Literature Review & Synthesis Flashcards

Which critical appraisal tool is commonly used to assess the quality of qualitative studies in a literature review?

Answer: CASP Qualitative Checklist

The CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme) Qualitative Checklist evaluates rigor, credibility, and relevance of qualitative research.

In a literature review, 'concept mapping' is most useful for:

Answer: Visually representing relationships among themes and concepts across sources

Concept mapping visually displays how ideas and themes from the literature are interconnected, aiding synthesis and communication of complex relationships.

What is the role of a 'PICO' framework in structuring a literature review search?

Answer: It organizes the research question into Population, Intervention, Comparison, and Outcome

PICO structures the research question to ensure search terms cover all key dimensions: who is studied, what is done, what it is compared to, and what is measured.

If a researcher applies Boolean operator 'AND' between two search terms, the result set will:

Answer: Narrow to records containing both terms simultaneously

The Boolean AND operator restricts results to documents that contain all specified terms, narrowing the search.

Which of the following is an example of 'evidence mapping' in a literature review?

Answer: Creating a visual or tabular overview of available evidence across multiple dimensions

Evidence mapping systematically charts what is known across a topic area, identifying where evidence is strong, weak, or absent.

A researcher wants to ensure two reviewers are consistently applying inclusion criteria. The most appropriate metric is:

Answer: Cohen's kappa

Cohen's kappa measures inter-rater agreement beyond chance, making it the standard statistic for assessing consistency between screeners in systematic reviews.

In literature synthesis, 'vote counting' is generally considered problematic because:

Answer: It ignores effect sizes and study quality, giving equal weight to all findings

Vote counting simply tallies how many studies show positive or negative results without accounting for effect magnitude or study rigor, leading to misleading conclusions.