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。

叙事综述×快速审查方法论×
领域科学计量学证据综合
方法族Process / pipelineProcess / pipeline
起源年份Pre-20th century practice; peer-reviewed methodological guidance from 2000s onward2012
提出者Traditional academic practice; formalized discussion by Green, Johnson & Adams (2006)Khangura et al. (2012), Codified by Cochrane Rapid Reviews (2020)
类型Literature review methodologyFramework
开创性文献Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006). Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade. Journal of Chiropractic Medicine, 5(3), 101–117. DOI ↗Garritty, C., Gartlehner, G., Nussbaumer-Streit, B., et al. (2021). Cochrane Rapid Reviews interim guidance on methodological considerations for expedited reviews of interventions. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 130, 13–21. link ↗
别名traditional review, expert review, unsystematic review, narrative synthesisRapid Evidence Synthesis, Expedited Review, Fast-Track Systematic Review
相关61
摘要A narrative review is a broad, author-directed synthesis of published literature on a topic, written to summarize, interpret, and contextualize existing knowledge without following the rigorous, pre-registered search and selection protocols that characterize systematic reviews. It draws on the author's expertise to weave disparate sources into a coherent account that identifies themes, debates, and directions for future research.A rapid review is a systematic synthesis method that accelerates the evidence review process by streamlining or omitting certain systematic review steps while maintaining transparent, reproducible methodology. Pioneered by Khangura et al. (2012) and codified by the Cochrane Collaboration (2020), rapid reviews answer urgent policy or clinical questions in weeks to months rather than 12-18 months required by full systematic reviews. Methodological shortcuts—such as single screening of borderline studies, abbreviated search strategies, or limiting study designs—trades some rigor for speed. Rapid reviews are increasingly vital in responding to public health emergencies (pandemics, environmental crises) and evolving clinical practice questions where waiting for a full systematic review is not feasible.
ScholarGate数据集
  1. v1
  2. 2 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: Narrative Review · Rapid Review Methodology. 于 2026-06-20 检索自 https://scholargate.app/zh/compare