LITERATURE REVIEW.pdf

Literature Review  Objectives By the end of this session the candidate should be able to: 1. understanding the def in ition of literature review (LR). 2.Demon s trate an u n der s tan di n g of th e importance of LR. 3.Know the structure for writing a LR....

Literature Review  Objectives By the end of this session the candidate should be able to: 1. understanding the def in ition of literature review (LR). 2.Demon s trate an u n der s tan di n g of th e importance of LR. 3.Know the structure for writing a LR. 2 The word “literature” is used to describe all the published work on a particular subject. LR is a systematic process that aims to provide a concise overview and critical analysis of points in current biomedical knowledge surrounding a par ticular research question in a biomedical science.  Why we review literature?
1.To prevent duplication. 2. To refine statement of the problem. 3. To formulate the suitable type of methodology. 4. To support the need of the research.. Possible sources of the information 1. Individuals, groups and organizations. 2. Published information ( books, articles, indexes and abstracts journals ). 3. Unpublished information (reports, records and computer data bases).  Structure of ( LR) Body Introduction Conclusion Literature review 1- introduction 2- body 3- conclusion When writing the body or literature review Summarize and describe the relevant findings of prior studies compare and discuss the similar and dissimilar between the relevant findings in the prior studies. point out relevant the methodology that may have affected the findings. conclude by stating what your research would focus on, underline  How to refer to source 1. For an article : Author (s) , title of article, name of journal, year, volume number : page numbers e.g. Gwebu ET , Metero S, Dube N, Tagwirey J T, Mugwagwa N, Assessment of nutritional status in pregnancy : Central Africa Journal of Medicine, 1985, 31: 193- 196  How to refer to source :
2. For a book : Author (s) (surname followed by initials) title of book, edition, place: publisher, year: number of pages in the book. e.g. Abramson JH, Survey method in community medicine, 2nd edition Edinburgh: Churchill Livingstone, 1979: 229.  More than six authors ( et al ) after the sixth author Referencing  Citing references In biomedical sciences there are two major styles for citing references: 1. The Vancouver system. 2. The Harvard system  Referencing Vancouver References are referred to in the text by consecutive numbers. The re f e re nc e s are liste d at the e nd o f the pro po sal consecutively in the order they appear within the text. Harvard References are referred to more fully in the text, putting the surname of the author and year of publication between brackets. The references are listed in the end of the proposal in alphabetical order, irrespective of their order in the text. 14/11/2009 14  Referencing – Vancouver style “It is interesting that studies quantifying problems in case-f inding and case-holding in TB are far more numerous than studies identifying contributing factors, and further, that knowledge, attitudes and practices of patients often receive more attention than those of staff. In areas as different as India and Honduras 1 Yet, a study in Japan showed that he average ‘doctor’s delay’ (time between f ir st visit to a doctor and actual diagnosis) always surpassed the ‘patient’s delay’ (time between reported onset of symptoms and f ir st visit to a doctor). For patients who reported early with complaints, within two months after onset of symptoms, the delays in diagnosis were relatively most extensive. Aluoch found the same for Kenya. 2 14/11/2009 15  Referencing – Vancouver style AT the end of research 1. Westaway MS. Knowledge and attitudes about tuberculosis of black hospitalised TB patients. Tubercle, 1990, 71: 55-59. 2 Aoki M, Mori T, Shimao T. Studies on factors inf luencing patient’s, doctor’s and total delay of tuberculosis case- detection in Japan. Bulletin of the International Union Against Tuberculosis, 1990, 60(3-4):128-130. 14/11/2009 16  Referencing – Harvard Style “It is interesting that studies quantifying problems in case-f in ding and case-holding in TB are far more numerous than studies identifying contributing factors, and further, that knowledge, attitudes and practices of patients often receive more attention than those of staff. In areas as different as India and Honduras (Westaway 1990). Yet, a study in Japan showed that he average ‘doctor’s delay’ (time between f irst visit to a doctor and actual diagnosis) always surpassed the ‘patient’s delay’ (time between reported onset of symptoms and f irst visit to a doctor). For patients who reported early with com pla in ts , w ith in tw o m on th s a f ter on s et of symptoms, the delays in diagnosis were relatively most extensive (Aoki et al 1990). 14/11/2009 17  Referencing – Harvard Style. Aoki M, Mori T, Shimao T. Studies on factors inf lu encing patient’s, doctor’s and total delay of tuberculosis case- detection in Japan. Bulletin of the International Union Against Tuberculosis, 1990, 60(3-4):128-130.. Westaway MS. Knowledge and attitudes about tuberculosis of black hospitalised TB patients. Tubercle, 1990, 71: 55-59. 14/11/2009 18 Thank you