Research methods Assignment help

What is Research methodology?

For any student looking for dissertation help, coming up with a suitable research method is a crucial part toward carrying out of practical research. The research method targets at justifying how the data were collected, analysed and presented to the respective readers in a way that relates to the set research objectives. As a result, various components of research such as research methods and data collection techniques are analysed critically for their reliability hinged on the research structure. Of more importance, ethical considerations of the research are outlined to make sure that it gives reliable information and reach an eligible, informative and legitimate conclusion

Table of contents

What is Research methodology?

Table of contents

Type Of Data

Primary data

Secondary data

Research Methods- qualitative and quantitative

Qualitative Research Methods

Quantitative Research Methods

Research Philosophy

Interpretivism

Positivism

Research Methods Approach

Inductive

Quantitative Data Collection Methods

Qualitative Data Collection Methods

Case Study

Interviews

Focus Groups

Observation

Systematic analysis

Quantitative Research Ethical Considerations

Qualitative Data Analysis Techniques

Type Of Data

For any research methodology, effective data collection is very critical. There are two possible types of data. Primary data and secondary data.

Primary data

Primary data can be obtained from interviews, surveys, observations and questionnaires which have been answered by respondents. The advantages of using primary data is that they are real time and reflects what is happening at the time that the study is conducted. Furthermore, the researcher is able to make inferences from what is observed while undertaking the study and relate it to what is understood theoretically. This makes primary data highly dependable especially in places where high level of accuracy is required.

Secondary data

Secondary data can be obtained through review of publications which have been made by other researchers or scholars. The limitation of using secondary data is that they do not present the current prevailing situations in the area of study. Data is mined from published information and there is a possibility of propergating error from the previous studies. This study will embrace the use of primary data which will be collected through interviews.

Research Methods- qualitative and quantitative

Two main types of research methods methods any dissertation; qualitative and quantitative methods. Quantitative research method is employed in collection of statistical data and therefore applies inductive philosophy. On the other hand, qualitative research method is employed in collecting secondary data by employing a deductive approach.

Qualitative Research Methods

This research method does not make use of quantitative data and information to analyse phenomenon. The research method comprises an array of interpretive techniques that aims at describing, decoding, and generating meaning of certain phenomena observed in the social world. Qualitative rresearch methods designed to help the research team understand people and the social and cultural setting that they dwell in. Some of the benefits of employing the qualitative research method include the fact that it grants the researchers a detailed description of the opinions, feelings, and experiences of the participant and can help to interpret them into actions. However, Qualitative rresearch method also faces various limitations, such as low credibility associated with the results garnered using this approach, and it is prone to bias since it takes into account the perception and opinions of the people.

Quantitative Research Methods

Quantitative research method entails deductive emphasis that comprises a very structured research method, which involves a move to data from theory as well as the implementation of controls which confirm the validation of such information. It is objective. Quantitative research method collects a very small and at times a superficial set of data as compared to the qualitative method of study. Moreover, the outcomes are limited since they provide mathematical accounts rather than detailed narrative. As a result, Quantitative research method offer a less elaborate explanation of an individual’s perception. Quantitative research method also involves preset answers that primarily do not reflect the view of individuals regarding a specific subject. This research method includes sources reliable and hard facts on a particular topic and takes into account the design and the shape of an item.

Research Philosophy

According to the research onion framework, analysis of research method starts with the outermost circle as we go insider. Therefore, we start our critical analysis of the research philosophy. The philosophy is important in this research because it analyses the key beliefs of the research. That is how the research collects, analyses and uses its data so that it is used only for the research and to come up with the appropriate information which can help in understanding the relationship between leadership and staff performance in an organization. There are two types of research philosophies that include positivism and interpretivism. Notably, these two are complete mirror of each other. While positivism is concerned with testing of the null hypothesis in quantitative research, interpretivism is more focused in interpreting narratives.

Interpretivism

The philosophy is based on the principle that researchers have a specific role which is observing the social world. The research team is required to interpret various elements within the topic being investigated in an attempt to develop a better understanding of the social constructs of the society. Therefore, interpretivism philosophy tends to integrate human interest into the research. The interpretive researchers assume that access to reality, which can either be given or socially constructed, is only through social constructions such as shared meaning, instruments, consciousness, and language. The philosophy is more inclined towards qualitative as compared to quantitative analysis since it is based on the perception of the participants.

Positivism

This concept informs the study by answering questions related to perceptions, attitude, opinions and ideas about the studied phenomenon, that is a bonus as a motivation factor. Positivism philosophy is based on the idea that science is the best way to learn the truth. Positivism, therefore, adheres to the view that factual information can be obtained through observation or measurement. The researcher needs to concentrate on the facts by collecting, analyzing and interpreting the data. Additionally, positivism as a philosophy view that knowledge stems from human experience that comprises discrete and observable elements that can be determined in a regular manner . This concept further relies on existing theory to develop a hypothesis to be studied. The positivist philosophy will, therefore, help in explaining the effect of bonuses on managers which can help in making a prediction.

The positivism approach is designed to gather information in inform of numeric data, thus rely on logic and does not rely on the bias interpretation of the researcher.This fits well with the current study since data concerning the effect of bonuses on minor managers will be collected using a structured questionnaire. The quantitative design in the positivist approach helps in collecting data that are more precise and objective, thus can be easily analyzed using statistical tools. Positivism relies on scientific evidence of research like statistics to reveal the nature of relationship between variables under study.

Critics of positivism approach to scientific research methods have argued that the methodology is not valid because it is not scientific. Although the arguments have been made, researchers have found this philosophy to be very important in conducting research in social sciences that involve physical or natural phenomena. Others reason that positivists approach is not suitable for conducting studies in physical sciences and should be restricted to social sciences with others still insisting that there are many un research areas in the philosophy and once studied can be able to lead to further revelations.

Research Methods Approach

The deductive and inductive processes are the most common research method approaches with the former used in quantitative research methods and the inactive approach in qualitative research method. Gathering facts becomes the basis for developing a theory, description or making laws to explain a phenomenon making laws in the inductive research approach. The choice of research approach depends on the aim of research since the observation and measurement can be used when there is either objectivity or subjectivity.

Inductive

The inductive process helps researchers to integrate information necessary to explain and expound on the phenomena under observation as well as clarify. Since the inductive research approach is mostly used when there is rich and in-depth information, it is useful to develop generalizations from specific observations in the research. While the inductive inferences are weaker than deductive inferences and probable, they offer plausible explanations. The case for the inductive approach is that there is focus on with evidence, which helps to build theories, offer explanations, and interpretations of phenomena. The empirical observation is also useful in developing of concepts, constructs, relationship and generalizations. Describing, analyzing, interpreting, and documenting the evidence helps to obtain general conclusions from the premises. The observation of facts, their classification and analysis of these facts were considered in the inductive approach that starts from the facts and allowed to develop a generalization.

Deductive approach

The deductive approach is the proposed research design for the study. The method is usually associated with scientific investigations. It starts with the research team studying what has already been covered in the existing literature when it comes to the topic being investigated, then they read the existing theories relating to the phenomenon and then tests the hypotheses that are created from these theories (Woiceshyn & Daellenbach, 2018). Therefore, the primary intention of the approach is to determine whether a given idea or hypothesis is valid in a given circumstance.

Quantitative Data Collection Methods

  1. Survey research method
  2. correlational research method
  3. experimental research method
  4. causal-comparative research method

Qualitative Data Collection Methods

Case Study

Case studies are in-depth research methods about individual groups or certain phenomena in natural, real-life contexts. Following the previous description of case studies, it is evident that case studies in research are the most reliable research methods to release both practical and theoretical aims. Case studies provide a high level of flexibility towards investigative research objectives following diversity in study designs. Researchers adopt case studies fundamentally to analyze and solve related business questions, especially in educational research studies.

Interviews

Interviews are defined as the recorded conversations between two or more individuals. During an interview session, one individual (the interviewer) asks questions about a particular topic, while the other person (the interviewee) provides reposes to the questions. There are different research methods of conducting interviews; through structured and semi-structured interviews.

The advantage of adopting this approach is that I have total control over the order of questions and have a better response rate than mailed interviews. Nevertheless, interviews for this research will be challenging because the entire process is time-consuming, especially when trying to identify and find volunteers for the interviews. Also, informing the interviewees about the possible topics before the study can cause errors in the research. This is because the previous description of the potential discussion topics gave them ample time to think about what to say and how to answer the questions, therefore aid in the production of inconclusive results and findings.

Focus Groups

Focus groups are forms of qualitative research method whereby individuals are asked about their perceptions, opinions, beliefs, and attitudes towards a particular subject. Focus groups will be used in the study because they help derive first-hand information about student experiences using translation apps. The use of focus groups gives room for group interaction through open-ended questions and non-verbal communication, which will be a massive advantage during the study.

Observation

One of the data collections research methods that is intended to be employed in the research is observation. It entails garnering the required information from the respondents through making observations of the researched phenomenon as it happens. Some of the aspects that the technique mainly focuses on include human behavior, the application of a given phenomenon, human interactions, and verbal and non-verbal expressions. The data collection research method can be categorized under participatory study since the researcher is required to immerse himself in the context whereby the respondents are situated while recording and taking notes. Some of the advantages of employing the technique include it is a simpler data collection research method, and it tends to give more reliable information as compared to other techniques such as questionnaires or interviews. Some of the limitations these data collection research method include that some of the phenomena are not open for observation, faulty perception, and lack of reliability.

Focus groups

Another proposed data collection research method is focus groups. A focus group refers to the data collection research method that involves group interactions as a way of collecting the required information. The groups consist of a small number of people who are carefully selected to discuss a specific topic. The main reason for employing this data collection research method is since it will help in identifying and exploring the perceptions of the students and how they behave in relation to the application of the Language Translation Apps within the institutions. It will help in answering the why, what, and how questions relating to the topic being studied. The Focus groups will act as a supplementary data collection research method to validate the information garnered through observation.

Systematic analysis

A systematic literature review is an analysis of previous research. To address a particular research issue, it makes an effort to compile all available data on the subject. Before beginning the systematic literature review, the authors develop criteria for choosing whether evidence is included or rejected. By doing so, the possibility of bias is decreased and the validity of the results is increased.

 

Systematic literature review evaluations ought to:

• Explicitly define objectives and use a predictable technique;

• use a thorough systematic literature review approach to try to find all studies that satisfy the requirements;

• evaluate the veracity of the outcomes of the studies that were included in the systematic literature review;

• systematic literature review ought to summarize the findings of the research.

Quantitative Research Ethical Considerations

Ensuring data gathered is safeguarded is critical whenever research is conducted. The procedure of safeguarding this information is what entails ethics in research. Among the ethical issues considered in safeguarding gathered information is achieving and maintaining honesty. Additional factors need to be put in place to achieve ethical issues comprise of aspects like participant discretion. Establishing participant anonymity and maintaining the same is essential in information gathering since it allows for minimizing potential issues that potentially result in primary and secondary data defaming. Towards enhancing confidentiality, that of every personal detail of the participants, as well as that of the researcher, the researcher has to guarantee anonymity. In addition, the participants were informed concerning their consent before participating. Informing participants was equally important since it allowed them to comprehend related risks that had the possibility of being involved within the research. Lastly, all crucial approvals and licenses was sought and any fee required was given out before the onset of this research. Seeking approval facilitated in the researcher the essential justification for the need of the study and ensured the appropriate research protocols were adhered when carrying out the research

Qualitative Data Analysis Technique

Thematic analysis

A thematic analysis will be used to analyze data from the interviews. Thematic analysis is the qualitative research method of data analysis whereby the data collected to identify common themes, topics, ideas and patterns. Through data elucidations, identification of the regularly repeated words and phrases from the Interviews and then analyze each transcript from the interviews independently. The participants’ world views from the semi-structured interviews will make sense when used to strategically develop informative relationships with interview transcripts and. Thereafter, the development of themes from the transcripts will follow after, then identify differences and contradictions in those themes. I chose this data analysis technique because it is flexible and can be modified for other further studies. Besides, thematic analysis is easy to use than other data analysis strategies. However, the strategy lacks substantial literature compared to strategies such as ethnography and grounded theories. Although this is a flexible data analysis strategy, it has been proven that this flexibility can result in inconsistency during theme development.

Constant analysis

Constant comparison is a focus group analysis strategy used to analyze focus groups interviews data by interpreting information collected and comparing it with existing findings on the topic. At first, the researcher will conduct an open coding where he will combine all information into smaller chunks. Then, group these codes into different categories and finally identify major identifiable themes from focus groups. I will proceed with this strategy because it ensures that I will begin with using raw data through which a substantive theory will develop to analyze data. However, the use of this data analysis is that is time-consuming because data needed to be transcribed and grouped before being analyzed.

Narrative analysis

Narrative analysis is the proposed data analysis technique that will be employed to deduct conclusions from the information garnered. The method entails listening to the people’s explanations and digging into what that implies. Through listening to people’s insights and observing as they conduct their daily activities, a researcher can be able to understand the ways in which the participants perceive reality and cope with it. This technique is appropriate for application in academic literature since it helps in assessing the perception of the participants in relation to a given topic which enhances the application of the subjective method in research.

 

SAMPLING METHODS

This refers to a statistical procedure which is concerned with selection of individual observation in a study. It enables the researcher to make statistical inferences in the study population. A sample refers to part of the population that represents the characteristics of the entire population. There are various types of sampling methods which are used in studies. The most common methods of sampling include random sampling simple random sampling, systematic random sampling and stratified random sampling

Simple random sampling technique

Simple random sampling technique is a pure straight forward sampling strategy which is used to obtain samples in a study. It is one of the most commonly used methods in statistics as it offers equal chance to the individuals in a population for observation. Simple random sampling can be done by assigning all the individuals in a population numbers and then generating random numbers to select the individuals to be used as a sample. The advantage of this method is that it provides no room for biasness as compared to other sampling methods. It is easy to generalize the results from a study conducted by random sampling due to the distribution. It is necessary to assume that the population that you are working with is homogeneous and assign them numbers that can be used for randomization. There are many programs which are currently used in generating random numbers. The random numbers will assign positions to the selected samples without bias making them more representative of the population in question.

Disadvantages of simple random sampling technique may include the costs involved while listing or numbering the potential respondents in a population (Heckathorn., 1997). This can be really time consuming especially in populations where very large numbers are involved. Although large samples are preferred, having such may be a challenge when large numbers are involved. The other disadvantage is that not all populations which are being studied are homogeneous. Taking an assumption that the population is homogeneous may ignore very important differences that could have serious impacts on the study. For example, among human population, there are adults and children, male and female or even different races or people living in different environments. The differences would contribute to variation. Additionally, it is not good where face to face interactions are desired in studies that cover large geographic areas.

Systematic random sampling

Systematic random sampling is slightly different from simple random sampling. In the systematic sampling, every Nth individual is selected to be included in the sample (Kothari, 2004). The method requires that the individuals in a population are assigned positions and it is decided a priori the positions to be selected and these forms the samples in the population. It is done by determining the sampling fraction which is obtained by dividing the actual sample size by the total population. The sampling fraction becomes the guide for conducting systematic sampling. In this method, the first sample has to be chosen in a random manner while the succeeding samples are chosen following the order which is decided like say the 3rd, 4th or even 5th item (Cooper et al., 2006). The advantages of this method is that if it is done correctly, it will give results which is an approximation of the simple random sampling. It is both an efficient and a cost-effective method of sampling. It is suitable for collecting information from geographically diverse population where face to face contact is not necessary. The main disadvantage is that it can only be applied when a list of the entire population is available. Populations with periodic patterns may not be suitable for this approach as it will lead to biasness.

Stratified random sampling

Stratified random sampling is one of the probability sampling methods which involves dividing the population into groups also referred to as strata (Johnson and Onwuegbuzie, 2004). The groups can either be proportionate or disproportionate. In order to use this method, the researcher or the researchers have to identify relevant stratums and ensure their actual representation in the sample. Each of the subjects in the stratum have to be identified with unique numbers. It is important to select each of the unique numbers in each of the strata and ensure that they form part of the sample.

Purposive sampling technique

The purposive sampling technique utilized in the research was snowballing sampling technique. The technique (snowball) is where the participants of the study recruits others for a study or test (p. 62). Snowball sampling, which is a non-probability sampling approach, is used where finding potential respondents is difficult. With no randomized sampling involved, the research uses the researcher’s judgment to select participants. In snowball sampling, the following two steps are critical, first, identifies potential subjects from a population and in majority of cases, only one or two are initially found. Two, asks the identified potential subjects to recruit others. However, participants are made aware they do not have to provide any other names. Two critical advantages sets apart snowball sampling making it appropriate to use. One, it makes possible for research to be conducted where it would be otherwise impossible to take place due to lack of respondents. Two, it assists in helping the researcher discover characteristics of a population the researcher hardly knew it existed.

 

Systematic Literature Review Assignment Help

What is a systematic literature review?

A systematic literature review is an analysis of previous research. To address a particular research issue, it makes an effort to compile all available data on the subject. Before beginning the systematic literature review, the authors develop criteria for choosing whether evidence is included or rejected. By doing so, the possibility of bias is decreased and the validity of the results is increased.

 

Systematic literature review evaluations ought to:

• Explicitly define objectives and use a predictable technique;

• use a thorough systematic literature review approach to try to find all studies that satisfy the requirements;

• evaluate the veracity of the outcomes of the studies that were included in the systematic literature review;

• systematic literature review ought to summarize the findings of the research.

Highlights

Systematic Literature Review Assignment Help

What is a systematic literature review?

Highlights

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic literature review reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)

Development of PRISMA

PRISMA Steps Explanation

IDENTIFICATION

SCREENING

ELIGIBILITY

INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION

Classical Example

Search methods

Search outcome

References

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic literature review reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)

In order to make sure a systematic literature review is beneficial to readers, writers should write a clear, thorough, and accurate description of the reasons the review was conducted, everything they did (including how materials were searched and chosen), and what they discovered (such as characteristics of contributing studies and results of meta-analyses). This may be done using The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic literature review Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, which was issued in 2009 and was created to assist systematic literature review researchers in explicitly documenting why the study was performed, whatever the authors performed, as well as what they discovered.

PRISMA 2020 implementation might be advantageous for several parties. Readers may evaluate the applicability of the methodologies and, consequently, the veracity of the conclusions, thanks to comprehensive reporting. Healthcare professionals and policy makers can assess the relevance of the findings to their environment by presenting and summarizing the features of the systematic literature review that contributed to the synthesis. Policy makers, managers, and other decision makers should be assisted in developing suitable practice guidelines or policy by describing the degree of certainty in the body of evidence supporting a result and the consequences of findings. The inclusion of systematic literature review reviews in overviews (of systematic literature review reviews) and guidelines, as well as complete reporting of all PRISMA 2020 components, enable replication and review updates, allowing teams to capitalize on previously completed work and reduce research waste.

Development of PRISMA

29 review authors, methodologists, physicians, medical editors, and consumers collaborated to create the PRISMA declaration. 12 In 2005, they took part in a three-day meeting and engaged in a lot of post-meeting email communication. A four-phase flow diagram was created using a consensus approach that, if feasible, was influenced by evidence (fig 1 and 2) The checklist contained items considered necessary for transparent reporting of a systematic literature review. QUOROM’s initial flow diagram was also adjusted to display the numbers of designated records, omitted publications, and included studies.

Figure 1: Four-phase flow diagram

Fig 2:  Flow of information through the different phases of a systematic literature review review

PRISMA Steps Explanation

IDENTIFICATION

Step 1: Doing the Database Search Perform a separate search for each database using ALL of your search keywords, any MeSH or other topic headings, truncation (such as hemipleg*), and/or wildcards (such as sul?ur). Specify the scope (including years of search, English language only, et cetera). You should have a final number of entries or publications for each database once you have merged all of your search phrases and applied any necessary limitations. Fill out the PRISMA flow chart’s top left box with this data. Databases (n=) should be followed by the total number of aggregated results from all databases (including duplicates). Various systematic literature review researchers additionally include notations in the box indicating the number of outcomes from each database search, such as Pubmed (n=335) and Embase.

NOTE: When you import a file, certain citation managers automatically delete duplicates.  Before any duplicates are eliminated, ensure  to record the number of articles from your database searches.

 

Records identified from databases or registers

 

SCREENING

Step 2: Remove All Duplicates You must eliminate any articles that appear more than once in your results to prevent reviewing duplicate content. The duplicates may be removed by exporting the whole list of articles from each database to a citation manager like EndNote, Sciwheel, Zotero, or Mendeley (containing the citations and abstract in the file). The duplicated articles found in Covidence that you are utilizing for the evaluation should as well be included to the citation manager number. In the second field of your PRISMA template, enter the quantity of entries that were eliminated as duplicates. You should also add that amount if you are using automated tools to assess the value of the citations in your findings.

Records removed before screening: duplicates, automation tool exclusions, or other reasons

NOTE: If you use Covidence to filter your articles, you may paste the numbers from the PRISMA diagram into the fields shown below in your Covidence review. You must keep count of the number of results from each database manually because Covidence does not contain that information.

Step 3: Records Screened- Title/Abstract Screening Add the number of articles you plan to filter as the following step. Subtracting the number from the duplicates eliminated box, this number should equal the number of records that were found.

Number of records screened in Title/Abstract level

 

Step 4: Records Excluded- Title/Abstract Screening Search the article titles and abstracts for any that are pertinent to your study subject. Include any publications that seem to support your effort to respond to your systematic literature review subject. In the “Records excluded” box to the right, note the number of publications that were excluded as a result of title/abstract screening. Exclusion justifications are optional at this stage but they may be required after full text screening.

Records excluded after title & abstract screening

 

Step 5: Reports Sought for Retrieval This refers to the total number of publications obtained during preparation for full text analysis. The number sought for retrieval is calculated by deducting the number of excluded records (Step 5) from the total number of records screened (Step 4).

Reports sought for retrieval

Step 6: Reports Not Retrieved The number of articles for which the entire text is unavailable should be listed. Before automatically rejecting items, keep in mind to use Find@UNC and Interlibrary Loan to request them and determine whether they can be obtained from other libraries.

Reports not retrived

ELIGIBILITY

Step 7: Reports Assessed for Eligibility- Full Text Screening  The number of reports that were requested for recovery in step 6 less the number of reports that were not recovered should equal this (Step 7). To determine if these publications should be included in the systematic literature review, you should read the entire texts of each one.

Reports assessed for eligibility

 

INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION

Step 8: Reports Excluded All the publications that were excluded during the full-text screening step to ascertain eligibility should be entered in the “Reports excluded” box. Then, the reasons for doing so should be stated, along with the number of records omitted for each stated reason. Inappropriate patient population, improper treatment, inappropriate location, and incorrect dose are a few examples. Even if an article qualifies for more than one exclusion criterion, you should only count it once in your list.

Reports excluded, including reason for exclusion and number

 

Step 9: Included Studies The number of records rejected from consideration during the full-text eligibility evaluation (Step 9) is subtracted from the total number of articles examined for eligibility in the final step (Step 8). If necessary, this number should be combined with the outcomes of the grey literature search in the “Studies included in review” box. Unless systematic literature reviews were additionally conducted in non-database sources, the PRISMA flow diagram by far can be considered complete.

Studies included in review

 

Complete the extra procedures outlined in the following box if you have looked through other sources, such as websites for professional organizations, referenced or referencing citations, etc.

Classical Example

Example is retrieved from Lee J. (2022). Nursing home nurses’ turnover intention: A systematic literature review review. Nursing open9(1), 22–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1051

Search methods

A systematic literature review was conducted in June 2020 utilizing six electronic bibliographic resources (CINAHL, PubMed, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, RISS, and DBpia). In order to only examine publications that provided up-to-date and important information concerning the topic under discussion, the study’s time frame was restricted to run from January 2009 to January 2019. Among the terms used were variations of “nur” and “nursing home,” “residential facility,” “long term care facility,” “residential care,” “long term care environment,” and “leave” or “turnover.” Reference lists from publications on the intentions of NH nurses to quit their employment were also examined in order to find materials not included in digitized bibliographic databases.. Only systematic literature review that met the following requirements were taken into consideration for this analysis: A study needs to adhere to the following criteria in order to be eligible: The research population (organization) had to include NHs, the sample (person) had to include nurses (registered nurses [RNs] or licensed practical nurses [LPNs]), the preferred languages had to be English or Korean since there were no interpreters, and the study had to be peer-reviewed. In order to avoid biased results, articles that included unregistered nursing staff, such as CNAs (Certified Nursing Assistants), were omitted.

Search outcome

The selection of articles is shown in a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic literature review Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) diagram (Moher et al., 2009). The PRISMA criteria were used to guide the systematic literature review procedure in this investigation (see Figure 1). In all, 473 items were found in the six databases by the first systematic literature review. 109 publications were found in the first search after duplicates were eliminated. The titles and abstracts of the remaining 109 publications were then separately assessed by two reviewers (author 1, research assistant 1). There were 11 articles left after titles and abstracts were scrutinized. In order to get to a consensus, the third reviewer (research assistant number 2) and I examined the inconsistencies and concerns around screening. Two reviewers (author 1 and research assistant no. 1) examined the full-text of the remaining 11 publications to determine their eligibility using inclusion and exclusion criteria. One systematic literature reviewer (research assistant number 2) helped to clarify any discrepancies and questions about the study’s inclusion and exclusion criteria. After assessment, RNs and CNAs were used as samples in three publications, NHs and home nursing were used in one study’s setting, and a long-term care hospital was used in another systematic literature review. Six publications were finally left, and six articles pertaining to the intents of NH RNs to remain at their respective employment positions were evaluated and compiled.

References

https://www.bmj.com/content/339/bmj.b2700

Creating a PRISMA flow diagram: PRISMA 2020

https://guides.lib.unc.edu/prisma

 

Systematic Literature Review Assignment Help

Systematic Literature Review Assignment Help

What is a systematic literature review?

A systematic literature review is an analysis of previous research. To address a particular research issue, it makes an effort to compile all available data on the subject. Before beginning the systematic literature review, the authors develop criteria for choosing whether evidence is included or rejected. By doing so, the possibility of bias is decreased and the validity of the results is increased.

 

Systematic literature review evaluations ought to:

• Explicitly define objectives and use a predictable technique;

• use a thorough systematic literature review approach to try to find all studies that satisfy the requirements;

• evaluate the veracity of the outcomes of the studies that were included in the systematic literature review;

• systematic literature review ought to summarize the findings of the research.

Highlights

Systematic Literature Review Assignment Help

What is a systematic literature review?

Highlights

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic literature review reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)

Development of PRISMA

PRISMA Steps Explanation

IDENTIFICATION

SCREENING

ELIGIBILITY

INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION

Classical Example

Search methods

Search outcome

References

Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic literature review reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)

In order to make sure a systematic literature review is beneficial to readers, writers should write a clear, thorough, and accurate description of the reasons the review was conducted, everything they did (including how materials were searched and chosen), and what they discovered (such as characteristics of contributing studies and results of meta-analyses). This may be done using The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic literature review Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement, which was issued in 2009 and was created to assist systematic literature review researchers in explicitly documenting why the study was performed, whatever the authors performed, as well as what they discovered.

PRISMA 2020 implementation might be advantageous for several parties. Readers may evaluate the applicability of the methodologies and, consequently, the veracity of the conclusions, thanks to comprehensive reporting. Healthcare professionals and policy makers can assess the relevance of the findings to their environment by presenting and summarizing the features of the systematic literature review that contributed to the synthesis. Policy makers, managers, and other decision makers should be assisted in developing suitable practice guidelines or policy by describing the degree of certainty in the body of evidence supporting a result and the consequences of findings. The inclusion of systematic literature review reviews in overviews (of systematic literature review reviews) and guidelines, as well as complete reporting of all PRISMA 2020 components, enable replication and review updates, allowing teams to capitalize on previously completed work and reduce research waste.

Development of PRISMA

29 review authors, methodologists, physicians, medical editors, and consumers collaborated to create the PRISMA declaration. 12 In 2005, they took part in a three-day meeting and engaged in a lot of post-meeting email communication. A four-phase flow diagram was created using a consensus approach that, if feasible, was influenced by evidence (fig 1 and 2) The checklist contained items considered necessary for transparent reporting of a systematic literature review. QUOROM’s initial flow diagram was also adjusted to display the numbers of designated records, omitted publications, and included studies.

Figure 1: Four-phase flow diagram

Fig 2:  Flow of information through the different phases of a systematic literature review review

PRISMA Steps Explanation

IDENTIFICATION

Step 1: Doing the Database Search Perform a separate search for each database using ALL of your search keywords, any MeSH or other topic headings, truncation (such as hemipleg*), and/or wildcards (such as sul?ur). Specify the scope (including years of search, English language only, et cetera). You should have a final number of entries or publications for each database once you have merged all of your search phrases and applied any necessary limitations. Fill out the PRISMA flow chart’s top left box with this data. Databases (n=) should be followed by the total number of aggregated results from all databases (including duplicates). Various systematic literature review researchers additionally include notations in the box indicating the number of outcomes from each database search, such as Pubmed (n=335) and Embase.

NOTE: When you import a file, certain citation managers automatically delete duplicates.  Before any duplicates are eliminated, ensure  to record the number of articles from your database searches.

 

Records identified from databases or registers

 

SCREENING

Step 2: Remove All Duplicates You must eliminate any articles that appear more than once in your results to prevent reviewing duplicate content. The duplicates may be removed by exporting the whole list of articles from each database to a citation manager like EndNote, Sciwheel, Zotero, or Mendeley (containing the citations and abstract in the file). The duplicated articles found in Covidence that you are utilizing for the evaluation should as well be included to the citation manager number. In the second field of your PRISMA template, enter the quantity of entries that were eliminated as duplicates. You should also add that amount if you are using automated tools to assess the value of the citations in your findings.

Records removed before screening: duplicates, automation tool exclusions, or other reasons

NOTE: If you use Covidence to filter your articles, you may paste the numbers from the PRISMA diagram into the fields shown below in your Covidence review. You must keep count of the number of results from each database manually because Covidence does not contain that information.

Step 3: Records Screened- Title/Abstract Screening Add the number of articles you plan to filter as the following step. Subtracting the number from the duplicates eliminated box, this number should equal the number of records that were found.

Number of records screened in Title/Abstract level

 

Step 4: Records Excluded- Title/Abstract Screening Search the article titles and abstracts for any that are pertinent to your study subject. Include any publications that seem to support your effort to respond to your systematic literature review subject. In the “Records excluded” box to the right, note the number of publications that were excluded as a result of title/abstract screening. Exclusion justifications are optional at this stage but they may be required after full text screening.

Records excluded after title & abstract screening

 

Step 5: Reports Sought for Retrieval This refers to the total number of publications obtained during preparation for full text analysis. The number sought for retrieval is calculated by deducting the number of excluded records (Step 5) from the total number of records screened (Step 4).

Reports sought for retrieval

Step 6: Reports Not Retrieved The number of articles for which the entire text is unavailable should be listed. Before automatically rejecting items, keep in mind to use Find@UNC and Interlibrary Loan to request them and determine whether they can be obtained from other libraries.

Reports not retrived

ELIGIBILITY

Step 7: Reports Assessed for Eligibility- Full Text Screening  The number of reports that were requested for recovery in step 6 less the number of reports that were not recovered should equal this (Step 7). To determine if these publications should be included in the systematic literature review, you should read the entire texts of each one.

Reports assessed for eligibility

 

INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION

Step 8: Reports Excluded All the publications that were excluded during the full-text screening step to ascertain eligibility should be entered in the “Reports excluded” box. Then, the reasons for doing so should be stated, along with the number of records omitted for each stated reason. Inappropriate patient population, improper treatment, inappropriate location, and incorrect dose are a few examples. Even if an article qualifies for more than one exclusion criterion, you should only count it once in your list.

Reports excluded, including reason for exclusion and number

 

Step 9: Included Studies The number of records rejected from consideration during the full-text eligibility evaluation (Step 9) is subtracted from the total number of articles examined for eligibility in the final step (Step 8). If necessary, this number should be combined with the outcomes of the grey literature search in the “Studies included in review” box. Unless systematic literature reviews were additionally conducted in non-database sources, the PRISMA flow diagram by far can be considered complete.

Studies included in review

 

Complete the extra procedures outlined in the following box if you have looked through other sources, such as websites for professional organizations, referenced or referencing citations, etc.

Classical Example

Example is retrieved from Lee J. (2022). Nursing home nurses’ turnover intention: A systematic literature review review. Nursing open9(1), 22–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.1051

Search methods

A systematic literature review was conducted in June 2020 utilizing six electronic bibliographic resources (CINAHL, PubMed, Cochrane Library, PsycINFO, RISS, and DBpia). In order to only examine publications that provided up-to-date and important information concerning the topic under discussion, the study’s time frame was restricted to run from January 2009 to January 2019. Among the terms used were variations of “nur” and “nursing home,” “residential facility,” “long term care facility,” “residential care,” “long term care environment,” and “leave” or “turnover.” Reference lists from publications on the intentions of NH nurses to quit their employment were also examined in order to find materials not included in digitized bibliographic databases.. Only systematic literature review that met the following requirements were taken into consideration for this analysis: A study needs to adhere to the following criteria in order to be eligible: The research population (organization) had to include NHs, the sample (person) had to include nurses (registered nurses [RNs] or licensed practical nurses [LPNs]), the preferred languages had to be English or Korean since there were no interpreters, and the study had to be peer-reviewed. In order to avoid biased results, articles that included unregistered nursing staff, such as CNAs (Certified Nursing Assistants), were omitted.

Search outcome

The selection of articles is shown in a Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic literature review Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) diagram (Moher et al., 2009). The PRISMA criteria were used to guide the systematic literature review procedure in this investigation (see Figure 1). In all, 473 items were found in the six databases by the first systematic literature review. 109 publications were found in the first search after duplicates were eliminated. The titles and abstracts of the remaining 109 publications were then separately assessed by two reviewers (author 1, research assistant 1). There were 11 articles left after titles and abstracts were scrutinized. In order to get to a consensus, the third reviewer (research assistant number 2) and I examined the inconsistencies and concerns around screening. Two reviewers (author 1 and research assistant no. 1) examined the full-text of the remaining 11 publications to determine their eligibility using inclusion and exclusion criteria. One systematic literature reviewer (research assistant number 2) helped to clarify any discrepancies and questions about the study’s inclusion and exclusion criteria. After assessment, RNs and CNAs were used as samples in three publications, NHs and home nursing were used in one study’s setting, and a long-term care hospital was used in another systematic literature review. Six publications were finally left, and six articles pertaining to the intents of NH RNs to remain at their respective employment positions were evaluated and compiled.

References

https://www.bmj.com/content/339/bmj.b2700

Creating a PRISMA flow diagram: PRISMA 2020

https://guides.lib.unc.edu/prisma