Comparer des méthodes

	Revue exploratoire	Revue narrative
Domaine	Scientométrie	Scientométrie
Famille	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Année d'origine	2005	Pre-20th century practice; peer-reviewed methodological guidance from 2000s onward
Auteur d'origine	Hilary Arksey & Lisa O'Malley	Traditional academic practice; formalized discussion by Green, Johnson & Adams (2006)
Type	Evidence synthesis review design	Literature review methodology
Source fondatrice	Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32.	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.
Alias	scoping study, literature scoping, evidence mapping review, rapid evidence map	traditional review, expert review, unsystematic review, narrative synthesis
Apparentées	6	6
Résumé	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.	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.