系统回顾
期限(时间)
背景(考古学)
意义(存在)
领域(数学)
认识论
梅德林
工程伦理学
心理学
政治学
心理治疗师
历史
哲学
考古
纯数学
法学
量子力学
工程类
物理
数学
作者
Morris Gordon,Michelle Daniel,Madalena Patrício
出处
期刊:Medical Teacher
[Taylor & Francis]
日期:2018-09-27
卷期号:41 (8): 956-957
被引量:15
标识
DOI:10.1080/0142159x.2018.1504164
摘要
For anyone who reads the health education literature regularly, journal sections that focus on "reviews" are common, yet the use of the term "systematic" to describe these reviews is sporadic. Further, we believe this term is used in a manner in the field that does not accurately reflect the methodological implications of the term in this context. There are examples of "systematic" works that simply don't describe themselves in that way, despite a clear alignment with many of the principles of "systematic reviewing". Conversely, there are reviews that are clearly not systematic, yet describe themselves as such. In this piece, we discuss how this difficulty with methodological nomenclature has occurred and the distinct and important meaning of the term "systematic" in relation to health education reviews.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI