Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach.

By P. Cronin, F. Ryan, M. Coughlan. British Journal of Nursing, 2008

1,433 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Emergency Medical Services, Emergency Medicine, Physiology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/389de23f1843a91a9e7a832e672f3b5ff2829f33

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Emergency Medical Services

In Emergency Medicine

In Physiology

Citations in the corpus

Business intelligence in banking: A literature analysis from 2002 to 2013 using text mining and latent Dirichlet allocation (2015, background): “Such relevance is expressed through the numerous publications on conducting literature reviews across the different sciences (Jesson & Lacey, 2006; Cronin et al., 2008).”
Writing narrative style literature reviews (2015, methodology): “Evaluating the fitness of an article for the review may prove to be a complex task that concerns different issues related to the journal, author’s(s’) reputation, accuracy of methods, analysis and coherence.(6) In general, each article should be critically evaluated according to the following:(3)”
Making sense of implementation theories, models and frameworks (2015, background): “Narrative reviews yield qualitative results, with strengths in capturing diversities and pluralities of understanding [18,19].”
Sample Selection in Systematic Literature Reviews of Management Research (2021, background): “arrive at the presented conclusions (Cronin et al., 2008; Tranfield et al., 2003).”
Guidance on Conducting a Systematic Literature Review (2017, background): “A common mistake for novices is to select too broad of a research question (Cronin, Ryan, and Coughlan 2008).”
Past, present and future of Industry 4.0 - a systematic literature review and research agenda proposal (2017, methodology): “This type of review method is capable of critiquing and summarising a body of literature and drawing conclusions about their research topics (Cronin, Ryan, and Coughlan 2008).”
Gamification in Science Education. A Systematic Review of the Literature (2021, methodology): “Furthermore, according to Cronin et al. ([100], p. 38) suggestion, we used multiple database searches and did not limit our literature review, but potentially relevant publications could still have been missed due to bias in selecting databases or in the search strings that were used.”
A Framework for Guiding and Evaluating Literature Reviews (2015, positive): “Several alternative methods have also been proposed, such as using an indexing or summary system (Cronin et al., 2008) or a concept-centric approach that involves using a concept matrix to extract key information from the selected studies (Webster & Watson, 2002).”
Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews (2015, background): “Furthermore, they can direct future research developments by highlighting certain key issues, such as gaps, unexplored areas, opportunities, controversies, or trends [2,64].”
Participant Outcomes of Biodiversity Citizen Science Projects: A Systematic Literature Review (2019, neutral): “In contrast to traditional reviews, systematic literature reviews are characterized by a more rigorous and structured process [38].”
Social Robots for Language Learning: A Review (2018, methodology): “Specifically, we synthesize the relevant literature in order to provide a comprehensive overview of the work conducted so far (cf. Cronin, Ryan, & Coughlan, 2008).”