方法对比
并排查看您选择的方法；存在差异的行会高亮显示。
| 基于bibliometrix的快速文献回顾× | 范围界定审查× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 科学计量学 | 科学计量学 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 2017 (bibliometrix); rapid review practice established ~2010s | 2005 |
| 提出者≠ | Aria & Cuccurullo (bibliometrix package); rapid review tradition from Cochrane and evidence synthesis community | Hilary Arksey & Lisa O'Malley |
| 类型≠ | Expedited evidence synthesis with computational bibliometric support | Evidence synthesis review design |
| 开创性文献≠ | Aria, M., & Cuccurullo, C. (2017). bibliometrix: An R-tool for comprehensive science mapping analysis. Journal of Informetrics, 11(4), 959-975. DOI ↗ | Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. DOI ↗ |
| 别名 | bibliometrix rapid review, R-based rapid review, rapid bibliometric review, tool-assisted rapid synthesis | scoping study, literature scoping, evidence mapping review, rapid evidence map |
| 相关≠ | 5 | 6 |
| 摘要≠ | A bibliometrix-assisted rapid review combines the speed and pragmatic focus of a rapid review with the computational power of the bibliometrix R package. Researchers use bibliometrix to automate citation import, deduplication, descriptive statistics, and science-mapping tasks, compressing the bibliometric phase of a rapid review from days to hours while maintaining transparent, reproducible workflows within a single open-source environment. | 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. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|