HLTH 9101 Week 3 Literature Synthesis Section Example

Course	HLTH 9101 Dissertation
Week	Week 3
Paper type	Literature synthesis
Length	About 530 words, 4 pages
Format	APA 7 student paper
School	Walden University
Program	PhD in Public Health
Updated	October 2026

Free sample paper for HLTH 9101 Week 3

Literature Synthesis: Rebuilding One Section of a Composite Dissertation's Review Chapter on County Broadband and Older Adults' Behavioral Telehealth So Each Paragraph Asserts What No Single Source Says Alone

Student Name

Walden University

HLTH 9101: Dissertation

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

What this page is doingThe title states the test each paragraph must pass, which is the difference between synthesis and summary.

Why the Section Was Rebuilt

The original section summarized studies one per paragraph: what each did and what it found. A reader finished it knowing many results and no argument. Boote and Beile (2005) argued that a dissertation literature review should do more than summarize; it should synthesize, showing what the field knows, what it does not and why the study is needed. This rebuilt section organizes paragraphs by claims that require more than one source and ends each with what that claim hands to the method.

What this page is doingStating the standard for synthesis before presenting the rebuilt section lets the reader judge it.

Claim One: Telehealth Became a Major Mode of Behavioral Health Care for Older Adults, and the Shift Began Before the Pandemic

No single study shows both the timing and the scale. Mehrotra et al. (2017) documented rapid growth in telemental health use among rural Medicare beneficiaries in the decade before 2014, with large variation across states. Patel et al. (2021), working from a national insurance sample, showed telemedicine spiking in spring 2020 and holding its ground longest for mental health once offices reopened. Together, they establish that behavioral health is the area where telehealth took hold most durably, and that variation by place was present from the start.

What this hands to the method: the outcome should be specific to behavioral health, and the analysis should expect variation across counties, not only across states.

What this page is doingEnding the paragraph with what it hands to the method is the move that makes a review serve the study.

Claim Two: Modality Matters, and Broadband Shapes Modality More Than Use

In one Michigan system's pandemic records, Chen et al. (2022) saw phone-only care for 45.4% of telehealth patients, with each added decade of age and each low-broadband ZIP code cutting the odds of a video visit. Lam et al. (2020) judged a large fraction of the 65-and-older population unprepared for video care, with sensory, cognitive and technical hurdles named most. Read together, these findings imply that broadband may affect whether older adults receive video rather than audio-only care more than whether they receive telehealth at all.

What this hands to the method: if the claims allow, video and audio-only visits should be analyzed separately, with broadband expected to relate more strongly to video.

Claim Three: County Broadband Is an Area Characteristic, and Its Effects Cannot Be Read Off Individuals

Broadband access is recognized as a public health concern linked to many social and economic conditions (Bauerly et al., 2019). County subscription rates therefore travel with income, age structure and rurality. Robinson (1950) showed that associations among groups can mislead about individuals. Combined, these sources warn that a county-level association between broadband and telehealth may reflect the conditions that travel with broadband.

What this hands to the method: the models should adjust for county income, rurality and age structure, and the findings should be stated at the county level.

What this page is doingA third claim built from a policy source and a methodological classic shows synthesis can cross disciplines.

What the Section Concludes

The field has shown growth and variation in behavioral telehealth and individual-level links between broadband and video use. It has not examined whether county broadband relates to the mode of behavioral health care older adults receive across counties. That gap is the study's.

References

Bauerly, B. C., McCord, R. F., Hulkower, R., & Pepin, D. (2019). Broadband access as a public health issue: The role of law in expanding broadband access and connecting underserved communities for better health outcomes. Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 47(2 Suppl.), 39-42. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073110519857314

Boote, D. N., & Beile, P. (2005). Scholars before researchers: On the centrality of the dissertation literature review in research preparation. Educational Researcher, 34(6), 3-15. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X034006003

Chen, J., Li, K. Y., Andino, J., Hill, C. E., Ng, S., Steppe, E., & Ellimoottil, C. (2022). Predictors of audio-only versus video telehealth visits during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 37(5), 1138-1144. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-021-07172-y

Lam, K., Lu, A. D., Shi, Y., & Covinsky, K. E. (2020). Assessing telemedicine unreadiness among older adults in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. JAMA Internal Medicine, 180(10), 1389-1391. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.2671

Mehrotra, A., Huskamp, H. A., Souza, J., Uscher-Pines, L., Rose, S., Landon, B. E., Jena, A. B., & Busch, A. B. (2017). Rapid growth in mental health telemedicine use among rural Medicare beneficiaries, wide variation across states. Health Affairs, 36(5), 909-917. https://doi.org/10.1377/hlthaff.2016.1461

Patel, S. Y., Mehrotra, A., Huskamp, H. A., Uscher-Pines, L., Ganguli, I., & Barnett, M. L. (2021). Trends in outpatient care delivery and telemedicine during the COVID-19 pandemic in the US. JAMA Internal Medicine, 181(3), 388-391. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.5928

Robinson, W. S. (1950). Ecological correlations and the behavior of individuals. American Sociological Review, 15(3), 351-357. https://doi.org/10.2307/2087176

HLTH 9101 Week 3 instructions, in plain terms

Students revise a section of their literature review from summary into synthesis. Faculty expect paragraphs organized around claims that require more than one source, rather than around individual studies. The strongest syntheses state each claim at the start of a paragraph, use several sources together to support it, acknowledge evidence that complicates it, and end by stating what the claim means for the study's design. Faculty value syntheses that draw on different kinds of sources, such as empirical studies, policy analyses and methodological classics, when each contributes something the others cannot. The section should close by stating the gap the dissertation fills. A brief explanation of why the section was rebuilt helps a reader see the change.

Inside the HLTH 9101 Week 3 example

The section opens by explaining that the original version summarized one study per paragraph and cites Boote and Beile on reviews that synthesize. The first claim combines Mehrotra and colleagues and Patel and colleagues on the timing and scale of behavioral telehealth, handing the method a behavioral-specific outcome and county variation. The second combines Chen and colleagues and Lam and colleagues on modality and readiness, handing the method a separate video analysis. The third combines Bauerly and colleagues and Robinson on broadband as an area characteristic, handing the method county covariates and county-level reporting. A closing paragraph states what the field has and has not shown.

Where the marks sit in the HLTH 9101 Week 3 rubric

The test for this section is whether each paragraph could exist without any one of its sources. Paragraphs that report one study after another are summary, however well written. Strong synthesis opens with a claim, uses two or more sources that together support it and ends by stating its consequence for the study. Graders value the explicit handoff to the method because it shows the review serves the dissertation. Drawing on different kinds of sources, including methodological work, earns credit when each adds something distinct. Accurate description of each source is checked. A closing statement of the gap should follow from the claims rather than appear as a separate assertion. Overlong paragraphs that pile up six sources around a vague claim are marked down as firmly as single-study summaries, because neither tells the reader what to believe.

Common HLTH 9101 Week 3 mistakes, and how to avoid them

Literature reviews often present studies one at a time, so readers learn many findings and no argument. To write stronger synthesis, list the claims your review needs to make. For each claim, find the two or three sources that together support it, and write a paragraph that begins with the claim. Include evidence that complicates it. End each paragraph by saying what the claim means for your method. Close the section by stating the gap. If your review covers a different topic, a synthesis of one of its sections can be written from your sources. Finally, read each paragraph's first sentence in order; together they should read as the argument of the whole section.

Get a HLTH 9101 Week 3 example written to your instructions

Paste the review section you want rebuilt and the studies it cites, with the Week 3 synthesis prompt and rubric. It returns organized under assertions drawn from several sources at once, each paragraph ending on what it means for your design, plus a before-and-after paragraph. First synthesis free, within 24 to 48 hours. The studies it weighs are stand-ins.

More HLTH 9101 papers and PhD in Public Health samples

HLTH 9101 Week 3 questions, answered

How do I know when summary has turned into synthesis?

Look at the subject of each sentence. When studies are the subjects, one after another, the paragraph is summarizing. When a claim leads and the studies serve as its evidence, it is synthesizing. The example's rebuilt paragraphs open on claims such as the two broadband measures capturing different things, and cite several sources for each. A quick pass through your first sentences shows which kind you have.

Should studies that complicate an assertion be included?

Yes, inside the paragraph they complicate. A synthesis citing only supporting work reads as advocacy, and committee members often know the exceptions. In the example, studies reporting heavy reliance on audio-only calls among older patients complicate the broadband assertion, and the paragraph says so before concluding. That candor also prepares a limitation the discussion chapter will need later.

Where can I find a free HLTH 9101 Week 3 sample paper?

You can read the full Week 3 literature synthesis on this page, rebuilding one section of a composite dissertation's review into three claims that each need more than one source, with seven references.

Why does each paragraph end with a note to the method?

Because a review exists to justify the study's design. Ending each claim with what it means for the method shows the reader why the claim was included and prepares them for chapter 3.

What does each paragraph hand to the method?

The first hands a behavioral-specific outcome and an expectation of county variation; the second hands a separate analysis of video visits; the third hands county covariates and reporting results only at the county level.