Literature Review Workshop
"SMART" Learning Objectives:
By the end of this section, you will be able to:
1) Compare and contrast the key components of narrative and systematic literature reviews and meta-analysis.
2) Explain the significance and essential components of a coding form in the literature review process.
3) Critique a literature review in your field using the principles described in this workshop.
1) Compare and contrast the key components of narrative and systematic literature reviews and meta-analysis.
2) Explain the significance and essential components of a coding form in the literature review process.
3) Critique a literature review in your field using the principles described in this workshop.
Introduction:
Literature reviews help to evaluate and synthesize knowledge across a wide variety of studies on a specific topic of interest (Callahan, 2014). They allow the reader to gain a more thorough understanding of the topic and identify any gaps in existing knowledge without having to refer to each individual study. In the field of medicine, literature reviews can provide the physician with evidence for best practices to follow in the diagnosis and treatment of a particular disease (Baker, 2016). Literature reviews may be published as a stand-alone review of a topic, or as a component of a larger research study. The stand-alone literature review serves as a detailed critical analysis of a given topic, while a literature review that is part of a research study explains the context and need for the investigation (Schroeder, 2016).
The three types of literature reviews we will discuss include the narrative review, systematic review, and meta-analysis, which can be considered a subset of the systematic review (Baker, 2016). A narrative review is usually descriptive, qualitative, and provides an overview of a specific topic explaining its significance (Baker, 2016). A narrative review may suffer from bias since search criteria may not be comprehensive or replicable. A systematic review, on the other hand, limits bias by using a detailed search process with clear inclusion and exclusion criteria that are rigorously followed and documented (Baker, 2016). A limitation of the systematic review is that it can be quite complex and time consuming. Unlike narrative reviews which tend to qualitatively analyze and summarize results, a meta-analysis is a quantitative method by which data from multiple similar studies are pooled and compared for statistical significance (Baker, 2016). Meta-analyses require statistical expertise and appropriate software for data analysis.
Research Question:
The research question we will focus on in this literature review is: "What is the impact of the modality principle on learning outcomes in the field of medical education?" The modality principle states that students learn best when words accompanying a multimedia image are presented in a narrated rather than written text format (Low & Sweller, 2014). Although this principle has been well supported in the general education literature, its impact specific to medical education is not well defined. The purpose of this literature review is to identify the best modality for presenting information in online medical multimedia learning modules to enhance student learning.
Coding Forms:
A coding form is a spreadsheet which allows the researcher to stay organized while gathering data relevant to the topic of the literature review (Schroeder, 2016). It serves as a quick overview of the relevant articles analyzed during the search process, and allows the researcher to look for broader themes in the content. It also provides a systematic way to categorize key details about each article as it is analyzed, allowing for easier recall when writing the literature review. A coding form could include the article citation, abstract, theoretical framework, a brief description of the article in terms of methodology, measures, reliability and validity, study results, an overall critique of the study, and a brief description of how the article applies to the research question (Schroeder, 2016). Below is a link to a sample coding form used in my literature review process.
coding_form_sk.xlsx | |
File Size: | 25 kb |
File Type: | xlsx |
Components of a Good Literature Review
A good literature review has a strong theoretical background, reviews the relevant empirical evidence including studies supporting and refuting a given argument, and synthesizes available information to generate new ideas and themes (Schroeder, 2016). The theoretical section of the review provides background information, guides the research question, and serves as a foundation for the paper as a whole. A good theory section should define the theory, explain its key components, and apply it to the topic being reviewed (Schroeder, 2016).
The empirical evidence section should critically analyze the results of studies cited in the literature. Some questions to consider when analyzing the empirical evidence section of a literature review include (Schroeder, 2016):
- How convincing are the results of the cited studies?
- Are the cited studies reliable?
- How much evidence is provided?
- Are the cited studies generalizable?
When synthesizing the results of various studies, it is important to consider broader themes across the cited literature rather than simply describing them. The coding form can be helpful in this regard in allowing the researcher to see broader themes across the cited works. Some questions to consider when determining the effectiveness of the synthesis section of a literature review include (Schroeder, 2016):
- Did the review highlight broader themes or simply describe the field?
- Do the highlighted themes align with the evidence cited?
- Do the conclusions add value to the field? Do they provide new directions, ideas, or thoughts about the field?
Below please find a link to my literature review. Since I plan to submit the finished manuscript for publication, the final version will not be accessible online at this time.
sk_lit_review_weebly.docx | |
File Size: | 30 kb |
File Type: | docx |
References:
- Baker, J. D. (2016). The purpose, process, and methods of writing a literature review. Association of Perioperative Registered Nurses Journal, 103(3), 265-269.
- Callahan, J. L. (2014). Writing literature reviews: A reprisal and update. Human Resource Development Review, 13(3), 271-275.
- Low, R., & Sweller, J. (2014). The modality principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (2nd ed.) (p. 227-246). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
- Schroeder, N. L. (2016). Digital scholarship of teaching: Literature review [PowerPoint slides]. Retrieved from https://pilot.wright.edu/d2l/im/onlinerooms