ScholarGate
助手

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。

Meta分析×系统评价×
领域学术写作学术写作
方法族Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
起源年份19761992
提出者Glass (1976, term coining); Fisher and Pearson (statistical foundations)Cochrane Collaboration (1992)
类型Document TypeDocument Type
开创性文献Page, M. J., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. DOI ↗Page, M. J., et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372, n71. DOI ↗
别名quantitative synthesis, meta-synthesis, pooled analysis, statistical integrationsystematic literature review, evidence synthesis, scoping review, mapping review
相关23
摘要Meta-analysis is the statistical pooling of quantitative findings from multiple independent studies to produce a combined effect estimate. By aggregating data across studies, meta-analysis increases statistical power, reduces random error, and provides a precise summary of an intervention's effectiveness or an association's magnitude. Gene V. Glass coined the term in 1976, formalizing a technique that has become indispensable for evidence synthesis in medicine, psychology, education, and other evidence-based disciplines.A systematic review is a structured, transparent synthesis of all available evidence addressing a specific research question. Unlike narrative reviews, systematic reviews employ comprehensive database searches, predefined selection criteria, quality assessment, and rigorous reporting (PRISMA guideline). The Cochrane Collaboration (founded 1992) established this methodology as the gold standard for evidence synthesis in healthcare and social sciences.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 3 来源
  3. PUBLISHED
  1. v1
  2. 3 来源
  3. PUBLISHED

前往搜索 下载幻灯片

ScholarGate方法对比: Meta-Analysis · Systematic Review. 于 2026-06-17 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare