Σύγκριση μεθόδων

	Επισκόπηση πεδίου	Βιβλιομετρική Ανάλυση	Επισκόπηση	Ανασκόπηση Αφήγησης
Πεδίο	Επιστημομετρία	Επιστημομετρία	Επιστημομετρία	Επιστημομετρία
Οικογένεια	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Έτος προέλευσης	2005	1969 (term coined); practice dates to 1920s–1930s	2005 (updated methodology); roots in Cooper (1982)	Pre-20th century practice; peer-reviewed methodological guidance from 2000s onward
Δημιουργός	Hilary Arksey & Lisa O'Malley	Alan Pritchard (coined term); earlier quantitative work by Paul Otlet (1934) and S. C. Bradford (1934)	Robin Whittemore & Kathleen Knafl	Traditional academic practice; formalized discussion by Green, Johnson & Adams (2006)
Τύπος	Evidence synthesis review design	Quantitative literature analysis	Systematic review method	Literature review methodology
Θεμελιώδης πηγή	Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32.	Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics? Journal of Documentation, 25(4), 348–349.	Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546–553.	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.
Εναλλακτικές ονομασίες	scoping study, literature scoping, evidence mapping review, rapid evidence map	bibliometrics, bibliometric study, bibliometric mapping, publication analysis	integrative literature review, integrative research review, ILR, integrative synthesis	traditional review, expert review, unsystematic review, narrative synthesis
Συναφείς	6	6	6	6
Σύνοψη	A scoping review is a systematic evidence-synthesis method that maps the breadth and nature of research on a topic — identifying key concepts, evidence types, and gaps — without necessarily appraising study quality or pooling effect sizes. Developed by Arksey and O'Malley (2005) and refined by Levac and colleagues (2010), it is particularly valuable for emerging or heterogeneous fields where a full systematic review would be premature or infeasible.	Bibliometric analysis applies statistical and mathematical methods to bibliographic records — publications, citations, authors, journals, and keywords — to measure and map the structure, output, and intellectual evolution of a research field. It is widely used to identify influential works, prolific authors, productive journals, collaboration networks, and emerging research themes across any academic discipline.	An integrative review is a systematic method for synthesising literature that allows the simultaneous inclusion of diverse study designs — experimental, quasi-experimental, and non-experimental — as well as theoretical papers. Unlike the conventional systematic review, which is restricted to controlled trials or a single methodology, the integrative review builds a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon by drawing on the full breadth of the relevant evidence base. The method follows a rigorous, structured pipeline to ensure transparency and minimise bias.	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.