Abstract

The emerging multiple terms used to describe a scientific literature review is a cause for concern, contributing to risk of confusion. We suggest that consistency in terms used would assist researchers and journal editors alike.

Author Details

Diana Lyn Baptiste, DNP, MSN, RN, Department of Acute and Chronic Care, Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; Quanlei Li, MPH, MSN, RN, Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; Helen Aveyard, PhD, MA, BSc (Hons), PDCE, RGN, School of Health and Life Sciences, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, United Kingdom; Caroline Bradbury-Jones, PhD, RN, School of Nursing, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom

Sigma Membership

Nu Beta at-Large

Lead Author Affiliation

Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA

Type

Presentation

Format Type

Text-based Document

Study Design/Type

N/A

Research Approach

N/A

Keywords:

Focused Mapping, Review and Synthesis, Reporting and Review

Conference Name

30th International Nursing Research Congress

Conference Host

Sigma Theta Tau International

Conference Location

Calgary, Alberta, Canada

Conference Year

2019

Rights Holder

All rights reserved by the author(s) and/or publisher(s) listed in this item record unless relinquished in whole or part by a rights notation or a Creative Commons License present in this item record.

All permission requests should be directed accordingly and not to the Sigma Repository.

All submitting authors or publishers have affirmed that when using material in their work where they do not own copyright, they have obtained permission of the copyright holder prior to submission and the rights holder has been acknowledged as necessary.

Acquisition

Proxy-submission

Additional Files

download (103 kB)

Share

COinS
 

Systematic reviews in nursing: Healthy diversity or complete confusion?

Calgary, Alberta, Canada

The emerging multiple terms used to describe a scientific literature review is a cause for concern, contributing to risk of confusion. We suggest that consistency in terms used would assist researchers and journal editors alike.