A scoping review of engineering education systematic reviews

IF 3.9 2区 工程技术 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Journal of Engineering Education Pub Date : 2023-07-13 DOI:10.1002/jee.20549
Margaret Phillips, Jason B. Reed, Dave Zwicky, Amy S. Van Epps
{"title":"A scoping review of engineering education systematic reviews","authors":"Margaret Phillips,&nbsp;Jason B. Reed,&nbsp;Dave Zwicky,&nbsp;Amy S. Van Epps","doi":"10.1002/jee.20549","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Systematic review or systematic literature review (SLR) methodologies are a powerful tool for evidence-based decision making. The method originated in the medical sciences but has since been adopted by other disciplines, including engineering education (EE).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Purpose</h3>\n \n <p>We aimed to answer two research questions: (i) To what extent is the SLR research method being applied in EE? (ii) How closely are SLRs published in EE following established reporting guidelines for the methodology?</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Scope/Method</h3>\n \n <p>We searched Inspec, Compendex, and ERIC for engineering-related SLRs and meta-analyses (MAs). We included English language papers that contained an explicit SLR search, or where it appeared the methodology was intended by the author(s). We completed a data extraction process for 21 descriptive and quality-related items, including engineering discipline, which allowed us to identify the EE studies analyzed in this article.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>This sub-analysis presents the results of 276 EE-related reviews. We found the use of SLR/MA methods is growing in EE, with 93% of papers published during 2015–2022. However, we found that authors are not generally following established guidelines for reporting their methods and findings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>Not following the best practices for conducting and reporting SLRs can result in the presentation of incorrect summaries and analyses due to missed evidence. Including search experts (e.g., librarians) trained in conducting SLRs can improve review quality. There is also an opportunity for EE-related publishers to recruit experts trained in conducting SLRs as peer reviewers to participate in evaluating submitted reviews.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":50206,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering Education","volume":"113 4","pages":"818-837"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jee.20549","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Engineering Education","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jee.20549","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Systematic review or systematic literature review (SLR) methodologies are a powerful tool for evidence-based decision making. The method originated in the medical sciences but has since been adopted by other disciplines, including engineering education (EE).

Purpose

We aimed to answer two research questions: (i) To what extent is the SLR research method being applied in EE? (ii) How closely are SLRs published in EE following established reporting guidelines for the methodology?

Scope/Method

We searched Inspec, Compendex, and ERIC for engineering-related SLRs and meta-analyses (MAs). We included English language papers that contained an explicit SLR search, or where it appeared the methodology was intended by the author(s). We completed a data extraction process for 21 descriptive and quality-related items, including engineering discipline, which allowed us to identify the EE studies analyzed in this article.

Results

This sub-analysis presents the results of 276 EE-related reviews. We found the use of SLR/MA methods is growing in EE, with 93% of papers published during 2015–2022. However, we found that authors are not generally following established guidelines for reporting their methods and findings.

Conclusions

Not following the best practices for conducting and reporting SLRs can result in the presentation of incorrect summaries and analyses due to missed evidence. Including search experts (e.g., librarians) trained in conducting SLRs can improve review quality. There is also an opportunity for EE-related publishers to recruit experts trained in conducting SLRs as peer reviewers to participate in evaluating submitted reviews.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
工程学教育系统性审查的范围界定审查
背景 系统综述或系统文献综述(SLR)方法是循证决策的有力工具。这种方法起源于医学科学,但后来被其他学科采用,包括工程教育 (EE)。 目的 我们旨在回答两个研究问题:(i) SLR 研究方法在工程教育中的应用程度如何?(ii) 在 EE 中发表的 SLR 在多大程度上遵循了该方法的既定报告准则? 范围/方法 我们检索了 Inspec、Compendex 和 ERIC 中与工程相关的 SLR 和荟萃分析 (MA)。我们收录了包含明确 SLR 检索的英文论文,或作者似乎有意采用该方法的论文。我们完成了 21 个描述性和质量相关项目(包括工程学科)的数据提取过程,从而确定了本文分析的 EE 研究。 结果 本子分析介绍了 276 篇 EE 相关综述的结果。我们发现,SLR/MA 方法在 EE 中的使用越来越多,在 2015-2022 年间发表的论文中占 93%。然而,我们发现,作者在报告其方法和研究结果时普遍没有遵循既定的指导方针。 结论 不遵循开展和报告 SLR 的最佳实践,可能会因遗漏证据而导致提交不正确的摘要和分析。让受过进行 SLR 培训的检索专家(如图书馆员)参与进来可以提高综述质量。与电子工程相关的出版商也有机会招募在进行 SLR 方面受过培训的专家作为同行评审员,参与评估提交的综述。
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
Journal of Engineering Education
Journal of Engineering Education 工程技术-工程:综合
CiteScore
12.20
自引率
11.80%
发文量
47
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Engineering Education (JEE) serves to cultivate, disseminate, and archive scholarly research in engineering education.
期刊最新文献
Engineering students' interests in nonprofit and public policy careers: Applying a data-driven approach to identifying contributing factors Issue Information Issue Information The Undergraduate Engineering Mental Health Help-Seeking Instrument (UE-MH-HSI): Development and validity evidence How can I help move my manuscript smoothly through the review process?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1