EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London, 20 Bedford Way, London, WC1H 0AL, UK.
Syst Rev. 2012 Jun 9;1:28. doi: 10.1186/2046-4053-1-28.
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 insufficient 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 along 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 dimensions are proposed: (1) aims and approaches (including what the review is aiming to achieve, the theoretical and ideological assumptions, and the use of theory and logics of aggregation and configuration in synthesis); (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.
本文认为，当前系统评价类型的大量增加给描述此类评价的术语带来了挑战。术语对于规划、描述、评估和使用评价、构建支持评价开展和使用的基础设施以及进一步发展评价方法学都是必要的。对于制定一种评价分类法的术语尚未达成充分共识，任何此类尝试都可能受到评价在其变化维度上的重叠性质的限制。因此，该领域最有效的策略是为主要的变化维度开发术语。为此提出了三个主要维度：（1）目的和方法（包括评价的目标、理论和意识形态假设，以及在综合中使用理论和聚合与配置逻辑）；（2）结构和组成部分（包括映射和综合组成部分的数量和类型，以及它们之间的关系）；以及（3）广度和深度以及解决研究问题的“工作程度”（包括综述问题的广度、它们的处理细节以及综述对研究议程的推进程度）。这为涵盖更详细的方法描述提供了一个总体策略，并可能随着时间的推移导致更全面的系统评价术语体系。
