Vertaile menetelmiä
Tarkastele valitsemiasi menetelmiä rinnakkain; eroavat rivit korostetaan.
| PRISMA-compliant Umbrella Review× | Kartoittava katsaus× | |
|---|---|---|
| Tieteenala | Scientometriikka | Scientometriikka |
| Menetelmäperhe | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Syntyvuosi≠ | 2015 (umbrella review methodology); 2022 (PRIOR reporting extension) | 2005 |
| Kehittäjä≠ | Aromataris et al. (JBI); PRIOR reporting extension by Fusar-Poli et al. | Hilary Arksey & Lisa O'Malley |
| Tyyppi≠ | Evidence synthesis / review of systematic reviews | Evidence synthesis review design |
| Alkuperäislähde≠ | Aromataris, E., Fernandez, R., Godfrey, C. M., Holly, C., Khalil, H., & Tungpunkom, P. (2015). Summarizing systematic reviews: Methodological development, conduct and reporting of an umbrella review approach. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 13(3), 132–140. DOI ↗ | Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. DOI ↗ |
| Rinnakkaisnimet | umbrella review with PRISMA, PRIOR-guided umbrella review, overview of reviews, PRISMA umbrella overview | scoping study, literature scoping, evidence mapping review, rapid evidence map |
| Liittyvät≠ | 5 | 6 |
| Tiivistelmä≠ | A PRISMA-compliant umbrella review is a structured synthesis of existing systematic reviews and meta-analyses on a topic, conducted and reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines — specifically the PRIOR extension developed for umbrella reviews. By operating one level above primary research, it maps the totality of evidence, identifies convergent or contradictory findings across reviews, and quantifies evidence strength at the highest tier of the evidence hierarchy. | 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. |
| ScholarGateAineisto ↗ |
|
|