Display options
Share it on

Work. 2015 Jan 01;50(2):1-12. doi: 10.3233/WOR-141983.

A response to Harris, Gould, and Fujiura: Beyond scoping reviews: a case for mixed-methods research reviews.

Work (Reading, Mass.)

Shawn M Fitzgerald, Phillip D Rumrill, William R Merchant

Affiliations

  1. School of Education, Innovation, and Continuing Studies, Widener University, Chester, PA, USA.
  2. Center for Disability Studies, Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA.
  3. School of Foundations, Leadership, and Administration, Kent State University, Kent, OH, USA.

PMID: 25503884 DOI: 10.3233/WOR-141983

Abstract

This article serves as a response to the Work article on scoping literature reviews by Harris et al. [1]. Conceptualizing scoping reviews as an exploratory approach to organizing literature and research findings in a content area that is still developing, we propose a mixed-methods approach to systematic reviews that enables researchers to capture the breadth and depth of existing knowledge, thereby facilitating the transfer of research findings into field practice.

Keywords: Reviews; mixed-methods reviews

MeSH terms

Publication Types