Publication Status as a Common Inclusion Criterion in Systematic Reviews

MedienPadagogik Zeitschrift fur Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung Pub Date : 2023-08-12 DOI:10.21240/mpaed/54/2023.08.12.x

C. Mertens, Carolin Quenzer-Alfred, Anna-Maria Kamin, Daniel C. Mays

{"title":"Publication Status as a Common Inclusion Criterion in Systematic Reviews","authors":"C. Mertens, Carolin Quenzer-Alfred, Anna-Maria Kamin, Daniel C. Mays","doi":"10.21240/mpaed/54/2023.08.12.x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper critically discusses the use of publication status as a common inclusion criterion for systematic reviews, a method adopted from the field of medicine into education and media-related education studies. Two systematic reviews exploring the use of digital media in inclusive, integrative or segregated teaching settings are compared. By adding peer-reviewed grey and non-peer reviewed literature in a second review, the initial corpus of 15 studies (articles in journals with peer review) was increased by another 19 studies (without peer review). The advantages and disadvantages of including research articles with a different publication status in systematic reviews is discussed based on the comparison of both reviews. Overall, in both reviews, the focus was on individual support with digital media while teaching, especially within technology-based learning classes, mostly from a quantitative perspective. Both reviews revealed a didactic focus (learning with digital media) and hardly any study dealt with learning about digitalization.","PeriodicalId":30246,"journal":{"name":"MedienPadagogik Zeitschrift fur Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"MedienPadagogik Zeitschrift fur Theorie und Praxis der Medienbildung","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21240/mpaed/54/2023.08.12.x","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper critically discusses the use of publication status as a common inclusion criterion for systematic reviews, a method adopted from the field of medicine into education and media-related education studies. Two systematic reviews exploring the use of digital media in inclusive, integrative or segregated teaching settings are compared. By adding peer-reviewed grey and non-peer reviewed literature in a second review, the initial corpus of 15 studies (articles in journals with peer review) was increased by another 19 studies (without peer review). The advantages and disadvantages of including research articles with a different publication status in systematic reviews is discussed based on the comparison of both reviews. Overall, in both reviews, the focus was on individual support with digital media while teaching, especially within technology-based learning classes, mostly from a quantitative perspective. Both reviews revealed a didactic focus (learning with digital media) and hardly any study dealt with learning about digitalization.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

发表状态作为系统评价的共同纳入标准

本文批判性地讨论了使用出版状态作为系统综述的常见纳入标准，这是一种从医学领域引入教育和媒体相关教育研究的方法。比较了两篇系统综述，探讨了数字媒体在包容性、综合性或隔离性教学环境中的使用。通过在第二次审查中添加同行评审的灰色和非同行评审的文献，15项研究（在有同行评审的期刊上发表的文章）的初始语料库增加了另外19项研究（没有同行评审）。在比较两种综述的基础上，讨论了将不同发表状态的研究文章纳入系统综述的优缺点。总的来说，在这两篇评论中，重点都是在教学时使用数字媒体的个人支持，尤其是在基于技术的学习班中，主要是从数量的角度。这两篇综述都揭示了教学重点（使用数字媒体学习），几乎没有任何研究涉及数字化学习。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊