Level of literature review in dissertation in diriment spheres of medicine
There is absolutely no standard that is official the quantity associated with literary works review and amount of sources. Much more than 90% of cases, the scope associated with Ph.D. thesis study is 25-30 pages (excluding the list of literary works) – this is certainly an unofficial standard for the number of literary review. At exactly the same time, the amount varies somewhat with respect to the specialty:
- reviews on healing specialties and obstetrics and gynecology frequently simply take 25-30 (usually closer to 30 s.), sometimes just over 30 pages
- Volume of reviews on traumatology and surgery, usually nearer to 25 pages, suppose the volume is lower than 25.
- reviews of literature on dentistry, frequently occupy about 25., Although, with regards to the subject of work, the quantity is allowed around 30.
- especially it is important to mention user reviews associated with literary works on general hygiene – their amount, being a guideline, is about 20.
Optimal quantity of literature sources
It’s not an easy task to state why the quantity of literary works review, add up to the 25-30, is regarded as optimal and a lot of frequently present in Ph.D. dissertation. This indicates towards the author that there are 3 many reasons that are important
- this type of volume allows us to present the question having a adequate level of depth
- your reader can cover the written text of exactly this amount in its entirety from starting to end for just one time
- after the tradition
However, it must be borne in your mind that the systematic manager can have their own opinion about this issue, so he requires a different discussion because customwritings of the supervisor. Also keep in mind that the amount of lower than 20 pages creates the impression of unfinished work, and overview of significantly more than 30 pages is quite tough to perceive, it would appear that there will be something more when you look at the ongoing work that it’s overloaded with back ground information.
In addition, a volume that is large suspicion of writing from the text from other reviews associated with literary works. Usually reviews of large volumes are not look over at a right time, and that’s why they truly are difficult to perceive and will also cause some discomfort from the area of the reader. Even yet in a qualitative report on the literature for the Ph.D. dissertation, any brand new source after the 30th should really be very informative in order to justify the requirement of the presence into the literature review.
Need for quality of literature review
Again I would like to emphasize the reader’s attention, that the presssing issue of the range regarding the review is secondary when compared to the content. It is advisable to publish a summary of an inferior amount, but better in content than to incorporate in the review demonstrably additional information. Using this perspective, the scope associated with the review is dependent upon 2 facets:
- 1) the breadth associated with the topic, i.?. the total amount of text to publish, to reveal the relevance for the subject of work. The « ideal » review – in which « neither add nor subtract »
- 2) the available amount of literature entirely on the main topics the work. The subject has been studied so little that it is possible to increase the scope of the survey only at the expense of background information, resulting in sections directly relating to the topic of work, lost in the review in some cases. This is the reason you can prepare the range of this survey only after gathering a part that is large of literary works on the subject.
The total amount of work can change significantly following its writing in the process of finalizing and correcting the review due to the fact that the superfluous, into the opinion associated with the systematic adviser, components should be deleted, additionally the necessary data is likely to be added.