Include at least 10 scientific references in your list (scientific journals and books) of which
at least 5 empirical articles (i.e. at least 5 empirical studies reviewed in your Results chapter). In addition, you can also refer to webpages and “grey” materials available through the internet, but this should be an exception. Take care where the materials come from. Many interest organizations offer information – sometimes of good quality, but often to influence opinions. In your results chapter, only refer to the empirical studies that you review. You can use the other references in the introduction and discussion, and in the methods when it concerns methodological matters related to your own methods.
Your research question must be complete (PICOT/ SPIDER) and contain a European dimension
Introduction (I)
Answers “Why?”
1. Rationale
2. Overview of the subject
area
3. Research questions
1. Explain why you have undertaken the current literature review (describe the knowledge gap)
2. Include background information that addresses key terms and major research and/or theory that has been done or is relevant in the area (use references)
3. Formulate your research questions preferably one main research question formulated according the PICOT or SPIDER structure (Aveyard 2019, chapter 2, pp. 33-34), with additional specific sub questions (objectives)
Methods (M)
Answers “How? When? Where?”
1. Design (or type of research)
2. Search strategy
3. Critical appraisal tools
4. Thematic analysis
1. The design is a narrative literature review following a comprehensive and systematic approach
2. Describe your search strategy and include a table like Aveyard 2019, table 4.1, and include a figure like Aveyard 2019 figure 4.1 (your search should result in at least five empirical studies)
3. Describe which critical appraisal tool(s) you have used (not yet the findings). At least use the generic critical appraisal tool as described in Aveyard 2019 table 5.1
4. Describe the steps of your thematic analysis based on Aveyard 2019, chapter 5, pp. 141-150 (not yet the findings)
Results (R)
Answers “What?”
– Create your own structure using the main themes that resulted from your thematic analysis as
1. Include a table like Aveyard 2019, table 6.1 (with the findings)
Results (R)
Answers “What?”
– Create your own structure using the main themes that resulted from your thematic analysis as
1. Include a table like Aveyard 2019, table 6.1 (with the findings) headings (in a logical
order)
– Describe the main themes
taking into account the strength of evidence resulting from your critical appraisal
– Describe similarities and inconsistencies between your data
2. Include a table like Aveyard 2019, table 6.2 (with the findings)
Discussion Answers “So what?”
1. Main findings in a wider context
2. Limitations of the literature review
3. Recommendations for practice
4. Recommendations for future research
1. Interpret your findings in light of other related literature
2. Set your findings in context by exploring the limitations of your review
3. Describe the implications for relevant practitioners for example health workers, policy makers
4. Describe the implications for future research (remaining knowledge gaps)
Additional format requirements
1)Title page with at the top: title, and at the bottom: university name, faculty name, bachelor name, module code and name, student number and name, peer reviewer number and name, staff assessor name, date, number of words
2)Table of contents
3) Abstract (before the Introduction)
4) Reference list
5)Appendices (if applicable)
