Methoden vergelijken
Bekijk de geselecteerde methoden naast elkaar; rijen die verschillen zijn gemarkeerd.
| Systematische Literatuurstudie× | Narratieve Recensie× | |
|---|---|---|
| Vakgebied | Scientometrie | Scientometrie |
| Familie | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Jaar van ontstaan≠ | 1993 (Cochrane Collaboration); 2004 (Kitchenham SLR guidelines) | Pre-20th century practice; peer-reviewed methodological guidance from 2000s onward |
| Grondlegger≠ | Archie Cochrane (conceptual foundation); formalized by the Cochrane Collaboration (1993) and Barbara Kitchenham in software engineering (2004) | Traditional academic practice; formalized discussion by Green, Johnson & Adams (2006) |
| Type≠ | Evidence synthesis methodology | Literature review methodology |
| Oorspronkelijke bron≠ | Kitchenham, B. (2004). Procedures for Performing Systematic Reviews. Keele University Technical Report TR/SE-0401. link ↗ | 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 ↗ |
| Aliassen | SLR, systematic review, evidence synthesis review, structured literature review | traditional review, expert review, unsystematic review, narrative synthesis |
| Verwant≠ | 5 | 6 |
| Samenvatting≠ | A systematic literature review (SLR) is a structured, reproducible method for identifying, appraising, and synthesizing all relevant studies on a research question. Unlike a narrative review, it follows an explicit, pre-specified protocol — from database search strings through inclusion criteria to data extraction — so that the process is transparent, auditable, and replicable by other researchers. It is widely used in medicine, education, software engineering, and the social sciences to produce the most comprehensive possible evidence base on a topic. | 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. |
| ScholarGateGegevensset ↗ |
|
|