Systematic Approaches to Literature Reviewing

1. Systematic Approaches to Literature Reviews Systematic Approaches to Literature Reviewing Dr. Mark Matthews Student Learning Development mark.matthews@tcd.ie Dr. Mark Matthews Student Learning Development http://student-learning.tcd.ie

2. Workshop Overview • explain elements of the systematic review process • explore how these might be used or adapted to support: - a thesis literature review; - approaches to keeping up-to-date with the literature through a PhD

3. Discussion • What does a Literature Review mean to you ?

4. The Literature Review ? “Literature reviews …… introduce a topic, summarise the main issues and provide some illustrative examples.” from www.eppi.ioe.ac.uk Agree? Disagree?

5. The Literature Review ? If they are to be considered a reliable source of research evidence they should record how the primary studies were sought and selected and how they were analysed to produce their conclusions. Readers need to be able to judge whether all of the relevant literature is likely to have been found, and how the quality of studies was assessed. 1 Agree? 5 Disagree? 10

6. Discussion • What does a Literature Review mean to you ? • What are the 3 main challenges?

7. Challenges?

8. Discussion • What does a Literature Review mean to you? • What are the 3 main challenges? • Why do we do Literature Reviews?

9. Why do them? Identify gaps Avoid re-inventing wheel Build on past work Identify future colleagues Increase your knowledge of the subject Identify key works in your area Provide intellectual context of your work Identify opposing views Demonstrate you can find and analyse research Identify ideas & methods relevant to your work Bourner, 1996

10. disciplinary perspective connection to findings critical appraisal working understanding coverage scholarliness literature use Literature Matters From Holbrook et al (2007)

11. Systematic Reviews areview of a clearly formulated question that uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect and analyse data from the studies that are included within the review. Statistical methods (meta-analysis) may or may not be used to analyse and summarise the results of the included studies.  fromwww.sebc.bangor.ac.uk

14. Systematic v.s. Narrative reviews Agreed standards Context and differences High degree of focus Bias of empirical studies Minimise bias Strengths of both approaches Student Learning Development, TCD 14

15. “For some review topics, however, the strengths of the SR may turn into weaknesses…do not allow for comprehensive coverage” but “narrative reviews do not reveal how the decisions were made about relevance of studies” ‘Balancing the strengths of systematic and narrative reviews’ (Collins & Fauser, 2004) p. 103-104.

16. Key features of the systematic review process you might want to adopt or adapt– • Explicit and transparent methods • a standard set of stages • Accountable, replicable and updateable

17. Seven steps (of a Cochrane Review) • Formulating a problem • Locating and selecting studies • Critical appraisal of studies • Collecting data • Analyzing and presenting results • Interpreting results • Improving and updating reviews

18. 1. Formulating a Problem

19. 1. Formulating a Problem Example Questions? Standard SR question contains subject- intervention- outcome- comparator

20. Does drinking coffee raise people’s blood pressure (when compared to chocolate)? Standard SR question contains subject- intervention- outcome- comparator

21. 1 Minute Big Picture Interviewer Interview your partner and take brief notes

22. 2. Locating and Finding Research

23. Where do I start? Previous Theses Review Papers Recent Conference Papers Subject librarian Supervisor

24. Phase 1- Identify the Research a broad but defined, systematic sweep Defined search terms – record recall and precision Defined search arena - e.g. databases, citation indices, reference lists from primary and review articles, grey literature, conference proceedings, research registers, the internet, individual researchers/practitioners Other broad search limits, e.g. language, date, TIPS! Document the search protocol and record what research was found Systematically manage the search output, e.g. using endnote

25. Phase 2- Selection select from research using criteria related to your research question Develop inclusion or exclusion statements, these might relate to study outcomes, research design, methods used, population worked with etc. e.g. studies with a mixed population of men and women e.g. random control trials only e.g. maximum exposure time of 10mins TIPS! Document the statements and their purpose (might be pragmatic or research related)

26. Search Log

27. Running the search • How many titles and abstract can you check? • How easy will it be to decide to accept or reject a record? • Record the reason for rejection for “Excluded studies”

28. Don’t stop searching when you’ve stopped searching

29. 3. Critical appraisal of studies “Assessing the quality of methodology is a critical part of the systematic review process” No standard approach but there are hierarchies in fields of study

30. 3. Critical appraisal of studies What would be appropriate to consider when critically appraising research in your area? Student Learning Development, TCD 30

31. 3. Critical appraisal of studies Authority Validity Accuracy Objectivity Currency - Recency Coverage Location Student Learning Development, TCD 31

32. connection connection connection to findings to findings to findings critical critical critical appraisal appraisal appraisal disciplinary disciplinary disciplinary working working working perspective perspective perspective understanding understanding understanding coverage coverage coverage scholarliness scholarliness scholarliness literature use literature use 3. Critical appraisal of studies No standard approach but there are hierarchies in fields of study

33. 4. Collect data & analyse Evaluate Synthesise results of literature review Tables to compare Descriptive Meta-analysis Index Cards Student Learning Development, TCD 33

34. Student Learning Development, TCD 34

36. Write up literature review - Structure Background Purpose/Research question Method Findings Discussion Implications/Recommendations Student Learning Development, TCD 36

37. Remember Not a description of what you found Not a list of relevant research Your review must be directed by your research question

38. Voice Writer as tour guide - voice

39. Funnel Method

40. Writing Style • Assess the value of the literature • Explain the context research takes place • Emphasise limitations of existing research • Tell a story

41. Writing Style Introduction What I will show you? Why? Body Why this area? Don’t leave reader to fill gaps Conclusion What we have seen? How this is relevant to research?

42. Writing Style Introduction Define your topic & provide context Why are you reviewing literature Explain the structure of the review What is included and not Body Group the literature Provide insight and make connections for reader Proceed from general to specific Conclusion Summarise main points / contributions of literature Evaluate current “State of Art” Gaps? Issues?

43. Workflow for Literature Reviews • Search • Assess • Read • Write

44. Evaluation and Literature Review Research evaluation

45. disciplinary perspective connection to findings critical appraisal working understanding coverage scholarliness literature use Literature Matters From Holbrook et al (2007)

46. Comprehensive Literature Review What have been the main research questions? What are the main perspectives on this topic in previous research? In which subject areas has the topic been studied? Do parallel literatures exist for this topic? What are the main conclusions on previous research in this area? What are the key concepts in this area? Coherent synthesis of past and present research in the domain of study How is this topic approached by others? Who are these “others”? Which existing work could be extended? Where are the gaps in literature? Where is existing knowledge “thin”? Which aspects of this work are of most relevance to my study? Which discussions? What are the key areas of debate in this area? Which work is subject to challenge? Which sub-themes? Which writers? Source: Dr Hazel Hall, Napier University

47. Other ideas and options Speed reading Endnote Databases in my area Google Alerts

48. Reading Constructing a Good Dissertation Erik Hofstee www.exactica.co.za/dn/exactica-book-literature-review.pdf Examiner comment on the literature review in Ph.D. theses Allyson Holbrook et al. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03075070701346899 Academic Phrasebank http://www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.uk/sources.htm Systematic Approaches to Literature Reviewing Dr. Mark Matthews Student Learning Development mark.matthews@tcd.ie

49. SR websites Centre for Evidence-based Conservation -http://www.cebc.bangor.ac.uk/ Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (medical) -http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/index.htm Cochrane Collaboration (international- medical) -http://www.cochrane.org/ EPPI-Centre, Institute of Education - http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/ Social Policy and Social Care -http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/chp/srspsc/index.htm If you read one article, an example here of a review of the ways studies in reviews are appraised - http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=521688 If you prefer power-point, how about this one on mixed method reviewshttp://www.ccsr.ac.uk/methods/events/challenges/documents/JamesThomasESRCMethodologicalchallenges.ppt

50. Finding your way in the woods Systematic Approaches to Literature Reviewing Dr. Mark Matthews Student Learning Development mark.matthews@tcd.ie