The literature review is where many BSN capstones lose the most marks. The cause is rarely clinical knowledge; it is the search and synthesis skills that few courses teach directly.
This guide walks through those skills in order, from your PICOT question to a finished, faculty-ready review. Use it alongside your rubric, which always overrides general advice.
The BSN Literature Review in Brief
Turn your PICOT question into a Boolean search in CINAHL, then PubMed and the Cochrane Library. Apply clear inclusion criteria, rank each study with an evidence hierarchy and record it in an appraisal table.
Write the review by theme, not article by article, so each paragraph compares findings and builds the case for your practice change. Most BSN programs expect around 10 to 15 peer-reviewed sources, but your rubric sets the number.
Step 1: Know What You Are Producing
Before you search, be clear about the target. A BSN literature review is not a list of article summaries, a full systematic review or an opinion essay about what works.
It is a thematically organized synthesis of the best available evidence on your PICOT question. It answers one question: what does current evidence say about this intervention, for this population, on this outcome?
Step 2: Use the Right Databases
Not every database suits a nursing capstone. Start with nursing sources and add others only where your question needs them.
| Database | Best for | Access |
|---|---|---|
| CINAHL | Nursing and allied health research; your main database | Through your library portal |
| PubMed (MEDLINE) | Clinical and biomedical evidence, outcome data | Free online, fuller access through your library |
| Cochrane Library | Systematic reviews and meta-analyses | Partly free; full access through your library |
| ProQuest nursing databases | Wider nursing content, including dissertations | Through your library |
| Google Scholar | Checking citations and finding extra sources | Free, but not a primary database |
Run your main search in CINAHL first. Then check Cochrane for an existing systematic review on your topic: if one exists, it becomes your strongest source.
Step 3: Build a Boolean Search
A vague keyword returns thousands of irrelevant hits. A structured search returns a set you can actually read.
- AND narrows: fall prevention AND older adults AND hospital.
- OR broadens: fall prevention OR fall reduction.
- NOT excludes: fall prevention NOT pediatric (spell it as the database does, often "pediatric").
- Quotation marks find an exact phrase: "hourly rounding".
- Parentheses group terms: (fall prevention OR fall reduction) AND (older adults OR elderly) AND hospital.
Build the string from your PICOT: population AND intervention AND outcome. If you get far too many results, add terms or filters. If you get very few, add synonyms with OR or drop a narrow term.
Save each search string, the database, the date and the number of results. Many rubrics ask you to report your search, and you will need it again.
Step 4: Apply Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria
Inclusion criteria decide what belongs in the review. Apply them consistently so your evidence actually fits the question, not just to reach a source count.
- Date: commonly the last five years; some programs allow older landmark studies.
- Peer review: use the database's peer-reviewed filter. Guidelines and websites can support background but are not research studies.
- Language: usually English unless you can read other languages.
- Population match: a pediatric study rarely supports an adult capstone.
- Intervention match: the study tests your type of intervention, not something loosely related.
Common exclusions are editorials, case reports, studies outside your date range and studies on very different populations. Write your criteria down so you can describe them in the methods part of the review.
Step 5: Rank the Evidence
Not all evidence is equal. Many BSN programs use the Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt hierarchy, which ranks study designs by how reliably they show effect.
| Level | Evidence type |
|---|---|
| I | Systematic review or meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials |
| II | Well-designed randomized controlled trial |
| III | Controlled trial without randomization (quasi-experimental) |
| IV | Case-control or cohort study |
| V | Systematic review of descriptive or qualitative studies |
| VI | Single descriptive or qualitative study |
| VII | Expert opinion or reports of expert committees |
A strong BSN review usually mixes levels, with a few Level I or II sources where they exist. A review built only on Levels VI and VII will be read as weak. If your program uses the Johns Hopkins levels instead, follow those.
Step 6: Build an Evidence Appraisal Table
Most BSN programs ask for an appraisal table, sometimes called a literature matrix or evidence table. Typical columns are author and year, design, sample and setting, intervention, outcomes, evidence level and relevance to your PICOT.
Build it before you write. With every study summarized in one place, the themes for your narrative become obvious and drafting goes much faster.
Step 7: Write Synthesis, Not Summary
This is the step that separates strong reviews from weak ones. Summary repeats what each article found; synthesis compares articles and draws a conclusion.
Summary (loses marks): Jones et al. (2022) found hourly rounding reduced falls. Smith et al. (2021) found the same. Brown (2023) also found fewer falls.
Synthesis (earns marks): Three studies found that nurse-led hourly rounding was linked to fewer falls across medical-surgical and telemetry units (Brown, 2023; Jones et al., 2022; Smith et al., 2021), which suggests the effect does not depend on unit type. Reductions were larger where compliance was audited (Brown, 2023; Jones et al., 2022) than where rounding was self-reported (Smith et al., 2021), pointing to implementation fidelity as a key factor.
These citations are illustrative. Use your own sources and findings.
Organize the review under theme headings, such as effect on fall rates, staff adherence and patient experience. End with a paragraph that connects the evidence to the practice change you propose.
How to Structure the Written Review
Once the table is done, the review itself follows a simple shape. Faculty find it easy to follow, and it keeps you from drifting into article-by-article summary.
| Part | What it does | Typical length |
|---|---|---|
| Opening | Restates the PICOT question and the purpose of the review | One short paragraph |
| Search methods | Databases, search terms, limits, criteria and number of sources kept | One paragraph |
| Themes | Two to four themed sections that compare findings | Most of the review |
| Gaps and limits | Where evidence is thin, mixed or from different settings | One paragraph |
| Summary | What the evidence supports and how it leads to your practice change | One paragraph |
Sample search methods paragraph: CINAHL, PubMed and the Cochrane Library were searched for peer-reviewed studies published in the last five years, using combinations of fall prevention, hourly rounding, older adults and hospital. Inclusion criteria were English-language studies of adult inpatients testing a rounding or structured check-in intervention. Of the records screened, 12 studies met the criteria and were appraised with the Melnyk and Fineout-Overholt hierarchy.
The numbers are illustrative. Report your own databases, dates and counts.
Name the gaps honestly. Noting that most studies come from large teaching hospitals, for example, shows faculty you have read critically rather than collected agreement.
Step 8: Get APA 7th Citations Right
Citation errors are easy marks to lose. Check your reference list for these common problems.
- DOIs: include them when available, formatted as https://doi.org/ followed by the number.
- Author names: surname and initials only, such as Smith, J. K.
- Article titles: sentence case, with only the first word and proper nouns capitalized.
- Journal details: journal name and volume in italics; issue number in brackets, not italic.
- Three or more authors: first author plus et al. in every in-text citation.
How NurseCapstone Helps with BSN Literature Reviews
Send your PICOT question, rubric, required source count and any articles your faculty has approved. A writer matched to BSN level searches the databases, appraises each study and writes a themed model review with an evidence table.
Use it to guide your own review. Every paper is written from scratch and plagiarism-checked, and free revisions within the scope of your original request are included.
Want the Literature Review Done Properly?
Send your PICOT question, rubric and any approved sources. You get a synthesized, APA 7th model review with an evidence table.
Start My Literature ReviewFree revisions · Full refund if late · Written from scratch for your order
Frequently Asked Questions
Most programs ask for around 10 to 15 peer-reviewed sources, but your rubric sets the figure. Ten directly relevant studies beat twenty loosely related ones.
Yes, for background and to support your intervention. Guidelines from bodies such as AHRQ or the CDC sit low on most research hierarchies, so pair them with peer-reviewed studies.
Broaden your terms with synonyms, remove a narrow limit such as unit type, or include related settings and note the difference in your synthesis.
No. Screen titles and abstracts first, then read the methods and results of possible matches, and read fully only the studies you keep.
Many programs ask for the last five years, with exceptions for landmark studies. Check your rubric.
By theme. Theme headings let you compare studies, which is what synthesis means.
Usually author and year, design, sample and setting, intervention, outcomes, evidence level and relevance to your PICOT question.
As a supplement for checking citations and finding extra sources, yes. Use CINAHL and PubMed as your main databases.