Systematic Reviews: Searching and Analysis of the Literature
This Assignment expands upon the work you have been conducting for this week’s Discussion.) you will conduct a search for literature on your selected practice problem. A Literature Review Matrix template will be used to identify gaps in the literature.
Consider the practice problem you addressed in this week’s Discussion. (You may select a new issue if necessary, but it is not recommended): Practice problem chosen: Health literacy and self-care activities, self-efficacy, and health related outcome of patients with type 2 Diabetes.
Review the guidelines in the Literature Review Matrix, included in the Learning Resources.
Formulate a research question around your issue as indicated in Part I. Then
complete Part II of the Matrix, identifying the resources you will use, search terms and criteria, and Boolean search strings.
Using the Walden Library, locate 10 articles related to your research question. At least one article must be a systematic review.
All of the articles should be primary sources. NOTE: If appropriate, you may use the four articles you reviewed for this week’s Discussion.
Complete Part I and Part II of the Literature Review Matrix template.
Begin working on Part III.
Review Part III of the Literature Review Matrix and notice which middle range theories were used most frequently in the articles you reviewed.
Consider the appropriate use of the theoretical frameworks in each article.
Review the information on empiricism presented in Chapter 1 of Theoretical Basis for Nursing and Chapter 6 in The Practice of Nursing Research: Appraisal, Synthesis, and Generation of Evidence as you consider your response to Part IV.
Complete Part III of the Literature Review Matrix.
In your analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the existing literature, note the appropriate use of the theoretical frameworks.
Complete Part IV addressing the influence of empiricism on quantitative methodology.
McEwin, M., & Wills, E.M. (2014). Theoretical basis for nursing. (4th ed.). Philadelphia, PA: Wolters Kluwer Health.
Chapter 10, “Introduction to Middle Range Nursing Theories”
Chapter 11, “Overview of Selected Middle Range Nursing Theories”
Gray, J.R., Grove, S.K., & Sutherland, S. (2017). Burns and Grove’s the practice of nursing research: Appraisal, synthesis, and generation of evidence (8th ed.). St. Louis, MO: Saunders Elsevier.
Chapter 3, “Introduction to Quantitative Research”
Chapter 4, “Introduction to Qualitative Research”
Chapter 6 guides nurses through the process of identifying research objectives, developing research questions, and creating research hypotheses.
Chapter 7 examines the process of preparing for a literature review to support research efforts.
Chapter 13, “Outcomes Research”
Moran, K., Burson, R., & Conrad, D. (2017). The doctor of nursing practice scholarly project: A framework for success (2nd ed.). Burlington, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Review Chapter 6, “Developing the Scholarly Project”
Armola, R., Bourgault, A., Halm, M., Board, R., Bucher, L., Harrington, L., & … Medina, J. (2009). AACN levels of evidence: What’s new? Critical Care Nurse, 29(4), 70–73. doi: 10.4037/ccn2009969
Elkins, M. Y. (2010). Using PICO and the brief report to answer clinical questions. Nursing, 40(4), 59–60. doi: 10.1097/01.NURSE.0000369871.07714.39
Fawcett, J., & Garity, J. (2009). Chapter 6: Evaluation of middle-range theories. Evaluating Research for Evidence-Based Nursing. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: F. A. Davis.
DeSanto-Madeya, S., & Fawcett, J. (2009). Toward Understanding and Measuring Adaptation Level in the Context of the Roy Adaptation Model. Nursing Science Quarterly, 22(4), 355–359.
Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B., Stillwell, S., & Williamson, K. (2010). Critical appraisal of the evidence: Part I an introduction to gathering, evaluating, and recording the evidence… fifth in a series. American Journal of Nursing, 110(7), 47–52. doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000383935.22721.9c
Fineout-Overholt, E., Melnyk, B., Stillwell, S., & Williamson, K. (2010). Critical appraisal of the evidence: Part III the process of synthesis: Seeing similarities and differences across the body of evidence. American Journal of Nursing, 110(11), 43–51. doi: 10.1097/01.NAJ.0000390523.99066.b5
Edit question’s body