Conducting a Professional and Academic Literature Review

Evidence Based Practice

When conducting a literature review in the EBP process, the best approach to take is to refer to scholarly databases. Keyword searches can be conducted using databases such as ProQuest, PubMed, EbscoHost, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and several others. Conducting research using Google Scholar may be easy and free, but as Gusenbauer and Haddaway (2020) show it is not the most effective way to conduct keyword searches or research in a scholarly manner. That said, however, Gussenbauer (2019) does admit that Google Scholar is by far the most comprehensive collection of scholarly records, with nearly 400 million files on record, making it “the most comprehensive academic search engine” (p. 177). For that reason, it is understandable that researchers and students might feel compelled to turn to Google Scholar as a search engine of choice. What remains to be considered, however, is that the size of a collection does not necessarily indicate the quality of its search system. Indeed, Google has been found to fail query tests—which means that even if a person enters in keywords that should retrieve relevant sources, Google does not necessarily provide those sources in the return (Gusenbauer & Haddaway, 2020).

Open Access search systems do exist, and Gusenbauer and Haddaway (2020) recommend ClinicalTrials.gov, as it “passed all tests relating to necessary criteria” (p. 210). Nonetheless, whatever method one chooses to use, it must be stated in the report’s methodology, because it will have an impact on the quality of the search conducted. SpringerLink and Wiley are journal platforms that one can choose to use as well, but, again, this should be stated in the written section of the report that describes the method used to obtain literature for the review.

It is important that when conducting research, one understand the databases and platforms, libraries and research centers available to one. Simply because it is an accessible library, center, database or search engine does not mean it is optimized to meet your research needs. To obtain the most relevant literature pertaining to the research subject at hand, queries must be precisely defined and conducted in libraries, centers, databases, and platforms that have been designed to facilitate such searches in an optimal way. Researchers have shown that some platforms and databases perform better than others when tested—but dispute over the merits of these same platforms and databases remains (Klopfenstein & Dampier, 2021). My advice, then, is to diversify your approach and to not rely solely on a single university library or Google Scholar type of database for this EBP process. The process should be systematically undertaken in as professional and scholarly a manner as possible.

As for using another student’s log-in information to access a college library, this is not a recommended course of action for a professional research team. While the offer is well-intentioned, the fact is that log-in information is provided to an individual student for individual academic purposes; it is not a pass that may be shared with colleagues for professional purposes. For professional research, professional steps should be taken within the parameters of all ethical codes of conduct.

As part of a hospital consortium, we have access to a large academic medical center, and this should be our relevant access point for literature. The research center will be able to provide us with the necessary guidance and support as we begin the EBP process. This center will also be able to provide support with keyword queries and search criteria.