SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Much at stake: the importance of training and capacity building for stakeholder engagement in evidence synthesis
12 references·0 citing·46 second hop
Much at stake: the importance of training and capacity building for stakeholder engagement in evidence synthesis (2017)Much at stake: the importance of training…Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2020)Cochrane Handbook for Systema…On the benefits of systematic reviews for wildlife parasitology (2016)On the benefits of systematic…A methodology for systematic mapping in environmental sciences (2016)A methodology for systematic …“A little learning is a dangerous thing”: A call for better understanding of the term ‘systematic review’ (2016)“A little learning is a dange…Sustainability: Map the evidence (2015)Sustainability: Map the evide…Making literature reviews more reliable through application of lessons from systematic reviews (2015)Making literature reviews mor…Information retrieval for ecological syntheses (2014)Information retrieval for eco…Evaluating and improving the reliability of evidence syntheses in conservation and environmental science: A methodology (2014)Evaluating and improving the …The Cochrane Collaboration: International activity within Cochrane Review Groups in the first decade of the twenty‐first century (2011)The Cochrane Collaboration: I…Meta-analysis in applied ecology (2009)Meta-analysis in applied ecol…Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)Cochrane Handbook for Systema…Guidelines for Systematic Review in Conservation and Environmental Management (2006)Guidelines for Systematic Rev…Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials (1995)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials (2001)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Systematic reviews in the social sciences: a practical guide (2006)Introduction to Meta‐Analysis (2009)The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)An automated approach to identifying search terms for systematic reviews using keyword co‐occurrence networks (2019)Eight problems with literature reviews and how to fix them (2020)Climate change and industrial F-gases: A critical and systematic review of developments, sociotechnical systems and policy options for reducing synthetic greenhouse gas emissions (2021)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement (2009)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)The reliability of evidence review methodology in environmental science and conservation (2016)Evidence maps and evidence gaps: evidence review mapping as a method for collating and appraising evidence reviews to inform research and policy (2017)Simplifying the selection of evidence synthesis methods to inform environmental decisions: A guide for decision makers and scientists (2017)A Coefficient of Agreement for Nominal Scales (1960)Practical Meta-Analysis (2000)Application of systematic review methodology to food and feed safety assessments to support decision making (2010)ROSES RepOrting standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses: pro forma, flow-diagram and descriptive summary of the plan and conduct of environmental systematic reviews and systematic maps (2018)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2019)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses in ecology and evolutionary biology: a PRISMA extension (2021)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)Implementing systematic review techniques in chemical risk assessment: Challenges, opportunities and recommendations (2015)Poor methodological detail precludes experimental repeatability and hampers synthesis in ecology (2015)Towards a Methodology for Developing Evidence‐Informed Management Knowledge by Means of Systematic Review (2003)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)CONSORT 2010 Statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)Updating and amending systematic reviews and systematic maps in environmental management (2016)Assessing the risk of bias in choice of search sources for environmental meta‐analyses (2020)Reliability of evidence‐review methods in restoration ecology (2020)Evidence & Gap Maps: A tool for promoting evidence informed policy and strategic research agendas (2016)A fresh approach to evidence synthesis (2018)Systematic reviews and maps as tools for applying behavioral ecology to management and policy (2018)The role of green logistics management practices, supply chain traceability and logistics ecocentricity in sustainability performance (2020)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)Online tools supporting the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and systematic maps: a case study on CADIMA and review of existing tools (2018)Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements (2019)A survey of prevalence of narrative and systematic reviews in five major medical journals (2017)Overview authors rarely defined systematic reviews that are included in their overviews (2019)The CEEDER database of evidence reviews: An open-access evidence service for researchers and decision-makers (2020)Positive psychology interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies (2013)AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews that include randomised or non-randomised studies of healthcare interventions, or both (2017)Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas (2021)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2008Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions25,045 cited
  • 2020Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions5,670 cited
  • 2006Guidelines for Systematic Review in Conservation and Environmental Management1,136 cited
  • 2016A methodology for systematic mapping in environmental sciences766 cited
  • 2015Making literature reviews more reliable through application of lessons from systematic reviews417 cited
  • 2009Meta-analysis in applied ecology213 cited
  • 2014Evaluating and improving the reliability of evidence syntheses in conservation and environmental science: A methodology147 cited
  • 2015Sustainability: Map the evidence104 cited
  • 2016“A little learning is a dangerous thing”: A call for better understanding of the term ‘systematic review’48 cited
  • 2014Information retrieval for ecological syntheses45 cited
  • 2011The Cochrane Collaboration: International activity within Cochrane Review Groups in the first decade of the twenty‐first century33 cited
  • 2016On the benefits of systematic reviews for wildlife parasitology31 cited

Cited by

No citing works inside the corpus for this window.

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