IOE EPrints

Clarifying differences between review designs and methods

Gough, David and Thomas, James and Oliver, Sandy (2012) Clarifying differences between review designs and methods. Systematic Reviews, 1 (N/A). N/A. ISSN 2046-4053. DOI UNSPECIFIED

Full text not available from this repository.
SFX image for help Not from UCL IOE? image for help


This paper argues that the current proliferation of types of systematic reviews creates challenges for the terminology for describing such reviews. Terminology is necessary for planning, describing, appraising, and using reviews, building infrastructure to enable the conduct and use of reviews, and for further developing review methodology. There is not sufficient consensus on terminology for a typology of reviews to be produced and any such attempt is likely to be limited by the overlapping nature of the dimensions on which reviews vary. It is therefore proposed that the most useful strategy for the field is to develop terminology for the main dimensions of variation. Three such main areas are proposed of: (1) aims and approaches (including what the review is aiming to achieve, the theoretical and ideological assumptions, and the use of theory and aggregation and configuration); (2) structure and components (including the number and type of mapping and synthesis components and how they relate); and (3) breadth and depth and the extent of 'work done' in addressing a research issue (including the breadth of review questions, the detail with which they are addressed, and the amount the review progresses a research agenda). This then provides an overarching strategy to encompass more detailed descriptions of methodology and may lead in time to a more overarching system of terminology for systematic reviews.

Item Type: Article
Controlled Keywords: Systematic review
Divisions: IOE Departments > Departments > Social Science Research Unit
Depositing User: Atira Pure
Date Deposited: 01 Jun 2013 01:55
Last Modified: 29 Jan 2015 08:55
View Item View Item