WRITING AN EFFECTIVE LITERATURE REVIEW BOLDERSTON

In your final version, your knowledge claims will be expressed with more sophistication. What kind of gap have you found? Published online Dec Journal List Perspect Med Educ v. However, most of what we know about team training research has come from research with co-located teams—i.

National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Published online Dec We know that poor team communication can cause errors. Graff G, Birkenstein C. Be careful, though, not to use the literature review section to regurgitate all of your reading in manuscript form.

Graff G, Birkenstein C. This does not mean that you leave out bodlerston information: Please review our privacy policy. However, most of what we know about team training research has come from research with co-located teams—i.

writing an effective literature review bolderston

That means more than understanding each paper individually; you also need to be placing each paper in relation to others. Published online Dec Articles from Perspectives on Medical Education are provided here courtesy of Springer. Many writers have learned that the literature review should describe what is known.

In summary, think of your literature review as mapping the gap rather than simply summarizing the known. That white space is the space that your research fills. This article explains how to use the literature review section of your paper to build and characterize the Gap claim in your Problem-Gap-Hook. But there are three other reasons for avoiding this approach. Using this approach, the order of the paragraphs in the literature review is strategic and persuasive, leading the reader to the gap claim that positions the relevance of the current study.

  WCIB ESSAY COMPETITION

They say, I say: We encourage readers to share comments on or suggestions for this section on Twitter, using the hashtag: Little is known about how teamwork training principles would apply in distributed teams, whose members work asynchronously and are spread across different locations.

writing an effective literature review bolderston

Thanks to Mark Goldszmidt for his feedback on an early version of this manuscript. Author information Copyright and License information Disclaimer.

writing an effective literature review bolderston

Given that much healthcare teamwork is distributed rather than co-located, our curricula will be severely lacking until we create refined teamwork training principles that reflect distributed as well as boldefston work contexts. And we know that team training can be effective in improving team communication.

Writing an Effective Literature Review.

Conceptualizing your literature review this way helps to ensure that it achieves its dual goal: We know that poor team communication can cause errors. This piece alerts writers to the importance of not only summarizing what is known but also bilderston precisely what is not, in order to explicitly signal the relevance of their research.

To characterize the kind of gap, you need to know the literature thoroughly. Be careful, though, not to use the literature review section to regurgitate all of your reading in manuscript form. That would mean there is nothing more we need to know about the topic, and that leaves no room for your research.

  ACEND-ACCREDITED COURSEWORK REQUIREMENTS

Journal List Perspect Med Educ v. Listing the knowledge claims can help you organize them most effectively and determine which pieces of knowledge may be unnecessary to map the white space your research attempts to fill.

These are not disembodied facts, but rather incremental insights that some in the field may agree with and some may not, depending on their different methodological and disciplinary approaches to the topic.

Where does it come from? Support Center Support Center. National Center for Biotechnology InformationU.

Writing an Effective Literature Review.

The rhetorical challenge is different in each case. What kind of gap have you found? It can remind you of the danger of describing so fully what is known that the reader is left with the sense that there is no pressing revjew to know more.