nursing research – literature review
empirical (relevant studies in journals, books)
theoretical (models, theories, frameworks, that will help guide study development)
documents what is known about the topic
illuminates chronology of related knowledge development as appropriate
through description identifies: gaps; inconsistencies; methodological flaws; limitations of prior work – identifies what remains unanswered
published by scholarly source or in peer reviewed journal
-systematic reviews, meta-analyses, meta-syntheses – can be very valuable!!
-reference books, textbooks
-information from professional organizations
things used a long time ago that are still important today
current – or seminal
organized / logical
document what is known / unknown (gaps or inconsistencies)
reveal shortcomings of prior work (methodological, etc.)
make relationship with current research question clear
multiple replications of a study are required to verify findings and rule out sources of error / threats to the validity of findings
***research does not prove anything***
nurses need information literacy skills to make decisions from an unbiased, informed position
-suggesting appropriate data collection methods
-instruments used previously
-document need to replicate previous work – with a twist
supports/defines key concepts (variables) and relationships
documents past theoretical frameworks / suggests appropriateness of current framework
Dissertation Abstracts International (DAI)
-subject; key terms; titles; authors
select references by ‘checking’ those of interest
abstracts can be viewed
print, retrieve or send for through ILL once determine which worthy of retrieving
can facts be verified by reliable sources/
work for an organization?
conflict of interest?
is this scope appropriate / meaningful to the research question?
‘classic’ (seminal) articles in a field may also be justifiable
authorship and bias can be unclear
accuracy often not verified
motivation of author / site often not explicitly stated
current? might not be updated with latest info
review articles retrieved (reference lists) for additional references
sort out articles into categories
-not of use
-sources that help define research
more objective than traditional lit review
rates relative quality of study and weighs significance of findings based on this
helps resolve significance of contradictory results
a valuable type of 2nd resource
-not a summary or aggregate
-promotes fuller knowing
-generate a new, broader view
have the authors references mostly primary rather than secondary sources? if secondary, justifiable?
is the review primarily critical or summative?
does the review logically support the need for the current research while presenting an apparently unbiased and comprehensive review of relevant literature?