Порівняння методів
Переглядайте обрані методи поруч; рядки з відмінностями підсвічено.
| Протокольна метаетнографія× | Оглядовий огляд (Scoping Review)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Галузь | Наукометрія | Наукометрія |
| Родина | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Рік появи≠ | 1988 (meta-ethnography); protocol-based practice formalised 2010s | 2005 |
| Автор методу≠ | Noblit & Hare (meta-ethnography); protocol registration formalised through PROSPERO and eMERGe guidance | Hilary Arksey & Lisa O'Malley |
| Тип≠ | Qualitative evidence synthesis with pre-registered protocol | Evidence synthesis review design |
| Основоположне джерело≠ | Noblit, G. W., & Hare, R. D. (1988). Meta-Ethnography: Synthesizing Qualitative Studies. Sage. ISBN: 978-0803930742 | Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. DOI ↗ |
| Інші назви | pre-registered meta-ethnography, prospero meta-ethnography, registered qualitative synthesis, protocol-driven meta-ethnography | scoping study, literature scoping, evidence mapping review, rapid evidence map |
| Пов'язані≠ | 5 | 6 |
| Підсумок≠ | Protocol-based meta-ethnography is a structured qualitative evidence synthesis that follows Noblit and Hare's meta-ethnography method while requiring a pre-registered, publicly available protocol — typically on PROSPERO — before the review is conducted. Pre-registration constrains post-hoc decision-making, enhances methodological transparency, and aligns qualitative synthesis with the rigour standards now expected by leading journals and funders. | 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. |
| ScholarGateНабір даних ↗ |
|
|