On ‘Systematic’ Reviews of Research Literatures: A ‘narrative’ response to Evans & Benefield
Top Cited Papers
- 1 December 2001
- journal article
- editorial
- Published by Wiley in British Educational Research Journal
- Vol. 27 (5) , 543-554
- https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920120095726
Abstract
The production of ‘systematic’ reviews of research findings has recently come to be treated as a priority in the field of education, and other areas too. Such reviews are believed to play an important role in making evidence from research available in a usable form to policy‐makers and practitioners. This article examines the assumptions about research, and about the task of reviewing, which are built into the concept of systematic review. In addition, attention is given to the likely consequences of the priority now being given to this type of review.This publication has 25 references indexed in Scilit:
- Beyond Watching Over Established Ways: A Review as Recasting the Literature, Recasting the LivedReview of Educational Research, 1999
- To Be of Use: The Work of ReviewingReview of Educational Research, 1999
- The Interpretive Review of Educational Matters: Is There Any Other Kind?Review of Educational Research, 1998
- Threads of a New Language: A Response to Eisenhart’s ‘On the Subject of Interpretive Review’Review of Educational Research, 1998
- On the Subject of Interpretive ReviewsReview of Educational Research, 1998
- A Popperian perspective of the term ‘evidence‐based medicine’Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 1997
- Best evidence synthesis: An intelligent alternative to meta-analysisJournal of Clinical Epidemiology, 1995
- Objectivity in Educational ResearchCurriculum Inquiry, 1992
- Best-Evidence Synthesis: An Alternative to Meta-Analytic and Traditional ReviewsEducational Researcher, 1986
- The Many Meanings of Research UtilizationPublic Administration Review, 1979