Literature review wiki

Wikipedia, the free to: navigation, a focused scientific review with pre-defined methodology, see systematic has been suggested that this article be merged into review article. Literature review is a text of a scholarly paper, which includes the current knowledge including substantive findings, as well as theoretical and methodological contributions to a particular topic. Most often associated with academic-oriented literature, such reviews are found in academic journals, and are not to be confused with book reviews that may also appear in the same publication. 1][unreliable source] a narrow-scope literature review may be included as part of a peer-reviewed journal article presenting new research, serving to situate the current study within the body of the relevant literature and to provide context for the reader. In such a case, the review usually precedes the methodology and results sections of the ing a literature review may also be part of graduate and post-graduate student work, including in the preparation of a thesis, dissertation, or a journal article. Literature reviews are also common in a research proposal or prospectus (the document that is approved before a student formally begins a dissertation or thesis). Fourth type, the systematic review, is often classified separately, but is essentially a literature review focused on a research question, trying to identify, appraise, select and synthesize all high-quality research evidence and arguments relevant to that question. A meta-analysis is typically a systematic review using statistical methods to effectively combine the data used on all selected studies to produce a more reliable result. And rangarajan (2013) distinguish between the process of reviewing the literature and a finished work or product known as a literature review. 5]:193–229 the process of reviewing the literature is often ongoing and informs many aspects of the empirical research project. Scholars need to be scanning the literature long after a formal literature review product appears to be completed. The process of reviewing the literature requires different kinds of activities and ways of thinking. 6] shields and rangarajan (2013) and granello (2001) link the activities of doing a literature review with benjamin bloom’s revised taxonomy of the cognitive domain (ways of thinking: remembering, understanding, applying, analyzing, evaluating, and creating). For a person doing a literature review this would include tasks such as recognition, retrieval and recollection of the relevant literature. Understanding may be challenging because the literature could introduce the scholar to new terminology, conceptual framework and methodology.

Literature review wikipedia

In bloom’s third category applying the scholar is able to make connections between the literature and his or her larger research project. This is particularly true if the literature review is to be a chapter in a future empirical study. Analysis of the literature allows the scholar to develop frameworks for analysis and the ability to see the big picture and know how details from the literature fit within the big picture. When scholars use bloom’s fifth category evaluating they are able to see the strengths and weaknesses of the theories, arguments, methodology and findings of the literature they have collected and read. 7] when scholars engage in creating the final category in bloom's taxonomy, they bring creativity to the process of doing a literature review. They may be able to find a fresh and original research question, identify a heretofore, unknown gap in the literature or make surprising connections. By understanding how ways of thinking connect to tasks of a literature review, a scholar is able to be self-reflective and bring metacognition to the process of reviewing the literature. The process of reviewing the literature and writing a literature review can be complicated and lengthy. Promoting cognitive complexity in graduate written work: using bloom's taxonomy as a pedagogical tool to improve literature reviews". Writing literature reviews: a guide for students of the social and behavioral sciences (6th ed. Isbn ries: academic publishinghidden categories: articles to be merged from june 2017all articles to be mergedarticles needing expert attention with no reason or talk parameterarticles needing unspecified expert attentionarticles needing expert attention from may 2014all articles needing expert attentionall articles lacking reliable referencesarticles lacking reliable references from february 2016articles lacking in-text citations from november 2010all articles lacking in-text logged intalkcontributionscreate accountlog pagecontentsfeatured contentcurrent eventsrandom articledonate to wikipediawikipedia out wikipediacommunity portalrecent changescontact links hererelated changesupload filespecial pagespermanent linkpage informationwikidata itemcite this a bookdownload as pdfprintable version. Categories » education and communications » research and articlewikihow to do a literature parts:before writingconstructing your paperrevising your workcommunity q& people might think of a literature review as reading a book and then giving it a thumbs up or thumbs down. A literature review is a review of various pieces of literature on one topic, ranging from series of books to shorter pieces like pamphlets. Some instructors may ask you to do a literature review and not get more specific than that. If you are writing a review in the humanities, history, or social sciences, you can afford to be less concerned with timing (in fact, changing opinions throughout history may be an aspect of your paper).

But if you are writing a literary review for the sciences, say, on treating diabetes, information from 5 years ago could already be obsolete. Sort through current bibliographies or literature reviews in the field to get a sense of what your discipline expects. Stating something like this begs a few questions, making your review more interesting and meaningful: how will trends change in the future? Your intro should give a quick idea of the topic of your review, be it thematically or by organizational the reader along by letting them know what kind of ride they're in for. The survey nature of the literature review does not allow for in-depth discussion or detailed quotes from the text. Or you can just mention your own findings and put the references in like any other do i do a review of related literature? Often, professors are looking for strict use of these formats as part of the e your literature review. Of people told us that this article helped d articleshow to write a reporthow to write a research paperhow to write a thesis statementhow to write a research text shared under a creative commons d by answer wikipedia, the free to: navigation, the academic journal, see systematic atic reviews are types of literature reviews that collect and critically analyze multiple research studies or papers, using methods that are selected before one or more research questions are formulated, and then finding and analyzing studies that relate to and answer those questions in a structured methodology. 1] they are designed to provide a complete, exhaustive summary of current literature relevant to a research question. Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials are key in the practice of evidence-based medicine,[2] and a review of existing studies is often quicker and cheaper than embarking on a new understanding of systematic reviews, and how to implement them in practice, is highly recommended for professionals involved in the delivery of health care. Besides health interventions, systematic reviews may examine clinical tests, public health interventions, environmental interventions,[3] social interventions, adverse effects, and economic evaluations. 4][5] systematic reviews are not limited to medicine and are quite common in all other sciences where data are collected, published in the literature, and an assessment of methodological quality for a precisely defined subject would be helpful. Systematic review aims to provide a complete, exhaustive summary of current literature relevant to a research question. The first step in conducting a systematic review is to create a structured question to guide the review. 7] the second step is to perform a thorough search of the literature for relevant papers.

The methodology section of a systematic review will list all of the databases and citation indexes that were searched such as web of science, embase, and pubmed and any individual journals that were searched. Each included study may be assigned an objective assessment of methodological quality preferably by using methods conforming to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (prisma) statement (the current guideline)[8] or the high quality standards of cochrane. Reviews often, but not always, use statistical techniques (meta-analysis) to combine results of eligible studies, or at least use scoring of the levels of evidence depending on the methodology used. 6] systematic review is often applied in the biomedical or healthcare context, but it can be applied in any field of research. Groups like the campbell collaboration are promoting the use of systematic reviews in policy-making beyond just healthcare. Systematic review uses an objective and transparent approach for research synthesis, with the aim of minimizing bias. While many systematic reviews are based on an explicit quantitative meta-analysis of available data, there are also qualitative reviews which adhere to standards for gathering, analyzing and reporting evidence. 10] the eppi-centre has been influential in developing methods for combining both qualitative and quantitative research in systematic reviews. 11] the prisma statement[12] suggests a standardized way to ensure a transparent and complete reporting of systematic reviews, and is now required for this kind of research by more than 170 medical journals worldwide. 15][16] these approaches try to overcome the problems of methodological and epistemological heterogeneity in the diverse literatures existing on some subjects. Main stages of a systematic review are:Defining a question and agreeing an objective method. These stages are complete, the review may be published, disseminated and translated into practice after being adopted as cochrane is a group of over 37,000 specialists in healthcare who systematically review randomised trials of the effects of prevention, treatments and rehabilitation as well as health systems interventions. Cochrane reviews are published in the cochrane database of systematic reviews section of the cochrane library. Reviews assess the benefits and harms of interventions used in healthcare and health stic test accuracy reviews assess how well a diagnostic test performs in diagnosing and detecting a particular ology reviews address issues relevant to how systematic reviews and clinical trials are conducted and ative reviews synthesize qualitative and quantitative evidence to address questions on aspects other than effectiveness. Reviews address the probable course or future outcome(s) of people with a health ews of systematic reviews (oors) are a new type of study in order to compile multiple evidence from systematic reviews into a single document that is accessible and useful to serve as a friendly front end for the cochrane collaboration with regard to healthcare cochrane collaboration provides a handbook for systematic reviewers of interventions which "provides guidance to authors for the preparation of cochrane intervention reviews.

The review question(s) and developing criteria for including ing for ing studies and collecting ing risk of bias in included ing data and undertaking sing reporting ting results and "summary of findings" reting results and drawing cochrane handbook forms the basis of two sets of standards for the conduct and reporting of cochrane intervention reviews (mecir - methodological expectations of cochrane intervention reviews)[23]. 24] the lines within illustrate the summary results from an iconic systematic review showing the benefit of corticosteroids, which 'has probably saved thousands of premature babies'. The campbell collaboration "helps people make well-informed decisions by preparing, maintaining and disseminating systematic reviews in education, crime and justice, social welfare and international development. Systematic reviews are regarded as the strongest form of medical evidence, a review of 300 studies found that not all systematic reviews were equally reliable, and that their reporting can be improved by a universally agreed upon set of standards and guidelines. 28] a further study by the same group found that of 100 systematic reviews monitored, 7% needed updating at the time of publication, another 4% within a year, and another 11% within 2 years; this figure was higher in rapidly changing fields of medicine, especially cardiovascular medicine. 29] a 2003 study suggested that extending searches beyond major databases, perhaps into grey literature, would increase the effectiveness of reviews. And colleagues highlighted the problems with systematic reviews, particularly those conducted by the cochrane, noting that published reviews are often biased, out of date and excessively long. 31] they criticized cochrane reviews as not being sufficiently critical in the selection of trials and including too many of low quality. They proposed several solutions, including limiting studies in meta-analyses and reviews to registered clinical trials, requiring that original data be made available for statistical checking, paying greater attention to sample size estimates, and eliminating dependence on only published of these difficulties were noted early on as described by altman: "much poor research arises because researchers feel compelled for career reasons to carry out research that they are ill equipped to perform, and nobody stops them. 33] another concern is that the methods used to conduct a systematic review are sometimes changed once researchers see the available trials they are going to include. 34] bloggers have described retractions of systematic reviews and published reports of studies included in published systematic reviews. 38] subsequently, a number of donors – most notably the uk department for international development (dfid) and ausaid – are focusing more attention and resources on testing the appropriateness of systematic reviews in assessing the impacts of development and humanitarian interventions. Institute of medicine (us) committee on standards for systematic reviews of comparative effectiveness, research; eden, j; levit, l; berg, a; morton, s (2011). The prisma statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration". Tensions and paradoxes in electronic patient record research: a systematic literature review using the meta-narrative method".

Overview of systematic reviews - a new type of study: part i: why and for whom? Bias due to selective inclusion and reporting of outcomes and analyses in systematic reviews of randomised trials of healthcare interventions". Overseas development y resources ces in your dia commons has media related to systematic for reviews and dissemination, university of ne ce for policy and practice information and co-ordinating centre (eppi-centre), university of : review literature—articles about the review : review [publication type] - limit search results to search: "review literature" [majr]. Reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (prisma) statement, "an evidence-based minimum set of items for reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analyses". Nunn, jack (2015-10-01), english: this video explains why systematic reviews are important and how they are done. Retrieved ries: systematic reviewreview journalsevidence-based practicesinformation sciencemedical researchmeta-analysisnursing researchhidden categories: wikipedia articles needing page number citations from june logged intalkcontributionscreate accountlog pagecontentsfeatured contentcurrent eventsrandom articledonate to wikipediawikipedia out wikipediacommunity portalrecent changescontact links hererelated changesupload filespecial pagespermanent linkpage informationwikidata itemcite this a bookdownload as pdfprintable version. A non-profit wikipedia, the free to: navigation, wikipedia's peer review area, see wikipedia:peer review. Reviewer at the american national institutes of health evaluates a grant review is the evaluation of work by one or more people of similar competence to the producers of the work (peers). Peer review methods are employed to maintain standards of quality, improve performance, and provide credibility. In academia, scholarly peer review is often used to determine an academic paper's suitability for publication. Peer review can be categorized by the type of activity and by the field or profession in which the activity occurs, e. Medical peer sional peer review focuses on the performance of professionals, with a view to improving quality, upholding standards, or providing certification. Citation needed] henry oldenburg (1619–1677) was a british philosopher who is seen as the 'father' of modern scientific peer review. Prototype[clarification needed] professional peer-review process was recommended in the ethics of the physician written by ishāq ibn ʻalī al-ruhāwī (854–931). Peer review is common in the field of health care, where it is usually called clinical peer review.

5] further, since peer review activity is commonly segmented by clinical discipline, there is also physician peer review, nursing peer review, dentistry peer review, etc. 6] many other professional fields have some level of peer review process: accounting,[7][8] law,[9][10] engineering (e. Review is used in education to achieve certain learning objectives, particularly as a tool to reach higher order processes in the affective and cognitive domains as defined by bloom's taxonomy. This may take a variety of forms, including closely mimicking the scholarly peer review processes used in science and medicine. Article: scholarly peer rly peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of subjecting an author's scholarly work, research, or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field, before a paper describing this work is published in a journal or as a book. The peer review helps the publisher (that is, the editor-in-chief or the editorial board) decide whether the work should be accepted, considered acceptable with revisions, or rejected. Peer review requires a community of experts in a given (and often narrowly defined) field, who are qualified and able to perform reasonably impartial review. Impartial review, especially of work in less narrowly defined or inter-disciplinary fields, may be difficult to accomplish, and the significance (good or bad) of an idea may never be widely appreciated among its contemporaries. Peer review is generally considered necessary to academic quality and is used in most major scientific journals, but it does by no means prevent publication of all invalid research. Traditionally, peer reviewers have been anonymous, but there is currently a significant amount of open peer review, where the comments are visible to readers, generally with the identities of the peer reviewers disclosed as ment policy[edit]. Government peer review european union has been using peer review in the "open method of co-ordination" of policies in the fields of active labour market policy since 1999. 15] each program sponsors about eight peer review meetings in each year, in which a "host country" lays a given policy or initiative open to examination by half a dozen other countries and the relevant european-level ngos. The results are published on the united nations economic commission for europe, through unece environmental performance reviews, uses peer review, referred to as "peer learning", to evaluate progress made by its member countries in improving their environmental state of california is the only u. In 1997, the california governor signed into law senate bill 1320 (sher), chapter 295, statutes of 1997, which mandates that, before any calepa board, department, or office adopts a final version of a rule-making, the scientific findings, conclusions, and assumptions on which the proposed rule are based must be submitted for independent external scientific peer review. Peer review may be distinguished in 4 classifications: 1) clinical peer review; 2) peer evaluation of clinical teaching skills for both physicians and nurses;[17][18] 3) scientific peer review of journal articles; 4) a secondary round of peer review for the clinical value of articles concurrently published in medical journals.

19] additionally, "medical peer review" has been used by the american medical association to refer not only to the process of improving quality and safety in health care organizations, but also to the process of rating clinical behavior or compliance with professional society membership standards. The review process was double-blind to provide anonymity for both authors and reviewers, but was otherwise handled in a fashion similar to that used by scientific journals. Pmid ries: peer reviewhidden categories: cs1 maint: multiple names: authors listwebarchive template wayback linksarticles with limited geographic scope from october 2015use mdy dates from october 2012all articles with unsourced statementsarticles with unsourced statements from september 2017wikipedia articles needing clarification from october 2017articles with unsourced statements from december 2015broad-concept logged intalkcontributionscreate accountlog pagecontentsfeatured contentcurrent eventsrandom articledonate to wikipediawikipedia out wikipediacommunity portalrecent changescontact links hererelated changesupload filespecial pagespermanent linkpage informationwikidata itemcite this a bookdownload as pdfprintable dia ansالعربيةбългарскиcatalàčeštinadanskdeutschελληνικάespañolفارسیfrançaisgalego한국어hrvatskibahasa indonesiainterlinguaíslenskaitalianoעבריתmagyarമലയാളംbahasa melayunederlands日本語norskpolskiportuguêsqaraqalpaqsharomânăрусскийsimple englishslovenčinaslovenščinasrpskohrvatski / српскохрватскиsuomisvenskaไทยtürkçeукраїнськаtiếng việt吴语粵語中文.