Skip to Main Content
It looks like you're using Internet Explorer 11 or older. This website works best with modern browsers such as the latest versions of Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. If you continue with this browser, you may see unexpected results.

Integrative Review

A guide introducing the process of conducting an integrative review

Resources

Resources, Tools, and Journal Articles

Resources for Starting an Integrative Review
  1. Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
  2. PRISMA checklist
  3. da Silva, R. N., Brandão, M. A. G., & Ferreira, M. de A. (2020). Integrative review as a method to generate or to test nursing theory. Nursing Science Quarterly, 33(3), 258–263. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894318420920602
  4. Hopia, H., Latvala, E., & Liimatainen, L. (2016). Reviewing the methodology of an integrative review. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 30(4), 662–669. https://doi.org/10.1111/scs.12327
  5. Westlake, C. (2012). Practical tips for literature synthesisClinical Nurse Specialist, 26(5), 244–249. https://doi.org/10.1097/NUR.0b013e318263d766
  6. Toronto, C. E., & Remington, R. (Eds.). (2020). A step-by-step guide to conducting an integrative review. Springer.
Additional Resources for Integrative Reviews
Alternative Review Types and Possible Issues
  1. Whittemore, R., Chao, A., Jang, M., Minges, K. E., & Park, C. (2014). Methods for knowledge synthesis: An overview. Heart & Lung, 43(5), 453–461. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrtlng.2014.05.014
  2. Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
  3. Kastner, M., Antony, J., Soobiah, C., Straus, S. E., & Tricco, A. C. (2016). Conceptual recommendations for selecting the most appropriate knowledge synthesis method to answer research questions related to complex evidence. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 73, 43–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.11.022
  4. Tricco, A. C., Antony, J., Soobiah, C., Kastner, M., Cogo, E., Macdonald, H., D’Souza, J., Hui, W., & Straus, S. E. (2016). Knowledge synthesis methods for generating or refining theory: A scoping review reveals that little guidance is available. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 73, 36–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.11.021
  5. Tricco, A. C., Antony, J., Soobiah, C., Kastner, M., MacDonald, H., Cogo, E., Lillie, E., Tran, J., & Straus, S. E. (2016). Knowledge synthesis methods for integrating qualitative and quantitative data: a scoping review reveals poor operationalization of the methodological steps. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 73, 29–35. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.12.011

Gumberg Resources

Gumberg Related Resources