W5-L5 (DSA 458) Literature Review and How to Search The Literature (21.09.2023) PDF

Research Methodology (DSA 4580) Step 1: Identifying a Study Question Literature Review And How to Search The Literature Academic Year: 2023-2024 Fifth Year DSA 4580 WEEK 5 LECTURE 5 Abdulhamid Al Ghwainem, BDS, MSc, DClinDent Pediatric Dentistry Assistant Professor in Pediatric Dentistry a.alghwa...

Research Methodology (DSA 4580) Step 1: Identifying a Study Question Literature Review And How to Search The Literature Academic Year: 2023-2024 Fifth Year DSA 4580 WEEK 5 LECTURE 5 Abdulhamid Al Ghwainem, BDS, MSc, DClinDent Pediatric Dentistry Assistant Professor in Pediatric Dentistry [email protected] Thursday, 21 September 2023 Copyright © 2023 by PSAU, Abdulhamid Al Ghwainem Disclaimer DISCLAIMER The information presented in this lecture is offered for educational and informational purposes and should not be construed as medical, dental, or research advice. While the amount of information in this handout is vast, and I make every effort to be as current and thorough as possible, the information cannot be taken as a reference manual or textbook. Please note that you should read the required textbooks as specified in the course curriculum and lecture references. 2 Notice WARNING Materials used in connection with this course or lecture may be subject to copyright protection. This material has been reproduced and communicated to you by or on behalf of Prince Sattam Bin Abdulaziz University. Materials may include, but are not limited to: documents, slides, images, audio, and video. Materials in this course are only for the use of students enrolled in this course, for purposes associated with this course, and may not be retained for longer than the class term. Unauthorized retention, duplication, distribution, or modification of copyrighted materials may be the subject of copyright protection by law. For more information, visit the Saudi Authority for Intellectual Property. Do not remove this notice 3 Outline § The definition, purpose, types and sources of the literature review. § Review families and the most common types of reviews in the literature. § Steps of the literature review as a part of the research process. § Database search activity. 4 Lecture Objectives By the end of this session, you should be able to: § Describe a literature review, explain its purpose, and give examples of its types and resources. § Classify the wide range of literature reviews and describe the common types of review families. § Compare a literature review, systematic review, and metaanalysis. § Describe the steps in undertaking a literature review. § Explain the importance of searching the literature. § Implement an effective search strategy for literature search using keywords and Boolean searching. § Perform a literature search. § Write a literature review. § Apply the five ‘C’s of writing a literature review. § Utilize the available resources and tools for searching the literature. 5 Research Process/Steps Research: answering questions in logical and systematic ways Question Answer Research methodology: how get from question to answer 6 Research Process/Steps Research: answering questions in logical and systematic ways Question Answer Research methodology: how get from question to answer Identify study question Select study approach Design study and collect data 7 Analyse data Report findings Research Process/Steps Research: answering questions in logical and systematic ways Identify study question 1 Choose a research area and brainstorm for research topics Design study and collect data Select study approach 2 Find a mentor Analyse data 3 4 Evaluate the topic for FINER criteria Formulate a research question according to PICOT framework 8 Report findings 5 Perform a literature review 6 Refine the research question into testable/answerable / hypothesis Literature Review 9 What is a Literature Review? § The word “literature” means “sources of information”. § A literature review is a survey of everything that has been written about a particular topic, theory, or research question. § Inform you about the research that has already been done on your chosen topic. § Why it is important? repeating others work, or doing research without a clear purpose and justification § It can be: Comprehensive or Selective, Stand-alone work or Part of larger work § It is much more than a simple list of sources; § An effective literature review analyzes and synthesizes information about key themes or issues 10 What is a Literature Review? §“an account of what has been published on a topic by accredited scholars and researchers” (Taylor,2008). §“a comprehensive summary and critical appraisal of the literature that is relevant to your research topic” (Williamson, 2014). §“systematic, explicit, and reproducible method for identifying, evaluating, and synthesizing the existing body of completed and recorded work produced by researchers, scholars and practitioners” (Fink, 2005). §“a literature review surveys scholarly articles, books, and other sources (e.g., dissertations, conference proceedings) relevant to a topic. Its purpose is to demonstrate that the writer has insightfully and critically surveyed relevant literature on his or her topic in order to convince an intended audience that the topic is worth addressing” (Clark et al., 2006). 11 Purpose of a Literature Review? Research Process Establish research context Justify the research Ensure that research has not been done before Show why the question is significant Understand the structure of the problem Demonstrate your knowledge of the field Illustrate and describe previous research Outline gaps and highlight flaws in previous research Synthesize previous perspectives and develop your own perspective Help refine, refocus, or even move the topic in a new direction Literature Review 12 What is involved in a Literature Review? § Research – to discover what has been done about the topic; § Critical Appraisal – to evaluate the literature, determine the relationship between the sources and ascertain what has been done already and what still needs to be done; and § Writing – to explain what you have found This Photo by Unknown Author is licensed under CC BY 13 Literature Review Should be § Comprehensive Evidence should be gathered from all relevant sources § Referenced Provide full references and citations for reviewed papers § Develop context Select and source the information that is necessary to develop a context for your research § Selective Use acceptable search strategy to find the most important evidence § Balanced Provide evidence from papers with different findings 14 § Relevant literature Focus and relates to previous research on the same topic § Importance of your contribution Reveals the contribution that your research makes to the field of your study § Critical analysis Understand and critically analyse the previous research § Analytical Develop new ideas from the evidence that may help explain your findings later § Writing skills Show your ability to write clearly and concisely your arguments and conclusions Literature Review Should NOT be § Straightforward summary of everything you have read on the topic. § Chronological description of what was discovered in your field. § Background information or explanations of concepts § A descriptive list of papers or summaries of research § Organized around the sources with each described in great detail § An argument for the importance of what you are researching with no contextualisation of key issues 15 Types of Literature Review It can be: § Comprehensiv e or Selective § Standalone work or Part of larger work The purpose is to convey to your reader what knowledge and ideas have been established on a topic, and what their strengths and weaknesses are Such as: • Course assignment • Part of the introduction to an essay, research paper or research proposal • Thesis/dissertation • Traditional or narrative literature review • Systematic literature review • Meta-analysis 16 Literature Review 17 Literature Review 18 Sources of Literature The term “sources” refers to material needed to conduct the literature review, which could be summarized in three types: § Primary source: is a direct description of a research study written by a researcher who conducted the study. § Secondary source: is a review of studies summarizing and providing new interpretations built from and often extending beyond the original study. § Tertiary source: include perceptions, conclusions, opinions, and interpretations that are informally shared. Finally, a literature review might use a combination of primary and secondary sources since its purpose is to document and analyze what has been published on the given topic 19 Sources of Literature Primary Articles/Reports Theses Emails Conference proceedings Company reports Unpublished manuscript sources Some government publications Secondary Books Journals Newspapers Some government publication Increasing time to publish Increasing level of details 20 Tertiary Indexes Abstracts Catalogues Encyclopaedias Dictionaries Bibliographies Citation indexes Sources of Literature § Journal articles: These are the premier source, especially for up-to-date information. They are frequently used in literature reviews because they offer a relatively concise, up-to-date format for research. Depending on the publication, these materials may Peer-reviewed and non-peer reviewed literature Non-peer reviewed literature such as Trade Journals, or magazines use less rigorous standards of screening prior to publication. Non-peer reviewed literature may not be checked as intensely as refereed materials, but many can still be considered useful, although NOT for scientific literature and research. § Books: Remember that books tend to be less up-to-date, as it takes longer for a book to be published than for a journal article. They are still likely to be useful for including in your literature review as they offer a good starting point from which to find more detailed and upto-date sources of information. § Conference proceedings: These can be useful in providing the latest research, or research that has not been published. They are also helpful in providing information about people in different research areas, and so can be helpful in tracking down other work by the same researchers. 21 Sources of Literature § Government/corporate reports/Guidelines: Many government departments and corporations commission carry out research. Their published findings can provide a useful source of information, depending on your field of study. § Theses and dissertations: These can be useful sources of information. However, there are disadvantages: They can be difficult to obtain since they are not published but are generally only available from the library or interlibrary systems. The student who carried out the research may not be an experienced researcher and therefore you might have to treat their findings with more caution than published research. § Internet: The fastest-growing source of information is on the Internet. Bear in mind that anyone can post information on the Internet so the quality may not be reliable. The information you find may be intended for a general audience and so not be suitable for inclusion in your literature review (information for a general audience is usually less detailed). 22 Classification of Literature Review A wide range of literature review types that are available for research synthesis for publication and research purposes. Review Families Review of Reviews Rapid Reviews Systematic Reviews Purpose Specific Reviews Qualitative Reviews Mixed Method Reviews Narrative Review Umbrella Review Rapid Review Systematic Review Scoping Review Q Evidence Synthesis Mixed Methods Synthesis Critical Review Review of Reviews Rapid Evidence Assessment Meta-analysis Mapping Review Q Interpretive Meta-synthesis Narrative Synthesis Rapid Realist Review Comparative Effectiveness Review Systematised Review Q Meta synthesis Meta-narrative Review Diagnostic Systematic Review Concept Synthesis Framework Synthesis Bayesian Meta analysis Network Metaanalysis Expert Opinion Policy Review Meta aggregation EPPI Centre Review Prognostic Review Technology Assessment Review Meta ethnography Critical Interpretive Synthesis Psychometric Review Methodological Review Metainterpretation Realist Synthesis Review of Economic Evaluations Systematic Search and Review Meta-Narrative Review Traditional Reviews Integrative Review State of the Art Review ALL REVIEW THAT ARE NOT SYSTEMATIC (Literature Review) Systematic Review Meta-analysis SR of Epidemiology Studies Meta-study Meta-summary Based on on the work of Sutton et al., (2019) on 'Review Families’. Sutton, A., Clowes, M., Preston, L., & Booth, A. (2019). Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 36(3), 202-222 23 Thematic Synthesis Common Review Types Found in The Literature Literature Review/Narrative Review Description Search Appraisal Synthesis Analysis Examples Resources/Further Reading Provide an overview and analysis of a broad spectrum of material on a specific topic of interest. It is is often used interchangeably with a traditional Literature Review. May or may not include comprehensive searching May or may not include quality assessment Typically Narrative Bengtsson, V., Berglund, L., & Aasa, U. (2018). Narrative review of injuries in powerlifting with special reference to their association to the squat, bench press and deadlift. BMJ open sport & exercise medicine, 4(1) Allen, M. (2017). The sage encyclopedia of communication research methods (Vols. 1-4). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, May be chronological, conceptual, thematic, etc. Sutton, A., Clowes, M., Preston, L., & Booth, A. (2019). Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 36(3), 202-222. Ferrari, R. (2015). Writing narrative style literature reviews. Medical Writing, 24(4), 230-235. Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006). Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. Journal of chiropractic medicine, 5(3), 101-117. Based on on the work of Grant and Booth (2009) on 'A typology of reviews’. Grant, M.J. and Booth, A. (2009), A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26: 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x 24 Common Review Types Found in The Literature Critical Review Description Search Appraisal Synthesis Analysis Examples Resources/Further Reading Demonstrate that the writer has extensively researched the literature and critically evaluated its quality. It goes beyond mere description of identified articles and includes a degree of analysis and conceptual innovation" and "an effective critical review presents, analyses and synthesizes material from diverse sources" Seeks to identify most significant items in the topic No formal quality assessment Attempts to evaluate according to contribution Typically narrative, perhaps conceptual or chronological Seeks to identify conceptual contribution to embody existing or derive new theory Younas, A., & Maddigan, J. (2019). Proposing a policy framework for nursing education for fostering compassion in nursing students: A critical review. Journal of advanced nursing, 75(8), 1621–1636. Cooper, Harris M & Cooper, Harris M. Synthesizing research (2017). Research synthesis and meta-analysis : a step-by-step approach (Fifth edition). SAGE Publications, Los Angeles Rew, L., Young, C. C., Monge, M., & Bogucka, R. (2021). Review: Puberty blockers for transgender and gender diverse youth-a critical review of the literature. Child and adolescent mental health, 26(1), 3–14. Kirkevold, M. (1997). Integrative nursing research—an important strategy to further the development of nursing science and nursing practice. Journal of advanced nursing, 25(5), 977-984. Based on on the work of Grant and Booth (2009) on 'A typology of reviews’. Grant, M.J. and Booth, A. (2009), A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26: 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x Paré G, Kitsiou S. Chapter 9 Methods for Literature Reviews. In: Lau F, Kuziemsky C, editors. Handbook of eHealth Evaluation: An Evidencebased Approach [Internet]. Victoria (BC): University of Victoria; 2017 Feb 27 25 Common Review Types Found in The Literature State of The Art Review Description Search Appraisal Synthesis Analysis Examples Resources/Further Reading Focus on recently published literature to assess current matters. A state-of-the-art review will often highlight new ideas or gaps in research with no official quality assessment." "In general, state-of-the-art reviews tend to report results using both narrative forms and a tabular component" Aims to comprehensively search the current literature No formal quality assessment Typically narrative, may have a and a tabular component Current state of knowledge and potentials for future research Wang, L., Kolios, A., Liu, X., Venetsanos, D., & Rui, C. (2022). Reliability of offshore wind turbine support structures: A stateof-the-art review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 161, 112250. Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health information & libraries journal, 26(2), 91-108. Based on on the work of Grant and Booth (2009) on 'A typology of reviews’. Grant, M.J. and Booth, A. (2009), A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26: 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x 26 Dochy, F. (2006). A guide for writing scholarly articles or reviews for the Educational Research Review. Educational Research Review, 4(1-2), 121 Common Review Types Found in The Literature Umbrella Review Description Search Appraisal Synthesis Analysis Examples Resources/Further Reading Compiles evidence from multiple existing reviews. Allowing easy comparison between other individual reviews, the umbrella review may address a broader question and can be useful for comparing interventions and developing guidelines. Identification of reviews only, but no search for primary studies Quality assessment of studies within component reviews Graphical and tabular with narrative commentary What is known what is unknown recommendat ions for practice and future research Avşar, T. S., McLeod, H., & Jackson, L. (2021). Health outcomes of smoking during pregnancy and the postpartum period: an umbrella review. BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 21(1), 1-9 Guidelines Aromataris, E., Fernandez, R., Godfrey, C., Holly, C., Khalil, H., & Tungpunkom, P. (2014). The Joanna Briggs Institute reviewers’ manual 2014: methodology for JBI umbrella reviews. University of Adelaide: Joanna Briggs Institute. Critical Appraisal Shea, B. J., Grimshaw, J. M., Wells, G. A., Boers, M., Andersson, N., Hamel, C., ... & Bouter, L. M. (2007). Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC medical research methodology, 7(1), 1-7. Whiting, P., Savović, J., Higgins, J. P., Caldwell, D. M., Reeves, B. C., Shea, B., ... & Churchill, R. (2016). ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 69, 225-234. Other Aromataris, E., Fernandez, R., Godfrey, C. M., Holly, C., Khalil, H., & Tungpunkom, P. (2015). Summarizing systematic reviews: methodological development, conduct and reporting of an umbrella review approach. JBI Evidence Implementation, 13(3), 132-140. Pollock, M., Fernandes, R. M., Becker, L. A., Pieper, D., & Hartling, L. (2020). Chapter V: overviews of reviews. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version, 6.v Pollock, M., Fernandes, R. M., Newton, A. S., Scott, S. D., & Hartling, L. (2019). A decision tool to help researchers make decisions about including systematic reviews in overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions. Systematic reviews, 8(1), 1-8. Fusar-Poli, P., & Radua, J. (2018). Ten simple rules for conducting umbrella reviews. Evidence-based mental health, 21(3), 95-100. Biondi-Zoccai, G. (Ed.). (2016). Umbrella reviews: evidence synthesis with overviews of reviews and meta-epidemiologic studies. Springer Based on on the work of Grant and Booth (2009) on 'A typology of reviews’. Grant, M.J. and Booth, A. (2009), A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26: 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x 27 Common Review Types Found in The Literature Review of Reviews/Overview Description Examples Resources/Further Reading An overview of reviews (also known as a 'review of reviews') collates multiple reviews with the aim to demonstrate conclusive evidence for clinical decision making Marco, D. J. T., Thomas, K., Ivynian, S., Wilding, H., Parker, D., Tieman, J., & Hudson, P. (2022). Family carer needs in advanced disease: systematic review of reviews. BMJ Supportive & Palliative Care, 12(2), 132-141. Checklist Aromataris, E., Fernandez, R., Godfrey, C., Holly, C., Khalil, H., & Tungpunkom, P. (2014). The Joanna Briggs Institute reviewers’ manual 2014: methodology for JBI umbrella reviews. University of Adelaide: Joanna Briggs Institute. Critical Appraisal Shea, B. J., Grimshaw, J. M., Wells, G. A., Boers, M., Andersson, N., Hamel, C., ... & Bouter, L. M. (2007). Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC medical research methodology, 7(1), 1-7. Whiting, P., Savović, J., Higgins, J. P., Caldwell, D. M., Reeves, B. C., Shea, B., ... & Churchill, R. (2016). ROBIS: a new tool to assess risk of bias in systematic reviews was developed. Journal of clinical epidemiology, 69, 225-234. Other Pollock, M., Fernandes, R. M., Becker, L. A., Pieper, D., & Hartling, L. (2020). Chapter V: overviews of reviews. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version, 6.v Pollock, M., Fernandes, R. M., Newton, A. S., Scott, S. D., & Hartling, L. (2019). A decision tool to help researchers make decisions about including systematic reviews in overviews of reviews of healthcare interventions. Systematic reviews, 8(1), 18. Fusar-Poli, P., & Radua, J. (2018). Ten simple rules for conducting umbrella reviews. Evidence-based mental health, 21(3), 95-100 Based on on the work of Grant and Booth (2009) on 'A typology of reviews’. Grant, M.J. and Booth, A. (2009), A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26: 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x 28 Common Review Types Found in The Literature Rapid Review Description Search Complete Accelerates the process of searching with conducting a traditional time constraints systematic review through streamlining or omitting specific methods to produce evidence for stakeholders in a resource-efficient manner. Rapid reviews target high quality and authoritative resources for time-critical decision-making or clinically urgent questions Appraisal Synthesis Analysis Examples Resources/Further Reading Timelimited formal quality Assessment Typically narrative and tabular Quantities of literature and overall quality/directio n of literature Abboah-Offei, M., Salifu, Y., Adewale, B., Bayuo, J., Ofosu-Poku, R., & Opare-Lokko, E. (2021). A rapid review of the use of face mask in preventing the spread of COVID-19. International journal of nursing studies advances, 3, 100013. Guidelines Garritty C, Gartlehner G, Kamel C, King VJ, Nussbaumer-Streit B, Stevens A, Hamel C, Affengruber L. Cochrane Rapid Reviews. Interim Guidance from the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group. March 2020. Other Cochrane Rapid Review Methods Cochrane Rapid Reviews Interim Guidance from the Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group (2020) Nussbaumer-Streit, B., Mayr, V., Dobrescu, A. I., Chapman, A., Persad, E., Klerings, I., ... & Gartlehner, G. (2020). Quarantine alone or in combination with other public health measures to control COVID-19: a rapid review. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (9). Grant MJ, Booth A. A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal. 2009; 26(2):91-108. Haby, M.M., Chapman, E., Clark, R. et al. What are the best methodologies for rapid reviews of the research evidence for evidence-informed decision making in health policy and practice: a rapid review. Health Res Policy Sys 14, 83 (2016). Schünemann, H. (Ed.). (n.d.). Advances in rapid reviews. www.biomedcentral.com. Retrieved June 21, 2022, from https://www.biomedcentral.com/collections/arr Dobbins, M. (2017). Rapid review guidebook. Natlonal Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools, 13, 25. Pandor A, Kaltenthaler E, Martyn-St James M, Wong R, Cooper K, Dimairo M, O’Cathain A, Campbell F, Booth A. (2019), Delphi consensus reached to produce a decision tool for SelecTing Approaches for Rapid Reviews (STARR), Journal of Clinical Epidemiology Ganann R, Ciliska D and Helen T. Expediting systematic reviews: methods and implications of rapid reviews. Implementation Science. 2010; 5:56. Tricco AC, Antony J, Zarin W, et al. A scoping review of rapid review methods. BMC Medicine. 2015;13:224. Khangura, S., Konnyu, K., Cushman, R., Grimshaw, J., & Moher, D. (2012). Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach. Systematic reviews, 1(1), 1. Based on on the work of Grant and Booth (2009) on 'A typology of reviews’. Grant, M.J. and Booth, A. (2009), A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26: 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x 29 Common Review Types Found in The Literature Scoping Review/Mapping Review Description Search Appraisal Synthesis Analysis Examples Resources/Further Reading Systematically assess and map out the literature available on a topic, identifying key concepts, theories, sources of evidence and gaps in the research. Aims to identify nature and context of research evidence Complete searching with time/scope constraints May include research in progress No formal quality Assessment Typically tabular and graphical with some narrative commentary Quantities and qualities of literature perhaps by study design and other key features Hladkowicz, E., Dumitrascu, F., Auais, M., Beck, A., Davis, S., McIsaac, D. I., Miller, J., (2022). Evaluations of postoperative transitions in care for older adults: a scoping review. BMC Geriatrics 22, 329. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12 877-022-02989-6 Aromataris E, Munn Z (Eds). (2020) JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI, 2020. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES-20-01 Hladkowicz, E., Dumitrascu, F., Auais, M., Beck, A., Davis, S., McIsaac, D. I., Miller, J., (2022). Evaluations of postoperative transitions in care for older adults: a scoping review. BMC Geriatrics 22, 329. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12 877-022-02989-6 Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International journal of social research methodology, 8(1), 19-32. Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18(1), 143. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x Pollock, D., Davies, E. L., Peters, M. D., Tricco, A. C., Alexander, L., McInerney, P., ... & Munn, Z. (2021). Undertaking a scoping review: A practical guide for nursing and midwifery students, clinicians, researchers, and academics. Journal of advanced nursing, 77(4), 2102-2113. Peters, M. D., Godfrey, C. M., Khalil, H., McInerney, P., Parker, D., & Soares, C. B. (2015). Guidance for conducting systematic scoping reviews. JBI Evidence Implementation, 13(3), 141-146. Peters, M. D., Marnie, C., Tricco, A. C., Pollock, D., Munn, Z., Alexander, L., ... & Khalil, H. (2020). Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews. JBI evidence synthesis, 18(10), 2119-2126. Tricco, A., Oboirien, K., Lotfi, T., Sambunjak, D., (2017). Scoping reviews: what they are and how you can do them. Cochrane Training. PRISMA for Scoping Reviews, (2020) Tricco, AC, Lillie, E, Zarin, W, O'Brien, KK, Colquhoun, H, Levac, D, Moher, D, Peters, MD, Horsley, T, Weeks, L, Hempel, S et al. (2018). PRISMA extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR): checklist and explanation. Annals of Internal Medicine. 169(7):467473. doi:10.7326/M18-0850. Pham, M. T., Rajić, A., Greig, J. D., Sargeant, J. M., Papadopoulos, A., & McEwen, S. A. (2014). A scoping review of scoping reviews: advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency. Research synthesis methods, 5(4), 371–385. https://doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1123 Based on on the work of Grant and Booth (2009) on 'A typology of reviews’. Grant, M.J. and Booth, A. (2009), A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26: 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x 30 Common Review Types Found in The Literature Qualitative Review Description Search Appraisal Synthesis Analysis Examples Resources/Further Reading Method for integrating or comparing the finding from qualitative studies. It looks for themes, patterns and features that lie in or across individual qualitative studies May used selective and purposive sampling Quality Assessment may determine inclusion/ex clusion Qualitative, narrative synthesis Thematic analysis Odendaal, W. A., Anstey Watkins, J., Leon, N., Goudge, J., Griffiths, F., Tomlinson, M., & Daniels, K. (2020). Health workers' perceptions and experiences of using mHealth technologies to deliver primary healthcare services: a qualitative evidence synthesis. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 3(3), CD011942 Guidelines Authors should always consult current methods guidance at methods.cochrane.org/q Flemming, K., Booth, A., Garside, R., Tunçalp, Ö., & Noyes, J. (2019). Qualitative evidence synthesis for complex interventions and guideline development: clarification of the purpose, designs and relevant methods. BMJ global health, 4(Suppl 1), e000882. Other Cochrane training: Chapter 21 Qualitative Evidence. Cooke, A., Smith, D., & Booth, A. (2012). Beyond PICO: the SPIDER tool for qualitative evidence synthesis. Qualitative health research, 22(10), 1435– 1443. Based on on the work of Grant and Booth (2009) on 'A typology of reviews’. Grant, M.J. and Booth, A. (2009), A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26: 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x 31 Common Review Types Found in The Literature Mixed Methods Review Description Search Appraisal Synthesis Analysis Examples Resources/Further Reading Incorporates mixed methods primary studies or, more commonly, as reviews that seek to integrate mixed (quantitative and qualitative) data that are conducted and then aggregated into a final, combined synthesis, or qualitative and quantitative data are combined and synthesized in a single synthesis Requires very sensitive search either to retrieve all studies or a separate quantitative and qualitative search strategies Generic quality assessment or separate one Both qualitative and quantitative synthesis with tables and graphs with Both qualitative and quantitative analysis Hurley, M., Dickson, K., Hallett, R., Grant, R., Hauari, H., Walsh, N., Stansfield, C., & Oliver, S. (2018). Exercise interventions and patient beliefs for people with hip, knee or hip and knee osteoarthritis: a mixed methods review. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 4(4), CD010842. Guidelines Lizarondo L, Stern C, Carrier J, Godfrey C, Rieger K, Salmond S, Apostolo J, Kirkpatrick P, Loveday H. Chapter 8: Mixed methods systematic reviews. In: Aromataris E, Munn Z (Editors). JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI, 2020. Other Stern, C., Lizarondo, L., Carrier, J., Godfrey, C., Rieger, K., Salmond, S., ... & Loveday, H. (2020). Methodological guidance for the conduct of mixed methods systematic reviews. JBI evidence synthesis, 18(10), 21082118. Pluye, P., Hong, Q.N., & Vedel, I. (2016). Toolkit for mixed studies reviews (V3). Department of Family Medicine, McGill University. Sandelowski M, Leeman J, Knafl K, Crandell JL. Text-in-context: a method for extracting findings in mixedmethods mixed research synthesis studies. 2012; 69(6): 1428-37. Petticrew M, Rehfuess E, Noyes J, et al. Synthesizing evidence on complex interventions: how meta-analytical, qualitative, and mixed method approaches can contribute. J Clin Epid. 2013;66:1230-1243. RAMESES-Reporting standards and guidance for realist/meta-narrative reviews Based on on the work of Grant and Booth (2009) on 'A typology of reviews’. Grant, M.J. and Booth, A. (2009), A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26: 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x 32 Common Review Types Found in The Literature Systematic Review Description Search Appraisal Synthesis Analysis Examples Resources/Further Reading Present a transparent, exhaustive approach to reviewing the primary sources of literature on a given topic. Provide syntheses of the state of knowledge in a field, from which future research priorities can be identified; they can address questions that otherwise could not be answered by individual studies; they can identify problems in primary research that should be rectified in future studies; and they can generate or evaluate theories about how or why phenomena occur Comprehensive search with well-defined research question Formal quality assessment may determine inclusion/ex clusion Typically narrative synthesis with tables What is known What is unknown Uncertainty around finding Recommenda tions for practice and future research Schmidt-Hansen M, Bennett MI, Arnold S, Bromham N, Hilgart JS, Page AJ, Chi Y. Oxycodone for cancer-related pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2022, Issue 6. Art. No.: CD003870. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD0038 70.pub7. Higgins, J. P., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M. J., & Welch, V. A. (Eds.). (2019). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. John Wiley & Sons. Based on on the work of Grant and Booth (2009) on 'A typology of reviews’. Grant, M.J. and Booth, A. (2009), A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26: 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x Pittayanon, R., Lau, J. T., Yuan, Y., Leontiadis, G. I., Tse, F., Surette, M., & Moayyedi, P. (2019). Gut microbiota in patients with irritable bowel syndrome—a systematic review. Gastroenterology, 1 57(1), 97-108 33 . Aromataris E., Munn, Z., (Eds). (2020) JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis. JBI, 2020. https://doi.org/10.46658/JBIMES20-01 Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, Boutron I, Hoffmann TC, Mulrow CD, et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Systematic Reviews 2021;10:89. Muka, T., Glisic, M., Milic, J., Verhoog, S., Bohlius, J., Bramer, W., ... & Franco, O. H. (2020). A 24-step guide on how to design, conduct, and successfully publish a systematic review and metaanalysis in medical research. European Journal of Epidemiology, 35(1), 49-60. Common Review Types Found in The Literature Meta-analysis Review Description Search Appraisal Synthesis Analysis Examples Resources/Further Reading Systematically synthesise or merge the findings of single, independent studies, using statistical methods to calculate an overall or ‘absolute’ effect. Often used with SR Comprehensive search with well-defined research question Formal quality assessment may determine inclusion/ex clusion AND sensitivity analyses Typically narrative and numerical synthesis with tables and figures Quantitative analysis Abou Ghayda, R., Lee, K. H., Han, Y. J., Ryu, S., Hong, S. H., Yoon, S., ... & Shin, J. I. (2022). The global case fatality rate of coronavirus disease 2019 by continents and national income: A meta-analysis. Journal of Medical Virology, 94(6), 2402-2413 Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. International Journal of Surgery, 88, 105906. Based on on the work of Grant and Booth (2009) on 'A typology of reviews’. Grant, M.J. and Booth, A. (2009), A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26: 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x Cleophas, T., & Zwinderman, A. (2017). Modern MetaAnalysis: Review and Update of Methodologies: Springer Cham. 34 Putting all this together 35 Review § All review articles in the health sciences require: – An extensive search of the literature – The extraction of key information from relevant articles – The clear and concise presentation of this information § Conducting a review is one way to become an expert in the literature on a welldefined topic § Well-written and comprehensive review often become foundational for new research in the field because they summarize what is known about an area of inquiry 36 Review § A narrative review/literature review provides a unique perspective about a topic by using evidence from the literature to support the author’s commentary § Narrative reviews must be carefully organized by theme, methodology, chronology, or some other guiding principle § Narrative reviews are becoming less common as editors and reviewers push for the use of systematic methods – A narrative review works best when the researcher has a unique perspective on a topic and a particular expertise in the field that can be drawn on without using a systematic search strategy 37 Review § A systematic review uses a predetermined and comprehensive searching and screening method to identify relevant articles § An unbiased search strategy should be able to identify all the articles ever published on the narrow, well-defined area covered by the review § Each candidate article is screened to see whether it meets all of the inclusion criteria § Relevant information is extracted from all eligible articles and presented in a summary table, then the trends and key observations are summarized 38 Review § Meta-analysis is the calculation of a pooled statistic that combines the results of similar studies identified during a systematic review – The values included in the calculation of a summary statistic should come from high-quality quantitative studies that used similar methods to collect and analyze their data – A summary statistic is meaningful only when every study included in the meta-analysis used similar definitions and methods – Trying to combine dissimilar studies could hide real and meaningful differences among the study populations 39 Review 40 Steps in The Literature Review 1 Choose a topic and frame questions 2 Identify relevant databases and resources 3 Search and refine 41 4 Read and analyse 5 Write the review Steps in The Literature Review 42 Steps in The Literature Review PICOTT Description Example P: Patient/Participant/ Population or Problem Patient or the problem to be addressed Consider age, sex, socioeconomic status, etc. Adult with sleep bruxism I: Intervention Exposure to be consideredtreatment/test Occlusal splint C: Comparison/Comparator/Cont rol Control or comparison intervention/placebo/standar d of care. comparison not always present No treatment O: Outcome(s) The deserved outcome should be measurable Pain T: Time frame time for data collection e.g., 1 YEAR T: Type of study Covered in the last lecture 43 RCT Steps in The Literature Review 44 Steps in The Literature Review In order to select the best database for your particular question you need to know… What each database specializes in. How it is indexed. 45 If EBP filters are available. What you have access to Steps in The Literature Review PubMed/MEDLINE Ovid MEDLINE CINHAL Contains more than 32 million citations for biomedical literature from MEDLINE, life science journals, and online books Biomedical database Database covers the literature of nursing and allied health professionals The Cochrane Library a collection of databases that contain different types of highquality, independent evidence to inform healthcare decisionmaking Web of Science a platform consisting of several literature search databases designed to support scientific and scholarly research Embase comprehensive biomedical research database UpToDate provides overviews of clinical topics 46 PubMed Clinical Queries Uses predefined filters to help you quickly refine PubMed searches on clinical or disease-specific topics. To use this tool, enter your search terms in the search bar and select filters before searching Scopus Citation data, journal impact metrics, and journal indexing. Includes all of MEDLINE and Embase TRIP a clinical search engine designed to allow users to quickly and easily find and use high-quality research evidence to support their practice and/or care Steps in The Literature Review 47 Steps in The Literature Review § Finding background information: - It is useful to have general background on your topic by using a review article, encyclopedia or reference book - It gives you an overall understanding of your topic and will help you find some direction for building your search § The search could be carried out by the different search engines detailed above, nevertheless, PubMed, WoS and Scopus are the primary databases for researchers in health research. 48 Steps in The Literature Review Keywords vs. subject headings § Keyword searches are the most common method of identifying literature § All papers should contain keywords. § The use of keywords enables easy access to papers on the same or similar topics § However, keywords need to be carefully considered in order to select terms that will generate the data being sought. § the keywords used to identify terms may differ (e.g., teen, teens, teenager, adolescence, etc.) Subject headings § To overcome the potential problems when keywords are used in a search, we can use the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) system, also called descriptors, MeSH terms, index terms, or controlled vocabulary. § Professional indexers review each article in a database and add subject headings to the article’s database record to reflect what the article is about. 49 Steps in The Literature Review Basic search strategies § Start with PubMed, § It's usually best to start fairly broad; § Later, you can add limits or filters, to help narrow the search. § Identify your topic, and then break it down into concepts or keywords. § DON’T use “natural language” § DON’T abbreviate § DON’T use general search words like “comparison”, “cause”, or “versus” § DON’T apply limiters unless you need to § DON’T get too specific too quickly § DON’T pay for an article 50 Steps in The Literature Review Advanced search strategies § Boolean Searching “Boolean logic” is a system that allows you to set relationships between keywords or concepts when searching. The most commonly used Boolean commands are AND, OR, and NOT. Using these operators can make your searches more precise and save time. § AND NARROWS: Tells the database that you only want articles that contain ALL of the search terms § OR EXPANDS: Tells the database that you want all articles that contain EITHER of the terms § NOT EXCLUDES: Tells the database that you do not want any articles that contain a certain term 51 Steps in The Literature Review Advanced search strategies § AND NARROWS: Tells the database that you only want articles that contain ALL of the search terms § OR EXPANDS: Tells the database that you want all articles that contain EITHER of the terms § NOT EXCLUDES: Tells the database that you do not want any articles that contain a certain term 52 Steps in The Literature Review Advanced search strategies Using Wildcards, Truncation and Exact Phrase • Databases also often have features to help you search similar words or phrases. • Most databases use the symbol * or # for truncation or wildcard symbols. • Use the Database's Help tab to verify the correct symbol. 53 Steps in The Literature Review Advanced search strategies In narrowing the literature selection, more focused screening criteria are taken into consideration, such as: § Date of publication: ex: only studies conducted between 2005 and 2012 § Participants or subjects: ex: children 6 to 12 years of age § Publication language: ex: documents written in English § Research design: ex: clinical trials § Authors: ex: well-known author in a specific field § Journal: ex: high impact journal § Relevance: ex: similar objectives addressed, and methodologies adopted 54 Steps in The Literature Review Selected studies Constructing a summary table or Excel Sheet of selected material will serve as a tool to organize a researcher's work. ● Chronological: Organize by time ● Thematic: Organize by theme ● Methodological: Organize by methodology ● Theoretical: Organize by theoretical approach 55 Steps in The Literature Review 56 Steps in The Literature Review Critical Reading – to evaluate the literature, determine the relationship between the sources and ascertain what has been done already and what still needs to be done Initial reading plan: § Re-read the abstract § Look carefully at the tables and figures, which usually display the most important results § Read the entire text of the article § Review the reference list for any additional sources that should be read 57 Steps in The Literature Review Critical Reading – to evaluate the literature, determine the relationship between the sources and ascertain what has been done already and what still needs to be done 58 Steps in The Literature Review 59 Steps in The Literature Review To help you frame and write your literature review, think about these five C’s (Callahan, 2014): Cite Compare Contrast Critique Cite the material you have referred to and used to help you define the research problem that you will study Compare the various arguments, theories, methods, and findings expressed in the literature. For example, describe where the various researchers agree and where they disagree. Describe the similarities and dissimilarities in approaches to studying related research problems Contrast the various arguments, themes, methods, approaches, and controversies apparent and/or described in the literature. For example, describe what major areas are contested, controversial and/or still in debate. Critique the literature. Describe which arguments you find more persuasive and explain why. Explain which approaches, findings, and methods seem most reliable, valid, appropriate, and/or most popular and why. Pay attention to the verbs you use to describe what previous researchers have stated (e.g., asserts, demonstrates, argues, clarifies, etc.). Callahan, J. L. (2014). Writing literature reviews: A reprise and update. Human Resource Development Review, 13(3), 271-275. doi:10.1177/1534484314536705 60 Connect Connect the various research studies you reviewed. Describe how your work utilizes, draws upon, departs from, synthesizes, adds to or extends previous research studies Steps in The Literature Review Format of a literature review 1. Introduction establishing purpose 2. Body analyzing the literature 3. Conclusion summarizing key findings 61 Steps in The Literature Review Introduction Stand-alone literature review: § § Provide background on the topic Describe the objectives of the literature review Dissertation, thesis, or research paper: § § Reiterate the central problem Briefly summarize the scholarly context 62 Steps in The Literature Review Body § May be divided into sections § Analyze and interpret § Critically evaluate § Synthesize different sources § Use well-structured paragraphs § Cite your sources 63 Steps in The Literature Review Conclusion Stand-alone literature review: § § Discuss the overall implications Make suggestions for future research Dissertation, thesis, or research paper: § § Show how the literature review has informed your approach State what gaps your research will address 64 Recommended Resources for The Literature Review § "Systematic search" is a streamlined way to search for published literature online. § Its use ranges from simple literature reviews to more superior systematic reviews. § Here are 9 free videos from the Welch Medical Library at Johns Hopkins on how to do a systematic search: 1. Basics of Searching: Learn Boolean operators, nesting, truncation, and how to use quotes https://youtu.be/qBV9HsPKXi0?si=YUk059zDcVIOBVU3 2. Behind the Scenes: This video shows how PubMed classifies a simple search to retrieve relevant search results https://youtu.be/9md0kGzZ8Ak?si=FGlqNiC4FoEBxzAS 3. Filters and Field Tags: Ever wondered what tags such as [tiab], [tw], or [ti] mean? Watch this video to learn more https://youtu.be/E101qvK8ZJY?si=gCKu83m-VqWmN-21 4. Identifying Search Terms: This video shows how to appropriately select key terms and their synonyms and controlled vocabulary https://youtu.be/xR_pWVoVM-M?si=8z-lPhUuN5awbjYh 5. Building a Search: In this video, you'll be guided through a practical example of how to carry out a systematic search on a topic in PubMed https://youtu.be/xGYFDrORpzA?si=w1vUEDAPItIXpT0l 6. Evaluating Websites: This video's focus is on evaluating health information found on the internet focusing on using a method that evaluates currency, relevance, authority, accuracy, and purpose, otherwise known as the CRAAP method https://youtu.be/1cRlMntyOmY?si=EO_L5KWunbaI7Npx 7. Searching Google, Google Scholar, and the Internet: This video discusses tips for searching Google, google scholar and the internet. It includes advanced search operators and filters https://youtu.be/sdDEPdMkdo0?si=PAfHI68fpXXXxhPY 8. Grey Literature: This video discusses grey literature--what it is and what it's not, examples of producers and the types of grey literature, why you would want to be using this in your searches and in your research, how to document your searches, and we'll point you to some key helpful sites https://youtu.be/sidEpKTtw8M?si=aU-YDB5ljaYJa9cL 9. Overview of Searching Techniques. In this video you'll learn about five common search techniques, basic searching, berry picking, citation searching, pearl growing, and concept building, and when it's valuable to use each of these techniques https://youtu.be/8u7N5xBQl88?si=ZdQ7DCVGSbS1-qUX 65 Recommended Resources for The Literature Review Literature Search Knowledge Map Writing PubMed is a free tool by NIH that supports the search and retrieval of biomedical and life sciences literature. Litmaps helps you find articles and papers for your literature search. It generates a map of the most relevant articles related to your seed paper. Grammarly is a writing assistant that checks for spelling, grammar, punctuation errors, and vocabulary usage. Mendeley is a citation management tool that lets you collect & organize citations. & then easily insert them into documents. Google Scholar is a free tool that lets vou search the latest scholarly articles, documents and books. Research Rabbit is a free. literature review tool that visualizes the complex relationships in the literature. QuillBot's Al-powered paraphrasing tool helps to rewrite, edit, and change the tone of their text to improve clarity Zotero is a powerful, easy-touse research tool that helps you organize, analyze and cite academic literature sources. Elicit is a free Al app that helps you find papers, extract data, summarize, brainstorm ideas, and more. Connected Papers is a visual tool to help researchers find and explore papers and trends relevant to their field of work. Paperpal helps academics write better, faster with realtime suggestions for in-depth language and grammar correction. EndNote is a personal citation/bibliography manager tool that helps researchers create bibliographies and format references in MS word 66 Citations Putting all this together 67 Steps in The Literature Review 1 Choose a topic and frame questions 2 Identify relevant databases and resources 3 Search and refine 68 4 Read and analyse 5 Write the review Research Process/Steps Research: answering questions in logical and systematic ways Identify study question 1 Choose a research area and brainstorm for research topics Design study and collect data Select study approach 2 Find a mentor Analyse data 3 4 Evaluate the topic for FINER criteria Formulate a research question according to PICOT framework 69 Report findings 5 Perform a literature review 6 Refine the research question into testable/answerable / hypothesis Break Out Session Effectiveness of fissure sealants and fluoride varnish in preventing dental caries in permanent teeth of children and adolescents Instructions: By now let's assume based on previous sessions that you have already identified: • The research topic, problem, aim and objectives • The research question has been stated clearly Occlusal surfaces of posterior teeth are the most susceptible area of dental caries because their anatomy facilitates biofilm production and retention. Most dental caries in children and adolescents occur on the first molar pits and fissures. Clinical studies have shown that sealants and fluoride varnishes prevent caries better than no intervention. However, which one is more effective is uncertain. For permanent teeth of children and adolescents, does the fissure sealants prevent dental caries when compared to fluoride varnish? Permanent teeth of 6-18 yrs. Fissure sealants Fluoride varnish Caries To assess whether fissure sealants or fluoride varnishes are more effective for preventing dental caries in permanent teeth of children and adolescents https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov § 70 § § To compare fissure sealants to fluoride varnishes or fissure sealants and varnishes to fluoride varnishes alone for preventing dental caries in permanent teeth of children and adolescents To assess the impact of sealant material type and follow-up duration on efficacy. To record and report sealants and fluoride varnish adverse events. Break Out Session Feedback 71 Homework § Instructions: - Brainstorm and select two research topics based on your observations, interests, personal experiences, coursework, clinical or public health practice, and formal and informal reading. - Rate the research topics based on the provided criteria and choose one topic. - State a research problem - Formulate the research question - State the research aim and objectives Should be submitted by next week 28 September 2023 72 Homework To help you frame and write your literature review, think about these five C’s (Callahan, 2014): § Instructions: - Write a literature review about The Prevalence of Dental Caries in Saudi Arabia - Use the provided template and utilize the suggested resources - Word count: 1000 words - Use five C’s for writing a literature review - The work MUST be your own work and it will be checked for plagiarism Should be submitted by 15 October 2023 73 References Required: Neale, J., 2020. Research methods for health and social care. Bloomsbury Publishing. Jacobsen, K.H., 2020. Introduction to health research methods: A practical guide. Jones & Bartlett Publishers. Additional: Bowling, A., 2014. Research methods in health: Investigating health and health services. Maidenhead, United Kingdom: Open University Press. Creswell, J.W. and Creswell, J.D., 2018. Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage publications. World Health Organization. Regional Office for the Western Pacific, 2001. Health research methodology : a guide for training in research methods. 2nd ed.. WHO Regional Office for the Western Pacific. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/206929 World Health Organization. Regional Office for the Eastern Mediterranean. (2004). A practical guide for health researchers. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/119703 References Cited references: § Clark, I. L., Mendoza, A., Skawratananond, C., & Walker, A. (2006). Writing the successful thesis and dissertation: Entering the conversation. Prentice Hall. § Fink, A. (2019). Conducting research literature reviews: From the internet to paper. Sage publications. § Grant, M.J. and Booth, A. (2009), A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26: 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.14711842.2009.00848.x § Sutton, A., Clowes, M., Preston, L., & Booth, A. (2019). Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 36(3), 202-222 § Taylor, D. (2008) The Literature Review: A Few Tips On Conducting It (1). Available at: https://journals.scholarsportal.info/browse/19207093/v01i0001. § Williamson, G. (2019) Succeeding in literature reviews and research project plans for nursing students. 4. edn. Thousand Oaks: Sage. Next Lecture: Step 2: Selecting a Study Approach Identify study question Select study approach Design study and collect data Thank you! Any questions [email protected] Analyse data Report findings