Clicking on the category to the right ‘How to conduct a literature review’ does bring up all blog posts related to doing a lit review, but there were getting to be too many to keep track of the order.
So this is just a menu of all the blog posts related to writing a literature review, and also EBP in general, so they are in some kind of order and all in one place.
Conducting a literature review:
Conducting a literature review: evaluating the quality of research methods used in an article “Comparison of a traditional and non-traditional residential care facility for persons living with dementia and the impact of the environment on occupational engagement” by Richards et al. (2015)
Conducting a literature review: Quality reviewing a research article “Strategies used by older women with intellectual disability to create and maintain their social networks: An exploratory qualitative study” by Mackenzie & White (2015)
This article investigated uses of the term “occupational perspective” in order to clarify a standard definition for use in occupational science. This should make it easier to apply occupational science research findings in practice, the authors argue. In the end they came up with
“a way of looking at or thinking about human doing”
What is an occupational perspective then? According to the authors it’s not an occupational therapy perspective, since this term was one of the exclusion criteria in the Method section. The authors describe in the Findings the term as being used in relation to employment until the 90s when it became associated with Occupational Therapy and Occupational Science. Research investigating it is mainly qualitative suggesting it is something abstract perhaps also explaining why there were so many different interpretations of the term in the articles Njelesani et al (2014) shortlisted. The research on occupational perspective covered a wide variety of client populations indicating it’s a concept that applies to all people with disabilities/illness.
Questions can be created to answer a question in practice, or as an aim for research, so you must be clear which goal you are aiming for!
For both, you must first think of the question in narrative format, that describes the purpose and aim of your review.Then you need to break down the narrative question (using PICOT, SPICE, ECLIPSE or SPIDER tools) so you can identify each concept that needs to be searched for. To create a good research question, there are different tools you can use as a guide to identify the different concepts your question is made up of. Each of them is best suited to a different type of aim and question:
PICOT tool (Riva et al 2012) for clinical quantitative diagnosis-type questions, where there are two well-defined alternatives you are comparing. Eg. Does medication A more effectively reduce glaucoma in adults aged over 70 than medication B?
SPICE tool (Booth 2004, 2006) for intervention qualitative evidence-type questions, especially where there’s policy or practical implications to consider,
such as whether a policy/intervention has improved patient health or not.
Eg. Do hip fracture patients who stay in hospital for over four days recover more quickly on wards where staff have completed a training course in compassionate care?
ECLIPSE tool (Wildridge & Bell 2002) for health service questions, especially where exploring relevant information rather than comparing two options. Eg. Has the new advertising campaign run by the Stop Smoking Service resulted in increased smoking cessation amongst smokers as reported by GPs ?
SPIDER tool (Cooke et al 2012) for qualitative-type questions, focusing on study design and samples more than interventions. Eg What are young parents’ experiences of attending antenatal education?
Examples of questions produced from these tools can be found here. Fink (1998) asserts that a good search will attempt to use MeSH terms (Medical Subject Headings), which are a bit like using a thesaurus to find similar words so you can ensure you’re not missing out anything in your search because someone else calls it by a different name!
Searching for the evidence
Lots of different information sources are available to OTs when they are searching for evidence to guide their Evidence Based Practice. The different types each have different levels of usefulness related to patient care.
Some example sources and their uses are:
- Guidelines – help OTs to make decisions quickly as you do not need to search and review literature yourself. Someone eg NICE has done this (plus taken into account the cost/benefit) already for you.
- Protocols – defined steps or rules used to describe the process for a particular treatment or assessment. Often specific to local contexts; stricter and hold more weight legally than a guideline.
- Blogs – useful to understand public opinion around a certain issue; can read a wide range of opinions and see what evidence is used to back each up (or question whether any has!). Is this where patients have researched healthcare in the absence of journal access, and does this explain their viewpoints?. Some professional organisations also have blogs, such as this BMJ evidence based nursing blog.
- Theories – explanations of phenomena. They can be tested to see if they work in practice via research hypotheses, so in this way evidence could prove or disprove theory.