How the Literature Review Can Provide a Strong Basis for a New Study?
J Grad Med Educ. 2016 Jul; 8(iii): 297–303.
The Literature Review: A Foundation for Loftier-Quality Medical Education Research
a These are subscription resource. Researchers should check with their librarian to decide their access rights.
Despite a surge in published scholarship in medical education ane and rapid growth in journals that publish educational research, manuscript credence rates continue to fall. ii Failure to deport a thorough, accurate, and up-to-date literature review identifying an important problem and placing the written report in context is consistently identified as 1 of the elevation reasons for rejection. 3,4 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 bones processes, authors can enhance both the quality of their educational research and the likelihood of publication in the Journal of Graduate Medical Instruction (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 enquiry paper; thus, a literature review tin can take a number of forms. Depending on the type of article, target journal, and specific topic, these forms will vary in methodology, rigor, and depth. Several organizations have published guidelines for conducting an intensive literature search intended for formal systematic reviews, both broadly (eg, PRISMA) 5 and within medical education, vi and there are fantabulous commentaries to guide authors of systematic reviews. seven,viii
Such work is outside the telescopic of this article, which focuses on literature reviews to inform reports of original medical instruction inquiry. We define such a literature review as a synthetic review and summary of what is known and unknown regarding the topic of a scholarly torso of work, including the current piece of work's identify within the existing knowledge. While this type of literature review may not require the intensive search processes mandated by systematic reviews, information technology 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 inquiry study. Lingard 9 recently invoked the "journal-every bit-conversation" metaphor as a way of understanding how ane's enquiry fits into the larger medical education conversation. Every bit she described it: "Imagine yourself joining a conversation at a social issue. After y'all hang nigh eavesdropping to become 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 noesis of what's already been said, and your intention." 9
The literature review helps whatever researcher "join the conversation" past providing context, informing methodology, identifying innovation, minimizing duplicative inquiry, and ensuring that professional standards are met. Understanding the current literature likewise promotes scholarship, as proposed by Boyer, 10 by contributing to v of the 6 standards by which scholarly work should be evaluated. xi Specifically, the review helps the researcher (one) clear articulate goals, (two) show bear witness of adequate preparation, (iii) select advisable methods, (4) communicate relevant results, and (v) appoint in reflective critique.
Failure to conduct a high-quality literature review is associated with several problems identified in the medical pedagogy literature, including studies that are repetitive, not grounded in theory, methodologically weak, and fail to expand knowledge beyond a single setting. 12 Indeed, medical teaching scholars complain that many studies repeat work already published and contribute trivial new knowledge—a likely cause of which is failure to carry a proper literature review. iii,4
Likewise, studies that lack theoretical grounding or a conceptual framework make study design and interpretation difficult. 13 When theory is used in medical teaching studies, it is oftentimes invoked at a superficial level. As Norman xiv noted, when theory is used appropriately, it helps clear variables that might be linked together and why, and information technology allows the researcher to make 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 problem is that many medical education studies are methodologically weak. 12 Practiced research requires trained investigators who can articulate relevant research questions, operationally define variables of interest, and choose the best method for specific enquiry questions. Conducting a proper literature review helps both novice and experienced researchers select rigorous enquiry methodologies.
Finally, many studies in medical education are "one-offs," that is, unmarried studies undertaken considering the opportunity presented itself locally. Such studies frequently are not oriented toward progressive knowledge building and generalization to other settings. A firm grasp of the literature can encourage a programmatic approach to enquiry.
Approaching the Literature Review
Considering these issues, journals take a responsibility to demand from authors a thoughtful synthesis of their study's position within the field, and information technology is the authors' responsibility to provide such a synthesis, based on a literature review. The same purposes of the literature review mandate that the review occurs throughout all phases of a study, from formulation and pattern, to implementation and analysis, to manuscript preparation and submission.
Planning the literature review requires understanding of journal requirements, which vary greatly past periodical ( tabular array 1). Authors are advised to take note of common problems with reporting results of the literature review. Table 2 lists the nearly common problems that nosotros have encountered equally authors, reviewers, and editors.
Tabular array one
Sample of Journals' Author Instructions for Literature Reviews Conducted as Part of Original Research Articlea
Table 2
Common Problem Areas for Reporting Literature Reviews in the Context of Scholarly Articles
Locating and Organizing the Literature
3 resource may facilitate identifying relevant literature: human resources, search tools, and related literature. As the process requires time, information technology is important to begin searching for literature early in the process (ie, the report design phase). 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 tin can maximize impact.
Human Resources
A medical librarian can help translate inquiry interests into an constructive search strategy, familiarize researchers with bachelor information resources, provide information on organizing information, and introduce strategies for keeping current with emerging inquiry. Frequently, librarians are also aware of enquiry across their institutions and may be able to connect researchers with similar interests. Reaching out to colleagues for suggestions may help researchers quickly locate resource that would non otherwise exist on their radar.
During this process, researchers will likely place other researchers writing on aspects of their topic. Researchers should consider searching for the publications of these relevant researchers (see table three for search strategies). Additionally, institutional websites may include curriculum vitae of such relevant faculty with access to their entire publication record, including hard to locate publications, such equally book chapters, 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. 15,sixteen
Considering medical education research draws on a variety of disciplines, researchers should include search tools with coverage beyond medicine (eg, psychology, nursing, instruction, and anthropology) and that embrace several publication types, such every bit reports, standards, briefing abstracts, and book chapters (run into the box for several data resource). 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 commodity on its field.
Once relevant articles are located, information technology is useful to mine those articles for additional citations. One strategy is to examine references of key manufactures, especially review manufactures, for relevant citations.
Getting Organized
As the aforementioned resource will likely provide a tremendous amount of information, organization is crucial. Researchers should determine which details are most important to their written report (eg, participants, setting, methods, and outcomes) and generate a strategy for keeping those details organized and attainable. Increasingly, researchers use digital tools, such as Evernote, to capture such information, which enables accessibility beyond digital workspaces and search capabilities. Utilise of citation managers tin besides be helpful as they store citations and, in some cases, can generate bibliographies ( table 4).
Table 4
Commendation Managers
Knowing When to Say When
Researchers often enquire how to know when they have located enough citations. Unfortunately, there is no magic or ideal number of citations to collect. One strategy for checking coverage of the literature is to audit references of relevant manufactures. As researchers review references they will start noticing a repetition of the same articles with few new manufactures appearing. This can signal that the researcher has covered the literature base of operations on a particular topic.
Putting Information technology All Together
In preparing to write a research paper, it is important to consider which citations to include and how they will inform the introduction and give-and-take sections. The "Instructions to Authors" for the targeted journal will oftentimes provide guidance on structuring the literature review (or introduction) and the number of total citations permitted for each article category. Reviewing manufactures of similar type published in the targeted journal tin also provide guidance regarding structure and boilerplate lengths of the introduction and discussion sections.
When selecting references for the introduction consider those that illustrate cadre background theoretical and methodological concepts, also as contempo relevant studies. The introduction should be brief and present references non as a laundry list or narrative of available literature, merely rather as a synthesized summary to provide context for the current study and to identify the gap in the literature that the report intends to fill. For the discussion, citations should be thoughtfully selected to compare and contrast the nowadays study's findings with the current literature and to betoken how the present study moves the field forwards.
To facilitate writing a literature review, journals are increasingly providing helpful features to guide authors. For example, the resource available through JGME include several articles on writing. 17 The journal Perspectives on Medical Pedagogy recently launched "The Writer's Craft," which is intended to help medical educators improve their writing. Additionally, many institutions have writing centers that provide web-based materials on writing a literature review, and some even have writing coaches.
Conclusion
The literature review is a vital role of medical education research and should occur throughout the research procedure to help researchers design a strong report and effectively communicate study results and importance. To achieve these goals, researchers are brash to programme and execute the literature review carefully. The guidance in this editorial provides considerations and recommendations that may better the quality of literature reviews.
References
ane. Lee M, Whelan JS, Tannery NH, Kanter SL, Peters Equally. 50 years of publication in the field of medical education. Med Teach . 2013; 35 vii: 591– 598. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. Norman G. Taking stock. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2014; 19 4: 465– 467. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
3. Artino AR, Jr, West DC, Gusic ME. Foreword: the more things change, the more they stay the same. Acad Med . 2015; 90 suppl 11: Si– Siii. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
4. Bordage One thousand. Reasons reviewers reject and accept manuscripts: the strengths and weaknesses in medical education reports. Acad Med . 2001; 76 ix: 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]
vi. Harden R, Grant J, Buckley 1000, Hart I. BEME. Guide No. i: all-time evidence medical education. Med Teach . 1999; 21 half-dozen: 553– 562. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. Melt DA, W CP. Conducting systematic reviews in medical education: a stepwise approach. Med Educ . 2012; 46 ten: 943– 952. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
eight. Hammick M, Dornan T, Steinert Y. Conducting a all-time bear witness systematic review. Part 1: from idea to data coding. BEME Guide No. 13. Med Teach . 2010; 32 1: 3– fifteen. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
nine. Lingard 50. Joining a conversation: the problem/gap/hook heuristic. Perspect Med Educ . 2015; 4 5: 252– 253. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
10. Boyer EL. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate . San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2016. [Google Scholar]
eleven. Hofmeyer A, Newton Yard, Scott C. Valuing the scholarship of integration and the scholarship of application in the academy for health sciences scholars: recommended methods. Wellness Res Policy Syst . 2007; 5: 5. [PMC gratuitous article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Albert M, Hodges B, Regehr G. Inquiry in medical education: balancing service and science. Adv Wellness Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2007; 12 1: 103– 115. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
xiii. Bordage 1000. Conceptual frameworks to illuminate and magnify. Med Educ . 2009; 43 4: 312– 319. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
fourteen. Norman G. Editorial—how bad is medical education enquiry anyway? Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2007; 12 one: 1– v. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15. Haig A, Dozier Chiliad. BEME. Guide No. 3: systematic searching for prove in medical education—part 2: constructing searches. Med Teach . 2003; 25 5: 463– 484. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
16. Maggio LA, Tannery NH, Kanter SL. AM last page: how to perform an constructive database search. Acad Med . 2011; 86 8: 1057. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Articles from Periodical of Graduate Medical Educational activity are provided here courtesy of Accreditation Quango for Graduate Medical Education
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4936839/
0 Response to "How the Literature Review Can Provide a Strong Basis for a New Study?"
Post a Comment