What Can a Novice Researcher Gain From a Literature Review
J Grad Med Educ. 2016 Jul; eight(3): 297–303.
The Literature Review: A Foundation for High-Quality Medical Education Research
a These are subscription resources. Researchers should check with their librarian to make up one's mind their access rights.
Despite a surge in published scholarship in medical education 1 and rapid growth in journals that publish educational research, manuscript acceptance rates continue to fall. 2 Failure to conduct a thorough, accurate, and up-to-appointment literature review identifying an of import trouble and placing the study in context is consistently identified every bit one of the height reasons for rejection. 3,4 The purpose of this editorial is to provide a route map and practical recommendations for planning a literature review. By understanding the goals of a literature review and post-obit a few basic processes, authors can heighten both the quality of their educational enquiry and the likelihood of publication in the Periodical of Graduate Medical Education (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 tin take a number of forms. Depending on the type of article, target journal, and specific topic, these forms volition 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, 6 and there are excellent commentaries to guide authors of systematic reviews. vii,viii
Such work is outside the scope of this article, which focuses on literature reviews to inform reports of original medical education research. We ascertain such a literature review as a synthetic review and summary of what is known and unknown regarding the topic of a scholarly trunk of work, including the current work'southward identify within the existing knowledge. While this blazon of literature review may not crave 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 disquisitional for all phases of a enquiry report. Lingard 9 recently invoked the "journal-every bit-conversation" metaphor equally a way of understanding how one'south research fits into the larger medical education conversation. As she described it: "Imagine yourself joining a conversation at a social issue. Later on you hang about eavesdropping to get the migrate of what's being 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'south 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 inquiry, and ensuring that professional standards are met. Understanding the current literature also promotes scholarship, as proposed past Boyer, x past contributing to 5 of the 6 standards by which scholarly work should be evaluated. 11 Specifically, the review helps the researcher (1) articulate clear goals, (2) prove evidence of adequate training, (3) select appropriate methods, (4) communicate relevant results, and (5) engage in reflective critique.
Failure to conduct a loftier-quality literature review is associated with several problems identified in the medical education literature, including studies that are repetitive, not grounded in theory, methodologically weak, and fail to expand knowledge across a single setting. 12 Indeed, medical education scholars complain that many studies repeat work already published and contribute little new knowledge—a probable crusade of which is failure to bear a proper literature review. three,4
Too, studies that lack theoretical grounding or a conceptual framework make study pattern and interpretation difficult. thirteen When theory is used in medical education studies, it is often invoked at a superficial level. Equally Norman 14 noted, when theory is used accordingly, it helps articulate variables that might be linked together and why, and it allows the researcher to make hypotheses and ascertain a study's context and scope. Ultimately, a proper literature review is a first critical footstep toward identifying relevant conceptual frameworks.
Another trouble is that many medical education studies are methodologically weak. 12 Practiced enquiry requires trained investigators who can clear relevant research questions, operationally ascertain variables of interest, and cull the best method for specific research questions. Conducting a proper literature review helps both novice and experienced researchers select rigorous research methodologies.
Finally, many studies in medical education are "1-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 firm grasp of the literature tin encourage a programmatic approach to enquiry.
Budgeted 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 it is the authors' responsibleness 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 design, to implementation and analysis, to manuscript preparation and submission.
Planning the literature review requires agreement of journal requirements, which vary greatly by journal ( table one). Authors are advised to take note of common issues with reporting results of the literature review. Tabular array 2 lists the almost common problems that we have encountered equally authors, reviewers, and editors.
Table ane
Sample of Journals' Author Instructions for Literature Reviews Conducted as Part of Original Research Articlea
Tabular array 2
Mutual Trouble Areas for Reporting Literature Reviews in the Context of Scholarly Articles
Locating and Organizing the Literature
Three resources may facilitate identifying relevant literature: human resource, search tools, and related literature. As the procedure requires time, it is important to brainstorm searching for literature early in the procedure (ie, the report design stage). Identifying and agreement relevant studies will increase the likelihood of designing a relevant, adaptable, generalizable, and novel report that is based on educational or learning theory and tin maximize touch.
Human Resources
A medical librarian tin can aid interpret research interests into an effective search strategy, familiarize researchers with bachelor information resource, provide information on organizing information, 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 like interests. Reaching out to colleagues for suggestions may assistance researchers rapidly locate resources that would not otherwise be on their radar.
During this process, researchers will probable identify other researchers writing on aspects of their topic. Researchers should consider searching for the publications of these relevant researchers (see table iii 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 as 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 information using databases and search engines. Splendid resource are available to guide researchers in the mechanics of literature searches. 15,16
Because medical educational activity inquiry draws on a diversity of disciplines, researchers should include search tools with coverage beyond medicine (eg, psychology, nursing, education, and anthropology) and that embrace several publication types, such as reports, standards, conference abstracts, and book chapters (meet the box for several information 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 commodity on its field.
Once relevant articles are located, it is useful to mine those manufactures for additional citations. One strategy is to examine references of key manufactures, especially review articles, for relevant citations.
Getting Organized
Every bit the aforementioned resources will likely provide a tremendous amount of information, arrangement is crucial. Researchers should determine which details are most important to their report (eg, participants, setting, methods, and outcomes) and generate a strategy for keeping those details organized and attainable. Increasingly, researchers utilize digital tools, such equally Evernote, to capture such information, which enables accessibility across digital workspaces and search capabilities. Use of commendation managers can likewise exist helpful as they store citations and, in some cases, can generate bibliographies ( table 4).
Table 4
Citation Managers
Knowing When to Say When
Researchers often inquire how to know when they have located enough citations. Unfortunately, at that place is no magic or platonic number of citations to collect. 1 strategy for checking coverage of the literature is to audit references of relevant manufactures. As researchers review references they volition start noticing a repetition of the same manufactures with few new manufactures actualization. This tin bespeak that the researcher has covered the literature base on a particular topic.
Putting It All Together
In preparing to write a enquiry paper, information technology is of import to consider which citations to include and how they volition 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 commodity category. Reviewing articles of similar type published in the targeted periodical tin as well provide guidance regarding structure and boilerplate lengths of the introduction and word sections.
When selecting references for the introduction consider those that illustrate core background theoretical and methodological concepts, besides as recent relevant studies. The introduction should be cursory and present references not as a laundry listing or narrative of available literature, but rather equally a synthesized summary to provide context for the current study and to place the gap in the literature that the study intends to fill up. For the discussion, citations should be thoughtfully selected to compare and contrast the present study's findings with the current literature and to signal how the present study moves the field frontward.
To facilitate writing a literature review, journals are increasingly providing helpful features to guide authors. For case, the resources bachelor through JGME include several articles on writing. 17 The journal Perspectives on Medical Education recently launched "The Writer's Arts and crafts," which is intended to assist medical educators improve their writing. Additionally, many institutions have writing centers that provide web-based materials on writing a literature review, and some even take writing coaches.
Conclusion
The literature review is a vital part of medical education research and should occur throughout the enquiry process to aid researchers design a strong study and effectively communicate study results and importance. To achieve these goals, researchers are advised to plan and execute the literature review carefully. The guidance in this editorial provides considerations and recommendations that may meliorate the quality of literature reviews.
References
1. Lee Yard, Whelan JS, Tannery NH, Kanter SL, Peters AS. 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; nineteen iv: 465– 467. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
3. Artino AR, Jr, West DC, Gusic ME. Foreword: the more than things change, the more they stay the aforementioned. Acad Med . 2015; 90 suppl 11: Si– Siii. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
4. Bordage G. Reasons reviewers reject and take 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 Grouping. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med . 2009; 6 7: e1000097. [PMC complimentary article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
six. Harden R, Grant J, Buckley Thousand, Hart I. BEME. Guide No. 1: best evidence medical instruction. Med Teach . 1999; 21 6: 553– 562. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. Cook DA, W CP. Conducting systematic reviews in medical didactics: a stepwise approach. Med Educ . 2012; 46 10: 943– 952. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
8. Hammick G, Dornan T, Steinert Y. Conducting a best evidence systematic review. Role 1: from idea to data coding. BEME Guide No. xiii. 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 5: 252– 253. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
x. 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 awarding in the university for health sciences scholars: recommended methods. Health Res Policy Syst . 2007; 5: 5. [PMC gratuitous article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Albert 1000, Hodges B, Regehr One thousand. Inquiry in medical education: balancing service and science. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2007; 12 1: 103– 115. [PMC gratis article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
13. Bordage M. Conceptual frameworks to illuminate and magnify. Med Educ . 2009; 43 iv: 312– 319. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
xiv. Norman M. Editorial—how bad is medical pedagogy research anyway? Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2007; 12 i: 1– 5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
xv. Haig A, Dozier M. BEME. Guide No. 3: systematic searching for evidence in medical education—part two: constructing searches. Med Teach . 2003; 25 5: 463– 484. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
sixteen. Maggio LA, Tannery NH, Kanter SL. AM last page: how to perform an effective database search. Acad Med . 2011; 86 viii: 1057. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Articles from Periodical of Graduate Medical Didactics are provided hither courtesy of Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Pedagogy
Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4936839/