Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,426

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

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

Open access
Cronin, Patricia, Ryan, Frances, Coughlan, Michael·2008·British Journal of Nursing

Abstract

Nowadays, most nurses, pre- and post-qualification, will be required to undertake a literature review at some point, either as part of a course of study, as a key step in the research process, or as part of clinical practice development or policy. For student nurses and novice researchers it is often seen as a difficult undertaking. It demands a complex range of skills, such as learning how to define topics for exploration, acquiring skills of literature searching and retrieval, developing the ability to analyse and synthesize data as well as becoming adept at writing and reporting, often within a limited time scale. The purpose of this article is to present a step-by-step guide to facilitate understanding by presenting the critical elements of the literature review process. While reference is made to different types of literature reviews, the focus is on the traditional or narrative review that is undertaken, usually either as an academic assignment or part of the research process

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.12968/bjon.2008.17.1.28059

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 21

  1. 2007, AND', `OR' and `NOT' (Ely and Scott
  2. Beecroft C, 2006, The Research Process in Nursing
  3. 10.1016/S0001-2092(06)62653-7 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Burns N, 2007, Understanding Nursing Research - Building an Evidence-Based Practice
  5. 10.1054/nepr.2001.0008 · DOI
  6. Cohen G, 1990, The Open University's Introduction to Psychology.Volume 2. Milton Keynes
  7. Colling J, 2003, Urol Nurs, 23, 297
  8. 10.12968/bjon.2007.16.11.23681 · DOI · Paper page
  9. Ely C, 2007, Essential Study Skills for Nursing
  10. Hart C, 1998, Doing a Literature Review
  11. 10.7748/nr2000.04.7.3.40.c6120 · DOI
  12. Hek G, 2006, Making Sense of Research: An Introduction for Health and Social Care Practitioners
  13. 10.7748/ns.12.44.46.s56 · doi:10.7748/ns.12.44.46.s56
  14. Newell R, 2006, Research for Evidence-Based Practice
  15. 10.12968/pnur.2002.13.1.9222 · doi:10.12968/pnur.2002.13.1.9222
  16. Parahoo K, 2006, Nursing Research - principles, process and issues
  17. 10.1177/014572170403000106 · DOI
  18. Polit DF, 2004, Nursing Research: principles and methods
  19. Polit D, 2006, Essentials of Nursing Research: Methods, Appraisal and Utilization
  20. 10.7748/ns2005.11.20.11.41.c4010 · doi:10.7748/ns2005.11.20.11.41.c4010
  21. 10.7748/ns2004.10.19.6.45.c3728 · doi:10.7748/ns2004.10.19.6.45.c3728

Cited by

See all 1,426

Metadata

Authors
Cronin, P., Ryan, F., & Coughlan, M.
Venue
British Journal of Nursing
Published
2008-01-01
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
38-43
ISSN
  • 0966-0461 (ISSN-L)
  • 2052-2819
OpenAlex
W2134444348
Cited by
1,426
References
0
FWCI
5.62
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.12968/bjon.2008.17.1.28059
The paper
Cronin, P., Ryan, F., & Coughlan, M. (2008). Undertaking a literature review: a step-by-step approach. British Journal of Nursing. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2008.17.1.28059

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.