ScholarGate
Asystent

Porównaj metody

Przeglądaj wybrane metody obok siebie; wiersze, które się różnią, są wyróżnione.

Przegląd integracyjny×Przegląd mapujący×
DziedzinaNaukometriaNaukometria
RodzinaProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
Rok powstania2005 (updated methodology); roots in Cooper (1982)Late 1990s–2000s; major methodological formalization ~2010s
TwórcaRobin Whittemore & Kathleen KnaflBuckland & Gann (1998); formalized by systematic review community (Campbell Collaboration, Collaboration for Environmental Evidence)
TypSystematic review methodSystematic evidence mapping methodology
Źródło pierwotneWhittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546–553. DOI ↗James, K. L., Randall, N. P., & Haddaway, N. R. (2016). A methodology for systematic mapping in environmental sciences. Environmental Evidence, 5(1), 7. DOI ↗
Inne nazwyintegrative literature review, integrative research review, ILR, integrative synthesisevidence map, systematic map, research map, literature map
Pokrewne66
PodsumowanieAn integrative review is a systematic method for synthesising literature that allows the simultaneous inclusion of diverse study designs — experimental, quasi-experimental, and non-experimental — as well as theoretical papers. Unlike the conventional systematic review, which is restricted to controlled trials or a single methodology, the integrative review builds a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon by drawing on the full breadth of the relevant evidence base. The method follows a rigorous, structured pipeline to ensure transparency and minimise bias.A 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.
ScholarGateZbiór danych
  1. v1
  2. 2 Źródła
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Źródła
  3. PUBLISHED

Przejdź do wyszukiwania Pobierz slajdy

ScholarGatePorównaj metody: Integrative Review · Mapping Review. Pobrano 2026-06-20 z https://scholargate.app/pl/compare