systematic approaches to literature reviewing dr tamara o’connor student learning development...
Post on 17-Jan-2016
237 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Systematic Approaches to Literature Reviewing
Dr Tamara O’Connor Student Learning
Development
toconnor@tcd.ie
Workshop Overview
explain elements of the systematic review process
explore how these might be used or adapted to support: - a thesis literature review; - approaches to keeping up-to-date with the literature through a PhD
contextualise this within other approaches to managing and working with the literature
Literature Matters
From Holbrook et al (2007)
disciplinary perspective
connection to findings
coverage
working understanding
critical appraisal
scholarliness
literature use
The Literature Review ?
“Literature reviews …… introduce a topic, summarise the main issues and provide some illustrative examples.”
from www.eppi.ioe.ac.uk
Agree? Disagree?
Agree? or Disagree?
If they are to be considered a reliable source of research evidence they should record how the primary studies were sought and selected and how they were analysed to produce their conclusions.
Readers need to be able to judge whether all of the relevant literature is likely to have been found, and how the quality of studies was assessed.
1 Agree? 5 Disagree? 10
Systematic Reviews
a review of a clearly formulated question that uses systematic and explicit methods to identify, select and critically appraise relevant research, and to collect and analyse data from the studies that are included within the review. Statistical methods (meta-analysis) may or may not be used to analyse and summarise the results of the included studies.
from www.sebc.bangor.ac.uk
Key features
- of the systematic review process you might want to adopt or adapt–
Explicit and transparent methods a standard set of stages
Accountable, replicable and updateable
Systematic Reviews
Seven steps (of a Cochrane Review)
Formulating a problem Locating and selecting studies Critical appraisal of studies Collecting data Analyzing and presenting results Interpreting results Improving and updating reviews
1. Formulating a Problem
What is your research question?
1. Formulating a Problem
Example Questions?
Standard SR question containssubject- intervention- outcome- comparator
Phase 1- Identify the Researcha broad but defined, systematic sweep
Defined search terms – record recall and precision
Defined search arena - e.g. databases, citation indices, reference lists from primary and review articles, grey literature, conference proceedings, research registers, the internet, individual researchers/practitioners
Other broad search limits, e.g. language, date,
2. Locating and selecting studies
TIPS! Document the search protocol and record what
research was found
Systematically manage the
search output, e.g. using
endnote
2. Locating and selecting studies
Phase 2- Selectionselect from research using criteria related to your
research question
Develop inclusion or exclusion statements, these might relate to study outcomes, research design, methods used, population worked with etc.
e.g. studies with a mixed population of men and womene.g. random control trials onlye.g. maximum exposure time of 10mins
TIPS! Document the
statements and
their purpose (might be
pragmatic or research related)
3. Critical appraisal of studies
“Assessing the quality of methodology is a critical part of the systematic review process”
No standard approach but there are hierarchies in fields of study
3. Critical appraisal of studies
disciplinary perspective
connection to findings
coverage
working understanding
critical appraisal
scholarliness
literature use
disciplinary perspective
connection to findings
coverage
working understanding
critical appraisal
scholarliness
disciplinary perspective
connection to findings
coverage
working understanding
critical appraisal
scholarliness
literature use
No standard approach but there are hierarchies in fields of study
3. Critical appraisal of studies
In field/ discipline groups
Brainstorm the range of research variance that exists that can be used to discriminate
between studies e.g. in methodological approaches,
theoretical stances, or in relation to other factors,
What next?
One thing I’ve realised……
Something I want to work on is…..
One idea I’m thinking about is…..
As a result of this workshop I….
Other ideas and options
Speed reading
Endnote
Databases in my area
Data mining techniques
SR websites
Centre for Evidence-based Conservation -http://www.cebc.bangor.ac.uk/
Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (medical) -http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/index.htm
Cochrane Collaboration (international- medical) -http://www.cochrane.org/
EPPI-Centre, Institute of Education - http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/
Social Policy and Social Care -http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/chp/srspsc/index.htm
If you read one article, an example here of a review of the ways studies in reviews are appraised - http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=521688
If you prefer power-point, how about this one on mixed method reviews http://www.ccsr.ac.uk/methods/events/challenges/documents/JamesThomasESRCMethodologicalchallenges.ppt
top related