Σύγκριση μεθόδων
Εξετάστε τις επιλεγμένες μεθόδους δίπλα-δίπλα· οι γραμμές που διαφέρουν επισημαίνονται.
| Συστηματική Βιβλιογραφική Ανασκόπηση× | Επισκόπηση πεδίου× | |
|---|---|---|
| Πεδίο | Επιστημομετρία | Επιστημομετρία |
| Οικογένεια | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Έτος προέλευσης≠ | 1993 (Cochrane Collaboration); 2004 (Kitchenham SLR guidelines) | 2005 |
| Δημιουργός≠ | Archie Cochrane (conceptual foundation); formalized by the Cochrane Collaboration (1993) and Barbara Kitchenham in software engineering (2004) | Hilary Arksey & Lisa O'Malley |
| Τύπος≠ | Evidence synthesis methodology | Evidence synthesis review design |
| Θεμελιώδης πηγή≠ | Kitchenham, B. (2004). Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews. Keele University Technical Report TR/SE-0401. link ↗ | Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. DOI ↗ |
| Εναλλακτικές ονομασίες | SLR, systematic review, evidence synthesis review, structured literature review | scoping study, literature scoping, evidence mapping review, rapid evidence map |
| Συναφείς≠ | 5 | 6 |
| Σύνοψη≠ | A systematic literature review (SLR) is a structured, reproducible method for identifying, appraising, and synthesizing all relevant studies on a research question. Unlike a narrative review, it follows an explicit, pre-specified protocol — from database search strings through inclusion criteria to data extraction — so that the process is transparent, auditable, and replicable by other researchers. It is widely used in medicine, education, software engineering, and the social sciences to produce the most comprehensive possible evidence base on a topic. | 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. |
| ScholarGateΣύνολο δεδομένων ↗ |
|
|