Los puntos clave no están disponibles para este artículo en este momento.
This study examined methods for reviews of research that focus on inferring generalizations about substantive issues from a set of studies directly bearing on those issues. The purposes were to: (1) develop a conceptualization of the various methodological tasks of integrative reviews and of the alternative approaches to each task, (2) estimate the frequency with which current reviews published in high quality social science journals use each of the alternative approaches, (3) evaluate critically the strengths and weaknesses of the alternative approaches, and (4) suggest some ways in which more powerful and valid integrative reviews might be done. The primary source of data was a content analysis of two samples of such reviews.
Gregg B. Jackson (Mon,) studied this question.