Contents page (not included in word count)
Provide a title for each section in your dissertation (for example, introduction, background, methods etc.) including each appendix where appropriate and the page number they start on.
Abstract (included in the word count)
This should provide a summary of the content of your dissertation and structured using the following headings: background, review question(s), methods, findings, discussion and conclusions.
Introduction
Briefly introduce your work.
Background
• Provide a broad overview of your topic.
• Why is this area important?
• Why is it important to review the literature? For example, to advance knowledge, to develop research, to develop practice etc.
• Lead into the development of your search question; that is, what question are you seeking to answer about your topic? This should be focused so that the review is manageable.
Methods (more information on this can be found in the introductory session)
Provide an overview of the value of literature review as a method and the different types of review. State what type of review you conducted (see Grant and Booth, 2009)
• Search strategy
o What databases did you use and why? For those using grey literature – what sources of information did you use and how did you locate them?
o What were your search terms? Why? (You may find PEO, PICO useful for this or their qualitative equivalents) How did you use these in your search?
o What were your inclusion and exclusion criteria? Why did you choose them?
• Screening
o What was your process for filtering your search results?
• Critical appraisal
o Why is this important?
o Which method did you used? For example, the CASP tool.
• Analysis
o How did you analyse your findings, for example content or thematic analysis? Justify you chosen method.
• Ethics
o Brief overview of the importance of ethics.
o What ethics process is required of a literature review? Why? What process did you follow? (Include a copy of the signed UREC1 form in an appendix). Please note that you MUST have the UREC1 approved before you start your review. If you do not, it will constitute research misconduct and a mark of zero will be awarded.
Findings
• Provide a summary of the number of papers you obtained from your search and how you screened these leading to the studies that you included in your review. Include a PRISMA diagram to show this process (http://prisma-statement.org/prismastatement/flowdiagram.aspx?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1).
• Provide a brief overview of the study characteristics of your included papers. These points will depend on your topic but may include a summary of how many papers are qualitative/quantitative, the countries where the studies were conducted, the methods used to collect/generate data, types of samples, sample sizes, how authors analysed data in their studies and any ethical processes included.
• Comment on the quality of your included studies.
• Provide a data extraction table of key information from each paper in an appendix and refer to it here.
• Provide a brief description of the categories and/or themes identified from your review of the included studies.
• Present each category and/or theme – use each category/theme as a subheading and synthesise the findings from the included studies under each.
• Note: Do not present the findings of each paper separately.
Discussion
This should involve discussing the evidence collectively rather than paper by paper.
• What does the review of the included literature suggest?
• How does this relate to wider literature?
• What are the implications for education/practice/research? What recommendations can you make?
• How might you share these findings?
Conclusion
Provide an overview of key points.
References