Сравнение на методи
Прегледайте избраните методи един до друг; редовете с разлики са откроени.
| Обзорен преглед за картографиране на област× | Анализ на тематичната еволюция× | |
|---|---|---|
| Област | Наукометрия | Наукометрия |
| Семейство | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Година на възникване≠ | 2005 (foundational framework); field-mapping purpose formalised c. 2015–2018 | 2011 |
| Създател≠ | Arksey & O'Malley (scoping review framework); field-mapping purpose formalised by Munn et al. and Peters et al. | Manuel J. Cobo and colleagues (University of Granada) |
| Тип≠ | Evidence synthesis — systematic review variant | Quantitative bibliometric technique |
| Основополагащ източник≠ | Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic review and scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18, 143. DOI ↗ | Cobo, M. J., Lopez-Herrera, A. G., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Herrera, F. (2011). Science mapping software tools: Review, analysis, and cooperative study among tools. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 62(7), 1382–1402. DOI ↗ |
| Други названия | field-mapping scoping study, evidence-mapping scoping review, field map review, scoping review for field mapping | TEA, thematic development analysis, temporal thematic mapping, longitudinal theme analysis |
| Свързани | 6 | 6 |
| Резюме≠ | A field-mapping scoping review is a purposive variant of the scoping review in which the overarching goal is to chart the conceptual and empirical landscape of a research field — identifying what has been studied, by whom, using which methods, and where knowledge gaps remain. It follows the Arksey and O'Malley scoping framework but is explicitly oriented toward producing a structured map of a field rather than answering a focused clinical or policy question. | Thematic evolution analysis is a bibliometric technique that divides a body of literature into consecutive time periods and tracks how research themes emerge, consolidate, split, merge, or disappear across those periods. By combining co-word analysis, clustering, and strategic diagrams for each time slice, it produces a dynamic picture of a field's intellectual development rather than a static snapshot. |
| ScholarGateНабор от данни ↗ |
|
|