Vertaile menetelmiä

	Meta-analyysi, joka perustuu meta-regressioon	Kartoittava katsaus
Tieteenala	Scientometriikka	Scientometriikka
Menetelmäperhe	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Syntyvuosi	1993–1999	2005
Kehittäjä	Stephen G. Thompson & Simon J. Sharp (systematic framework); earlier work by Berlin, Longnecker & Greenland (1993)	Hilary Arksey & Lisa O'Malley
Tyyppi	Quantitative evidence synthesis with covariate modeling	Evidence synthesis review design
Alkuperäislähde	Thompson, S. G., & Sharp, S. J. (1999). Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: a comparison of methods. Statistics in Medicine, 18(20), 2693–2708.	Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32.
Rinnakkaisnimet	meta-regression, meta-analytic regression, weighted regression meta-analysis, MR-MA	scoping study, literature scoping, evidence mapping review, rapid evidence map
Liittyvät	4	6
Tiivistelmä	Meta-regression-based meta-analysis extends standard meta-analysis by fitting a weighted regression model in which study-level characteristics (moderators) predict observed effect sizes. Rather than simply pooling effects, this approach asks why effects vary across studies — linking heterogeneity in outcomes to differences in population, intervention, design, or measurement features. It is the primary tool for explaining between-study variance in quantitative evidence synthesis.	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.