Salvato in:
| Autori principali: | , , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Natura: | Recurso educativo Open Access |
| Lingua: | en |
| Pubblicazione: |
2024
|
| Soggetti: | |
| Accesso online: | https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1421858 |
| Tags: |
Aggiungi Tag
Nessun Tag, puoi essere il primo ad aggiungerne!!
|
| _version_ | 1867181881526583296 |
|---|---|
| author | Hanan Khalil Fiona Campbell Katrina Danial Danielle Pollock Zachary Munn Vivian Welsh Ashrita Saran Dimi Hoppe Andrea C. Tricco |
| author_facet | Hanan Khalil Fiona Campbell Katrina Danial Danielle Pollock Zachary Munn Vivian Welsh Ashrita Saran Dimi Hoppe Andrea C. Tricco Hanan Khalil Fiona Campbell Katrina Danial Danielle Pollock Zachary Munn Vivian Welsh Ashrita Saran Dimi Hoppe Andrea C. Tricco |
| collection | Education Resources Information Center |
| contents | Advancing the Methodology of Mapping Reviews: A Scoping Review Hanan Khalil Fiona Campbell Katrina Danial Danielle Pollock Zachary Munn Vivian Welsh Ashrita Saran Dimi Hoppe Andrea C. Tricco Databases Citations (References) Research Reports Evidence Research Methodology Standards Selection Criteria Scientific Research Information Retrieval This scoping review aims to identify and systematically review published mapping reviews to assess their commonality and heterogeneity and determine whether additional efforts should be made to standardise methodology and reporting. The following databases were searched; Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Campbell collaboration database, Social Science Abstracts, Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA). Following a pilot-test on a random sample of 20 citations included within title and abstracts, two team members independently completed all screening. Ten articles were piloted at full-text screening, and then each citation was reviewed independently by two team members. Discrepancies at both stages were resolved through discussion. Following a pilot-test on a random sample of five relevant full-text articles, one team member abstracted all the relevant data. Uncertainties in the data abstraction were resolved by another team member. A total of 335 articles were eligible for this scoping review and subsequently included. There was an increasing growth in the number of published mapping reviews over the years from 5 in 2010 to 73 in 2021. Moreover, there was a significant variability in reporting the included mapping reviews including their research question, priori protocol, methodology, data synthesis and reporting. This work has further highlighted the gaps in evidence synthesis methodologies. Further guidance developed by evidence synthesis organisations, such as JBI and Campbell, has the potential to clarify challenges experienced by researchers, given the magnitude of mapping reviews published every year. |
| format | Recurso educativo Open Access |
| id | eric_EJ1421858 |
| institution | ERIC Institute of Education Sciences |
| language | en |
| publishDate | 2024 |
| record_format | eric |
| spellingShingle | Advancing the Methodology of Mapping Reviews: A Scoping Review Hanan Khalil Fiona Campbell Katrina Danial Danielle Pollock Zachary Munn Vivian Welsh Ashrita Saran Dimi Hoppe Andrea C. Tricco Databases Citations (References) Research Reports Evidence Research Methodology Standards Selection Criteria Scientific Research Information Retrieval Advancing the Methodology of Mapping Reviews: A Scoping Review Hanan Khalil Fiona Campbell Katrina Danial Danielle Pollock Zachary Munn Vivian Welsh Ashrita Saran Dimi Hoppe Andrea C. Tricco Databases Citations (References) Research Reports Evidence Research Methodology Standards Selection Criteria Scientific Research Information Retrieval This scoping review aims to identify and systematically review published mapping reviews to assess their commonality and heterogeneity and determine whether additional efforts should be made to standardise methodology and reporting. The following databases were searched; Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Campbell collaboration database, Social Science Abstracts, Library and Information Science Abstracts (LISA). Following a pilot-test on a random sample of 20 citations included within title and abstracts, two team members independently completed all screening. Ten articles were piloted at full-text screening, and then each citation was reviewed independently by two team members. Discrepancies at both stages were resolved through discussion. Following a pilot-test on a random sample of five relevant full-text articles, one team member abstracted all the relevant data. Uncertainties in the data abstraction were resolved by another team member. A total of 335 articles were eligible for this scoping review and subsequently included. There was an increasing growth in the number of published mapping reviews over the years from 5 in 2010 to 73 in 2021. Moreover, there was a significant variability in reporting the included mapping reviews including their research question, priori protocol, methodology, data synthesis and reporting. This work has further highlighted the gaps in evidence synthesis methodologies. Further guidance developed by evidence synthesis organisations, such as JBI and Campbell, has the potential to clarify challenges experienced by researchers, given the magnitude of mapping reviews published every year. |
| title | Advancing the Methodology of Mapping Reviews: A Scoping Review |
| topic | Databases Citations (References) Research Reports Evidence Research Methodology Standards Selection Criteria Scientific Research Information Retrieval |
| url | https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1421858 |