Leterature Review Topics About Health Qulaity in Usa
J Grad Med Educ. 2016 Jul; 8(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 go on to fall. 2 Failure to conduct a thorough, accurate, and up-to-date literature review identifying an important problem and placing the study in context is consistently identified as one of the tiptop 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 tin raise both the quality of their educational enquiry and the likelihood of publication in the Journal of Graduate Medical Education (JGME) and in other journals.
The Literature Review Defined
In medical instruction, no organization has articulated a formal definition of a literature review for a research paper; thus, a literature review tin can accept a number of forms. Depending on the type of commodity, 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, 6 and there are first-class commentaries to guide authors of systematic reviews. seven,8
Such work is outside the scope of this article, which focuses on literature reviews to inform reports of original medical teaching 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 piece of work, including the current work's place within the existing knowledge. While this type of literature review may non 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 electric current literature is disquisitional for all phases of a research report. Lingard 9 recently invoked the "periodical-every bit-conversation" metaphor as a way of agreement how ane'southward enquiry fits into the larger medical education conversation. As she described it: "Imagine yourself joining a conversation at a social event. After you hang about eavesdropping to get the drift of what's being said (the conversational equivalent of the literature review), you bring together the conversation with a contribution that signals your shared involvement in the topic, your knowledge of what's already been said, and your intention." nine
The literature review helps any researcher "bring together the conversation" by providing context, informing methodology, identifying innovation, minimizing duplicative research, and ensuring that professional standards are met. Understanding the current literature too promotes scholarship, as proposed past Boyer, 10 by contributing to 5 of the 6 standards by which scholarly work should exist evaluated. 11 Specifically, the review helps the researcher (1) articulate articulate goals, (2) evidence evidence of acceptable training, (iii) select appropriate methods, (4) communicate relevant results, and (5) engage in reflective critique.
Failure to acquit a loftier-quality literature review is associated with several issues identified in the medical education 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 echo work already published and contribute little new cognition—a likely crusade of which is failure to acquit a proper literature review. iii,4
Also, studies that lack theoretical grounding or a conceptual framework make study pattern and estimation difficult. 13 When theory is used in medical pedagogy studies, it is often invoked at a superficial level. As Norman 14 noted, when theory is used appropriately, it helps clear variables that might exist 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 step toward identifying relevant conceptual frameworks.
Another problem is that many medical didactics studies are methodologically weak. 12 Expert research requires trained investigators who can articulate relevant research questions, operationally define variables of involvement, and choose 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 instruction are "one-offs," that is, unmarried studies undertaken because the opportunity presented itself locally. Such studies oftentimes are non oriented toward progressive knowledge building and generalization to other settings. A firm grasp of the literature can 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 report'southward position inside 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 study, from formulation and design, to implementation and analysis, to manuscript preparation and submission.
Planning the literature review requires understanding of journal requirements, which vary profoundly by journal ( table ane). Authors are brash to take note of common problems with reporting results of the literature review. Table 2 lists the most common problems that we have encountered every bit authors, reviewers, and editors.
Tabular array 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
Three resources may facilitate identifying relevant literature: homo resources, search tools, and related literature. As the procedure requires fourth dimension, it is of import to begin searching for literature early on in the process (ie, the written report blueprint phase). Identifying and understanding relevant studies volition increase the likelihood of designing a relevant, adaptable, generalizable, and novel study that is based on educational or learning theory and can maximize impact.
Human Resources
A medical librarian tin assist translate research interests into an effective search strategy, familiarize researchers with available information resource, provide information on organizing data, and introduce strategies for keeping current with emerging research. Often, 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 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 (meet table three for search strategies). Additionally, institutional websites may include curriculum vitae of such relevant kinesthesia with admission to their entire publication record, including difficult to locate publications, such every bit book capacity, dissertations, and technical reports.
Tabular array 3
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. Excellent resources are available to guide researchers in the mechanics of literature searches. xv,16
Because medical education inquiry draws on a diverseness 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 (run across the box for several information resources). Many search tools include options for viewing citations of selected manufactures. Examining cited references provides boosted manufactures for review and a sense of the influence of the selected article 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 articles, specially review articles, for relevant citations.
Getting Organized
As the aforementioned resources will likely provide a tremendous amount of data, arrangement is crucial. Researchers should make up one's mind which details are most 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 information, which enables accessibility beyond digital workspaces and search capabilities. Use of citation managers can also be helpful as they store 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 enough citations. Unfortunately, there is no magic or ideal number of citations to collect. One strategy for checking coverage of the literature is to inspect references of relevant articles. Every bit researchers review references they volition start noticing a repetition of the same manufactures with few new articles appearing. This can bespeak that the researcher has covered the literature base of operations 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 will inform the introduction and word sections. The "Instructions to Authors" for the targeted periodical volition oftentimes provide guidance on structuring the literature review (or introduction) and the number of full citations permitted for each article 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 core background 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 as a synthesized summary to provide context for the current study and to identify the gap in the literature that the study intends to fill up. For the word, citations should be thoughtfully selected to compare and contrast the present study'due south findings with the current literature and to bespeak 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 manufactures on writing. 17 The journal Perspectives on Medical Instruction recently launched "The Writer'south Craft," which is intended to help medical educators better 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 role of medical education enquiry and should occur throughout the inquiry process to help researchers blueprint 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 improve the quality of literature reviews.
References
1. Lee One thousand, Whelan JS, Tannery NH, Kanter SL, Peters AS. 50 years of publication in the field of medical education. Med Teach . 2013; 35 seven: 591– 598. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
2. Norman G. Taking stock. Adv Wellness Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2014; 19 4: 465– 467. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
three. Artino AR, Jr, Westward DC, Gusic ME. Foreword: the more things change, the more they stay the same. Acad Med . 2015; 90 suppl xi: Si– Siii. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
iv. Bordage M. Reasons reviewers turn down and accept manuscripts: the strengths and weaknesses in medical educational activity 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 statement. PLoS Med . 2009; 6 7: e1000097. [PMC gratis article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
6. Harden R, Grant J, Buckley G, Hart I. BEME. Guide No. i: best show medical teaching. Med Teach . 1999; 21 six: 553– 562. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
7. Cook DA, Due west CP. Conducting systematic reviews in medical education: a stepwise approach. Med Educ . 2012; 46 ten: 943– 952. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
8. Hammick Yard, Dornan T, Steinert Y. Conducting a best testify systematic review. Office one: from thought to data coding. BEME Guide No. thirteen. Med Teach . 2010; 32 1: iii– 15. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
9. Lingard Fifty. Joining a conversation: the trouble/gap/claw 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]
11. Hofmeyer A, Newton M, 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; five: v. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
12. Albert 1000, Hodges B, Regehr G. Research in medical education: balancing service and scientific discipline. Adv Wellness Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2007; 12 i: 103– 115. [PMC free 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 education research anyway? Adv Wellness Sci Educ Theory Pract . 2007; 12 i: 1– 5. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
15. Haig A, Dozier Yard. BEME. Guide No. three: systematic searching for bear witness in medical education—part 2: amalgam searches. Med Teach . 2003; 25 5: 463– 484. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
xvi. Maggio LA, Tannery NH, Kanter SL. AM last folio: how to perform an effective database search. Acad Med . 2011; 86 eight: 1057. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Manufactures from Journal 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/
0 Response to "Leterature Review Topics About Health Qulaity in Usa"
Post a Comment