Undertaking a Literature Review: A Step-by-Step Approach, Exercises of Literature

Download Undertaking a Literature Review: A Step-by-Step Approach and more Exercises Literature in PDF only on Docsity! Undertaking a literature review: a step'by-step approacii Patricia Cronin, Frances Ryan, Michael Coughian Abstract Nowadays, most nurses, pre- and post-qualification, will be required to undertake a literature review at some point, either as part of a course of study, as a key step in the research process, or as part of clinical practice development or policy. For student nurses and novice researchers it is often seen as a diflScult undertaking. It demands a complex range of skills, such as learning how to define topics for exploration, acquiring skiUs of literature searching and retrieval, developing the ability to analyse and synthesize data as well as becoming adept at writing and reporting, often within a limited time scale. The purpose of this article is to present a step-by-step guide to facilitate understanding by presenting the critical elements of the literature review process. While reference is made to diflFerent types of literature reviews, the focus is on the traditional or narrative review that is undertaken, usually either as an academic assignment or part of the research process. Key words: Aneilysis and synthesis • Literature review • Literature searching • Writing a review The reasons for undertaking a literature review are numerous and include eliciting information for developing policies and evidence-based care, a step in the research process and as part of an academic assessment. To many qualified nurses and nursing students faced with undertaking a literature review the task appears daunting. Frequently-asked questions range from where to start, how to select a subject, and how many articles to include, to what is involved in a review of the literature. The aim of this article is to present a step-by-step approach to undertaking a review ofthe literature to facilitate student nurses' and novice reviewers' understanding. What is a literature review? A literature review is an objective, thorough summary and critical analysis of the relevant available research and non- Patricia Cronin, Frances Ryan and Michael Coughian are Lecturers, School of Nursing and Midwifery, University of Dublin, Trinity College, Dublin Accepted for publication: November 2007 research literature on the topic being studied (Hart, 1998). Its goal is to bring the reader up-to-date with current hterature on a topic and form the basis for another goal, such as the justification for future research in the area. A good literature review gathers information about a particular subject from many sources. It is well written and contains few if any personal biases. It should contain a clear search and selection strategy (Carnwell and Daly, 2001). Good structuring is essential to enhance the flow and readability ofthe review. Accurate use of terminology is important and jargon should be kept to a minimum. Referencing should be accurate throughout (Colhng, 2003). Types of literature reviews Traditional or narrative literature review This type of review critiques and summarizes a body of literature and draws conclusions about the topic in question. The body of literature is made up of the relevant studies and knowledge that address the subject area. It is typically selective in the material it uses, although the criteria for selecting specific sources for review are not always apparent to the reader. This type of review is useful in gathering together a volume of literature in a specific subject area and summarizing and synthesizing it. Its primary purpose is to provide the reader with a comprehensive background for understanding current knowledge and highlighting the significance of new research. It can inspire research ideas by identifying gaps or inconsistencies in a body of knowledge, thus helping the researcher to determine or define research questions or hypotheses. Beecroft et al (2006) argue that a sufficiently focused research question is essential before undertaking a literature review. Equally, however, it can help refine or focus a broad research question and is useful for both topic selection and topic refinement. It can also be helpful in developing conceptual or theoretical frameworks (Coughian Table 1. Non-research reasons for undertaking a literature review •As an assignment for an academic course •To update current personai knowledge and practice on a topic •To evaluate current practices •To develop and update guidelines for practice •To develop work-related policies From: Polit and Beck (2006) 38 Britishjournal of Nursing. 2008, Vol 17. No 1 RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES et al, 2007). In addition, literature reviews can be undertaken independently of a research study (PoUt and Beck, 2006). Some reasons for this are described in Table 1. Systematic literature review In contrast to the traditional or narrative review, systematic reviews use a more rigorous and well-defined approach to reviewing the literature in a specific subject area. Systematic reviews are used to answer well-focused questions about clinical practice. i^irahoo (2006) suggests that a systematic review should detail the time frame within which the literature was, selected, as well as the methods used to evaluate and synthesize findings of the studies in question. In order for the reader to assess the reliability and validity of the review, the reviewer needs to present the precise criteria used to: • Formulate the research question • Set inclusion or exclusion criteria • Select and access the literature • Assess the quality of the literature included in the review • Analyse, synthesize and disseminate the findings. Unlike traditional reviews, the purpose of a systematic review is to provide as complete a list as possible of all the published and unpublished studies relating to a particular subject area.While traditional reviews attempt to summarize results of a number of studies, systematic reviews use explicit and rigorous criteria to identify, critically evaluate and synthesize ail the literature on a particular topic. Meta-analysis Meta-analysis is the process of taking a large body of quantitative findings and conducting statistical analysis in order to integrate those findings and enhance understanding. Meta-analysis is seen as a form of systematic review which is largely a statistical technique. It involves taking the findings from several studies on the same subject and analysing them using standardized statistical procedures. This helps to draw conclusions and detect patterns and relationships between findings (Polit and Beck, 2006). Meta-syn thesis Meta-synthesis is the non-statistical technique used to integrate, evaluate and interpret the findings of multiple qualitative research studies. Such studies may be combined to identify their common core elements and themes. Findings from phenomenological, grounded theory or ethnographic studies may be integrated and used. Unhke meta-analysis, where the ultimate intention is to reduce findings, meta- synthesis involves analysing and synthesizing key elements in each study, with the aim of transforming individual findings into new conceptualizations and interpretations (Polit and Beck, 2006). Steps in tiie literature review process Given the particular processes involved in systematic reviews, meta-anaiysis and meta-synthesis, the focus of the remainder of this article is on the steps involved in undertaking a traditional or narrative review of the Table 2. The literature review process • Selecting a review topic • Searching the literature • Gathering, reading and analysing the literature • Writing the review • References literature {Table 2). The first step involves identifying the subject ofthe literature review. The researcher undertaking a quantitative study may have decided this already. However, for the individual undertaking a non-research based literature review this will be the first step. Selecting a review topic Selecting a review topic can be a daunting task for students and novice reviewers (Timmins and McCabe, 2005). A common error for novices is to select a review title that is all encompassing, such as 'pressure ulcers' or'pain'. Although this may be a useful initial strategy for determining how much literature is available, subjects such as these generate a considerable amount of data making a review infeasible. Therefore, it is advisable to refine this further so that the final amount of information generated is manageable. For example, to focus the topic of interest, consider what aspects of pressure ulcers or pain are of particular significance. Is there a specific element of this topic that is of interest, such as prevention or management? Identifying what exactly is of interest and why can help refine the topic (Hendry and Farley, 1998). Talking to others, such as clinical specialists, or reading around a topic can also help to identify what areas of the subject the reviewer is interested in and may help indicate how much information exists on the topic (Timmins and McCabe, 2005). Having sufficient literature is also important, particularly when the review is an academic assignment. These academic exercises usually have short deadlines, so having enough literature is key from the perspective of being able to do the review and submit it on time. Attempting to change the topic close to the deadline for submission is usually a recipe for disaster so select an area that will hold your interest and ensure that there is enough data to meet your needs. Literature reviews that are part of academic coursework usually have strictly enforced word limits and it is important to adhere to that limit. Topics that are too broad will result in reviews that are either too long or too superficial. As a rule of thumb, it is better to start with a narrow and focused topic, and if necessary broaden the scope of the review as you progress. It is much more difficult to cut content successfully, especially if time is short. Searciiing the literature Having selected a topic the next step is to identify, in a structured way, the appropriate and related information. A systematic approach is considered most likely to generate a review that will be beneficial in informing practice (Hek and Langton, 2000). While a narrative or traditional review is not Uritishjournnl of Nursiny, 2008,Vol 17, No 1 39 Table 7. Framing the review Approach Dividing the literature into themes or categories Presenting the literature chronologically Exploring the theoretical and methodological literature Excimining theoretical literature and empirical literature in two sections Definition Distinct themes from the literature are discussed Literature divided into time periods Discussion of theoretical literature followed by exploration of methodological literature that would give some indication of why a particular research design might be appropriate for investigating the topic Where the topic has both theoretical and empirical literature and each is discussed separately Advantages/disadvantages Most popular approach. Allows integration of theoretical and empirical (research) literature. Care must be taken in ensuring that the themes are clearly related to the literature Useful when examining the emergence of a topic over a period of time Useful when the body of literature is largely theoretical with little or no empirical (research) literature. Can be used to identify the need for qualitative studies May tend to be a description rather than a critical review From: Carnwell and Daly (2001) knowledge in a clear and consistent way. The basis of good writing is to avoid long and confusing words and keep jargon to a minimum. Sentences should be kept as short as possible with one clear message and speUing and grammar should be accurate and consistent with the form of English being used. Many universities provide facilities for developing and improving writing sidlls and it is a good idea to try to attend such a course. Study skills books, such as that of Ely and Scott (2007), offer some good tips for writing competently. The organization of material in an objective manner and the structure ofthe review are crucial to its comprehensiveness. To some extent, the structure wiU depend on the purpose of the review. For example, systematic reviews have a clear structure that must be followed and that wUl dictate for the most part how the writing should be undertaken. However, for most students or practitioners a review is either part of a coursework assignment, research proposal or research dissertation, and as such, there is some fireedom in how the writing is structured. Nonetheless, it is important to be logical and there are some key elements that need to be included in all literature reviews. Primarily, the written report should include an introduction, body and conclusion (Burns and Grove, 2007).The length of literature reviews vary and word limits and assignment criteria must be considered in the overall construction. If it is a stand alone review, an abstract may also be necessary. An abstract is a short summary of the findings of the review and is normally undertaken last (Hendry and Farley, 1998). Introduction The introduction should include the purpose ofthe review and a brief overview of the 'problem'. It is important that the literature sources and the key search terms are outlined. Any limits, boundaries or inclusion/exclusion criteria should be clearly described. Some comment on what was found in the literature should be offered, that is, whether there was a dearth or wealth of literature on the topic. This gives the reader some insight into the breadth and depth of the literature sourced and also facilitates some judgement as to the validity of the claims being made. Main body The main body of the report presents and discusses the findings from the literature. There are several ways in which this can be done (see Table 7). Regardless ofthe manner in which the main body ofthe review is framed, there are key points that must be considered. Literature that is central to the topic should be analysed in- depth here. When discussing empirical or research literature a critical review of the methodologies used should be included. Care must be taken, however, that the review does not end up just as a description of a series of studies. In addition, it is best to avoid broad sweeping statements about the conclusiveness of research studies. Poht and Beck (2006) suggest that when describing a study's findings it is best to use language that indicates the tentativeness of the results rather than making definite statements about the research. Similarly, it is necessary for the reviewer to remain objective about the literature and personal opinions about the quality of research studies should not be included. Neither shouid it be a series of quotes or descriptions but needs to be written succinctly in the writer's own words. The reader should know that the reviewer has understood and synthesized the relevant information, rather than merely describing what other authors have found. The review should 42 Britishjournal of Nursing, 200H, Vol 17, No 1 RESEARCH METHODOLOGIES read hke a critical evaluation ofthe information available on the topic, highlighting and comparing results fi-om key sources. If using a thematic approach, the account should flow logically from one section or theme to the next, to maintain continuity and consistency (Beyea and NichoU, 1998). This can be achieved by summarizing each theme or section and outlining how it is related to the ensuing one. In respect of theoretical literature, consensus or difference regarding the topic should be outlined. Sometimes, where the theoretical literature dominates and there are few studies undertaken in the area of interest, the review may include an analysis of methodologies used across the studies. Inconsistencies and contradictions in the literature should also be addressed (Colling, 2003) as should the strengths and weaknesses inherent in the body of hterature. The role of the reviewer is to summarize and evaluate evidence about a topic, pointing out similarities and differences and offering possible explanations for any inconsistencies uncovered (Poiit and Beck, 2006). Conclusion The review shouid conclude with a concise summary of the findings that describes current knowledge and offer a rationale for conducting future research. In a review, which forms part of a study, any gaps in knowledge that have been identified should lead logicaUy to the purpose ofthe proposed study. In some cases, it may also be possible to use the developed themes to construct a conceptual framework that will inform the study. In aU reviews, some recommendations or implications for practice, education and research should be included. References The literature review should conclude with a full bibhographical list of all the books, journal articles, reports and other media, which were referred to in the work. Regardless of whether the review is part of a course of study or for publication, it is an essential part of the process that all sourced material is acknowledged. This means that every citation in the text must appear in the reference/bibliography and vice versa. Omissions or errors in referencing are very common and students often lose vital marks in assignment because of it. A useful strategy is to create a separate file for references and each time a publication is cited, it can be added to this list immediately. Some universities offer their students access to referencing systems, such as Endnote, and while they may initially appear difficult to learn they are worth the effort later in terms of ensuring the reference list is accurate. Remember, the reference list may be a useful source of literature for others who are interested in studying this topic (Coughian et al, 2007), and, therefore, every effort shouid be made to ensure it is accurate. Conclusion A iiterature review is central to the research process and can help refine a research question through determining inconsistencies in a body of knowledge. Similarly, it can help inspire new research innovations and ideas while creating greater understanding about a topic. It can enable a novice researcher to gain insight into suitable designs for a future study, as well as providing information on data collection and analysis tools. Whether the approach is qualitative or quantitative will often dictate when and how it is carried out. Various types of literature reviews may be used depending on the reasons for carrying out the review and the overall aims and objectives of the research. Writing a review ofthe literature is a skill that needs to be learned. By conducting them, nurses can be involved in increasing the body of nursing knowledge and ultimately enhancing patient care through evidence-based practice. DEI Beecroft C, Rees A, Bootii A (2006) Finding tiie evidence. In: Gerrisii K, Lacey A, eds. Tlie Research Process in Nursing. 5th edn. Biacicweii i^ubiisliing, Piiiiadepiiia: 90-106 Beyea S, Nichoil L (1998) Writing an integrative review. AORNJournal 67(4): 877-80 Burns N, Grove SK (2007) Understanding Nursing Research - Building an Evidence- Based Practice. 4tii edn. Saunden Eisevier, St. Louis Carnwell R, Daly W (2001) Strategies for tiie construction of a cridcal review ofthe iiterature. Nurse Educ Pract 1: 57-63 Cohen G (1990) Memory. In: Roth I, ed.The Open University's Introduction to Psychology.Vo\ume 2. Miiton Keynes, Lawrence Eribaum: 570-620 CollingJ (2003) Demystifying the ciinical nuning research process: the literature review. Urol Nurs 23(4): 297-9 Coughian M, Cronin P, R p n F (2007) Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 1: quantitative research. BrJ Nurs 16(11): 658-63 Ely C, Scott I (2007) Essential Study Skills for Nursing Eisevier, Edinburgh Hart C (1998) Doing a Literature Review. Sage Publications, London Heic G, Langton H (2000) Systematicaliy searching and reviewing iiterature. Nurse Res 7Q): 40-57 Hek G, Mouie P (2006) Making Seiue of Research: An Introduction for Health and Social Care Practitioners. 3rd edn. Sage Publications, London Hendry C, Farley A (1998) Reviewing the iiterature: a guide for students. Nurs Stand 12(44): 46-8 Newell R, Burnard P (2006) Researth for Evidence-Based Practice. Blackwell Publishing, Oxford Paniagua H (2002) Planning research: methods and ethics. Practice Nursing 13(1): Parahoo K (2006) Nursing Reseanh — principles, process and issues. 2nd edn. Palgrave, Houndsmiil Patriclc LJ, Munro S (2004) The iiterature review: demystifying the literature search. Diabetes Educ 30(1): 30-8 Poiit DF, Beck C T (2004) Nursing Research: principles and methods. 7th edn. Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia Poiit D, Beck C (2006) Essentiak of Nursing Research: Methods, Appraisal and Utilization. 6th edn. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Philadelphia Timmins F, McCabe C (2005) How to conduct an effective literature review. Nurs Stand 20(11): 41-7 Younger P (2004) Using the internet to conduct a literature search. Nurs Stand 19(6): 45-51 KEY POINTS I Undertaking a literature review is a key feature in many courses of study, an essential step in the research process, and is fundamental in the development of clinical practice and policy. I Types of literature reviews include narrative or traditional; systematic review; meta-anaiysis and meta-synthesis. I Undertaking a iiterature review includes identification of a topic of interest, searching and retrieving the appropriate literature, analysing and synthesizing the findings and writing a report. IA structured step-by-step approach faciiitates the production of a comprehensive and informed iiterature review. Britishjournal of Nursing. 2008, Vol 17, No 1 43 Copyright of British Journal of Nursing (BIN) is the property of Mark Allen Publishing Ltd and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.