GUIDELINES FOR QUALITY COVERAGE OF CONTINUING EDUCATION ISSUES

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.28925/2412-0774.2024.3.5

Abstract

The aim of this article is twofold: first, to elucidate the importance and value of conducting a literature review, and second, to provide practical guidance and suggestions for effectively planning and executing such a review. To provide an overview of the findings from previous studies, a systematic approach to scientific research was employed. The material for this systematic review consists of publications that provide practical guidance on the writing of review articles. The purpose of a literature review is to synthesize existing scholarly works on a specific topic or research question, contextualizing them within the current state of knowledge on that topic. It is not uncommon for literature reviews to fall short of the standards expected of scientific research. In such cases, they may be regarded as mere summaries of previous work in a given field. To circumvent such a scenario, it is advised that a determination be made at the outset of the project regarding the type of review to be conducted. It is recommended that a classification system be employed which divides literature reviews into three categories: systematic review, semi-systematic review, and integrative review. The efficacy of each type of literature review depends on the objective being pursued. In the context of a literature review, a number of methods may be employed to facilitate a comprehensive analysis. Given the plethora of methodological alternatives at their disposal, researchers may encounter the challenge of selecting an appropriate method. The most commonly utilized methodological approaches in this field are bibliometric analysis, content analysis, critical analysis, meta-analysis, multiple correspondence analysis, and homogeneity analysis through alternating least squares. A researcher undertaking a literature review is confronted with a range of potential challenges, including the existence of a vast number of sources, which makes it challenging to identify pertinent materials; a lack of expertise in literature search techniques, which can impede the ability of a novice researcher to fully comprehend a specific phenomenon when searching a single database; and a lack of expertise in formulating a precise and coherent research question or purpose for the review, which may result in the absence of a structured plan for data analysis, ultimately limiting the depth of analysis in the literature review to a mere descriptive summary. To ensure a comprehensive and rigorous study, researchers must select an optimal methodological approach for their literature review, one that aligns with their research question and the available resources at their disposal.

References

Khraban, H., Samoilenko, K. (2023). Vysvitlennia obraziv viiskovosluzhbovyts v ukrainskykh media v period rosiisko-ukrainskoi viiny [Representations of servicewomen by the ukrainian media during the Russo-Ukrainian war]. Ukrainskyi sotsium – Ukrainian society, 2 (85), 145–167. https://doi.org/10.15407/socium2023.02.145

Khraban, T., & Khraban, M. (2024). Kontent-analiz u viiskovykh doslidzhenniakh [Content analysis in military studies]. Visnyk Natsionalnoho universytetu oborony Ukrainy – Bulletin of the National Defense University of Ukraine, 78 (2), 141–150. https://doi.org/10.33099/2617-6858-2024-78-2-141-150

Amobonye, A., Lalung, J., Mheta, G., & Pillai, S. (2024). Writing a Scientific Review Article: Comprehensive Insights for Beginners. The Scientific World Journal, 2024, 7822269. https://doi.org/10.1155/2024/7822269

Cajal, B., Jiménez, R., Gervilla, E., and Montaño, J. J. (2020). Doing a Systematic Review in Health Sciences. Clínica y Salud, 31 (2), 77–83. https://doi.org/10.5093/clysa2020a15

Carrera-Rivera, A., Ochoa, W., Larrinaga, F., & Lasa, G. (2022). How-to conduct a systematic literature review: A quick guide for computer science research. MethodsX, 9, 101895. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mex.2022.101895

Cronin, P., Ryan, F., & Coughlan, M. (2008). Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach. British journal of nursing, 17 (1), 38–43. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2008.17.1.28059

Dhollande, S., Taylor, A., Meyer, S., & Scott, M. (2021). Conducting integrative reviews: a guide for novice nursing researchers. Journal of research in nursing, 26 (5), 427–438. https://doi.org/10.1177/1744987121997907

Divecha, C. A., Tullu, M. S., & Karande, S. (2023). Utilizing tables, figures, charts and graphs to enhance the readability of a research paper. Journal of postgraduate medicine, 69 (3), 125–131. https://doi.org/10.4103/jpgm.jpgm_387_23

Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., Lim, W.M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285–296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070

Fan, D., Breslin, D., Callahan, J.L., Iszatt-White, M. (2022). Advancing literature review methodology through rigour, generativity, scope and transparency. International Journal of Management Reviews, 24, 171–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijmr.12291

Farrukh, A., & Sajjad, A. (2023). A critical review of literature review methodologies. In S. Rana, J. Singh, & S. Kathuria (Eds.), Advancing methodologies of conducting literature review in management domain (Vol. 2, pp. 103–123). Emerald Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2754-586520230000002006

Franzblau, L. E., & Chung, K. C. (2012). Graphs, tables, and figures in scientific publications: the good, the bad, and how not to be the latter. The Journal of hand surgery, 37 (3), 591–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2011.12.041

Grant, M. J. and Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26, 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x

Grewal, D., Puccinelli, N., & Monroe, K.B. (2018). Meta-analysis: Integrating accumulated knowledge. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 46 (1), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11747-017-0570-5

Kraus, S., Breier, M. & Dasí-Rodríguez, S. (2020). The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 16, 1023–1042. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00635-4

Kraus, S., Breier, M., Lim, W. M., Dabić, M., Kumar, S., Kanbach, D., Mukherjee, D., Corvello, V., Piñeiro-Chousa, J., Liguori, E., Palacios-Marqués, D., Schiavone, F., Ferraris, A., Fernandes, C., Ferreira, J. J. (2022). Literature reviews as independent studies: guidelines for academic practice. Review of Managerial Science, 16, 2577–2595. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11846-022-00588-8

Laher, S, Hassem, T. (2020). Doing systematic reviews in Psychology. South African Journal of Psychology, 50 (4), 450–468. https://doi.org/10.1177/0081246320956417

Levy, Y., & Ellis, T. J. (2006). A Systems Approach to Conduct an Effective Literature Review in Support of Information Systems Research. International Journal of an Emerging Transdiscipline, 9, 181–212. https://doi.org/10.28945/479

Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., Ali, F. (2022). Advancing knowledge through literature reviews: “what”, “why”, and “how to contribute.” The Service Industries Journal, 42 (7–8), 481–513. https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2022.2047941

MacLure, M. (2005). ‘Clarity bordering on stupidity’: where’s the quality in systematic review? Journal of Education Policy, 20 (4), 393–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930500131801

Moher, D., Shamseer, L., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., Stewart, L. A., & PRISMA-P Group. (2015). Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement. Systematic reviews, 4 (1), 1. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-4-1

Mukherjee, D., Lim, W.M., Kumar, S., Donthu, N. (2022). Guidelines for advancing theory and practice through bibliometric research. Journal of Business Research, 148, 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.04.042

Obradović, T., Vlačić, B., & Dabic, M. (2021). Open innovation in the manufacturing industry: A review and research agenda. Technovation, 102, 102221. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.technovation.2021.102221

Post, C., Sarala, R., Gatrell, C., & Prescott, J. (2020). Advancing Theory with Review Articles. Journal of Management Studies, 57 (2), 351–376. https://doi.org/10.1111/joms.12549

Randolph, J. (2009). A Guide to Writing the Dissertation Literature Review. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 14. https://doi.org/10.7275/b0az-8t74

Snyder, H. (2019). Literature Review as a Research Methodology: An Overview and Guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104, 333–339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.07.039

Snyder, H. (2023). Designing the literature review for a strong contribution. Journal of Decision Systems, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/12460125.2023.2197704

Steward, B. (2004) Writing a Literature Review. British Journal of Occupational Therapy, 67 (11), 495–500. https://doi.org/10.1177/030802260406701105

Winchester, C. L., Salji, M. (2016). Writing a literature review. Journal of Clinical Urology, 9 (5), 308–312. https://doi.org/10.1177/2051415816650133

Wong, G., Greenhalgh, T., Westhorp, G., Buckingham, J., & Pawson, R. (2013). RAMESES publication standards: meta-narrative reviews. BMC medicine, 11, 20. https://doi.org/10.1186/1741-7015-11-20

Zunder, T. H. (2021). A semi-systematic literature review, identifying research opportunities for more sustainable, receiver-led inbound urban logistics flows to large higher education institutions. European Transport Research Review, 13, 28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12544-021-00487-1

Published

2024-10-31

How to Cite

Khraban, T. . (2024). GUIDELINES FOR QUALITY COVERAGE OF CONTINUING EDUCATION ISSUES. Continuing Professional Education: Theory and Practice, 80(3), 57–66. https://doi.org/10.28925/2412-0774.2024.3.5

Issue

Section

THEORY AND METHODOLOGY OF CONTINUING PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION