Which of the Following Is an Important Characteristic of a High-quality Literature Review?
J Grad Med Educ. 2016 Jul; 8(3): 297–303.
The Literature Review: A Foundation for High-Quality Medical Pedagogy Research
a These are subscription resource. Researchers should cheque with their librarian to determine their access rights.
Despite a surge in published scholarship in medical education 1 and rapid growth in journals that publish educational inquiry, manuscript acceptance rates go along to fall. two Failure to conduct a thorough, accurate, and upward-to-appointment literature review identifying an important problem and placing the study in context is consistently identified every bit ane of the top reasons for rejection. three,4 The purpose of this editorial is to provide a road map and practical recommendations for planning a literature review. By understanding the goals of a literature review and following 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 Pedagogy (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 blazon of article, 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, half dozen and there are fantabulous commentaries to guide authors of systematic reviews. 7,eight
Such work is outside the scope of this article, which focuses on literature reviews to inform reports of original medical didactics research. We ascertain such a literature review equally a synthetic review and summary of what is known and unknown regarding the topic of a scholarly body of work, including the current work's identify inside the existing knowledge. While this blazon of literature review may not require the intensive search processes mandated past systematic reviews, it merits a thoughtful and rigorous approach.
Purpose and Importance of the Literature Review
An understanding of the current literature is critical for all phases of a research written report. Lingard ix recently invoked the "periodical-equally-chat" metaphor as a way of agreement how one's research fits into the larger medical education conversation. As she described it: "Imagine yourself joining a conversation at a social effect. After you hang most eavesdropping to get the drift of what's beingness said (the conversational equivalent of the literature review), you join the conversation with a contribution that signals your shared interest in the topic, your knowledge of what's already been said, and your intention." nine
The literature review helps whatsoever researcher "join the conversation" by providing context, informing methodology, identifying innovation, minimizing duplicative enquiry, and ensuring that professional standards are met. Understanding the current literature also promotes scholarship, as proposed by Boyer, 10 by contributing to 5 of the 6 standards by which scholarly work should be evaluated. xi Specifically, the review helps the researcher (i) articulate clear goals, (2) show evidence of adequate training, (3) select advisable methods, (4) communicate relevant results, and (five) engage in reflective critique.
Failure to acquit a high-quality literature review is associated with several problems identified in the medical education literature, including studies that are repetitive, non grounded in theory, methodologically weak, and fail to expand knowledge beyond a single setting. 12 Indeed, medical education scholars complain that many studies repeat 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 estimation difficult. 13 When theory is used in medical education studies, it is oft invoked at a superficial level. As Norman 14 noted, when theory is used accordingly, it helps clear variables that might be linked together and why, and it allows the researcher to brand hypotheses and define a study's context and scope. Ultimately, a proper literature review is a first critical step toward identifying relevant conceptual frameworks.
Another trouble is that many medical pedagogy studies are methodologically weak. 12 Skilful research requires trained investigators who can articulate relevant inquiry questions, operationally ascertain variables of interest, and cull the best method for specific enquiry 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, single studies undertaken because the opportunity presented itself locally. Such studies frequently are not oriented toward progressive knowledge building and generalization to other settings. A house grasp of the literature tin encourage a programmatic approach to research.
Budgeted the Literature Review
Considering these issues, journals have a responsibility to need from authors a thoughtful synthesis of their written report'southward position within the field, and it 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 preparation and submission.
Planning the literature review requires understanding of journal requirements, which vary profoundly by periodical ( table i). Authors are advised to take note of common issues with reporting results of the literature review. Table 2 lists the almost mutual problems that we have encountered every bit authors, reviewers, and editors.
Table one
Sample of Journals' Author Instructions for Literature Reviews Conducted equally Part of Original Research Articlea
Table ii
Common Problem Areas for Reporting Literature Reviews in the Context of Scholarly Articles
Locating and Organizing the Literature
Iii resources may facilitate identifying relevant literature: human being resources, search tools, and related literature. Equally the process requires fourth dimension, it is important to begin searching for literature early in the process (ie, the report design stage). Identifying and understanding relevant studies will increment the likelihood of designing a relevant, adaptable, generalizable, and novel study that is based on educational or learning theory and can maximize impact.
Human being Resource
A medical librarian can help translate research interests into an constructive search strategy, familiarize researchers with available information resources, provide information on organizing data, and innovate strategies for keeping current with emerging research. Often, librarians are besides aware of research beyond their institutions and may be able to connect researchers with similar interests. Reaching out to colleagues for suggestions may assistance researchers chop-chop locate resources that would non otherwise be on their radar.
During this process, researchers volition probable identify other researchers writing on aspects of their topic. Researchers should consider searching for the publications of these relevant researchers (run into table 3 for search strategies). Additionally, institutional websites may include curriculum vitae of such relevant kinesthesia with access to their unabridged publication tape, including difficult to locate publications, such as volume capacity, dissertations, and technical reports.
Table 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. Fantabulous resource are bachelor to guide researchers in the mechanics of literature searches. fifteen,xvi
Because medical education research draws on a variety of disciplines, researchers should include search tools with coverage beyond medicine (eg, psychology, nursing, education, and anthropology) and that cover several publication types, such every bit reports, standards, conference abstracts, and book chapters (meet the box for several data resources). Many search tools include options for viewing citations of selected articles. Examining cited references provides additional articles for review and a sense of the influence of the selected article on its field.
One time relevant manufactures are located, it is useful to mine those articles for boosted citations. I strategy is to examine references of central articles, especially review articles, for relevant citations.
Getting Organized
As the aforementioned resource will probable provide a tremendous amount of data, 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 accessible. Increasingly, researchers utilise digital tools, such as Evernote, to capture such data, which enables accessibility beyond digital workspaces and search capabilities. Use of citation managers can as well be helpful as they shop citations and, in some cases, tin generate bibliographies ( tabular array 4).
Table 4
Citation Managers
Knowing When to Say When
Researchers often ask how to know when they accept located enough citations. Unfortunately, there is no magic or platonic number of citations to collect. One strategy for checking coverage of the literature is to audit references of relevant articles. As researchers review references they volition offset noticing a repetition of the same articles with few new articles actualization. This can indicate that the researcher has covered the literature base of operations on a particular topic.
Putting It All Together
In preparing to write a research newspaper, it is of import to consider which citations to include and how they will inform the introduction and discussion sections. The "Instructions to Authors" for the targeted journal will often provide guidance on structuring the literature review (or introduction) and the number of total citations permitted for each article category. Reviewing articles of similar type published in the targeted journal tin can as well provide guidance regarding structure and average lengths of the introduction and discussion sections.
When selecting references for the introduction consider those that illustrate core groundwork theoretical and methodological concepts, besides as recent relevant studies. The introduction should be brief and present references non as a laundry listing or narrative of available literature, but rather as a synthesized summary to provide context for the current study and to identify the gap in the literature that the written report intends to make full. For the discussion, citations should exist thoughtfully selected to compare and contrast the nowadays study's findings with the current literature and to point how the present written report moves the field frontwards.
To facilitate writing a literature review, journals are increasingly providing helpful features to guide authors. For case, the resources available through JGME include several manufactures on writing. 17 The journal Perspectives on Medical Education recently launched "The Author'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 fifty-fifty have writing coaches.
Decision
The literature review is a vital part of medical education research and should occur throughout the research process to help researchers design a strong study and effectively communicate report results and importance. To reach these goals, researchers are advised to plan and execute the literature review advisedly. The guidance in this editorial provides considerations and recommendations that may improve the quality of literature reviews.
References
ane. Lee K, Whelan JS, Tannery NH, Kanter SL, Peters Every bit. 50 years of publication in the field of medical educational activity. Med Teach . 2013; 35 7: 591– 598. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
ii. Norman G. Taking stock. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2014; xix iv: 465– 467. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
3. Artino AR, Jr, Due west DC, Gusic ME. Foreword: the more than things change, the more they stay the same. Acad Med . 2015; 90 suppl 11: Si– Siii. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
4. Bordage G. Reasons reviewers refuse and accept manuscripts: the strengths and weaknesses in medical education reports. Acad Med . 2001; 76 9: 889– 896. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
5. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA argument. PLoS Med . 2009; 6 7: e1000097. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
6. Harden R, Grant J, Buckley Chiliad, Hart I. BEME. Guide No. 1: best prove medical instruction. Med Teach . 1999; 21 half-dozen: 553– 562. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. Cook DA, West CP. Conducting systematic reviews in medical education: a stepwise arroyo. Med Educ . 2012; 46 ten: 943– 952. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
8. Hammick M, Dornan T, Steinert Y. Conducting a all-time evidence systematic review. Part one: from idea to data coding. BEME Guide No. 13. Med Teach . 2010; 32 1: three– 15. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
9. Lingard L. Joining a chat: the problem/gap/hook heuristic. Perspect Med Educ . 2015; 4 v: 252– 253. [PMC gratuitous article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
ten. 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 university for health sciences scholars: recommended methods. Health Res Policy Syst . 2007; 5: v. [PMC complimentary article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Albert M, Hodges B, Regehr Chiliad. Research in medical pedagogy: balancing service and scientific discipline. Adv Wellness Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2007; 12 1: 103– 115. [PMC costless article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Bordage G. Conceptual frameworks to illuminate and magnify. Med Educ . 2009; 43 4: 312– 319. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
14. Norman G. Editorial—how bad is medical instruction research anyway? Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2007; 12 1: ane– 5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
xv. Haig A, Dozier M. BEME. Guide No. three: systematic searching for show in medical teaching—role 2: amalgam searches. Med Teach . 2003; 25 5: 463– 484. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
16. Maggio LA, Tannery NH, Kanter SL. AM last folio: how to perform an effective database search. Acad Med . 2011; 86 8: 1057. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Articles from Periodical of Graduate Medical Instruction are provided here courtesy of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Educational activity
millernessiogs1971.blogspot.com
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4936839/
0 Response to "Which of the Following Is an Important Characteristic of a High-quality Literature Review?"
Post a Comment