进行系统研究计划检讨的指引

A. García-Holgado, Samuel Marcos, F. García-Peñalvo
{"title":"进行系统研究计划检讨的指引","authors":"A. García-Holgado, Samuel Marcos, F. García-Peñalvo","doi":"10.9781/ijimai.2020.05.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"T number of scientific articles published, regardless of the academic discipline, has dramatically increased in the last decades. The publication in impact journals is considered one of the KPI (key performance indicators) in research centres and one of the measures to get funds. Moreover, in the current information society, most of the published works are available in online journals, repositories, databases, so researchers have access to them. One of the first tasks before conducting a research, regardless of the field of study, is to identify related works and previous studies as a way to support the need to conduct new research on a particular topic. Likewise, the review of available research provides answers to particular research questions and a knowledge base to learn from previous experiences and identify new research opportunities. Nevertheless, although the need to synthesise research evidence has been recognised for well over two centuries, it was not until the end of the last century that researchers began to develop explicit methods for this form of research. In particular, a literature review allows for achieving this objective. According to Grant and Booth [1], it involves some process for identifying materials for potential inclusion, for selecting included materials, for synthesizing them in textual, tabular or graphical form and for making some analysis of their contributions or value. There are different review types and associated methodologies. Specifically, before 1990, narrative reviews were typically used, but they have some limitations such as the subjectivity, coupled with the lack of transparency, and the early expiration because the synthetization process becomes complicated and eventually untenable as the number of studies increases [2]. The systematic review or systematic literature review method seeks to mitigate the limitations of narrative reviews. Systematic reviews have their origin in the field of Medicine and Health. Nevertheless, the logic of systematic methods for reviewing the literature can be applied to other areas of research such as Humanities, Social Sciences or Software Engineering; therefore there can be as much variation in systematic reviews as is found in primary research [3], [4]. A systematic review is a protocol-driven comprehensive review and synthesis of data focusing on a topic or related key questions. It is typically performed by experienced methodologists with the input of domain experts [5]. The systematic review methods are a way of bringing together what is known from the research literature using explicit and accountable methods [4]. According to Kitchenham [6][8], a systematic review is a means of evaluating and interpreting all available research relevant to a particular research question, topic area, or phenomenon of interest by using a trustworthy, rigorous, and auditable methodology. The analysis of related works and previous studies is not only associated with scientific literature. Another KPI in research centres is the number of projects funded in competitive calls. Project proposals, like other formal studies, have to justify the need to conduct them. Furthermore, most of the calls for funding projects require to justify the innovation of the proposal against other developed projects. Although it might be expected that the results of all funded projects are available in scientific publications, this is not always the norm. Determining the progress made through a research project requires the Guidelines for performing Systematic Research Projects Reviews","PeriodicalId":143152,"journal":{"name":"Int. J. Interact. Multim. Artif. Intell.","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"56","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Guidelines for performing Systematic Research Projects Reviews\",\"authors\":\"A. García-Holgado, Samuel Marcos, F. García-Peñalvo\",\"doi\":\"10.9781/ijimai.2020.05.005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"T number of scientific articles published, regardless of the academic discipline, has dramatically increased in the last decades. The publication in impact journals is considered one of the KPI (key performance indicators) in research centres and one of the measures to get funds. Moreover, in the current information society, most of the published works are available in online journals, repositories, databases, so researchers have access to them. One of the first tasks before conducting a research, regardless of the field of study, is to identify related works and previous studies as a way to support the need to conduct new research on a particular topic. Likewise, the review of available research provides answers to particular research questions and a knowledge base to learn from previous experiences and identify new research opportunities. Nevertheless, although the need to synthesise research evidence has been recognised for well over two centuries, it was not until the end of the last century that researchers began to develop explicit methods for this form of research. In particular, a literature review allows for achieving this objective. According to Grant and Booth [1], it involves some process for identifying materials for potential inclusion, for selecting included materials, for synthesizing them in textual, tabular or graphical form and for making some analysis of their contributions or value. There are different review types and associated methodologies. Specifically, before 1990, narrative reviews were typically used, but they have some limitations such as the subjectivity, coupled with the lack of transparency, and the early expiration because the synthetization process becomes complicated and eventually untenable as the number of studies increases [2]. The systematic review or systematic literature review method seeks to mitigate the limitations of narrative reviews. Systematic reviews have their origin in the field of Medicine and Health. Nevertheless, the logic of systematic methods for reviewing the literature can be applied to other areas of research such as Humanities, Social Sciences or Software Engineering; therefore there can be as much variation in systematic reviews as is found in primary research [3], [4]. A systematic review is a protocol-driven comprehensive review and synthesis of data focusing on a topic or related key questions. It is typically performed by experienced methodologists with the input of domain experts [5]. The systematic review methods are a way of bringing together what is known from the research literature using explicit and accountable methods [4]. According to Kitchenham [6][8], a systematic review is a means of evaluating and interpreting all available research relevant to a particular research question, topic area, or phenomenon of interest by using a trustworthy, rigorous, and auditable methodology. The analysis of related works and previous studies is not only associated with scientific literature. Another KPI in research centres is the number of projects funded in competitive calls. Project proposals, like other formal studies, have to justify the need to conduct them. Furthermore, most of the calls for funding projects require to justify the innovation of the proposal against other developed projects. Although it might be expected that the results of all funded projects are available in scientific publications, this is not always the norm. Determining the progress made through a research project requires the Guidelines for performing Systematic Research Projects Reviews\",\"PeriodicalId\":143152,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Int. J. Interact. Multim. Artif. Intell.\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"56\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Int. J. Interact. Multim. Artif. Intell.\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.9781/ijimai.2020.05.005\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Int. J. Interact. Multim. Artif. Intell.","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.9781/ijimai.2020.05.005","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 56

摘要

在过去的几十年里,发表的科学论文的数量,无论在哪个学科,都急剧增加。在有影响力的期刊上发表论文被认为是研究中心的KPI(关键绩效指标)之一,也是获得资金的措施之一。此外,在当前的信息社会中,大多数已发表的作品都可以在在线期刊、知识库、数据库中获得,因此研究人员可以访问它们。在进行研究之前的首要任务之一,无论研究领域如何,都是确定相关的工作和以前的研究,以支持对特定主题进行新研究的需要。同样,对现有研究的回顾为特定研究问题提供了答案,并为从以前的经验中学习和确定新的研究机会提供了知识库。然而,尽管综合研究证据的必要性在两个多世纪前就已经被认识到,但直到上世纪末,研究人员才开始为这种形式的研究开发明确的方法。特别是,文献回顾允许实现这一目标。根据Grant和Booth[1]的观点,它涉及到一些过程,包括识别可能被纳入的材料,选择被纳入的材料,以文本、表格或图形的形式综合它们,并对它们的贡献或价值进行一些分析。有不同的评审类型和相关的方法。具体而言,在1990年以前,叙事性评论是较为典型的,但其存在主观性、缺乏透明度以及随着研究数量的增加,合成过程变得复杂而最终站不住脚而过早失效等局限性[2]。系统综述或系统文献综述方法旨在减轻叙述性综述的局限性。系统评价起源于医学和卫生领域。然而,回顾文献的系统方法的逻辑可以应用于其他研究领域,如人文科学、社会科学或软件工程;因此,在系统综述中可能存在与在初级研究中发现的一样多的差异[3],[4]。系统综述是一种协议驱动的综合综述和数据综合,关注一个主题或相关的关键问题。它通常由经验丰富的方法学家在领域专家的输入下执行[5]。系统综述方法是一种使用明确和负责任的方法将研究文献中已知的内容汇集在一起的方法[4]。根据Kitchenham[6][8]的说法,系统综述是一种评估和解释与特定研究问题、主题领域或感兴趣的现象相关的所有可用研究的手段,采用可信赖、严格和可审计的方法。对相关著作和前人研究的分析不仅仅与科学文献有关。研究中心的另一个关键绩效指标是在竞争性招标中获得资助的项目数量。项目建议同其他正式研究一样,必须证明进行这些研究的必要性。此外,大多数对资助项目的呼吁都要求证明提案与其他已开发项目相比具有创新性。虽然可以期望所有资助项目的结果都可以在科学出版物中获得,但这并不总是常态。要确定研究项目的进展,就需要《进行系统研究项目评审指引》
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Guidelines for performing Systematic Research Projects Reviews
T number of scientific articles published, regardless of the academic discipline, has dramatically increased in the last decades. The publication in impact journals is considered one of the KPI (key performance indicators) in research centres and one of the measures to get funds. Moreover, in the current information society, most of the published works are available in online journals, repositories, databases, so researchers have access to them. One of the first tasks before conducting a research, regardless of the field of study, is to identify related works and previous studies as a way to support the need to conduct new research on a particular topic. Likewise, the review of available research provides answers to particular research questions and a knowledge base to learn from previous experiences and identify new research opportunities. Nevertheless, although the need to synthesise research evidence has been recognised for well over two centuries, it was not until the end of the last century that researchers began to develop explicit methods for this form of research. In particular, a literature review allows for achieving this objective. According to Grant and Booth [1], it involves some process for identifying materials for potential inclusion, for selecting included materials, for synthesizing them in textual, tabular or graphical form and for making some analysis of their contributions or value. There are different review types and associated methodologies. Specifically, before 1990, narrative reviews were typically used, but they have some limitations such as the subjectivity, coupled with the lack of transparency, and the early expiration because the synthetization process becomes complicated and eventually untenable as the number of studies increases [2]. The systematic review or systematic literature review method seeks to mitigate the limitations of narrative reviews. Systematic reviews have their origin in the field of Medicine and Health. Nevertheless, the logic of systematic methods for reviewing the literature can be applied to other areas of research such as Humanities, Social Sciences or Software Engineering; therefore there can be as much variation in systematic reviews as is found in primary research [3], [4]. A systematic review is a protocol-driven comprehensive review and synthesis of data focusing on a topic or related key questions. It is typically performed by experienced methodologists with the input of domain experts [5]. The systematic review methods are a way of bringing together what is known from the research literature using explicit and accountable methods [4]. According to Kitchenham [6][8], a systematic review is a means of evaluating and interpreting all available research relevant to a particular research question, topic area, or phenomenon of interest by using a trustworthy, rigorous, and auditable methodology. The analysis of related works and previous studies is not only associated with scientific literature. Another KPI in research centres is the number of projects funded in competitive calls. Project proposals, like other formal studies, have to justify the need to conduct them. Furthermore, most of the calls for funding projects require to justify the innovation of the proposal against other developed projects. Although it might be expected that the results of all funded projects are available in scientific publications, this is not always the norm. Determining the progress made through a research project requires the Guidelines for performing Systematic Research Projects Reviews
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Yield Curve as a Recession Leading Indicator. An Application for Gradient Boosting and Random Forest Variational Learning for the Inverted Beta-Liouville Mixture Model and Its Application to Text Categorization Why the Future Might Actually Need Us: A Theological Critique of the 'Humanity-As-Midwife-For-Artificial-Superintelligence' Proposal Artificial Canaries: Early Warning Signs for Anticipatory and Democratic Governance of AI Music Boundary Detection using Convolutional Neural Networks: A comparative analysis of combined input features
×
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