LITERATURE REVIEW by R85315Hi

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 27

									LITERATURE REVIEW


     ARCHELLE JANE C. CALLEJO, PTRP,MSPH
OBJECTIVES
 1.   TO DEFINE LITERATURE REVIEW


 2. TO INCREASE THE STUDENTS’ AWARENESS IN THE NEED
  TO CRTICALLY APPRAISE RESEARCH

 3. TO EXPOSE STUDENTS TO DIFFERENT APPRAISAL TOOLS


 4.TO INTRODUCE DIFFERENT FREE ACCESS WEBSITES FOR
  ELECTRONICALLY SEARCHING FOR JOURNALS
BEFORE STARTING



   AN EVIDENCE-SEEKING QUESTION:
   P - POPULATION
   I – INTERVENTION
   C – COMPARISON
   O – OUTCOME
EXAMPLE
 P - STROKE PATIENTS

 I - EXERCISE

 C - AUGMENTED FEEDBACK

 O - IMPROVE STATIC AND DYNAMIC
          BALANCE
LITERATURE REVIEW:
      WHAT?
 A SURVEY OF LITERATURE
 RELATING TO THE PROBLEM

 A PROCESS OF ACQUIRING DEPTH
 AND UNDERSTANDING OF THE
 PUBLISHED INFORMATION IN A
 PARTICULAR FIELD OF INTEREST
LITERATURE REVIEW:
      WHY ?
 1. TO ASCERTAIN ORIGINALITY OF
 THE RESEARCH

 2. TO PROVIDE IDEAS FOR SOLUTION
 OF THE PROBLEMS
PLANNING FOR
LITERATURE REVIEW
 PRIMARY LITERATURE
  – MATERIALS MOST CENTRAL TO THE PARTICULAR
    PROBLEM BEING INVESTIGATED

 SECONDARY LITERATURE
  – MATERIALS ALLIED OR RELATED TO THE PROBLEM OR
    AREA OF INTEREST BUT MORE PERIPHERAL THAN
    CENTRAL TO THE PROBLEM IN QUESTION

 GREY LITERATURE
  – PUBLICATIONS WHICH ARE NOT PUBLISHED OR
    DISTRIBUTED THROUGH THE USUAL CHANNELS AND
    ARE DIFFICULT TO RETRIEVE IN THE BIBLIOGRAPHIES
UTILIZE A SYTEMATIC SEARCH
STRATEGRY
 1. LIST AND DEFINE ANY RELEVANT MAIN
  WORDS ASSOCIATED WITH THE
  STATEMENT OF THE SELECTED PROBLEM
 EXAMPLE: (SYNONYMS, USING MeSH)
 P - STROKE OR CEREBROVASCULAR ACCIDENT OR
        CEREBROVASCULAR DISEASE OR HEMIPLEGIA OR
        HEMIPARESIS
 I -
 C - EXTRINSIC FEEDBACK OR BIOFEEDBACK OR
        COGNITIVE REHABILITATION
 O -
UTILIZE A SYTEMATIC SEARCH
STRATEGRY
 2. SEARCH FOR YOUR TOPIC UTILIZING
 THE KEY WORDS THROUGH:
  – INDEXING PRACTICE
  – DATABASES
  – REFERENCE LIST / PEARLING
     ( MAKING USE OF BIBLIOGRAPHIES)
  – LANGUAGE
  – STUDY DESIGN ACCEPTED
  – TIME LIMIT

 3. CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF ARTICLES
LITERATURE REVIEW:
HOW ? A SUBJECT APPROACH
WHAT IS CRITICAL APPRAISAL?

REFERS TO CHECKLIST TO PROVIDE AN OVERALL QUALITY
  SCORE


WHY SCORE THE QUALITY OF A
 RESEARCH ARTICLE?
  YOU CAN WEED OUT POOR ARTICLES
  YOU CAN USE YOUR READING TIME WISELY
ASSESSING PUBLISHED RESEARCH

 TITLE
 ABSTRACT / SUMMARY
   – SHORT STATEMENTS OF AIMS,
     METHODS,FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONSMOF
     A RESEARCH PROJECT
 INTRODUCTION
   – CLEAR STATEMENT OF THE CONTEXT AND
     GENERAL BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY;
   – IT’S IMPORTANCE / RELEVANCE OF PROJECT;
   – CRITICAL REVIEW OF RESEARCH LITERATURE
     THUS INCREASING IT’S CREDIBILITY
ASSESSING PUBLISHED RESEARCH

 METHOD
  – WHAT WAS DONE?
  – HOW IT WAS DONE?
  – THE ORDER IN WHICH IT WAS DONE?
  – WHY THIS PROJECT WAS CHOSEN?
  – WITH WHOM THE PROJECT WAS
    CONDUCTED?
ASSESSING PUBLISHED RESEARCH

 RESULTS
  – SUMMARY OF WHAT WAS ACTUALLY FOUND
    IN THE PROJECT
 DISCUSSION
  – …THE FINDINGS OF THE PROJECT VIS A VIS
    WITH OTHER RESEARCH WORK IN THE FIELD
  – CONCLUSION SHOULD REFLECT THE RESULT
  – THE FLAWS OF THE STUDY ARE RECOGNIZED
    WITH ACCOMPANY RECOMMENDATIONS
 REFERENCES
  – FULL NAME OF AUTHOR,DATE OF WORK,ITS
    TITLE,WHERE IT WAS PUBLISHED
OVERALL CONSIDERATION
 WAS THE PROJECT A WORTHWHILE ONE, CONTRIBUTING
  TO THE KNOWLEDGE BASE OF PHYSICAL THERAPY?

 WAS IT CLEARLY WRITTEN, SO THAT THE CONTENT WAS
  EASILY ACCESSIBLE TO THE READER?

 IS THE REPORT SCIENTIFIC AND OBJECTIVE BOTH IN THE
  WAY IN WHICH IT WAS CONDUCTED AS WELL AS THE WA
  IT WAS ANALYZED AND WRITTEN UP?

 HAS THE RESEARCH PROJECT ADVANCED PHYSICAL
  THERAPY IN ANY WAY?
CHECKLIST : TO START AND THEN
CONTINUE READING AN ARTICLE
 IS THE ARTICLE OF INTEREST TO YOU?
 TITLE / ABSTRACT
   – DOES IT ADEQUATELY DESCRIBE THE
     RESEARCH AND IT’S FINDINGS?
 CONCLUSION
  – DOES THE INFORMATION IN THE CONCLUSION
    MATCH THE INFORMATION IN THE
    ABSTRACT?
 IF “NO”, STOP NOW !
CHECKLIST : TO START AND THEN
CONTINUE READING AN ARTICLE
 WHY WAS THE STUDY DONE?
 BACKGROUND / INTRODUCTION
  – ARE YOU CONVINCED THAT IT IS CLINICALLY
    IMPORTANT ( PATIENT CARE , MORBIDITY,
    HEALTH ECONOMICS ETC)
  – IS THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY CLEARLY
    STATED
  – IS THE WORK CAREFULLY REFERENCED TO
    OTHER RECENT WORK?
 IF “NO”, STOP NOW!
CHECKLIST : TO START AND THEN
CONTINUE READING AN ARTICLE
 CAN YOU READILY DETERMINE THE
    HIERARCHY LEVEL(STUDY TYPE)?
   TITLE/ ABSTRACT / METHOD
   IF “NO”, STOP NOW!
   HOW WELL WAS THE STUDY CONDUCTED?
    (EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL VALIDITY)
     – WHO WAS STUDIED?
     – HOW ERE THE SUBJECTS RECRUITED?
     – WHAT WERE THEIR DIAGNOSTIC CRITERIA?
     – WHAT MEASUREMENT WERE TAKEN?
     – CAN YOU BELIEVE (RELIABLE / VALID ETC)?
     – WHAT STATISTICAL TESTS WERE DONE?
   IF “NO”, STOP NOW!
CHECKLIST : TO START AND THEN
CONTINUE READING AN ARTICLE
 WHAT WERE THE STUDY’S FINDINGS?
 RESULTS
 Are the tables/ graphs explained adequately in the
  text?
 Are the explanations logical?
 Do the results fulfill the study purpose?
 Does the presentation of the results make sense to
  you?
 Do you understand them?
 If “NO”, stop now!
CHECKLIST : TO START AND THEN
CONTINUE READING AN ARTICLE
 WHAT ARE THE IMPLICATIONS?
 DISCUSSIONS / CONCLUSIONS /
 ABSTRACT
  – ARE THE FINDINGS WELL EXPLAINED?
  – DOES THE AUTHOR’S INTERPRETATION
    MATCH YOUR INTERPRETATION OF THE
    RESULTS SECTION?
  – ARE THE FINDINGS IMPORTANT?
  – ARE THEY GENERALISABLE TO YOUR
    PRACTICE?
  – DO THEY ADD SOMETHING TO HEALTH CARE?
 IF “NO”, STOP NOW !
 PART OF THE FUN OF LEARNING
 ABOUT LITERATURE SEARCHING IS
 GETTING IT WRONG…….
  FREE ACCESS WEB SITES
• http://www.cebp.nl/index.php?ID=94
• www.doaj.com
• www.biomedcentral.com


BOOLEAN METHOD:
AND – BOTH TOPICS ARE INCLUDED
OR - EITHER OF THE TOPICS
NOT - EXCLUDED
SOURCES
 CURIE; CLINICAL RESEARCH, 1977
 RESEARCH FOR
  PHYSIOTHERAPIST,1995
 SANCHEZ ET AL; MANUAL FOR
  MEDICAL AND HEALTH RESEARCH,
  2002
              SEAT WORK
• USING THE P.I.C.O. METHOD ALL WILL HAVE AN
  HOUR TO ELECTRONICALLY SEARCH FOR
  RELEVANT RESEARCH ARTICLES REGARDING
  ONE’S RESEARCH PROBLEM

• MINIMUM OF FOUR RESEARCH ARTICLES ARE TO
  BE SENT

• SEND A PDF format TO ___________@yahoo.com
• & TO YOUR OWN EMAIL ADDRESS


• DEADLINE: JUNE 28, 2007 AT 12 NOON

								
To top