Review of the Literature

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

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

5. 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 Designs--Literature review for qualitative and quantitative

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

7. Content of the ROL

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

9. THEORY OR INTERPRETATION • Books by Theorist • Journals

10. METHODOLOGY

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

12. PRIMARY SOURCES • SECONDARY SOURCES • TERTIARY SOURCES

13. Primary Sources • 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 • 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 • Compendia of research findings from primary or secondary sources. e.g. textbooks or reference volumes

16. Primary sources should prevail! • 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 • 1. Problem Statement • 2. Definition of Theoretical Constructs • 3. Review of Studies • 4. Discussion/Comparison of Results • 5. Conclusions/Implications of Studies • 6. Summary • 7. Bibliography

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

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

20. Wording of the ROL • 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