Сравнение на методи
Прегледайте избраните методи един до друг; редовете с разлики са откроени.
| Методология на обзорния преглед (Scoping Review)× | Наративен преглед× | |
|---|---|---|
| Област≠ | Синтез на доказателства | Наукометрия |
| Семейство | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Година на възникване≠ | 2005 | Pre-20th century practice; peer-reviewed methodological guidance from 2000s onward |
| Създател≠ | Arksey & O'Malley (2005), Extended by JBI (2020) and PRISMA-ScR (2018) | Traditional academic practice; formalized discussion by Green, Johnson & Adams (2006) |
| Тип≠ | Framework | Literature review methodology |
| Основополагащ източник≠ | Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. DOI ↗ | Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006). Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 5(3), 101–117. DOI ↗ |
| Други названия≠ | Scoping Review, Scoping Study, Scope of the Field | traditional review, expert review, unsystematic review, narrative synthesis |
| Свързани≠ | 2 | 6 |
| Резюме≠ | A scoping review is a structured, transparent literature mapping method that identifies and synthesizes evidence across a defined topic without formally assessing study quality or generating pooled effect estimates. Developed by Arksey and O'Malley (2005) and refined by the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) and PRISMA-ScR (2018), scoping reviews answer 'what evidence exists and in what forms' rather than 'what does the evidence conclude'—making them ideal for charting emerging fields, knowledge gaps, and the scope of a literature base before conducting a systematic review or as a standalone rapid knowledge synthesis. | A narrative review is a broad, author-directed synthesis of published literature on a topic, written to summarize, interpret, and contextualize existing knowledge without following the rigorous, pre-registered search and selection protocols that characterize systematic reviews. It draws on the author's expertise to weave disparate sources into a coherent account that identifies themes, debates, and directions for future research. |
| ScholarGateНабор от данни ↗ |
|
|