Reviews as a promising kind of scholarly publication, its types and characteristics

Lilia K. Raitskaya; Elena V. Tikhonova

doi:undefined

Reviews as a promising kind of scholarly publication, its types and characteristics

Lilia K. Raitskaya, Elena V. Tikhonova

Full Text:

PDF (Rus)

HTML (Rus) Open Access

XML (Rus)

Generate QR code

Abstract

Reviews have been published for years in medical journals as integrators of new data in evidencebased medicine. This type of publication is finding its way into social sciences, humanities and other areas, getting popularity in the global context of the unprecedented rise in scholarly information. Reviews arrange and streamline the inflow of information, critically reflect on the new research contributions to science, outline the focus trends in subject areas and define gaps in the knowledge. Comparatively limited expertise of Russian researchers in authoring reviews is analysed against the advanced international traditions coupled with some practical guidelines relating to internationally published high-quality reviews. The article considers functions, characteristics, taxonomy and methodologies of reviews as a highly potential type of scientific publication for science in Russia. The authors also touch upon criteria for taxonomy resulting in multiple types of reviews and specific features of methods of the most popular and widely spread reviews (systematic reviews, scoping reviews, bibliometric reviews, etc.) in various fields and disciplines.

Keywords

review, systematic review, scoping review, bibliometric review, theoretical review, descriptive review, narrative review

About the Authors

Lilia K. Raitskaya

Moscow Institute of International Relations (MGIMO University)
Russian Federation

Dr. Sci. (Pedagogy), Associated Professor, Professor of the Chair of Pedagogy and Psychology, Rector’s Advisor, Moscow Institute of International Relations (MGIMO University), Moscow, Russian Federation

e-mail: L.Raitskaya@mail.ru

Elena V. Tikhonova

RUND University; Russian Academy of Education
Russian Federation

Cand. Sci. (History), Associated Professor, Head of the Editorial Office of the Journal of Language and Education, RUND University, Moscow, Russian Federation; Russian Academy of Education, Moscow, Russian Federation

e-mail: etihonova@gmail.com

References

1. Azer S.A. The Top-Cited Articles in Medical Education: A Bibliometric Analysis. Academic Medicine. 2015; 90(8): 1147–1161. https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 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. https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajpy.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. https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-30306-8 8

11. Duran-Sanchez A., Alvarez Garcia J., Del Rio-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. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEBR-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. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11216136

13. Sant E. Democratic Education: A Theoretical Review (2006–2017). Review of Educational Research. 2019; 89(5): 655–696. https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/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). https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/10.1080/1474225X.2018.1549212

19. Buse C.G., Sax M., Nowak N. et al. Locating community impacts of unconventional natural gas across the supply chain: A scoping review. The Extractive Industries and Society. 2019; 6(2): 620–629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.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). https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. 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. https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11010232

24. Onyura B., Baker L. et al. Evidence for curricular and instructional design approaches in undergraduate medical education: An umbrella review. Medical Teacher. 2016; 38(2): 150–161. https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.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. https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.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. https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.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. https://doi.org/10.1017/gov.2018.33

35. Moher D. et al. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Me-ta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement. PLoSMed. 2009; 6(7): e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097

Review

For citations:

Raitskaya L.K., Tikhonova E.V. Reviews as a promising kind of scholarly publication, its types and characteristics. Russian Journal of Occupational Health and Industrial Ecology. 2026;66(4):282-288. (In Russ.)

JATS XML