Salīdzināt metodes
Apskatiet izvēlētās metodes blakus; rindas, kas atšķiras, ir izceltas.
| Metodoloģiski pamatota metaetnogrāfija× | Pārskatīšana, pamatojoties uz PRISMA× | |
|---|---|---|
| Nozare | Zinātnometrija | Zinātnometrija |
| Saime | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Izcelsmes gads≠ | 1988 (meta-ethnography); protocol-based practice formalised 2010s | 2009 (original PRISMA statement); updated 2020 |
| Autors≠ | Noblit & Hare (meta-ethnography); protocol registration formalised through PROSPERO and eMERGe guidance | David Moher and PRISMA Group |
| Tips≠ | Qualitative evidence synthesis with pre-registered protocol | Structured reporting framework for systematic reviews |
| Pirmavots≠ | Noblit, G. W., & Hare, R. D. (1988). Meta-Ethnography: Synthesizing Qualitative Studies. Sage. ISBN: 978-0803930742 | Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P. M., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., ... & Moher, D. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. DOI ↗ |
| Citi nosaukumi | pre-registered meta-ethnography, prospero meta-ethnography, registered qualitative synthesis, protocol-driven meta-ethnography | PRISMA review, PRISMA-guided systematic review, PRISMA 2020 review, PRISMA-compliant review |
| Saistītās | 5 | 5 |
| Kopsavilkums≠ | Protocol-based meta-ethnography is a structured qualitative evidence synthesis that follows Noblit and Hare's meta-ethnography method while requiring a pre-registered, publicly available protocol — typically on PROSPERO — before the review is conducted. Pre-registration constrains post-hoc decision-making, enhances methodological transparency, and aligns qualitative synthesis with the rigour standards now expected by leading journals and funders. | A PRISMA-based review is a systematic literature review conducted and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Originally published by Moher et al. in 2009 and updated as PRISMA 2020 by Page et al., the framework specifies a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram covering identification, screening, eligibility, and inclusion — ensuring full transparency and reproducibility in the review process. |
| ScholarGateDatu kopa ↗ |
|
|