Why Is It Important to Conduct a Quality Literature Review?
J Grad Med Educ. 2016 Jul; 8(3): 297–303.
The Literature Review: A Foundation for Loftier-Quality Medical Didactics Research
a These are subscription resources. Researchers should bank check with their librarian to determine their admission rights.
Despite a surge in published scholarship in medical pedagogy 1 and rapid growth in journals that publish educational research, manuscript acceptance rates continue to fall. two Failure to conduct a thorough, accurate, and upward-to-engagement literature review identifying an important trouble and placing the study in context is consistently identified as one of the acme reasons for rejection. 3,four The purpose of this editorial is to provide a road map and practical recommendations for planning a literature review. Past understanding the goals of a literature review and following a few basic processes, authors tin enhance both the quality of their educational research and the likelihood of publication in the Journal of Graduate Medical Education (JGME) and in other journals.
The Literature Review Defined
In medical education, no arrangement has articulated a formal definition of a literature review for a inquiry 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 take published guidelines for conducting an intensive literature search intended for formal systematic reviews, both broadly (eg, PRISMA) five and within medical education, vi and there are first-class commentaries to guide authors of systematic reviews. 7,8
Such work is exterior the scope of this commodity, which focuses on literature reviews to inform reports of original medical teaching enquiry. We define such a literature review every bit a constructed review and summary of what is known and unknown regarding the topic of a scholarly torso of work, including the current work's place within the existing cognition. While this blazon of literature review may not require the intensive search processes mandated by 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 inquiry report. Lingard 9 recently invoked the "periodical-as-chat" metaphor as a mode of understanding how one's research fits into the larger medical didactics conversation. As she described it: "Imagine yourself joining a conversation at a social consequence. Subsequently y'all hang well-nigh 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 involvement in the topic, your knowledge of what's already been said, and your intention." 9
The literature review helps any researcher "join the conversation" by providing context, informing methodology, identifying innovation, minimizing duplicative inquiry, and ensuring that professional standards are met. Understanding the current literature also promotes scholarship, equally proposed by Boyer, x past contributing to five of the 6 standards past which scholarly work should be evaluated. 11 Specifically, the review helps the researcher (1) articulate clear goals, (two) show evidence of adequate preparation, (3) select appropriate methods, (4) communicate relevant results, and (5) engage in reflective critique.
Failure to conduct a high-quality literature review is associated with several issues identified in the medical instruction literature, including studies that are repetitive, not grounded in theory, methodologically weak, and fail to aggrandize knowledge across a single setting. 12 Indeed, medical education scholars complain that many studies repeat work already published and contribute niggling new cognition—a likely cause of which is failure to conduct a proper literature review. 3,4
Also, studies that lack theoretical grounding or a conceptual framework make study design and interpretation hard. 13 When theory is used in medical education studies, information technology is often invoked at a superficial level. As Norman fourteen noted, when theory is used appropriately, it helps articulate variables that might be linked together and why, and it allows the researcher to brand hypotheses and define a study's context and telescopic. Ultimately, a proper literature review is a first critical footstep toward identifying relevant conceptual frameworks.
Another problem is that many medical education studies are methodologically weak. 12 Good research requires trained investigators who can articulate relevant research questions, operationally ascertain variables of involvement, and cull the best method for specific research questions. Conducting a proper literature review helps both novice and experienced researchers select rigorous enquiry methodologies.
Finally, many studies in medical didactics are "i-offs," that is, unmarried studies undertaken because the opportunity presented itself locally. Such studies frequently are not oriented toward progressive knowledge edifice and generalization to other settings. A business firm grasp of the literature can encourage a programmatic approach to research.
Approaching the Literature Review
Considering these issues, journals accept a responsibleness to demand from authors a thoughtful synthesis of their study's position within the field, and it 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 report, from conception and blueprint, to implementation and analysis, to manuscript preparation and submission.
Planning the literature review requires understanding of journal requirements, which vary greatly by journal ( table 1). Authors are brash to have annotation of common problems with reporting results of the literature review. Table two lists the most mutual problems that we have encountered as authors, reviewers, and editors.
Table 1
Sample of Journals' Author Instructions for Literature Reviews Conducted as Part of Original Inquiry Articlea
Table 2
Common Problem Areas for Reporting Literature Reviews in the Context of Scholarly Manufactures
Locating and Organizing the Literature
3 resources may facilitate identifying relevant literature: human resources, search tools, and related literature. As the procedure requires time, it is important to begin searching for literature early in the process (ie, the study design phase). Identifying and understanding relevant studies will increase the likelihood of designing a relevant, adaptable, generalizable, and novel study that is based on educational or learning theory and tin can maximize bear on.
Human Resources
A medical librarian tin help translate research interests into an constructive search strategy, familiarize researchers with available information resources, provide data on organizing information, and introduce strategies for keeping current with emerging inquiry. Often, librarians are also enlightened of research across their institutions and may exist able to connect researchers with similar interests. Reaching out to colleagues for suggestions may help researchers quickly locate resources that would non otherwise be on their radar.
During this procedure, researchers will likely identify other researchers writing on aspects of their topic. Researchers should consider searching for the publications of these relevant researchers (see table 3 for search strategies). Additionally, institutional websites may include curriculum vitae of such relevant faculty with access to their unabridged publication record, including difficult to locate publications, such every bit volume chapters, dissertations, and technical reports.
Table iii
Strategies for Finding Related Researcher Publications in Databases and Search Engines
Search Tools and Related Literature
Researchers volition locate the majority of needed information using databases and search engines. Fantabulous resources are available to guide researchers in the mechanics of literature searches. 15,16
Because medical education research draws on a multifariousness of disciplines, researchers should include search tools with coverage across medicine (eg, psychology, nursing, education, and anthropology) and that cover several publication types, such as reports, standards, conference abstracts, and volume capacity (encounter the box for several data resources). Many search tools include options for viewing citations of selected articles. Examining cited references provides boosted articles for review and a sense of the influence of the selected article on its field.
One time relevant articles are located, information technology is useful to mine those articles for additional citations. One strategy is to examine references of key articles, especially review articles, for relevant citations.
Getting Organized
Equally the aforementioned resources will likely provide a tremendous amount of data, organisation is crucial. Researchers should determine which details are most important to their study (eg, participants, setting, methods, and outcomes) and generate a strategy for keeping those details organized and accessible. Increasingly, researchers use digital tools, such as Evernote, to capture such information, which enables accessibility across digital workspaces and search capabilities. Use of citation managers can also be helpful as they shop citations and, in some cases, tin can generate bibliographies ( tabular array 4).
Table 4
Citation Managers
Knowing When to Say When
Researchers often ask how to know when they have located plenty citations. Unfortunately, there is no magic or ideal number of citations to collect. 1 strategy for checking coverage of the literature is to inspect references of relevant articles. As researchers review references they volition start noticing a repetition of the same articles with few new manufactures appearing. This can indicate that the researcher has covered the literature base on a particular topic.
Putting It All Together
In preparing to write a research paper, information technology is important to consider which citations to include and how they volition inform the introduction and discussion sections. The "Instructions to Authors" for the targeted periodical volition often provide guidance on structuring the literature review (or introduction) and the number of full citations permitted for each commodity category. Reviewing manufactures of similar type published in the targeted journal can also provide guidance regarding structure and average lengths of the introduction and word sections.
When selecting references for the introduction consider those that illustrate cadre groundwork theoretical and methodological concepts, as well as recent relevant studies. The introduction should be brief and present references not as a laundry list or narrative of available literature, but rather equally a synthesized summary to provide context for the current study and to identify the gap in the literature that the study intends to fill. For the discussion, citations should be thoughtfully selected to compare and contrast the present study's findings with the current literature and to betoken how the present study moves the field forrard.
To facilitate writing a literature review, journals are increasingly providing helpful features to guide authors. For example, the resources available through JGME include several manufactures on writing. 17 The journal Perspectives on Medical Pedagogy recently launched "The Writer'southward Craft," which is intended to aid 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 part of medical education research and should occur throughout the research process to help researchers design a stiff study and effectively communicate written report results and importance. To accomplish these goals, researchers are advised to plan 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 K, Whelan JS, Tannery NH, Kanter SL, Peters As. 50 years of publication in the field of medical education. Med Teach . 2013; 35 7: 591– 598. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. Norman G. Taking stock. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2014; 19 iv: 465– 467. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
iii. Artino AR, Jr, Westward DC, Gusic ME. Foreword: the more things change, the more they stay the same. Acad Med . 2015; 90 suppl eleven: Si– Siii. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
four. Bordage G. Reasons reviewers reject and accept manuscripts: the strengths and weaknesses in medical didactics reports. Acad Med . 2001; 76 nine: 889– 896. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
five. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. PRISMA Group. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med . 2009; 6 7: e1000097. [PMC complimentary article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
half-dozen. Harden R, Grant J, Buckley Yard, Hart I. BEME. Guide No. 1: all-time evidence medical education. Med Teach . 1999; 21 half dozen: 553– 562. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. Cook DA, West CP. Conducting systematic reviews in medical education: a stepwise approach. Med Educ . 2012; 46 x: 943– 952. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
8. Hammick M, Dornan T, Steinert Y. Conducting a best testify systematic review. Part one: from idea to information coding. BEME Guide No. 13. Med Teach . 2010; 32 1: 3– 15. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
9. Lingard L. Joining a conversation: the problem/gap/hook heuristic. Perspect Med Educ . 2015; 4 v: 252– 253. [PMC costless article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
10. Boyer EL. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Professoriate . San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass; 2016. [Google Scholar]
xi. Hofmeyer A, Newton Grand, Scott C. Valuing the scholarship of integration and the scholarship of application in the academy for health sciences scholars: recommended methods. Health Res Policy Syst . 2007; v: 5. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Albert M, Hodges B, Regehr Yard. Research in medical didactics: balancing service and science. Adv Wellness Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2007; 12 one: 103– 115. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
thirteen. Bordage One thousand. Conceptual frameworks to illuminate and magnify. Med Educ . 2009; 43 4: 312– 319. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
xiv. Norman G. Editorial—how bad is medical education research anyhow? Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2007; 12 i: 1– five. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15. Haig A, Dozier M. BEME. Guide No. 3: systematic searching for evidence in medical education—part two: amalgam searches. Med Teach . 2003; 25 five: 463– 484. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
16. Maggio LA, Tannery NH, Kanter SL. AM final page: how to perform an effective database search. Acad Med . 2011; 86 8: 1057. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Articles from Periodical of Graduate Medical Education are provided hither courtesy of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4936839/
Post a Comment for "Why Is It Important to Conduct a Quality Literature Review?"