So sánh phương pháp
Xem các phương pháp đã chọn cạnh nhau; những hàng khác biệt được làm nổi bật.
| Systematic Literature Review dựa trên giao thức× | Tổng quan Ô (Umbrella Review)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Lĩnh vực≠ | Trắc lượng khoa học | Tổng hợp bằng chứng |
| Họ | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| Năm ra đời≠ | 1990s–2015 (Cochrane Handbook 1st ed. 1994; PRISMA-P 2015) | 2009 |
| Người khởi xướng≠ | Cochrane Collaboration; Moher et al. (PRISMA-P) | Grant & Booth (2009), Refined by AMSTAR-2 (Shea et al., 2017) |
| Loại≠ | Evidence synthesis method with pre-specified protocol | Framework |
| Công trình gốc≠ | Higgins, J. P. T., Thomas, J., Chandler, J., Cumpston, M., Li, T., Page, M. J., & Welch, V. A. (Eds.). (2023). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Version 6.4). Cochrane. Retrieved from https://training.cochrane.org/handbook link ↗ | Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91–108. DOI ↗ |
| Tên gọi khác≠ | protocol-registered SLR, pre-registered systematic review, PROSPERO-registered systematic review, protocol-driven systematic review | Overview of Reviews, Meta-Review, Review of Reviews |
| Liên quan≠ | 5 | 2 |
| Tóm tắt≠ | A protocol-based systematic literature review is a systematic review conducted according to a fully pre-specified and publicly registered research protocol. By committing the review question, eligibility criteria, search strategy, and planned analyses to a registered document before data collection begins, this approach minimises post-hoc decision-making, selective outcome reporting, and the accumulation bias that can undermine the credibility of unregistered reviews. Registration platforms such as PROSPERO and the Open Science Framework provide permanent, time-stamped records of the protocol. | An umbrella review is a systematic synthesis of multiple systematic reviews addressing overlapping or related research questions, typically on the same topic or intervention. Also called a 'review of reviews' or 'overview of reviews,' umbrella reviews consolidate evidence when two or more high-quality systematic reviews exist on the same clinical question. Grant and Booth (2009) formally categorized this methodology; Shea et al. (2017) developed AMSTAR-2, the critical appraisal tool for assessing the quality of included reviews. Umbrella reviews are essential when numerous systematic reviews produce conflicting conclusions, when rapid synthesis of evidence is needed for policy or clinical guidance, or when evidence has accumulated faster than any single systematic review can capture. |
| ScholarGateBộ dữ liệu ↗ |
|
|