Review of Literature Template

In this course, we are doing a Narrative Review of Literature. This is an objective, critical summary of the peer reviewed, scholarly literature related to your evidence-based question. The writer is showing the reader that they understand the literature on the topic and is presenting just enough information so the reader can be familiar with the research. The goal is to have a non-biased conversation with the reader about the current literature on a topic that reflects your research purpose.

In your literature review, you will have three components: 1) introduction paragraph to the the literature review, 2) main body, and 2) final paragraph to the literature review. For this assignment, please complete the three components. 

Separate from the beginning of your review of literature, state your research question.  Your instructor cannot give feedback to this assignment without your research question. Next, compete the three components of the Literature Review. 

Include TWO primary, peer-reviewed studies to include in this review of literature.  NOTE: The final paper will include five articles. One can be a meta-analysis or systematic review. 

Three Components of a Literature Review

1. Introduction Paragraph

You will begin with a short and concise introduction paragraph.  This paragraph will summarize your findings.  In other words, you will quickly tell the reader what to expect in your Review of Literature.  As with any paragraph, start with a strong introduction sentence.  For your final paper, the introduction should not be long, but at least three sentences.  In italics is an example from a past student.  Note the use of multiple articles in parenthesis.  This is effective!

The Review of Literature exposes general agreement between authors regarding the high incidence of false positive (nuisance) alarms and the associated prevalence of AF (Graham & Cvach, 2010; Peterson & Costanzo, 2016).  In fact, non-clinically significant CT alarms account for the majority of those recorded, contributing to actual and nurse-perceived increases in unit-noise levels (Atzema et al., 2006; Gazarian, 2013; Srinvasa, Mankoo, & Kerr, 2017). Nonetheless, much has been recommended in regard to AF reduction, largely within two broad categories: those concerning the use of patient specific parameters and explicitly defined indications for CT (Alsaad et al., 2017; Graham & Cvach, 2010; Srinvasa et al., 2017), and those related to the physical management of CT systems or equipment (Healthcare Technology Safety Institute, 2012; Cvach et al., 2013)

2. Main Body

You will be summarizing the literature. In other words, you are translating the information from your literature matrix into your review.  Each paragraph after your introduction paragraph will consist of one article that directly applies to your thesis/research question/purpose statement.  As needed, it is fine to extend that summary to another paragraph.  You decide if the information is relevant and needs an extra paragraph.  (Be aware of the page lengths for each section of the final paper).

Start by writing a summary of each study that you want to use in you Review of Literature. See below what each study should include. Once you have written a summary of each study, consider the “logical order” of how you want to present the literature.  Gently guide the reader from one study to the next.  Do not present contested literature first.  You may want to provide a general summary of the literature first, and then move into more complex and perhaps more contested literature.  Pay attention to transition words and “signposts” from on paragraph to another. These words create a fluidity from one paragraph/one study to another, so the review reads like a conversation.  You can use sub-headers to help the reader understand themes that you discovered in the literature.  As always, have the reader in mind as your write.  How do you want to guide your reader through the Review of Literature?

Here is what each study/paragraph should include:

1. Author(s) and year using APA
2. Type of study I.e. quantitative; qualitative; retrospective; grounded theory; thematic analysis; cohort study; RCT; etc. 
3. Indicate the number of participants, as needed and applicable
4. Brief description of what the study measured or showed
5. Identify key statistics and/or data that relates to your research question
6. Note limitations and/or weaknesses in the studies

In italics is an example from a previous student:

Kamboj et. al. (2015) performed a multiphase prospective study within a 470-bed tertiary medical center in New York City consisting of a 25-bed transplant ward, a 43-bed leukemia-lymphoma ward, and a 20-bed mixed medical surgical intensive care unit. The amount of CLABSIs and blood culture contamination rates were measured before and after implementation of the disinfection caps. A 34% decrease in hospital wide CLABSI resulted after implementation of this intervention (p. 1406). Blood culture contamination rates decreased by 63% in high risk units and 51% in the general oncology units after implementation of the disinfectant caps (p. 1407). As in the study above, one limitation this study highlighted was the fact that it was not a randomized controlled study design. Also, Kamboj et. al. (2015) did not record the causes of internal contamination of the catheter hub (p. 1407).

Here is another student example in italics. Note her transition from one paragraph to another.

Sarakatsianou et al. (2013) explored the effect that pre-emptive pregabalin had on postoperative pain and morphine consumption after elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy, dividing 50 patients undergoing this surgery into two groups.  Sarakatisianou et al. (2013) gave the intervention group pregabalin at night before the surgery and 1 hr preoperatively, and the other group received placebo at the same times.  Compared to the placebo group, the pregabalin group showed considerably lower postoperative pain and morphine consumption; 25% of the pregabalin group did not use additional morphine from the patient-controlled analgesia pump throughout the first 24-hr postoperative period (Sarakatsianou et al., 2013, p. 2508).  In this study, pregabalin-related side effects such as sedation, blurred vision and dizziness were reviewed as well as opioid-related side effects.  The two groups showed similar occurrences of adverse effects, except for higher dizziness in the pregabalin group.  Unfortunately, this study has a small sample size, and its participants were located in a single region in Greece; the researchers also only concentrated on one procedure. 

 Lastly, Lam et al.  (2015) evaluated the efficacy of pregabalin in reducing acute postoperative pain for various surgical categories, reviewing 74 studies from 1,700 publications as part of a meta-analysis.  Data was analyzed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software (version 2.2.064, Englewood, NJ).  This study revealed that pregabalin reduced pain scores at 2 hr postoperatively in all categories (cardiothoracic, ENT, gynecologic, laparoscope cholecystectomy, orthopedic, and spine), and that is also led to decreased 24-hr morphine consumption.  This study proved that various pregabalin regimens in terms of time, dosage, and route equally decreases pain scores, opioid-consumption, and length of hospital stays across various populations.  The limitation of this study was the authors’ usage of clinically heterogeneous studies in its meta-analysis.  Lam et al. (2015) thus may have included inconsistent sample sizes, procedures, measurement methods, and pregabalin administration protocols, making an objective assessment difficult to obtain.

3. Final paragraph

When you have completed the “body” of your review, you are ready to write the final paragraph. As with the introduction paragraph of the Review of Literature, attempt to be brief and concise.  This paragraph should include a summary sentence or two, an evaluation of the review content, and conclusion. You are now adding to the content of the Introduction, but with a more developed understanding of the literature. You are reminding the reader of the key findings and references in the review that relate directly to your thesis statement. What can you leave your reader with that will also transition them into your Argument section?

Here is an example of a concluding paragraph:

All these academic publications bring in comprehensive viewpoints, as their authors explored the same topic through many surgical procedures.  Although many researchers have tested perioperative pregabalin with various dosages, schedules, and procedures, all reached the same result.  The consensus was that perioperative pregabalin administration decreased the pain scores, total opioid consumption, and opioid-related side effects.