, Scott C. Valuing the scholarship of integration and the scholarship of application in the academy for health sciences scholars: recommended methods. Health Res Policy Syst . 2007; 5: five. [PMC complimentary article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Albert Grand, Hodges B, Regehr G. Research in medical education: balancing service and scientific discipline. Adv Wellness Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2007; 12 1: 103– 115. [PMC complimentary commodity] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Bordage G. Conceptual frameworks to illuminate and magnify. Med Educ . 2009; 43 4: 312– 319. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
14. Norman One thousand. Editorial—how bad is medical pedagogy research anyhow? Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2007; 12 ane: 1– 5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15. Haig A, Dozier G. BEME. Guide No. 3: systematic searching for testify in medical education—function 2: amalgam searches. Med Teach . 2003; 25 five: 463– 484. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
16. Maggio LA, Tannery NH, Kanter SL. AM terminal page: how to perform an effective database search. Acad Med . 2011; 86 viii: 1057. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Manufactures from Journal of Graduate Medical Education are provided here courtesy of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Didactics
belsteadquinginotted.blogspot.com
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4936839/
0 Response to "what is considered to be essential to a thorough and relevant review of the literature?"
Post a Comment