Skip to Main Content

Evidence-Based Practice for Nursing

Looking to know more about Evidence Based Practice? This is the libguide for you!

Types of Reviews

Name of Review:  Description
Literature Review  A literature review intends to provide an overview of a subject. It does not detail each individual article, but summarizes the topic. It does not include a systematic search of the literature or a description of the methods used in the review.
Umbrella Review  A review of systematic reviews. These are used when you want to evaluate the highest levels of evidence on a given topic. You can register the protocol of an umbrella review with PROSPERO. A team is typically required to perform this type of review. 
Cohort Study A study performed by researchers where the participants are already known to have a particular condition. They are followed over time and compared to those who do not have the condition.
Case Control This study follows two groups of participants: one WITH the outcome of interest and one WITHOUT it. They are compared to assess the frequency of a disease or a levels of instance in each group.
Cross Sectional

These are studies that look at the presence or absence of a disease or other variable. They observe a specific population at a single point in time.
Randomized Control Trials

A type of study that randomly assigns participants to 2 or more groups within a study. It must have one experimental group and one control group to compare.
Case-report A report on a series of participants with an outcome of interest. No control group for comparison.
Cost-Benefit Analysis A study comparing the cost of a program with its expected benefit in currency. Cost effectiveness can compare alternate ways to achieve a specific goal.
Scoping Review These aim to map the literature on a particular topic or research area and provide an opportunity to identify key concepts; gaps in the research; and types and sources of evidence to inform practice, policymaking, and research. These are less intensive than a systematic review. 
Systematic Review A summary of all of the clinical research on a topic. These involve complex and in-depth searching, evidence appraisal, and evidence synthesis. They require a team to complete and can take months or years to finish. Can be combined with a meta-analysis.
Meta-Analysis a method of combining data/ numbers from many different studies into one piece of data. Similar to a sys. rev. These involve multiple researchers or mathematicians and can take months/ years to finish. Can be combined with a sys. rev. 

Feeling confused about the term "research"? It seems to be used interchangeably with terms like "searching", but it does have different meanings depending on the context of its use. For the purposes of this guide we will compare what we mean by research versus searching. 

Research can refer to these two meanings: 

  • Primary Research: the act of performing experiments or data gathering in real time. This is when you design and perform actual science-based experiments to record the outcomes of information. You are gathering first hand data on a treatment, disease, or other focal point. Simply put: Research is the act of generating NEW knowledge. This includes: Randomized Controlled Trials, Cohort studies, Case-control studies and Cross-sectional studies. 
  • Systematic Searching: Searching the literature to gather information on a topic. This is database searching, or looking something up in a reference book. This is often what librarians do, we gather the best information possible and then present it to the patron, often giving a summary on the topic as a whole. Think of this as looking at secondary source material, rather than setting up a scientific experiment to gather primary data. Simply put: Searching is the act of gathering knowledge that already exists. These include Systematic reviews, Literature reviews, Meta-analysis, Umbrella reviews, and Scoping reviews. 

Evidence Synthesis

What is evidence synthesis?

Evidence synthesis refers to any method of identifying, selecting, and combining results from multiple studies into one comprehensive understanding of a topic. Different types of reviews will require varying levels of evidence synthesis. 

Systematic Review  Systematically and clearly gathers, categorizes, and evaluates evidence on a topic. This topic can be on a scientific question, policy, or management change. The goal is to compare, evaluate, and summarize, not to report on each individual article. This review is time intensive and requires a team. 

Umbrella Review

 A review of systematic reviews. Useful to gain an understanding of high level of evidence or when there are several competing interventions to choose from. This type of review's question/ topic should be broader than a regular systematic review. 
Literature/ Narrative Review This review type has a wide scope and non standardized/ unregistered methodology. These reviews will vary in depth and do not have to be as comprehensive as other reviews. 
Scoping Review Sometimes referred to as an Evidence Map. This review systematically and transparently gathers and categorizes evidence on a given topic. However, the goal of this review is to identify gaps and opportunities for more research rather than compare an intervention. This type of review may evaluate existing evidence but does not synthesize as a systematic review does. 
Rapid Review Follows the same goal as a systematic review but is limited by time. Researcher will employ shortcuts or other timesaving measures to meet a deadline. These reviews are good for snap decision making. 
Meta-Analysis A statistical method of combining data from differing quantitative studies on a given topic. This review uses statistical methods to objectively evaluate, synthesize, and summarize results. Can be done separately or in combination with a systematic review. 

Evidence Tables

What is an evidence table? 

An evidence table is a tool used to structure and organize citations that you are evaluating by putting all of the major considerations next to each other. In using this tool, you can quickly gauge how two or more articles compare. Below is an example of an evidence table and what to include in each box. 

Citation Purpose Research Question or Hypothesis Sample & Setting Study Design Concept/ Variable of Focus; Define Results Conclusions Level of Evidence 
Authors, citation, year published Describe the goal of the paper, What are the researchers trying to find out? Do the researchers state a hypothesis? What is it? Describe the population that the researchers studied. What are their characteristics? Describe the study design used by the researchers. Is the paper qualitative or quantitative?  What is the variable that the researchers are comparing? What was the intervention? Define or explain as needed.  What are the results? Key findings? What conclusions did the researchers draw? Did they find that more research is needed? Was the study design appropriate for this type of research? 

***NOTE --- you may decide to not use all columns depending on the literature you select.  For example, purpose and research question/hypothesis may be combined. You may also decide to change the labels of the columns from what is listed. ***

Quality Improvement/ Assessment Projects

What is a Quality Improvement (QI)/ Quality Assessment (QA) project? 

QI projects are founded on evidence-based medicine, built upon existing knowledge, and aim to improve institution-specific processes.

A QI project can be defined as the systematic approach to analyzing performance, identifying needed improvements, and evaluating said improvements. (Au & Murray, 2021)

What does a QI project entail?

  • Start by gaining understanding of a current system or process. 
  • Identify and flesh out a new intervention, system, process, or procedure to compare. 
  • Make sure to define your metrics to focus on improving the quality of a system, process, or procedure. 
  • Implement the new intervention and gather data for a set period of time. 
  • Compare the new intervention to the old. 
  • Determine if the new intervention is more effective and efficient. 
  • Make a recommendation based on your findings. 

For more information please read the following citations:

Aquino-Maneja, E., Kim, R. F., Flores, S. L., & Squier, V. R. (2023). Research, evidence-based practice, and quality improvement simplified. The Journal of Continuing Education in Nursing, 54(1), 40-48. doi:https://doi.org/10.3928/00220124-20221207-09

AU, S.; MURRAY, E.; GRANGER, B. B. Data Management for Quality Improvement: How to Collect and Manage Data. AACN Advanced Critical Care, [s. l.], v. 32, n. 2, p. 213–218, 2021. DOI 10.4037/aacnacc2021118. Disponível em: https://research.ebsco.com/linkprocessor/plink?id=b5103e2f-3f14-3ec1-9169-ca3c0808afe5. Acesso em: 9 jul. 2025.

Jones B, Vaux E, Olsson-Brown A. How to get started in quality improvement BMJ 2019; 364 :k5408 doi:10.1136/bmj.k5437

Puri I, Hollingshead CM, Tadi P. Quality Improvement. [Updated 2023 Nov 13]. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2025 Jan-. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK556097/

Silver SA, Harel Z, McQuillan R, Weizman AV, Thomas A, Chertow GM, Nesrallah G, Bell CM, Chan CT. How to Begin a Quality Improvement Project. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2016 May 6;11(5):893-900. doi: 10.2215/CJN.11491015. Epub 2016 Mar 25. PMID: 27016497; PMCID: PMC4858490.

Taylor MJ, McNicholas C, Nicolay C, Darzi A, Bell D, Reed JE. Systematic review of the application of the plan-do-study-act method to improve quality in healthcare. BMJ Qual Saf. 2014 Apr;23(4):290-8. doi: 10.1136/bmjqs-2013-001862. Epub 2013 Sep 11. PMID: 24025320; PMCID: PMC3963536.

 

Site navigation

Jump to:

Help me:

If you have suggestions for how to make this page better, please contact Elizabeth Jerow, Library Director (jerow@msoe.edu).