Which reporting guideline should I use and why?

This special issue has highlighted the many different approaches and methods for doing a literature review. These have included the established methods for undertaking a systematic review with meta-analysis as developed by the Cochrane Collaboration (Higgins et al., 2019) to more recent innovations...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of clinical nursing 2023-05, Vol.32 (9-10), p.e15-e16
Main Authors: Aveyard, Helen, Bradbury‐Jones, Caroline, Ring, Nicola, Flemming, Kate
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Checklist
Documentation
Guidelines
Humans
Literature reviews
Medical research
Research Design
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:This special issue has highlighted the many different approaches and methods for doing a literature review. These have included the established methods for undertaking a systematic review with meta-analysis as developed by the Cochrane Collaboration (Higgins et al., 2019) to more recent innovations involving the synthesis of both qualitative and quantitative data, alongside scoping reviews which map out the scope of existing research, telling us what is known about a particular topic. We argue that no review method is better than another; what is important is that the method used is appropriate to the focus of the review and is comprehensively undertaken. For example, a scoping review is used when we want to scope or map out the existing literature and to identify research gaps. It does not undertake an in-depth synthesis of the literature and is therefore unlikely to be the method of choice for those reviewing the literature to justify an empirical project. Where a deeper level of synthesis is required and where the nuances of the research really matter in order to justify a potential research question, a method of reviewing the literature which requires synthesis and analysis is required.
ISSN:0962-1067
1365-2702
DOI:10.1111/jocn.16548