Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A systematic review is a scholarly synthesis of the evidence on a clearly presented topic using critical methods to identify, define and assess research on the topic. [1] A systematic review extracts and interprets data from published studies on the topic (in the scientific literature), then analyzes, describes, critically appraises and summarizes interpretations into a refined evidence-based ...
A review article is an article that summarizes the current state of understanding on a topic within a certain discipline. [1] [2] A review article is generally considered a secondary source since it may analyze and discuss the method and conclusions in previously published studies.
A systematic review is focused on a specific research question, trying to identify, appraise, select, and synthesize all high-quality research evidence and arguments relevant to that question. A meta-analysis is typically a systematic review using statistical methods to effectively combine the data used on all selected studies to produce a more ...
Scholarly peer review or academic peer review (also known as refereeing) is the process of having a draft version of a researcher's methods and findings reviewed (usually anonymously) by experts (or "peers") in the same field.
Peer review is the evaluation of work by one or more people with similar competencies as the producers of the work . [1] It functions as a form of self-regulation by qualified members of a profession within the relevant field. Peer review methods are used to maintain quality standards, improve performance, and provide credibility.
The day my cancer was big enough to feel, it still did not show up on a mammogram." Dense breasts are not something you can see or feel, explains Bonnie Litvack, MD, diagnostic radiologist at ...
Future research should include larger sample sizes, diverse populations — including those with cognitive impairments — and longer follow-up periods to determine if short-term cognitive ...
A general narrative review of a subject by an expert in the field can make a good secondary source covering various aspects of a subject within a Wikipedia article. Such reviews typically do not contain primary research but can make interpretations and draw conclusions from primary sources that no Wikipedia editor would be allowed to do.