SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
How to Appraise the Studies: An Introduction to Assessing Study Quality
16 references·13 citing·34 second hop
How to Appraise the Studies: An Introduction to Assessing Study Quality (2006)How to Appraise the Studies: An Introduct…The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses (2014)The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (N…Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies (2003)Evaluating non-randomised int…Effectiveness of Mentoring Programs for Youth: A Meta‐Analytic Review (2002)Effectiveness of Mentoring Pr…The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized Trials (2001)The CONSORT Statement: Revise…Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? (2001)Checklists for improving rigo…Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research (2000)Qualitative research in healt…Dilemmas in qualitative health research (2000)Dilemmas in qualitative healt…The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis (1999)The Hazards of Scoring the Qu…Methods for evaluating area-wide and organisation-based interventions in health and health care: a systematic review. (1999)Methods for evaluating area-w…The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. (1998)The feasibility of creating a…Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)Assessing the quality of repo…Empirical Evidence of Bias (1995)Empirical Evidence of BiasThe Handbook of Research Synthesis. (1994)The Handbook of Research Synt…Judgment under Uncertainty (1982)Judgment under UncertaintyA method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial (1981)A method for assessing the qu…Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research (1963)Experimental and Quasi-Experi…Higher education as a driver of green innovation and entrepreneurship: A systematic literature review and future research agenda (2025)Higher education as a driver …Understanding the Relationship between Urban Public Space and Social Cohesion: A Systematic Review (2024)Understanding the Relationshi…A Literature Review of the COVID-19 Pandemic’s Effect on Sustainable HRM (2022)A Literature Review of the CO…Using a Systematic Literature Review to Build a Framework for University-Industry Linkages using Open Innovation (2021)Using a Systematic Literature…Social Media in Operations and Supply Chain Management: A Systematic Literature Review to Explore the Future (2021)Social Media in Operations an…A systematic review on flipped learning in teaching English as a foreign or second language (2020)A systematic review on flippe…Educational gender gaps and economic growth: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis (2019)Educational gender gaps and e…Sustainable Global Sourcing: A Systematic Literature Review and Bibliometric Analysis (2018)Sustainable Global Sourcing: …Comparative studies of water governance: a systematic review (2018)Comparative studies of water …The effectiveness of strength-based, solution-focused brief therapy in medical settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (2017)The effectiveness of strength…Individual motivation and threat indicators of collaboration readiness in scientific knowledge producing teams: a scoping review and domain analysis (2016)Individual motivation and thr…Acknowledging a Dual Heritage for Qualitative Evidence Synthesis: Harnessing the Qualitative Research and Systematic Review Research Traditions (2013)Acknowledging a Dual Heritage…Who will appraise the appraisers?—The paper, the instrument and the user (2007)Who will appraise the apprais…Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology A Proposal for Reporting (2000)Systematic reviews: CRD's guidance for undertaking reviews in health care (2010)GRADE guidelines: 4. Rating the quality of evidence—study limitations (risk of bias) (2011)Assessing risk of bias in prevalence studies: modification of an existing tool and evidence of interrater agreement (2012)Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. (1979)Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to Their Development and Use (1989)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate healthcare interventions: explanation and elaboration (2009)The case study approach (2011)‘Unsatisfactory Saturation’: a critical exploration of the notion of saturated sample sizes in qualitative research (2012)The Discovery of Grounded Theory (2017)The Discovery of Grounded Theory (2017)Thematic analysis of qualitative research data: Is it as easy as it sounds? (2018)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)Methodological index for non‐randomized studies ( MINORS ): development and validation of a new instrument (2003)ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (2016)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (1995)Improving the quality of reports of meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials: the QUOROM statement (1999)Assessing the quality of controlled clinical trials (2001)Towards Complete and Accurate Reporting of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy: The STARD Initiative (2003)Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups (2007)Systematic methodological review: developing a framework for a qualitative semi‐structured interview guide (2016)Determining Validity in Qualitative Inquiry (2000)Mixed Methods Research: A Research Paradigm Whose Time Has Come (2004)A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. (2006)Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide (2006)Critical evaluation of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the assessment of the quality of nonrandomized studies in meta-analyses (2010)CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching (1986)Perception of Risk (1987)The weirdest people in the world? (2010)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2014The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses17,633 cited
  • 1996Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?17,580 cited
  • 1963Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research15,090 cited
  • 1998The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions.8,247 cited
  • 1982Judgment under Uncertainty8,238 cited
  • 1995Empirical Evidence of Bias5,632 cited
  • 2000Qualitative research in health care: Assessing quality in qualitative research3,736 cited
  • 2003Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies2,905 cited
  • 2001Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog?2,612 cited
  • 2001The CONSORT Statement: Revised Recommendations for Improving the Quality of Reports of Parallel-Group Randomized Trials2,545 cited
  • 2000Dilemmas in qualitative health research2,306 cited
  • 1999The Hazards of Scoring the Quality of Clinical Trials for Meta-analysis1,981 cited
  • 1994The Handbook of Research Synthesis.1,868 cited
  • 2002Effectiveness of Mentoring Programs for Youth: A Meta‐Analytic Review1,544 cited

Only edges whose both ends are imported exist here. Widen the year window, or show the whole map. Back to the work

  • 1981A method for assessing the quality of a randomized control trial1,349 cited
  • 1999Methods for evaluating area-wide and organisation-based interventions in health and health care: a systematic review.1,210 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2024Understanding the Relationship between Urban Public Space and Social Cohesion: A Systematic Review219 cited
    • 2018Comparative studies of water governance: a systematic review108 cited
    • 2017The effectiveness of strength-based, solution-focused brief therapy in medical settings: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials102 cited
    • 2019Educational gender gaps and economic growth: A systematic review and meta-regression analysis86 cited
    • 2020A systematic review on flipped learning in teaching English as a foreign or second language64 cited
    • 2018Sustainable Global Sourcing: A Systematic Literature Review and Bibliometric Analysis56 cited
    • 2016Individual motivation and threat indicators of collaboration readiness in scientific knowledge producing teams: a scoping review and domain analysis36 cited
    • 2022A Literature Review of the COVID-19 Pandemic’s Effect on Sustainable HRM30 cited
    • 2025Higher education as a driver of green innovation and entrepreneurship: A systematic literature review and future research agenda24 cited
    • 2007Who will appraise the appraisers?—The paper, the instrument and the user21 cited
    • 2021Using a Systematic Literature Review to Build a Framework for University-Industry Linkages using Open Innovation19 cited
    • 2021Social Media in Operations and Supply Chain Management: A Systematic Literature Review to Explore the Future18 cited
    • 2013Acknowledging a Dual Heritage for Qualitative Evidence Synthesis: Harnessing the Qualitative Research and Systematic Review Research Traditions12 cited