Four Types of Literature Reviews Relevant for Assistive

Four Types of Literature Reviews Relevant for Assistive Technology Professionals By Dave Edyburn

research

Four Types of Literature Reviews Relevant for Assistive Technology Professionals SUMMARY Assistive technology (AT) professionals are generally interested in research, but often lack access to research articles and strat- egies for locating relevant research. The purpose of this article is to describe applications of Google Scholar for locating relevant research articles and describe four types of literature reviews that can help busy AT professionals learn about the latest research findings to support their practice.

Assistive technology (AT) professionals are generally interested in research, but often lack access to research articles and strate- gies for locating relevant research. As a result, it can be difficult to stay up-to-date with the latest research. The purpose of this article is to highlight one strategy for locating relevant research articles and describe four types of literature reviews that can help busy AT professionals learn about the latest research findings to support their practice. LAUNCHING INTO RESEARCH: GOOGLE SCHOLAR Google Scholar (scholar.google.com) is a resource all profes- sionals should become familiar with (see Figure 1). It is ideal for tracking down research articles about a topic (e.g., assistive tech- nology), a particular author (e.g., Edyburn), and a particular article by searching on the article title (e.g., Twenty-five years later: How is technology used in the education of students with disabilities?). When a PDF or html copy of the article is available, there will be a link on the right side of the screen so you can download the article. This is always an excellent first step in trying to obtain a research article of interest. If you cannot access an article online, you can trying searching a university database or submitting an interlibrary loan request to receive the article through your local

public library. If your school district has a School Library Media specialist, they might be able to assist in obtaining specific articles for you through some of the school’s database subscriptions. However, before we begin the primary focus of this article, let’s be sure that you are aware of two other critical features of Google Scholar. First, notice the quotation marks in the final line below the brief description of the article (see #1 in Figure 2). If you click on the quotation link, you will see a pop-up that provides the cita- tion for that article formatted in five of the most common citation formats. You simply need to copy and paste this citation into your reference list (but beware, there are often errors in the formatting, capitalization, or missing information). Nonetheless, this is a real time saving feature. The second Google Scholar feature you want to know about is the link next to the quotation mark, labeled Cited by (see #2 in Figure 2). If you click on the Cited by link you will see a list of all the articles that cite this particular article that may help you dis- cover even newer articles that may be relevant for your work. This is very interesting if you happen to be the author of the article! However, the real value of this feature is that it provides a litera- ture search going forward from the time an article was published. That is, when an article is published, the author lists the references

DAVE EDYBURN is Senior Research Scientist and Professor Emeritus, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee. His research and teaching interests focus on the use of technology to enhance teaching, learning, and performance. Email: edyburn@uwm.edu

BACK TO CONTENTS

Figure 1 A screen print illustrating the search results in Google Scholar.

Figure 2 A screen print illustrating two useful Google Scholar features.

BACK TO CONTENTS

s/he used at the time the work was written. However, how do you know about all the works that cited this particular article? Before Google Scholar, you would need to be an expert to un- derstand the impact of any specific article. Now, you simply need to pay attention to the citation count to have an approximate idea of the article’s impact. For example, if a paper is newly published it may have few, if any citations. If an article is several years old and has few citations, you should probably avoid it. However, when you start to see citation counts in the hundreds or thousands, it signals you should probably become familiar with the article be- cause it has had clear impact on the profession. Because the field of AT is so specialized, it is very common to see articles with ci- tation counts in the 30-150 range. Citation counts above 150 are noteworthy in the field of AT and citation counts above 1000 are articles that everyone should probably be familiar with. FOUR TYPES OF LITERATURE REVIEWS Reviews of the literature are essential for any research project because before we can conduct a new study we need to under- stand what is already known about our topic. Grant applications will often require a review of the literature to demonstrate that there is a need for the project. And, practitioners are often chal- lenged to demonstrate that the interventions we are proposing are evidence-based. As a result, it is increasingly important that AT professionals have a basic understand of literature reviews. Finding the right review of the literature will save hours of work trying to track down different individual studies to make sense of all that is known. The following sections provide a brief intro- duction to four types of literature reviews. Examples of each type of review are included if readers are interested in learning more about the literature review methodology. In some cases, I hope that you will discover a literature review that you didn’t know you needed. Items marked with an * are available from Google Schol- ar. DESCRIPTIVE LITERATURE REVIEWS The most common type of literature review is what is known as a descriptive review of the literature. Here, the author describes the search terms that they wanted to analyze (e.g., virtual reality in special education), a period of time to study (usually the past 5 or 10 years), some inclusionary criteria (i.e., K-12 education, writ- ten in English), and some exclusionary criteria (i.e., conference proceedings, post-secondary education). Then, they analyze the set of article they found and describe the characteristics of the knowledge base. Typically, they will end with a set of recommen- dations for future research (this is especially valuable for student researchers looking to justify a new study!). Finding a literature review on a topic of interest will point you to many more relevant articles that you can track down from the reference list. Here are a few recent descriptive literature reviews that may be of interest to AT professionals. Collins, J. C., & Collet-Klingenberg, L. (2018). Portable electron-

ic assistive technology to improve vocational task completion in young adults with an intellectual disability: A review of the litera- ture. Journal of Intellectual Disabilities, 22(3), 213-232. * Koumpouros, Y., & Kafazis, T. (2019). Wearables and mobile technologies in autism spectrum disorder interventions: A sys- tematic literature review. Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders, 66, 1-25. Mechling, L. C. (2007). Assistive technology as a self-manage- ment tool for prompting students with intellectual disabilities to initiate and complete daily tasks: A literature review. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 42(3), 252-269. * Schreffler, J., Vasquez, E., Chini, J., & James, W. (2019). Universal design for learning in postsecondary STEM education for students with disabilities: A systematic literature review. International Jour- nal of STEM Education, 6(1), 1-10. SCOPING REVIEWS Scoping Reviews are a newer type of literature review. The in- tent of a scoping review is to find as much information on a new topic that may not yet have a large research base. For this reason, there are no limits placed on inclusion and exclusion criteria since the goal is to produce a snapshot of what is known by gathering as many different types of articles that offer opinion, examples from practice, white papers and more. AT professionals trying to make the case for the acquisition of new technologies that may not yet have a research base may wish to search for a scoping re- view or conduct their own. Below are eight examples of recent scoping reviews that may be relevant for the field of AT. * Costantino, M. A., & Bonati, M. (2014). A scoping review of in- terventions to supplement spoken communication for children with limited speech or language skills. PloS One, 9 (3), e90744, 1-15. * Cunningham, B. J., Washington, K. N., Binns, A., Rolfe, K., Rob- ertson, B., & Rosenbaum, P. (2017). Current methods of evaluat- ing speech-language outcomes for preschoolers with commu- nication disorders: A scoping review using the ICF-CY. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 60 (2), 447-464. Drager, K. D., & Holyfield, C. (2016). Scoping review of inter- ventions for children who require augmentative and alternative communication is limited by focus on randomized controlled tri- als. Evidence-Based Communication Assessment and Intervention, 10 (2), 59-65. * Karem, R.W., Washington, K. N., Crowe, K., Jenkins, A., Leon, M., Kokotek, L., ... & Westby, C. (2019). Current methods of evaluating the language abilities of multilingual preschoolers: A scoping re- view using the International Classification of Functioning, Disabil- ity and Health–Children and Youth version. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 50 (3), 434-451.

BACK TO CONTENTS

* Kennedy, J., Missiuna, C., Pollock, N., Wu, S., Yost, J., & Camp- bell, W. (2018). A scoping review to explore how universal de- sign for learning is described and implemented by rehabilitation health professionals in school settings. Child: Care, Health and De- velopment, 44 (5), 670-688. * Lamontagne, M. E., Gagnon, C., Allaire, A. S., & Noreau, L. (2016). A scoping review of clinical practice improvement meth- odology use in rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Process and Outcome, 5 , RPO-S20360. * Schlosser, R. W., & Koul, R. K. (2015). Speech output technol- ogies in interventions for individuals with autism spectrum disor- ders: A scoping review. Augmentative and Alternative Communica- tion, 31 (4), 285-309. * Tao, G., Charm, G., Kabacińska, K., Miller, W. C., & Robillard, J. M. (2020). Evaluation tools for assistive technologies: A scoping review. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 101 (6), 1025-1040. META-ANALYTIC REVIEWS A meta-analysis review is similar to the formality of a descrip- tive literature review but goes further to conduct a statistical test about the size of the effect caused by the intervention. Until re- cently, a meta-analysis was considered one of the highest levels of research evidence (see Evidence Review below). Nonetheless, locating a meta-analysis on a topic of interest is an important find for any professional. Here are a few recent meta-analysis reviews that may be of interest to AT professionals. * Alzrayer, N., Banda, D. R., & Koul, R. K. (2014). Use of iPad/iP- ods with individuals with autism and other developmental dis- abilities: A meta-analysis of communication interventions. Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 1 (3), 179-191. Capp, M. J. (2017). The effectiveness of universal design for learning: A meta-analysis of literature between 2013 and 2016. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 21 (8), 791-807. Muharib, R., & Alzrayer, N. M. (2018). The use of high-tech speech-generating devices as an evidence-based practice for children with autism spectrum disorders: A meta-analysis. Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 5 (1), 43-57. * Perelmutter, B., McGregor, K. K., & Gordon, K. R. (2017). As- sistive technology interventions for adolescents and adults with learning disabilities: An evidence-based systematic review and meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 114 , 139-163.

reading comprehension for students with reading disabilities? A meta-analysis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 51 (1), 73-84.

EVIDENCE REVIEW Research methodologists have increasingly sought to improve the quality of research reviews to remove some of the subjectiv- ity found in descriptive literature reviews (Cooper, Hedges, & Val- entine, 2019; Higgins, et al., 2019). At the forefront of this work is an international network of researchers known as Cochrane (www.cochranelibrary.com). They have established protocols for conducting evidence reviews. They have also created a library of the evidence reviews. This work originally started by focusing on medicine and health science but the methodology is finding its way into education. At this point, there is only one AT evidence review that meets this highest standard of research evidence. Thomas, R., Barker, L., Rubin, G., & Dahlmann Noor, A. (2015). As- sistive technology for children and young people with low vision. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 6, Art. No.: CD011350. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011350.pub2 REFERENCES Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (Eds.). (2019). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis. NY: Russell Sage Foundation. Higgins, J. P., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Compton, M., Li, T, Page, M.J., & Welch, V.A. (Eds.). (2019). Cochrane handbook for systemat- ic reviews of interventions (2nd ed.). Chichester (UK): John Wiley & Sons.

* Wood, S. G., Moxley, J. H., Tighe, E. L., & Wagner, R. K. (2018). Does use of text-to-speech and related read-aloud tools improve

BACK TO CONTENTS

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4

www.closingthegap.com

Made with FlippingBook Ebook Creator