Standards of Literature Review
Reference Reading:
Kobayashi, L. C., O’Shea, B. Q., Kler, J. S., Nishimura, R., Palavicino-Maggio, C. B., Eastman, M. R., … & Finlay, J. M. (2021). Cohort profile: The COVID-19 Coping Study, a longitudinal mixed-methods study of middle-aged and older adults’ mental health and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA. BMJ open, 11(2), e044965.
There is no separate section of literature review in the reading by Kobayashi et al., (2021), which might have caused difficulties for the readers to understand the essential concepts and their relation, which has been attempted to develop in this research. However, the introduction sheds light on the current situation, where the risks of Covid 19 on the older adults have been highlighted. The context is that of USA, where the economic, psychosocial vulnerabilities have been emphasized, for enhancing the awareness of the audience. From these aspects, the standards of literature review could be considered as efficient in terms of laying a strong foundation to situational and contextual analysis. However, Johnson, and Onwuegbuzie, (2004) are of the view that design is an important aspect for conducting proper mixed method research. In this design, a specific set of design is used for identifying the commonalities existing between the quantitative and qualitative methods. This design includes introduction, literature review, methodology, data analysis, and conclusion, just like standard research. But, as there is no specific section of literature review, then, the standard of literature review conducted by Kobayashi and others is somewhat not up to the mark. This is because literature review section would have enhanced the understanding of the readers on the concepts, that are, Covid 19 coping abilities by middle aged an old aged adults, mental health and wellbeing, along with their correlations, the theories, models and factors associated or responsible for the coping against the pandemic.
Delving deep into the aspect, the standards of literature review is judged from the criterions of selecting the sources, critiquing the previous literature, interpretation of the extent to which the literature could be effective for solving the problem or issue, and coming up with something new regarding the subject matter. The research conducted by Kobayashi et al., (2021) fulfills all of these criteria, as there is relevancy in the sources, previous research, studies and experiments conducted have been critiqued, and future planning has also been stated. From this assessment, it could be asserted that the standards of literature review in this research is really high (Dawidowicz, 2010). Along with this, the standards and quality of the literature review could be assessed by the questions, which are:
- Is the purpose of review clearly stated?
- Are the parameters of the review reasonably designed?
In case of the research study by Kobayashi et al., (2021), the purpose of the review has been clearly stated. This is reflected from the discussion initiated in the objective section. In terms of the second question, inclusion and exclusion criteria could be brought in, which address why some literatures have been included and some excluded. The literature review conducted by Kobayashi et al., (2021) includes sources on the COVID-19 Coping capabilities of middle-aged and older adults in USA, ensuring their mental health and well-being. The exclusion of some literature is a wise and planned approach towards applying proper mixed method to conduct the research. Therefore, it could be inferred that inclusion of relevant sources, is one of the other aspects, which enhances the quality of literature review (Bradbury et al., 2019).
Assessment of Quality of Literature Review
Critique of the literature, as in the cohort study in the research conducted by Kobayashi et al., (2021), has been perfectly aligned with the findings. Here, it could be stated that a critical discussion has been established by synthesizing the findings, previous literature, aims and objectives, leading to a relevant conclusion. This synthesis is one of the other aspects which makes the literature review a standard one. Summary and interpretation are one of the other grounds on which the standard of literature review of the research conducted by Kobayashi et al., (2021). This is through the discussion on the synthesis of the analysis of data collected and critique of previous literature. In this criterion, the standards of literature review could be considered as that of high standards (Cyberhouse.arted.psu.edu, 2022).
The recruitment strategy, in the research conducted by Kobayashi et al., (2021), uses a multi-strategy, non-probability, non-profitability technique. Initial sampling used is that of snowball sampling, which helped the researcher for recruiting the samples through social media channels Facebook and Instagram. One of the challenges in the recruitment was using database for overcoming the difficulties of recruiting older adults online. Using online and word of mouth process for recruitment is one of the efficient issues, which increased understanding on the subject matter in terms of convenience of samples, that is, middle aged and older adults. Panel sampling was another of the issues in recruitment of samples for the research. However, quota reservation evokes racial segregation, which could be considered as a challenge (Kobayashi et al., 2021). One of the other challenges were reflected in receiving compensation. Typical evidence of this lies in the bias, as the participants recruited through the snowball technique did not receive compensation, but the samples selected through panel sampling received US$1. The rationale behind this is the ineffective management of commercialization for sampling, which lacked ethical considerations. This is against the sampling ethics, which is a challenge in terms of conducting research. Different sampling techniques could be used in research; however, the samples need to be provided with equal access and treatment. The issue of advertising the sample recruitment in the languages of English and Spanish is an issue, reflecting diversity in the process of sampling. This diversity is also a prospective in terms of gaining diversified responses, which expands the scope and arena of the research.
Primary data collection method, survey was used in the research conducted by Kobayashi et al., (2021). This survey was sent to the participants on computer, tablet, smartphones, which reflects diversified network of communication, which is needed for data collection. Administration through Qualtrics is an issue, reflecting monitoring and control of the data collection process. The deadline of one week expresses the provision of adequate time to the samples to produce the response, without any pressurizing or compulsion. Consulting the consultants for preparing the questions is a planned and rational move by the researcher, averting the chances of errors. Informed consent was taken from the participants, which is considered ethical. Asking for the personal information has no mention of whether it was secured, which is a challenge, raising concerns over the maintenance of privacy and security in the personal information shared by the samples (Kobayashi et al., 2021). The issue of completing the survey, sent online, consists of security threats, which is a challenge. This is because any unauthorized source could intervene into the responses and practice commercialization, which is against the ethical considerations in research.
Recruitment Strategy
Semi-structured interviews are an efficient means of data collection, used in the research. However, the channels of telephone are something where do not clarify the facial expressions of the sample or the researcher, as only the voice could be heard. But video calls are effective as it reflects the facial expressions of samples, which the researcher can view and comment on. The questions were grouped according to the aspects related to sociodemographic factors, personal COVID-19 testing symptoms, history, social network, morbidity and mortality tests, hospitalization, concerns on coping with COVID-19, reactions on governmental responses to COVID-19, self-isolation, frequency, types of contacts with family members and friends, changes in daily behaviors, social media use, use of mobility aids, and housing conditions (Kobayashi et al., 2021). Categorization of samples according to the racial groups, for collecting data, conforming to the US consensus definitions reflected consideration of the research ethics.
Cleland, and Durning, (2015) states the ways in which medical education research is to be conducted properly according to the requirements. The aspects covered are introduction, explanation, and illustration. The explanation and illustration include theories which expands the scope and arena of the research. Consideration of the previous literature helps in developing the ideas for conducting quantitative research (Sherif, 2018). The response collected from this data substantiates theories and previous literature. Discussion on the data analysis and theories is essential in terms of collating the aspects and deducing relevant conclusions. On the contrary, Groenland, and Dana, (2019) states that elementary orientation of the domain or subject matter is important for properly conducting the research. Elementary knowledge of the subject is helpful for the writer to choose which kind of research method to choose for data collection and analysis. The focus is on qualitative methodologies, where the necessary data is obtained through the method of interview (Mohajan, 2018).
Advantages of quantitative research method is that it evokes accuracy from the statistics and numbers which are developed from analyzing the responses produced by the samples (Pham, 2018). On the other hand, qualitative research is also advantageous as it increases the quality of the research through thematic analysis. Quantitative analysis mostly comprises of surveys, which provides the researcher with practical insights into the approach of the samples, which is essential in terms of analyzing the collected data. The responses provided in the survey, when used in analyzing the responses, seems to be effective in terms of avoiding tampering with the data, which is disadvantage in terms of maintaining accuracy, reliability and validity in the research (Cummings, Kong & Orminski, 2020). On the contrary, interviews in qualitative data are advantageous, as it helps the researcher in gaining practical insights into the responses by conducting face to face conversations. This is missing in case of the surveys, as surveys could be conducted online, where more samples could be reached at the same time (Kraus, Breier & Dasí-Rodríguez, 2020).
Malhotra et al., (2019) is of the view that both quantitative and qualitative methods are used in research, which is usually terms as mixed methods. This method is advantageous for the researchers, as it helps in analyzing the collected data from multiple perspectives. However, in case of the complex researches, use of mixed method is a disadvantage because there is limitation in time and financial resources. In this limitation, using both survey and interview is something which do not lead to the relevant conclusion. Here, a planned action is to select one method, which would be effective for collecting the relevant data, leading to the conclusion (Putney, Alley & Bengtson, 2005) Adopting secondary thematic analysis is a rational move for the researcher, which is advantageous for the researcher, as it saves the time of sending the questionnaires to the samples, getting back the responses, analyzing them. Therefore, it is important for the researcher to be knowledgeable and tactful for applying the right research method for getting the appropriate results (Snyder, 2019).
Primary Data Collection Method
Advantage of the research method, whether quantitative or qualitative, could be felt once it is applied. But this experimentation could be done when there is no time limitation. When there are time constraints, selecting secondary thematic analysis is a rational and logical move. However, Who.int (2015), states that if the research method is specified as quantitative or qualitative, then choice could be exerted. If survey is chosen, the sample size could be less.
Cummings, Kong, and Orminski, (2020) takes a stance on qualitative semi structures interviews for analyzing the collected data. Here, in this qualitative research method, transparency is one of the essential aspects, which increases the standards of a research. In this context, mention could be made of Standards of Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR), which comprises of the guidelines, which the researchers are to follow while conducting research through qualitative methods. Several standards for reporting are applicable for qualitative research, but currently, there is a dearth of effective reporting standard (Taylor et al., 2018). With the standards, and their information, the researcher finds ease in reporting about the flexibility in using various paradigms for deducing conclusions. As a matter of specification, there are 21 reporting guidelines, which are title, abstract, problem formulation, purpose, qualitative approach and research paradigm, research characteristics, context, sampling strategy, ethics, Data collection methods, data collection instruments, units of study, data processing, data analysis, synthesis and interpretation, integration of prior work, limitations, conflicts of interest, and funding. The research, after completing the research is to report on these aspects, which are verified and assessed in terms of the extent to which the guidelines have been followed (Squires & Dorsen, 2018).
Title, and abstract are related to the formatting of cover page, which is the basic start of research. Problem formulation, and purpose is the rationale, which the researcher excavates for conducting the research. Qualitative approach and research paradigm are decided by the research after studying the research characteristics for preparing a rough draft or proposal. Context bears special significance to the research, which is to be reported and highlighted for enhancing the understanding of the researchers about the subject, that is, coping capability of the middle and older adults from Covid 19. Sampling strategy is the next stage, which is applied for assessing the respondents from whom the data is to be collected within the limited time available (Buus & Perron, 2020). Strategic planning in this context involves optimizing the search for the samples, from whom of the population which bears direct or indirect relationship with the research.
Ethics is one of an important aspect which is to be maintained while reporting. This reporting contributes to the assessment whether there was fairness in recruiting the samples, and whether informed consent was taken before involving them in the process of data collection. Ethics is also applicable in the assessment whether the samples were informed and assured about the use of their responses for the research purpose and not for commercialization. Reporting about the instruments used for collecting data, that is, survey or interview, enhances transparency in the research method. in case of the unit of study, it is the number and characteristics of the samples, which are to be reported (Peditto, 2018). In this context, one of the other aspects of reporting is that of the channel through which the data has been processed. Clarity is to be maintained in reporting whether the data has been codified for processing or it has been anonymized.
Data analysis and interpretation is reported by stating the themes used. Stating these themes increases trust for the researcher in terms of refraining from the unauthorized sources, which could evoke plagiarism and collusion. This is because of ensuring the proper collection of data within the limited time. Conflicts of interest among the researchers is inevitable, however, rational approach is to be maintained for ensuring that conformity to ethical considerations are proper, and aligns with the reporting guidelines. Approval could be sought for application of the identified research method, which averts the instances of errors.
References
Bradbury-Jones C. , Breckenridge J.P., Clark M.T., Herber O.R., Jones C. & Taylor J. (2019) Advancing the science of literature reviewing in social research: the focused mapping review and synthesis. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 22(5), 451–462. [doi.org/10.1080/13645579.2019.1576328]
Buus, N., & Perron, A. (2020). The quality of quality criteria: Replicating the development of the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ). International Journal of Nursing Studies, 102, 103452. [https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2019.103452]
Cleland, J., & Durning, S. J. (2015). Researching medical education. John Wiley & Sons. (chapter 1) [https://books.google.co.in/books?hl=en&lr=&id=UUb3CQAAQBAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR7&dq=Cleland,+J.,+%26+Durning,+S.+J.+(2015).+Researching+medical+education.+John+Wiley+%26+Sons.+(chapter+1)+&ots=8Z8otAqomw&sig=HJgGkbAlfXYZGKWWOb8eZp6Wjf0#v=onepage&q=Cleland%2C%20J.%2C%20%26%20Durning%2C%20S.%20J.%20(2015).%20Researching%20medical%20education.%20John%20Wiley%20%26%20Sons.%20(chapter%201)&f=false]
Cummings, C. L., Kong, W. Y., & Orminski, J. (2020). A typology of beliefs and misperceptions about the influenza disease and vaccine among older adults in Singapore. PloS one, 15(5), e0232472. [https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0232472]
Cyberhouse.arted.psu.edu (2022). Standards of Adequacy for Narrative Literature Review. Retrieved 18th April 2022 from https://cyberhouse.arted.psu.edu/502/assign/crit_assign/5litrev.html
Dawidowicz. (2010). Literature Reviews Made Easy: A Quick Guide to Success. Information Age Publishing, Incorporated [https://search.library.suss.edu.sg/discovery/fulldisplay?docid=cdi_askewsholts_vlebooks_9781617351938&context=PC&vid=65SUSS_INST:SUSS&lang=en&search_scope=MyInst_and_CI&adaptor=Primo%20Central&tab=Everything&query=any,contains,The%20literature%20review&pfilter=rtype,exact,books&offset=10)]
Groenland, & Dana, L. (2019). Qualitative Methodologies And Data Collection Methods. World Scientific Publishing Company. (Chapter 1) https://search.library.suss.edu.sg/discovery/fulldisplay?docid=cdi_askewsholts_vlebooks_9789811206542&context=PC&vid=65SUSS_INST:SUSS&lang=en&search_scope=MyInst_and_CI&adaptor=Primo%20Central&tab=Everything&query=any,contains,Qualitative%20Methodologies%20And%20Data%20Collection%20Methods&offset=0
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational researcher, 33(7), 14-26. [https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.3102/0013189×033007014]
Kobayashi, L. C., O’Shea, B. Q., Kler, J. S., Nishimura, R., Palavicino-Maggio, C. B., Eastman, M. R., … & Finlay, J. M. (2021). Cohort profile: The COVID-19 Coping Study, a longitudinal mixed-methods study of middle-aged and older adults’ mental health and well-being during the COVID-19 pandemic in the USA. BMJ open, 11(2), e044965. [https://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2020-044965]
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(3), 1023-1042. [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11365-020-00635-4]
Malhotra, R., Bautista, M. A. C., Müller, A. M., Aw, S., Koh, G. C. H., Theng, Y. L., … & Chan, A. (2019). The aging of a young nation: population aging in Singapore. The Gerontologist, 59(3), 401-410. [https://academic.oup.com/gerontologist/article/59/3/401/5230750?login=false]
Mohajan, H. K. (2018). Qualitative research methodology in social sciences and related subjects. Journal of Economic Development, Environment and People, 7(1), 23-48. [https://www.ceeol.com/search/article-detail?id=640546]
Peditto, K. (2018). Reporting qualitative research: Standards, challenges, and implications for health design. HERD: Health Environments Research & Design Journal, 11(2), 16-19. [https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1937586718772615]
Pham, L. T. M. (2018). Qualitative approach to research a review of advantages and disadvantages of three paradigms: Positivism, interpretivism and critical inquiry. University of Adelaide. [https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Lan-Pham-3/publication/324486854_A_Review_of_key_paradigms_positivism_interpretivism_and_critical_inquiry/links/5acffa880f7e9b18965cd52f/A-Review-of-key-paradigms-positivism-interpretivism-and-critical-inquiry.pdf]
Putney, N. M., Alley, D. E., & Bengtson, V. L. (2005). Social gerontology as public sociology in action. The American Sociologist, 36(3), 88-104. [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12108-005-1018-9]
Sherif, V. (2018, May). Evaluating preexisting qualitative research data for secondary analysis. In Forum: qualitative social research (Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 26-42). Freie Universität Berlin. [https://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/download/2821/4211?inline=1]
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]
Squires, A., & Dorsen, C. (2018). Qualitative research in nursing and health professions regulation. Journal of Nursing Regulation, 9(3), 15-26. [https://doi.org/10.1016/S2155-8256(18)30150-9]
Taylor, B., Henshall, C., Kenyon, S., Litchfield, I., & Greenfield, S. (2018). Can rapid approaches to qualitative analysis deliver timely, valid findings to clinical leaders? A mixed methods study comparing rapid and thematic analysis. BMJ open, 8(10), e019993. [https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/8/10/e019993.abstract]
Who.int (2015). World report on ageing and health. Retrieved 18th April 2022 from https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/186463
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
