Literature review for the dissertation: what is important?

Spread the love

Literature review for the dissertation- the first chapter of the thesis, containing data on the state of the scientific problem, in which the author of the dissertation plans to propose his solution. According to the content, it is analytical. In the course of work on a literature review, it is necessary to collect information from numerous sources of scientific medical information, assess current trends in the decision, and the degree of knowledge of the topic.

The ability to assess the independence of the applicant in graduate school or the applicant:

Often, a literature review is the first chapter that a supervisor requests when working with a potential candidate for a degree. Thus, it is possible to understand how a potential student is theoretically prepared, how he works with literature, whether he is able to analyze data, whether concentration has a core of thought.

The literature review helps clarify the topic of the dissertation work:

It so happens that initially the topic is formulated in general terms and the department only offers the medical specialist a scientific problem that he will need to work through. The topic will be clarified in the process of working on a review of literature for the thesis and directly when collecting research material when it becomes clear which points can be realized and covered in the thesis, and which remain only in the discharge of scientific thought.

Show the theoretical significance of a scientific problem:

“The material has already been collected, but there is no review yet” or “I did a review at the very beginning of my thesis and now it needs to be updated” – such phrases are often heard in our association. Often, the theses focus on the practical side of doing research but forget about the theoretical part of the thesis. This is an absolutely unsurprising situation, because for most doctors the fulfillment of a thesis is only a step of the career ladder, and many medical specialists do not have the opportunity to grasp the subtleties of the work methodology.

The risk to repeat the work of the predecessor and not to show scientific novelty:

Without a review of the literature, the author of the thesis risks repeating the work already completed, it threatens with the lack of scientific novelty, which fundamentally contradicts the basic requirement for the thesis – proposing a new solution to the existing problem, new elaboration of medical problems. What is it fraught with? The supervisor will not miss a thesis for approbation and as a result, at best, you will be forced to work through the available literature again, at worst, simply do not defend yourself or you will be sent next year.