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。
| 范围界定审查× | 综合评价× | |
|---|---|---|
| 领域 | 科学计量学 | 科学计量学 |
| 方法族 | Process / pipeline | Process / pipeline |
| 起源年份≠ | 2005 | 2005 (updated methodology); roots in Cooper (1982) |
| 提出者≠ | Hilary Arksey & Lisa O'Malley | Robin Whittemore & Kathleen Knafl |
| 类型≠ | Evidence synthesis review design | Systematic review method |
| 开创性文献≠ | Arksey, H., & O'Malley, L. (2005). Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32. DOI ↗ | Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2005). The integrative review: Updated methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52(5), 546–553. DOI ↗ |
| 别名 | scoping study, literature scoping, evidence mapping review, rapid evidence map | integrative literature review, integrative research review, ILR, integrative synthesis |
| 相关 | 6 | 6 |
| 摘要≠ | 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. | An integrative review is a systematic method for synthesising literature that allows the simultaneous inclusion of diverse study designs — experimental, quasi-experimental, and non-experimental — as well as theoretical papers. Unlike the conventional systematic review, which is restricted to controlled trials or a single methodology, the integrative review builds a comprehensive understanding of a phenomenon by drawing on the full breadth of the relevant evidence base. The method follows a rigorous, structured pipeline to ensure transparency and minimise bias. |
| ScholarGate数据集 ↗ |
|
|