Chapter 2 - Literature Search and Research Question Development

Question 1

What is a literature review?

Answer 1

A summary and synthesis of published information on a subject area. The main goal is to familiarize yourself with what is already known about a topic and to identify gaps that justify your study.

Question 2

What is a research gap?

Answer 2

What exist in the literature also implicitly identifies what does not exist among studies on your topic. From searching the literature, you identified a gap and can narrow your research focus.

Question 3

What is a systematic review?

Answer 3

A systematic review involves collecting and analyzing all evidence that answers a specific question. This includes a comprehensive and exhaustive search of the literature and critical analysis (not just a summary like in a basic review) of the search results.

The goal of the review is to provide an evidence-based answer to a very specific research question.

Question 4

What guides exist for systematic reviews?

Answer 4

1. Cochrane Review

2) PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses)

Question 5

What is a meta-analysis?

Answer 5

A meta-analyses combines the quantitative results of a number of different studies into one report to create a single, more precise, and robust estimate of effect.

Data from individual studies are combined to reach new statistical conclusions. These conclusions are statistically stronger than the individual studies because combining results also increases the number of diversity of the study population.

Question 6

What is a scoping review?

Answer 6

A scoping review is a preliminary assessment of potential size and scope of available data. These reviews are most suited for a body of literature that is complex or heterogeneous and that would not be well suited for a systematic review.

Scoping reviews are useful for assessing emerging evidence when it is still unclear what other, more specific research questions con be posed.

Can be conducted prior to a systematic review.

Question 7

What is a review of reviews?

Answer 7

This type of review combines relevant data from systematic reviews and meta-analyses to inform recommendations within a specific topic instead of synthesizing studies.

Question 8

What is journal impact factor?

Answer 8

Because journals vary in quality, researchers look to a quality-rating score.

The impact factor is the average yearly number of citations of recent research from that journal within the past 2 years.

Question 9

What is grey literature?

Answer 9

Grey literature is a term that describes documents produced for purposes other than commercial publication (i.e. academic journals).

Conference abstracts, government reports, or industry documents.

One reason searching grey literature is important is because it is one way to address publication bias.

Question 10

What is publication bias?

Answer 10

Studies with positive, significant results are more likely to be published in academic journals compared with those having negative or no results.

Question 11

What are some examples of Public Health Journals?

Answer 11

1. The Lancet Public Health
2. Annual Review in Public Health
3. Tobacco Control
4. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity
5. American Journal of Preventive Medicine
6. American Journal of Public Health
7. Journal of Adolescent Health

Question 12

What steps should you follow when conducting a literature review?

Answer 12

1. Get a general overview of the topic
2. Select search terms
3. Select appropriate databases
4. Apply search strategies - (boolean operators, truncation)
5. Review your results
6. Outline and write your review

Question 13

What are some common literature databases used for public health research?

Answer 13

1. PubMed
2. CINAHL/EBSCO
3. ERIC
4. Academic Search Complete/EBSCO
5. PsychINFO

Question 14

What is truncation?

Answer 14

A database search strategy to find all words that come from the same stem word.

For example: SCHOOL* finds school, schools, schooled, schooling, and so on.

Question 15

What should you include in your review summary table?

Answer 15

1. Citation
2. Research Question/ Study Aims
3. Study design and sample
4. Analysis
5. Main Results
6. Limitations
7. Other Notes

Question 16

What should you consider when developing a research question?

Answer 16

1. The research purpose can affect how you write your question. If you are conducting an exploratory study your question would be very different from one used in an evaluation study.
2. It is also important the RQ is not to broad.
3. Develop a measurable research question. Make sure what you propose in your research question is feasible.

Question 17

What should you consider when reading articles?

Answer 17

1. What were the research aim?
2. How was the aim achieved?
3. What were the limitations to the study?
4. What are the lessons learned from the study?
5. What might you do differently?
6. What do authors recommend for future study?
7. How could you build on this work?

Question 18

What is plagiarism?

Answer 18

Plagiarism refers to using the work of another without crediting the original source. It is a form of cheating that can result in negative consequences.

Question 19

What is common knowledge?

Answer 19

Information most people know. You do not have to cite information any information considered common knowledge.

Question 20

What style of references do many public health researchers use?

Answer 20

American Medical Association, sequential superscript numbers are used for in-text citation.

The American Journal of Public Health adheres to AMA style

Question 21

What are some popular citation softwares?

Answer 21

1. Endnote
2. Mendeley
3. Refworks
4. Zotero

Question 22

Why study research?

Answer 22

To make sure we have the best science to improve health

Question 23

What’s wrong with research or what’s wrong with people’s interpretation of research: Major conceptual things

Answer 23

1. The belief that one research design is always the best -all have good and bad points
2. Over interpretation of your data (e.g. “proved” or “caused”
3. The belief that more of the same is an improvement in knowledge gain
4. Insignificant research questions -> best design in the world won’t help bad ideas
5. No theoretical foundation
6. Failing to consider cultural differences

Question 24

What is the outline of the scientific paper?

Answer 24

IMRaD is a general outline, details will differ based on 1) discipline of research (ex epi vs psych), 2) journal 3) type of article (brief, review or regular or meta-analysis, regular article, commentary)

Abstracts: structured vs unstructured

1) Introduction 2) Methods 3) Results 4) Discussion

Question 25

What is included in the Introduction?

Answer 25

Why is the study important
How does it improve and/or extend past work
End with objective/hypotheses

Question 26

What is included in the methods?

Answer 26

Who were the participants, who was approached, who consented
Basic demographics
How were they consented? Was IRB approval obtained?
Eligibility vs exclusion criteria
How recruited
What analyses you used and why

Question 27

What is included in the results?

Answer 27

Just the facts, interpretation should be left for the discussion
Appropriate use of tables/charts/graphs
Tables should be able to 1) stand alone 2) not repeat text results

Question 28

What is included in the discussion?

Answer 28

Review the point of the paper and how the findings match or don’t match with the hypothesis
Compare to previous literature (How does it supplement, extend or contradict)
Discuss limitations and discount them
Provide some speculation about what the findings may mean
Discuss future directions

Question 29

What are some tips for identifying a bad paper and/ or bad study

Answer 29

1. The study did not address an important issue
2. Study lacked originality
3. Question posed was not actually tested
4. In intervention studies, no control group
5. Poor writing - bad grammar, too much jargon, too many abbreviations, too many footnotes, etc
6. Conflict of interest with authors
7. Limited details in provided in write-ups
8. Bad methods

Question 30

What are some bad methods ?

Answer 30

Wrong analyses
Assumptions violated
Sample size too small 
Recruiting technique poor 
Failure to discuss attrition for EACH follow-up in longitudinal samples
Wrong study design

Question 31

What should you consider when making the assumptions of causation?

Answer 31

Is there evidence from true experiments in humans?
Is the assertion strong - how can you tell?
Is the association consistent across studies
Is temporal relation correct
Is there a dose-response gradient
Does the association make epidemiological sense
Is the association specific
Is there a biologic basis

Question 32

What are some of the ways some people manipulate results?

Answer 32

1. Going on fishing expeditions both in terms of finding the test that works for you. Throwing variables in an analysis just because you have them available: theory is good!
2. Ignore differences between study completers and non-completers
3. Tossing out outliers, regardless of the reason
4. Ignoring the value of confidence intervals if they make your results look bad

Question 33

Why is it important to review papers?

Answer 33

1. Service to profession

2. Will make you stronger as a writer

Question 34

How do you write a review paper?

Answer 34

Reviews should be the three C’s
Concrete - where and how the paper went astray
Constructive, not destructive
Considerate - no belittling, regardless of how bad
Point out the strengths of the paper
Provide a summary of the paper - this way the author knows you got the point
Suggestions for improving tables or deleting tables
Rank your concerns (This is big vs these are minor)
Number your concerns and link to text
No need to point out editing/style things unless it impedes your reading of the work.
Discuss objective and not subjective issues