提高辅助医学研究中范围评价的质量——对作者的指导

Q2 Health Professions
Paul Simpson, R. Pap
{"title":"提高辅助医学研究中范围评价的质量——对作者的指导","authors":"Paul Simpson, R. Pap","doi":"10.1177/27536386231161942","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scoping reviews are an increasingly common method for conducting evidence synthesis in paramedicine. Over the past decade clear methodological guidance has emerged, adding rigour and credibility to this review approach. Paramedicine receives many scoping review submissions, and views these as valid evidence synthesis capable of helping the journal achieve its strategic vision and mission. However the Editorial Board has noted that submissions frequently fail to adhere to essential elements of scoping methodology and reporting standards. This editorial aims to provide guidance to authors regarding Paramedicine's expectations and requirements for scoping review submissions, with the hope of contributing to a greater understanding of scoping review science and enhancement of quality.","PeriodicalId":55865,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Paramedicine","volume":"36 1","pages":"35 - 37"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Enhancing quality of scoping reviews in paramedicine research – guidance for authors\",\"authors\":\"Paul Simpson, R. Pap\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/27536386231161942\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Scoping reviews are an increasingly common method for conducting evidence synthesis in paramedicine. Over the past decade clear methodological guidance has emerged, adding rigour and credibility to this review approach. Paramedicine receives many scoping review submissions, and views these as valid evidence synthesis capable of helping the journal achieve its strategic vision and mission. However the Editorial Board has noted that submissions frequently fail to adhere to essential elements of scoping methodology and reporting standards. This editorial aims to provide guidance to authors regarding Paramedicine's expectations and requirements for scoping review submissions, with the hope of contributing to a greater understanding of scoping review science and enhancement of quality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55865,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australasian Journal of Paramedicine\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"35 - 37\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australasian Journal of Paramedicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/27536386231161942\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Health Professions\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Journal of Paramedicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/27536386231161942","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

范围审查是在辅助医学中进行证据合成的一种日益普遍的方法。在过去十年中,出现了明确的方法指导,增加了这种审查方法的严谨性和可信度。《辅助医学》收到了许多范围审稿,并认为这些审稿是有效的证据合成,能够帮助期刊实现其战略愿景和使命。然而,编辑委员会注意到,提交的材料经常未能遵守范围界定方法和报告标准的基本要素。这篇社论的目的是为作者提供关于辅助医学对范围审评提交的期望和要求的指导,希望有助于更好地理解范围审评科学和提高质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Enhancing quality of scoping reviews in paramedicine research – guidance for authors
Scoping reviews are an increasingly common method for conducting evidence synthesis in paramedicine. Over the past decade clear methodological guidance has emerged, adding rigour and credibility to this review approach. Paramedicine receives many scoping review submissions, and views these as valid evidence synthesis capable of helping the journal achieve its strategic vision and mission. However the Editorial Board has noted that submissions frequently fail to adhere to essential elements of scoping methodology and reporting standards. This editorial aims to provide guidance to authors regarding Paramedicine's expectations and requirements for scoping review submissions, with the hope of contributing to a greater understanding of scoping review science and enhancement of quality.
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
Australasian Journal of Paramedicine
Australasian Journal of Paramedicine Health Professions-Emergency Medical Services
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信