ScholarGate
Trợ lý

So sánh phương pháp

Xem các phương pháp đã chọn cạnh nhau; những hàng khác biệt được làm nổi bật.

Tổng quan nhanh dựa trên hồi quy meta×Tổng quan phạm vi×
Lĩnh vựcTrắc lượng khoa họcTrắc lượng khoa học
HọProcess / pipelineProcess / pipeline
Năm ra đời2000s–2010s (convergence of rapid review and meta-regression)2005
Người khởi xướngMeta-regression: Simon Thompson & Stephen Sharp (1999); Rapid review methodology: Cochrane, WHO, and health technology assessment bodies (2000s onward)Hilary Arksey & Lisa O'Malley
LoạiQuantitative evidence synthesis variantEvidence synthesis review design
Công trình gốcThompson, S. G., & Sharp, S. J. (1999). Explaining heterogeneity in meta-analysis: A comparison of methods. Statistics in Medicine, 18(20), 2693–2708. DOI ↗Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. DOI ↗
Tên gọi khácrapid review with meta-regression, accelerated meta-regression review, rapid synthesis with meta-regression, RRMRscoping study, literature scoping, evidence mapping review, rapid evidence map
Liên quan56
Tóm tắtA meta-regression-based rapid review is an accelerated evidence synthesis that combines the time-efficient protocols of a rapid review with meta-regression analysis to identify which study-level or population-level characteristics explain variability in effect sizes across included studies. By streamlining search and screening steps without sacrificing the explanatory power of regression modeling, this approach delivers actionable heterogeneity insights under decision-making time constraints.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.
ScholarGateBộ dữ liệu
  1. v1
  2. 2 Nguồn tài liệu
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 2 Nguồn tài liệu
  3. PUBLISHED

Đến trang tìm kiếm Tải xuống bản trình chiếu

ScholarGateSo sánh phương pháp: meta-regression-based rapid review · Scoping Review. Truy cập ngày 2026-06-19 từ https://scholargate.app/vi/compare