ScholarGate
Asistents

Salīdzināt metodes

Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.

Kartēšanas pārskats×Narratīvais pārskats×
NozareZinātnometrijaZinātnometrija
SaimeProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
Izcelsmes gadsLate 1990s–2000s; major methodological formalization ~2010sPre-20th century practice; peer-reviewed methodological guidance from 2000s onward
AutorsBuckland & Gann (1998); formalized by systematic review community (Campbell Collaboration, Collaboration for Environmental Evidence)Traditional academic practice; formalized discussion by Green, Johnson & Adams (2006)
TipsSystematic evidence mapping methodologyLiterature review methodology
PirmavotsJames, K. L., Randall, N. P., & Haddaway, N. R. (2016). A methodology for systematic mapping in environmental sciences. Environmental Evidence, 5(1), 7. DOI ↗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. DOI ↗
Citi nosaukumievidence map, systematic map, research map, literature maptraditional review, expert review, unsystematic review, narrative synthesis
Saistītās66
KopsavilkumsA mapping review (also called a systematic map or evidence map) is a form of systematic review that aims to chart the extent, range, and nature of evidence on a broad topic rather than synthesize findings into a single pooled answer. It categorizes studies by key dimensions — such as intervention type, population, outcome, and study design — and presents the resulting landscape visually and tabularly so that researchers and practitioners can identify clusters of evidence, knowledge gaps, and priorities for future primary research or deeper synthesis.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.
ScholarGateDatu kopa
  1. v1
  2. 2 Avoti
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Avoti
  3. PUBLISHED

Doties uz meklēšanu Lejupielādēt slaidus

ScholarGateSalīdzināt metodes: Mapping Review · Narrative Review. Izgūts 2026-06-18 no https://scholargate.app/lv/compare