An Audit of Literature Reviews Published in Australian Social Work (2007-2017)

View/ Open
File version
Version of Record (VoR)
Author(s)
Strandberg, Thomas
Simpson, Grahame K
Griffith University Author(s)
Year published
2020
Metadata
Show full item recordAbstract
This study examined the nature of literature reviews published in Australian Social Work between 2007 and 2017. An audit was conducted to determine the number of reviews; types of reviews (systematic, meta-analysis, metasynthesis, scoping, narrative, conceptual, critical); and elements that were commonly reported (based on items drawn from the PRISMA checklist) including quality appraisal. A total of 21 reviews were identified. Results showed the overall number of reviews published remained relatively consistent across the decade. In relation to review types, systematic and scoping reviews appeared with greater frequency in ...
View more >This study examined the nature of literature reviews published in Australian Social Work between 2007 and 2017. An audit was conducted to determine the number of reviews; types of reviews (systematic, meta-analysis, metasynthesis, scoping, narrative, conceptual, critical); and elements that were commonly reported (based on items drawn from the PRISMA checklist) including quality appraisal. A total of 21 reviews were identified. Results showed the overall number of reviews published remained relatively consistent across the decade. In relation to review types, systematic and scoping reviews appeared with greater frequency in more recent years. Most reviews reported significant proportions of the elements consistent with the type of review undertaken, although a minority did not report the search strategies and only one review included a quality appraisal. In conclusion, the reviews published over the last decade provide a strong foundation upon which further advances in the diversity and quality of reviews can be built.
View less >
View more >This study examined the nature of literature reviews published in Australian Social Work between 2007 and 2017. An audit was conducted to determine the number of reviews; types of reviews (systematic, meta-analysis, metasynthesis, scoping, narrative, conceptual, critical); and elements that were commonly reported (based on items drawn from the PRISMA checklist) including quality appraisal. A total of 21 reviews were identified. Results showed the overall number of reviews published remained relatively consistent across the decade. In relation to review types, systematic and scoping reviews appeared with greater frequency in more recent years. Most reviews reported significant proportions of the elements consistent with the type of review undertaken, although a minority did not report the search strategies and only one review included a quality appraisal. In conclusion, the reviews published over the last decade provide a strong foundation upon which further advances in the diversity and quality of reviews can be built.
View less >
Journal Title
Australian Social Work
Volume
73
Issue
1
Copyright Statement
© 2019 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
Subject
Specialist studies in education
Policy and administration
Social work
Social Sciences
Review
Scoping Review
Systematic Review