Purpose The purpose of this paper introduces the Experiential Growth Literature Review (EGLR), a novel methodological approach applying Positive Autoethnography (PosAE) principles to literature review processes. EGLR addresses a critical gap in mental health and healthcare research: how practitioners and researchers can create literature reviews that honor both scholarly rigor and experiential wisdom, documenting intellectual growth alongside content mastery. This approach counters skepticism by demonstrating that integrating experiential insights can uphold academic standards, making the hidden learning journey visible while maintaining rigor. Design/methodology/approach Drawing on PosAE’s three foundational principles – purpose-driven inquiry, positive reflexivity and experiential focus – the authors develop EGLR’s structure, procedures and quality criteria. The methodology maintains 70% traditional content (accurate synthesis, critical analysis and proper citation) while adding 30% reflexive documentation of learning journeys. EGLR applies post-traumatic growth frameworks to literature engagement contexts, documenting growth across five domains: relating to scholars/ideas, discovering new possibilities, developing intellectual strength, experiencing paradigmatic shifts and appreciating the knowledge journey. The authors position EGLR relative to other established review typologies, demonstrating it represents an orthogonal dimension – addressing reviewer positioning rather than evidence type or synthesis method. Detailed procedures include three phases: preparation (articulating purpose and selecting frameworks), engaged reading (traditional activities plus reflexive documentation) and analysis/writing (content synthesis integrated with growth documentation). Findings EGLR reveals insights about knowledge synthesis typically invisible in conventional reviews. The approach enables mental health practitioners transitioning to research to bridge experiential and scholarly knowledge authentically. PhD students can document intellectual development alongside content mastery, demonstrating emerging expertise through learning journeys rather than performed certainty. Researchers engaging emotionally difficult topics (trauma, moral injury and loss) can integrate their responses productively rather than professionally suppressing them. The 70/30 balance maintains scholarly standards while validating that positioned inquiry generates insights unavailable through false neutrality. Strategic voice shifting between third person (traditional content) and first person (reflexive elements) creates reviews that are both rigorous and revealing. Research limitations/implications EGLR is newly developed with minimal empirical validation. The 70/30 balance requires testing across contexts to ensure broad applicability. Clarifying how EGLR can be adapted or validated in diverse cultural or research settings will enhance its relevance. Future research should include application studies, quality criteria validation, comparative effectiveness research and cross-cultural adaptation studies. Time requirements exceed traditional reviews by an estimated 25%–50%, but understanding contextual transferability will support wider adoption and validation. Practical implications Mental health practitioners conducting research can position their clinical expertise as epistemological resource rather than bias to overcome. Doctoral students gain methodology for documenting learning authentically. Interdisciplinary researchers can make visible the substantial intellectual work of synthesizing across paradigms. Those researching personally relevant topics can integrate experience productively. EGLR provides immediately usable procedures, quality criteria and multiple examples demonstrating application across mental health contexts including trauma research, practitioner-researcher development and doctoral education. Social implications EGLR challenges assumptions about objectivity and neutrality in mental health research. By validating experiential knowledge and documenting growth through literature engagement, EGLR promotes social inclusion of practitioner voices in research, values lived experience expertise and democratizes knowledge production. The methodology supports recovery-oriented research approaches and positions service users and practitioners as legitimate knowledge producers. Originality/value This paper makes three original contributions to literature review methodology. First, it introduces EGLR as the inaugural application of PosAE to systematic knowledge synthesis, demonstrating that positioned inquiry can maintain scholarly standards while generating insights unavailable through false neutrality. Second, it operationalizes post-traumatic growth frameworks for literature engagement contexts, translating Tedeschi and Calhoun’s (2004) five domains into intellectual development indicators. Third, it positions EGLR as an orthogonal dimension to Grant and Booth’s (2009) established typology, clarifying that EGLR addresses reviewer development and positioning rather than evidence type or synthesis method, thereby expanding – not replacing – existing methodological options for healthcare researchers.
Matt Broadway-Horner (Fri,) studied this question.