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。
| 原创研究论文× | 叙述性文献综述× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 学术写作 | 学术写作 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 1665 | 1900 |
| 提出者≠ | Scientific research community | Research community (traditional academic writing format) |
| 类型 | Document Type | Document Type |
| 开创性文献≠ | International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (2023). Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly Work in Medical Journals. ICMJE. link ↗ | 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 ↗ |
| 别名 | research paper, empirical article, primary research, journal article | narrative review, literature survey, interpretive review, state-of-the-art review |
| 相关≠ | 5 | 3 |
| 摘要≠ | An original research article is the primary vehicle for reporting new empirical findings in a discipline. Following the IMRaD structure (Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion), it represents a researcher's novel data, analysis, and interpretation. The journal article format has been the gold standard for scientific communication since the establishment of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society in 1665. | A narrative literature review is an interpretive synthesis of published research organized around themes, concepts, or historical progression rather than systematic search. Unlike systematic reviews, narrative reviews employ subjective study selection, do not require protocol registration, and prioritize depth of interpretation over exhaustive comprehensiveness. Narrative reviews are valuable for conceptual synthesis, exploring emerging fields with sparse literature, and providing historical context; they have been the traditional form of scholarly literature synthesis since the inception of academic journals. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|