Reviewing Literature in Bioethics Research: Increasing Rigour in Non-Systematic Reviews
The recent interest in systematic review methods in bioethics has highlighted the need for greater transparency in all literature review processes undertaken in bioethics projects. In this article, I articulate features of a good bioethics literature review that does not aim to be systematic, but ra...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Published: |
[2015]
|
| In: |
Bioethics
Year: 2015, Volume: 29, Issue: 7, Pages: 523-528 |
| IxTheo Classification: | NCJ Ethics of science |
| Further subjects: | B
Literature Review
B critical interpretive synthesis B Methodology B systematic reviews |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (Publisher) Volltext (doi) |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000caa a22000002c 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1727698304 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20210813124646.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 200824s2015 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1111/bioe.12149 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1727698304 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1727698304 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a McDougall, Rosalind |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Reviewing Literature in Bioethics Research |b Increasing Rigour in Non-Systematic Reviews |
| 264 | 1 | |c [2015] | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a The recent interest in systematic review methods in bioethics has highlighted the need for greater transparency in all literature review processes undertaken in bioethics projects. In this article, I articulate features of a good bioethics literature review that does not aim to be systematic, but rather to capture and analyse the key ideas relevant to a research question. I call this a critical interpretive literature review. I begin by sketching and comparing three different types of literature review conducted in bioethics scholarship. Then, drawing on Dixon-Wood's concept of critical interpretive synthesis, I put forward six features of a good critical interpretive literature review in bioethics: answering a research question, capturing the key ideas relevant to the research question, analysing the literature as a whole, generating theory, not excluding papers based on rigid quality assessment criteria, and reporting the search strategy. | ||
| 601 | |a Literatur | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a critical interpretive synthesis | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Literature Review | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Methodology | |
| 650 | 4 | |a systematic reviews | |
| 652 | |a NCJ | ||
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Bioethics |d Oxford [u.a.] : Wiley-Blackwell, 1987 |g 29(2015), 7, Seite 523-528 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)271596708 |w (DE-600)1480658-7 |w (DE-576)078707986 |x 1467-8519 |7 nnas |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:29 |g year:2015 |g number:7 |g pages:523-528 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/bioe.12149 |x Verlag |
| 856 | |u https://doi.org/10.1111/bioe.12149 |x doi |3 Volltext | ||
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 3742394096 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1727698304 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20210813124646 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 200824||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixzo | ||
| LOK | |0 936ln |0 1550736582 |a NCJ | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||
| REF | |a Literaturinterpretation | ||
