Policy of national physical education journals on review articles/systematic reviews Política de periódicos nacionais em educação física para estudos de revisão/sistemática

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Schutz G.R.*
Publication Date: 2011
Other Authors: Sant'Ana A.S.S., dos Santos S.G.
Language: eng
Source: Repositório Institucional da Udesc
dARK ID: ark:/33523/001300000pxxk
Download full: https://repositorio.udesc.br/handle/UDESC/9489
Summary: The large amount of scientific information that is produced and available in different areas, including physical education, requires the summary of contents. Different synthesis/review methods that lead to different answers are available. The objective of this study was to analyze the policy of national physical education journals on review articles, to quantify the reviews, and to classify them as systematic and narrative reviews based on established criteria. All journals (n=13) offer the possibility to publish review articles, but do not have specific standards/methods for this type of article. The production of review articles was high (n=429), with the publication of 371 (86%) narrative reviews and 58 (14%) systematic reviews. A priori, narrative reviews are used for the production of knowledge by internationally renowned scientific researchers. However, the volume of production of this type of review, as diverse as the issues in physical education are, does not seem to be proportional to the number of recognized researchers. This fact can lead to lower quality of the scientific production and rejection of these articles, as observed for journals in other areas. In view of the criteria and method employed, systematic reviews seem to be more valuable in situations in which no renowned researchers wants to produce review articles, avoiding a poor outcome. This type of review is characterized by more scientific rigor, whose production follows specific steps and standards, and also seems to be more appreciated by journal editors, with these reviews sometimes even being classified as original articles.
id UDESC-2_9a660d36f3ab470946c210c59e664520
oai_identifier_str oai:repositorio.udesc.br:UDESC/9489
network_acronym_str UDESC-2
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da Udesc
repository_id_str 6391
spelling Policy of national physical education journals on review articles/systematic reviews Política de periódicos nacionais em educação física para estudos de revisão/sistemáticaThe large amount of scientific information that is produced and available in different areas, including physical education, requires the summary of contents. Different synthesis/review methods that lead to different answers are available. The objective of this study was to analyze the policy of national physical education journals on review articles, to quantify the reviews, and to classify them as systematic and narrative reviews based on established criteria. All journals (n=13) offer the possibility to publish review articles, but do not have specific standards/methods for this type of article. The production of review articles was high (n=429), with the publication of 371 (86%) narrative reviews and 58 (14%) systematic reviews. A priori, narrative reviews are used for the production of knowledge by internationally renowned scientific researchers. However, the volume of production of this type of review, as diverse as the issues in physical education are, does not seem to be proportional to the number of recognized researchers. This fact can lead to lower quality of the scientific production and rejection of these articles, as observed for journals in other areas. In view of the criteria and method employed, systematic reviews seem to be more valuable in situations in which no renowned researchers wants to produce review articles, avoiding a poor outcome. This type of review is characterized by more scientific rigor, whose production follows specific steps and standards, and also seems to be more appreciated by journal editors, with these reviews sometimes even being classified as original articles.2024-12-06T19:12:21Z2011Artigo de revisãoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionp. 313 - 3191980-003710.5007/1980-0037.2011v13n4p313https://repositorio.udesc.br/handle/UDESC/9489ark:/33523/001300000pxxkRevista Brasileira de Cineantropometria e Desempenho Humano134Schutz G.R.*Sant'Ana A.S.S.dos Santos S.G.engreponame:Repositório Institucional da Udescinstname:Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC)instacron:UDESCinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2024-12-07T21:03:11Zoai:repositorio.udesc.br:UDESC/9489Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertaçõeshttps://pergamumweb.udesc.br/biblioteca/index.phpPRIhttps://repositorio-api.udesc.br/server/oai/requestri@udesc.bropendoar:63912024-12-07T21:03:11Repositório Institucional da Udesc - Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Policy of national physical education journals on review articles/systematic reviews Política de periódicos nacionais em educação física para estudos de revisão/sistemática
title Policy of national physical education journals on review articles/systematic reviews Política de periódicos nacionais em educação física para estudos de revisão/sistemática
spellingShingle Policy of national physical education journals on review articles/systematic reviews Política de periódicos nacionais em educação física para estudos de revisão/sistemática
Schutz G.R.*
title_short Policy of national physical education journals on review articles/systematic reviews Política de periódicos nacionais em educação física para estudos de revisão/sistemática
title_full Policy of national physical education journals on review articles/systematic reviews Política de periódicos nacionais em educação física para estudos de revisão/sistemática
title_fullStr Policy of national physical education journals on review articles/systematic reviews Política de periódicos nacionais em educação física para estudos de revisão/sistemática
title_full_unstemmed Policy of national physical education journals on review articles/systematic reviews Política de periódicos nacionais em educação física para estudos de revisão/sistemática
title_sort Policy of national physical education journals on review articles/systematic reviews Política de periódicos nacionais em educação física para estudos de revisão/sistemática
author Schutz G.R.*
author_facet Schutz G.R.*
Sant'Ana A.S.S.
dos Santos S.G.
author_role author
author2 Sant'Ana A.S.S.
dos Santos S.G.
author2_role author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Schutz G.R.*
Sant'Ana A.S.S.
dos Santos S.G.
description The large amount of scientific information that is produced and available in different areas, including physical education, requires the summary of contents. Different synthesis/review methods that lead to different answers are available. The objective of this study was to analyze the policy of national physical education journals on review articles, to quantify the reviews, and to classify them as systematic and narrative reviews based on established criteria. All journals (n=13) offer the possibility to publish review articles, but do not have specific standards/methods for this type of article. The production of review articles was high (n=429), with the publication of 371 (86%) narrative reviews and 58 (14%) systematic reviews. A priori, narrative reviews are used for the production of knowledge by internationally renowned scientific researchers. However, the volume of production of this type of review, as diverse as the issues in physical education are, does not seem to be proportional to the number of recognized researchers. This fact can lead to lower quality of the scientific production and rejection of these articles, as observed for journals in other areas. In view of the criteria and method employed, systematic reviews seem to be more valuable in situations in which no renowned researchers wants to produce review articles, avoiding a poor outcome. This type of review is characterized by more scientific rigor, whose production follows specific steps and standards, and also seems to be more appreciated by journal editors, with these reviews sometimes even being classified as original articles.
publishDate 2011
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2011
2024-12-06T19:12:21Z
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv Artigo de revisão
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv 1980-0037
10.5007/1980-0037.2011v13n4p313
https://repositorio.udesc.br/handle/UDESC/9489
dc.identifier.dark.fl_str_mv ark:/33523/001300000pxxk
identifier_str_mv 1980-0037
10.5007/1980-0037.2011v13n4p313
ark:/33523/001300000pxxk
url https://repositorio.udesc.br/handle/UDESC/9489
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Revista Brasileira de Cineantropometria e Desempenho Humano
13
4
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv p. 313 - 319
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Institucional da Udesc
instname:Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC)
instacron:UDESC
instname_str Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC)
instacron_str UDESC
institution UDESC
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da Udesc
collection Repositório Institucional da Udesc
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da Udesc - Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ri@udesc.br
_version_ 1842258158231224320