4.4 Review

Reviewing the animal literature: how to describe and choose between different types of literature reviews

期刊

LABORATORY ANIMALS
卷 55, 期 2, 页码 129-141

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0023677220968599

关键词

Narrative review; mapping review; scoping review; systematic review; rapid review; umbrella review

资金

  1. R2N, Federal State of Lower Saxony
  2. DFG [FOR2591, BL953/11-1]
  3. NWO [313-99-310]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Before embarking on an animal research project, conducting a thorough literature review is essential to avoid redundancy, improve research reliability, and address research questions effectively. Understanding the various types of literature reviews and their associated terminology can help clarify conclusions and prevent ambiguity in research interpretation.
Before starting any (animal) research project, review of the existing literature is good practice. From both the scientific and the ethical perspective, high-quality literature reviews are essential. Literature reviews have many potential advantages besides synthesising the evidence for a research question. First, they can show if a proposed study has already been performed, preventing redundant research. Second, when planning new experiments, reviews can inform the experimental design, thereby increasing the reliability, relevance and efficiency of the study. Third, reviews may even answer research questions using already available data. Multiple definitions of the term literature review co-exist. In this paper, we describe the different steps in the review process, and the risks and benefits of using various methodologies in each step. We then suggest common terminology for different review types: narrative reviews, mapping reviews, scoping reviews, rapid reviews, systematic reviews and umbrella reviews. We recommend which review to select, depending on the research question and available resources. We believe that improved understanding of review methods and terminology will prevent ambiguity and increase appropriate interpretation of the conclusions of reviews.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据