Обзор как перспективный вид научной публикации, его типы и характеристики

Обзоры, публикуемые в медицинских журналах и интегрирующие новации в доказательной медицине, в условиях беспрецедентного роста объемов научной информации становятся востребованной формой публикации в социогуманитарных и других науках. Обзоры упорядочивают новую информацию, критически переосмысливают вклад новых публикаций в науку, определяют тенденции исследований в предметных областях и выявляют пробелы в знаниях. В статье сравнительно ограниченный опыт российских ученых в подготовке обзоров сопоставляется с передовыми международными традициями; выделяются основные рекомендации по подготовке обзоров на уровне мировых стандартов; анализируются функции, характеристики, таксономия и методология обзоров как перспективного вида научных публикаций для российской науки. Авторы рассматривают критерии, формирующие обширную типологию обзоров, а также особенности методологии самых популярных и перспективных видов обзоров (систематического обзора, обзора предметного поля, библиометрического обзора и др.) по различным областям научного знания.

1. Azer S. A. The Top-Cited Articles in Medical Education: A Bibliometric Analysis. Academic Medicine. 2015;90(8):1147-1161. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000000780.

2. Renck Jalongo M., Saracho O. N. Writing for Publication: Transitions and Tools that Support Scholars’ success. Springer; 2016.

3. Grant M., Booth A. A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal. 2009;26(2):91-108. DOI: 10.1111/i.1471-1842.2009.00848.

4. Torres J. T., Higheagle Strong Z., Adesope O. O. Reflection through assessment: A systematic narrative review of teacher feedback and student self-perception. Studies in Educational Evaluation. 2020;64:100814. DOI: 10.1016/i.stueduc.2019.100814.

5. Topoglu Y., Watson J., Suri R., Ayaz H. Electrodermal activity in ambulatory settings: a narrative review of literature. In: Ayaz H. (eds) Advances in Neuroergonomics and Cognitive Engineering. AHFE 2019. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. Vol. 953. Springer, Cham; 2020, pp. 91-102. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-20473-0_10.

6. Kragt D., Holtrop D. Volunteering research in Australia: A narrative review. Australian Journal of Psychology. 2019;71(4):342-360. DOI: 10.1111/aipy.12251.

7. Durojaye O., Laseinde T., Oluwafemi I. A Descriptive Review of Carbon Footprint. In: Ahram T., Karwowski W., Pickl S., Taiar R. (eds) Human Systems Engineering and Design II. IHSED 2019. Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing. Vol. 1026. Springer, Cham; 2020, pp. 960-968. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-27928-8_144.

8. Muggah R. Negotiating disarmament and demobilisation: A descriptive review of the evidence. Colombia International. 2013;77:21-41. Available at: http://www.scielo.org.co/pdf/rci/n77/n77a02.pdf

9. Zhu J.-H. Public opinion polling in China: A descriptive review. Gazette. 1988;41(2):127-138. DOI: 10.1177/001654928804100204.

10. Blass A. P., Gouvea da Costa S. E. Pinheiro de Lima E., Tortato U., Borges L. A. Environmental Performance Measurement in Hospitals: A Bibliometric Review of Literature (1987-2017). In: Leal Filho W., Tortato U., Franken-berger F. (eds) Universities and Sustainable Communities: Meeting the Goals of the Agenda 2030. World Sustainability Series. Springer, Cham; 2020, pp. 133-145. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-30306-8_8.

11. Duran-Sanchez A., Alvarez Garda J., Del Rrn-Rama M. C., Ratten V. Trends and changes in the International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research: A bibliometric review. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research. 2019;25(7):1494-1514. DOI: 10.1108/ITEBR-04-2019-0249.

12. Grosseck G., Tiru L. G., Bran R. A. Education for sustainable development: Evolution and perspectives: A bibliometric review of research, 1992-2018. Sustainability 2019;11(21):6136. DOI: 10.3390/su11216136.

13. Sant E. Democratic Education: A Theoretical Review (2006-2017). Review of Educational Research. 2019;89(5):655-696. DOI: 10.3102/0034654319862493.

14. Bostrom M., Andersson E., Berg M., Gustafsson K., Gustavsson E., Hysing E., et al. Conditions for transformative learning for sustainable development: A theoretical review and approach. Sustainability. 2018;10(12):4479. DOI: 10.3390/su10124479.

15. Smith R., Killgore W. D. S., Lane R. D. The structure of emotional experience and its relation to trait emotional awareness: A theoretical review. Emotion. 2018;18(5):670-692. DOI: 10.1037/emo0000376.

16. Lepage R., Glass S. V., Knowles W., Mukhopadhyaya P. Biodeterioration Models for Building Materials: Critical Review. Journal of Architectural Engineering. 2019;25(4). DOI: 10.1061/(ASCE)AE.1943-5568.0000366.

17. Barnes S., Bloch S. Why is measuring communication difficult? A critical review of current speech pathology concepts and measures. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics. 2019;33(3):219-236. DOI: 10.1080/02699206.2018.1498541.

18. Lai P.-С. Chinese explorations of orthodox theology: A critical review. International journal for the Study of the Christian Church. 2018;14:27-42. DOI: 10.1080/1474225X.2018.1549212.

19. Buse C. G., Sax M., Nowak N., Jackson J., Fresco T., Fyfe T., Halseth G. Locating community impacts of unconventional natural gas across the supply chain: A scoping review. The Extractive Industries and Society. 2019;6(2):620-629. DOI: 10.1016/i.exis.2019.03.002.

20. Doosty F., Maleki M., Yarmohammadian M. An investigation on workload indicator of staffing need: A scoping review. Journal of Education and Health Promotion. 2019;8(1). DOI: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_220_18.

21. Lee C. A., Pais K., Kelling S., Anderson O. S. A scoping review to understand simulation used in interprofessional education. Journal of Interprofessional Education & Practice. 2018;13:15-23. DOI: 10.1016/i.xjep.2018.08.003.

22. Arksey H., O’Malley L. Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology: Theory and Practice. 2005;8(1):19-32. DOI: 10.1080/1364557032000119616.

23. Mucci N, Traversini V, Giorgi G, Garzaro G, Fiz-Perez J, Campagna M, et al. Migrant Workers and physical health: An umbrella review. Sustainability. 2019;11(1):232. DOI: 10.3390/su11010232.

24. Onyura B., Baker L., Cameron B., Friesen F., Leslie K. Evidence for curricular and instructional design approaches in undergraduate medical education: An umbrella review. Medical Teacher. 2016;38(2):150-161. DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2015.1009019.

25. Mbemba G. Gagnon M.-P., Pare G., Cote J. Interventions for supporting nurse retention in rural and remote areas: An umbrella review. Human Resources for Health. 2013;11:44. DOI: 10.1186/1478-4491-11-44.

26. Biondi-Zoccai G. (ed.) Umbrella Reviews: Evidence Synthesis with overviews of Reviews and Meta-Epidemiologic Studies. Springer; 2016. DOI: 10.1007/978-3-319-25655-9.

27. Paterson C., Paterson N., Jackson W., Work F. What are students’ needs and preferences for academic feedback in higher education? A systematic review. Nurse Education Today. 2020;85:104236. DOI: 10.1016/i.nedt.2019.104236.

28. Amor A. M., Hagiwara M., Shogren K. A., Thompson J. R., Verdugo M. A., Burke K. M., et al. International perspectives and trends in research on inclusive education: a systematic review. International Journal of Inclusive Education. 2019;23(12):1277-1295. DOI: 10.1080/13603116.2018.1445304.

29. Tortella-Feliu M., Fullana M. A., Perez-Vigil A., Torres X., Chamorro J., Littarelli S. A., et al. Risk factors for posttraumatic stress disorder: An umbrella review of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Neuroscience & Biobe-havioralReviews. 2019;107:154-165. DOI: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.09.013.

30. Burgers C., Brugman B. C., Boeynaems A. Systematic literature reviews: Four applications for interdisciplinary research. Journal of Pragmatics. 2019;145:102-109. DOI: 10.1016/i.pragma.2019.04.004.

31. Raitskaya L., Tikhonova E. Scoping Reviews: What is in a Name? Journal of Language and Education. 2019;5(2):4-9. DOI: 10.17323/ile.2019.9689.

32. Yeganeh A. J., McCoy A. P., Schenk T. Determinants of climate change policy adoption: A meta-analysis. Urban Climate. 2020;31:100547. DOI: 10.1016/i.uclim.2019.100547.

33. van Alten D. C. D., Phielix C., Janssen J., Kester L. Effects of flipping the classroom on learning outcomes and satisfaction: A meta-analysis. Educational Research Review. 2019;28:100281. DOI: 10.1016/i.edurev.2019.05.003.

34. Kouba K., Lysek J. What Affects Invalid Voting? A Review and Meta-Analysis. Government and Opposition. 2019;54(4):745-775. DOI: 10.1017/gov.2018.33.

35. Moher D., Liberati A., Tetzlaff J., Altman D. G. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoSMed. 2009;6(7):e1000097. DOI: 10.1371/iournal.pmed.1000097.