Search

Background: There is considerable debate about how to review the literature in grounded theory research. Notably, grounded theory typically discourages reviewing the literature before data are collected and analysed, so that researchers do not form preconceptions about the theory. However, it is likely researchers will need to review the literature to show they intend to address a gap in knowledge with their research. This might confuse novice researchers, especially given that different approaches to grounded theory can have contrasting positions concerning how and when literature should be reviewed. Aim: To provide an overview of grounded theory and how different approaches might tackle literature reviews. Discussion: A framework is presented to illustrate some of the commonalities between grounded theory approaches, to guide novice researchers in reviewing the literature. The framework acknowledges some of the tensions concerning researchers' objectivity and sketches three phases for researchers to consider when reviewing the literature. Conclusion: Reviewing the literature has different meanings and implications when using grounded theory compared with other research methodologies. Implications for practice: Novice researchers must be attuned to the different ways of reviewing [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Up to 40 per cent of older people do not go to hospital after calling an emergency ambulance and until recently were not referred on to any other community services. This article describes how a multidisciplinary working group developed and evaluated a protocol to enable older people to be referred to intermediate care services after calling an emergency ambulance. A total of 54 patients were monitored after referral to intermediate care to assess adherence to the protocol and outcomes.