Methoden vergelijken
Bekijk de geselecteerde methoden naast elkaar; rijen die verschillen zijn gemarkeerd.
| Bibliometrische Analyse× | Scoping Review× | |
|---|---|---|
| Vakgebied | Scientometrie | Scientometrie |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Jaar van ontstaan≠ | 1969 (term coined); practice dates to 1920s–1930s | 2005 |
| Grondlegger≠ | Alan Pritchard (coined term); earlier quantitative work by Paul Otlet (1934) and S. C. Bradford (1934) | Hilary Arksey & Lisa O'Malley |
| Type≠ | Quantitative literature analysis | Evidence synthesis review design |
| Oorspronkelijke bron≠ | Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics? Journal of Documentation, 25(4), 348–349. link ↗ | Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. DOI ↗ |
| Aliassen | bibliometrics, bibliometric study, bibliometric mapping, publication analysis | scoping study, literature scoping, evidence mapping review, rapid evidence map |
| Verwant | 6 | 6 |
| Samenvatting≠ | 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. | 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. |
| ScholarGateGegevensset ↗ |
|
|