Issues in conducting and disseminating brief reviews of evidence

被引：48

作者：

Abrami, Philip C. ^{[1
]}

Borokhovski, Eugene ^{[1
]}

Bernard, Robert M. ^{[1
]}

Wade, C. Anne ^{[1
]}

Tamim, Rana ^{[1
]}

Persson, Tonje ^{[1
]}

Bethel, Edward Clement ^{[1
]}

Hanz, Katherine ^{[1
]}

Surkes, Michael A. ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] Concordia Univ, Ctr Study Learning & Performance, Montreal, PQ, Canada

来源：

EVIDENCE & POLICY | 2010年 / 6卷 / 03期

关键词：

brief review; systematic review; comprehensive review; meta-analysis; METAANALYSIS; PROJECTS; UK;

D O I：

10.1332/174426410X524866

中图分类号：

C [社会科学总论];

学科分类号：

03 ; 0303 ;

摘要：

A brief review of evidence is limited in time and/or scope compared to a comprehensive review. However, brief reviews are important not only in meeting the needs of policy makers and" practitioners, but also in providing students and researchers with an overview of the evidence. In this paper we summarise and evaluate alternative methods for brief reviews, including: using strict inclusion criteria; reviewing only a sample of evidence and eliminating or reducing steps in the review process.We examine a sample of brief reviews and found that the majority did not meet the methodological standards of comprehensive reviews.We conclude by recommending some methodological standards for brief reviews.

引用

页码：371 / 389

页数：19