SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
The CEEDER database of evidence reviews: An open-access evidence service for researchers and decision-makers
16 references·2 citing·41 second hop
The CEEDER database of evidence reviews: An open-access evidence service for researchers and decision-makers (2020)The CEEDER database of evidence reviews: …Making sense of science for policy under conditions of complexity and uncertainty: Evidence review report (2019)Making sense of science for p…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)ROSES RepOrting standards for…Online tools supporting the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and systematic maps: a case study on CADIMA and review of existing tools (2018)Online tools supporting the c…Meta-analysis and the science of research synthesis (2018)Meta-analysis and the science…Four principles to make evidence synthesis more useful for policy (2018)Four principles to make evide…A methodology for systematic mapping in environmental sciences (2016)A methodology for systematic …The production of quick scoping reviews and rapid evidence assessments: a how to guide (2015)The production of quick scopi…Making literature reviews more reliable through application of lessons from systematic reviews (2015)Making literature reviews mor…Uses and misuses of meta‐analysis in plant ecology (2014)Uses and misuses of meta‐anal…Evaluating and improving the reliability of evidence syntheses in conservation and environmental science: A methodology (2014)Evaluating and improving the …The problem of duplicate systematic reviews (2013)The problem of duplicate syst…Contribution of Systematic Reviews to Management Decisions (2013)Contribution of Systematic Re…Clarifying differences between review designs and methods (2012)Clarifying differences betwee…Article 50 million: an estimate of the number of scholarly articles in existence (2010)Article 50 million: an estima…Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence (2009)Avoidable waste in the produc…Are review articles a reliable source of evidence to support conservation and environmental management? A comparison with medicine (2006)Are review articles a reliabl…Can open access increase LIS research’s policy impact? Using regression analysis and causal inference (2023)Can open access increase LIS …Acting in the face of evidentiary ambiguity, bias, and absence arising from systematic reviews in applied environmental science (2021)Acting in the face of evident…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)Trim and Fill: A Simple Funnel‐Plot–Based Method of Testing and Adjusting for Publication Bias in Meta‐Analysis (2000)Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package (2010)Accurately measuring willingness to pay for consumer goods: a meta-analysis of the hypothetical bias (2019)Methods for testing publication bias in ecological and evolutionary meta‐analyses (2021)The growth and number of journals (2003)Reforming Science: Methodological and Cultural Reforms (2011)Opening Science (2013)revtools: An R package to support article screening for evidence synthesis (2019)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)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA Statement. (2009)Theories of behaviour and behaviour change across the social and behavioural sciences: a scoping review (2014)Using Qualitative Evidence in Decision Making for Health and Social Interventions: An Approach to Assess Confidence in Findings from Qualitative Evidence Syntheses (GRADE-CERQual) (2015)Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test (1997)A tale of two databases: the use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers (2020)Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas (2021)Declaración PRISMA 2020: una guía actualizada para la publicación de revisiones sistemáticas (2021)Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach (2012)Rayyan—a web and mobile app for systematic reviews (2016)Software tools to support title and abstract screening for systematic reviews in healthcare: an evaluation (2020)Trends in Educational Research about e-Learning: A Systematic Literature Review (2009–2018) (2020)Artificial intelligence and the conduct of literature reviews (2021)Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses: The PRISMA Statement (2009)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)The ABC of systematic literature review: the basic methodological guidance for beginners (2020)Revealing the theoretical basis of gamification: A systematic review and analysis of theory in research on gamification, serious games and game-based learning (2021)Policy advice: Use experts wisely (2015)Rapid reviews may produce different results to systematic reviews: a meta-epidemiological study (2018)EviAtlas: a tool for visualising evidence synthesis databases (2019)Quantifying and addressing the prevalence and bias of study designs in the environmental and social sciences (2020)Reducing waste from incomplete or unusable reports of biomedical research (2014)CONSORT Statement for Randomized Trials of Nonpharmacologic Treatments: A 2017 Update and a CONSORT Extension for Nonpharmacologic Trial Abstracts (2017)The COMET Handbook: version 1.0 (2017)Meeting the review family: exploring review types and associated information retrieval requirements (2019)Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses in ecology and evolutionary biology: a PRISMA extension (2021)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2009Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence2,204 cited
  • 2018Meta-analysis and the science of research synthesis1,700 cited
  • 2012Clarifying differences between review designs and methods1,061 cited
  • 2018ROSES RepOrting standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses: pro forma, flow-diagram and descriptive summary of the plan and conduct of environmental systematic reviews and systematic maps944 cited
  • 2016A methodology for systematic mapping in environmental sciences766 cited
  • 2018Online tools supporting the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and systematic maps: a case study on CADIMA and review of existing tools469 cited
  • 2014Uses and misuses of meta‐analysis in plant ecology459 cited
  • 2015Making literature reviews more reliable through application of lessons from systematic reviews417 cited
  • 2010Article 50 million: an estimate of the number of scholarly articles in existence401 cited
  • 2018Four principles to make evidence synthesis more useful for policy157 cited
  • 2014Evaluating and improving the reliability of evidence syntheses in conservation and environmental science: A methodology147 cited
  • 2006Are review articles a reliable source of evidence to support conservation and environmental management? A comparison with medicine136 cited
  • 2013Contribution of Systematic Reviews to Management Decisions101 cited

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

2013
The problem of duplicate systematic reviews
99 cited
  • 2015The production of quick scoping reviews and rapid evidence assessments: a how to guide80 cited
  • 2019Making sense of science for policy under conditions of complexity and uncertainty: Evidence review report72 cited
  • Cited by

    • 2023Can open access increase LIS research’s policy impact? Using regression analysis and causal inference18 cited
    • 2021Acting in the face of evidentiary ambiguity, bias, and absence arising from systematic reviews in applied environmental science12 cited