Сравнение методов

	Клинический случай	Нарративный (повествовательный) обзор литературы	Оригинальная исследовательская статья
Область	Академическое письмо	Академическое письмо	Академическое письмо
Семейство	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline	Process / pipeline
Год появления	1800	1900	1665
Автор метода	Clinical medicine (long tradition)	Research community (traditional academic writing format)	Scientific research community
Тип	Document Type	Document Type	Document Type
Основополагающий источник	Gagnier, J. J., Kienle, G., Altman, D. G., Moher, D., Lakatos, P., & Conboy, T. A. (2013). The CARE guidelines: consensus-based clinical case report guideline development. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 67(1), 46–51.	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.	International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (2023). Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. ICMJE.
Другие названия	case series, case study, clinical case, patient report	narrative review, literature survey, interpretive review, state-of-the-art review	research paper, empirical article, primary research, journal article
Связанные	2	3	5
Сводка	A case report is a detailed clinical account of one patient's diagnosis, treatment, and outcome, typically used to describe novel, unusual, or educational cases not previously reported. Unlike controlled studies with comparison groups, case reports are observational, non-comparative, and generate hypotheses rather than test them. Occupying the lowest rung of evidence hierarchy, case reports are nonetheless valuable for early signal detection, documenting rare diseases, and communicating clinical wisdom. The CARE guidelines (2013) provide reporting standards to ensure completeness and transparency.	A narrative literature review is an interpretive synthesis of published research organized around themes, concepts, or historical progression rather than systematic search. Unlike systematic reviews, narrative reviews employ subjective study selection, do not require protocol registration, and prioritize depth of interpretation over exhaustive comprehensiveness. Narrative reviews are valuable for conceptual synthesis, exploring emerging fields with sparse literature, and providing historical context; they have been the traditional form of scholarly literature synthesis since the inception of academic journals.	An original research article is the primary vehicle for reporting new empirical findings in a discipline. Following the IMRaD structure (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion), it represents a researcher's novel data, analysis, and interpretation. The journal article format has been the gold standard for scientific communication since the establishment of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society in 1665.