ScholarGate
Assistente

Comparar métodos

Examine os métodos selecionados lado a lado; as linhas que diferem ficam destacadas.

Revisão de Mapeamento×Análise Bibliométrica×Revisão Narrativa×
ÁreaCientometriaCientometriaCientometria
FamíliaProcess / pipelineProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
Ano de origemLate 1990s–2000s; major methodological formalization ~2010s1969 (term coined); practice dates to 1920s–1930sPre-20th century practice; peer-reviewed methodological guidance from 2000s onward
Autor originalBuckland & Gann (1998); formalized by systematic review community (Campbell Collaboration, Collaboration for Environmental Evidence)Alan Pritchard (coined term); earlier quantitative work by Paul Otlet (1934) and S. C. Bradford (1934)Traditional academic practice; formalized discussion by Green, Johnson & Adams (2006)
TipoSystematic evidence mapping methodologyQuantitative literature analysisLiterature review methodology
Fonte seminalJames, K. L., Randall, N. P., & Haddaway, N. R. (2016). A methodology for systematic mapping in environmental sciences. Environmental Evidence, 5(1), 7. DOI ↗Pritchard, A. (1969). Statistical bibliography or bibliometrics? Journal of Documentation, 25(4), 348–349. 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 ↗
Outros nomesevidence map, systematic map, research map, literature mapbibliometrics, bibliometric study, bibliometric mapping, publication analysistraditional review, expert review, unsystematic review, narrative synthesis
Relacionados666
ResumoA 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.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 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.
ScholarGateConjunto de dados
  1. v1
  2. 2 Fontes
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Fontes
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Fontes
  3. PUBLISHED

Ir para a pesquisa Baixar slides

ScholarGateComparar métodos: Mapping Review · Bibliometric Analysis · Narrative Review. Recuperado em 2026-06-20 de https://scholargate.app/pt/compare