手法を比較

	フィールドマッピング・スコーピングレビュー	書誌計量分析
分野	科学計量学	科学計量学
系統	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
提唱年	2005 (foundational framework); field-mapping purpose formalised c. 2015–2018	1969 (term coined); practice dates to 1920s–1930s
提唱者	Arksey & O'Malley (scoping review framework); field-mapping purpose formalised by Munn et al. and Peters et al.	Alan Pritchard (coined term); earlier quantitative work by Paul Otlet (1934) and S. C. Bradford (1934)
種類	Evidence synthesis — systematic review variant	Quantitative literature analysis
原典	Munn, Z., Peters, M. D. J., Stern, C., Tufanaru, C., McArthur, A., & Aromataris, E. (2018). Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic review and scoping review approach. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 18, 143.	Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics? Journal of Documentation, 25(4), 348–349.
別名	field-mapping scoping study, evidence-mapping scoping review, field map review, scoping review for field mapping	bibliometrics, bibliometric study, bibliometric mapping, publication analysis
関連	6	6
概要	A field-mapping scoping review is a purposive variant of the scoping review in which the overarching goal is to chart the conceptual and empirical landscape of a research field — identifying what has been studied, by whom, using which methods, and where knowledge gaps remain. It follows the Arksey and O'Malley scoping framework but is explicitly oriented toward producing a structured map of a field rather than answering a focused clinical or policy question.	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.