SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Scoping reviews. Another way of literature review
14 references·0 citing·28 second hop
Scoping reviews. Another way of literature review (2019)Scoping reviews. Another way of literatur…Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach (2018)Systematic review or scoping …PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation (2018)PRISMA Extension for Scoping …Same family, different species: methodological conduct and quality varies according to purpose for five types of knowledge synthesis (2017)Same family, different specie…Intersectorality and social participation as coping policies for health inequities-worldwide (2017)Intersectorality and social p…The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses (2016)The Mass Production of Redund…Opening-up the definition of systematic literature review: the plurality of worldviews, methodologies and methods for reviews and syntheses (2016)Opening-up the definition of …A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews (2016)A scoping review on the condu…A scoping review of rapid review methods (2015)A scoping review of rapid rev…A scoping review of scoping reviews: advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency (2014)A scoping review of scoping r…Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach (2012)Evidence summaries: the evolu…'Scoping the scope' of a cochrane review (2011)'Scoping the scope' of a coch…Scoping studies: advancing the methodology (2010)Scoping studies: advancing th…A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies (2009)A typology of reviews: an ana…Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework (2005)Scoping studies: towards a me…Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines (2019)Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews (2021)Oxford English dictionary (2004)The Oxford English Dictionary Online (2004)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines (2019)Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis (2005)Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews (2020)Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews (2007)Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Group offers evidence-informed guidance to conduct rapid reviews (2020)Occurrence, prevention, and management of the psychological effects of emerging virus outbreaks on healthcare workers: rapid review and meta-analysis (2020)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)Best practice guidance and reporting items for the development of scoping review protocols (2022)Recommendations for the extraction, analysis, and presentation of results in scoping reviews (2022)Why Most Published Research Findings Are False (2005)The PRISMA Statement for Reporting Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses of Studies That Evaluate Health Care Interventions: Explanation and Elaboration (2009)Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation (2015)Meta-analysis and the science of research synthesis (2018)Time to challenge the spurious hierarchy of systematic over narrative reviews? (2018)What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences (2018)Elder Abuse: Global Situation, Risk Factors, and Prevention Strategies (2016)Searching and synthesising ‘grey literature’ and ‘grey information’ in public health: critical reflections on three case studies (2016)Natural language processing in mental health applications using non-clinical texts (2017)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2018PRISMA Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR): Checklist and Explanation43,318 cited
  • 2005Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework36,603 cited
  • 2010Scoping studies: advancing the methodology15,226 cited
  • 2018Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach11,351 cited
  • 2009A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies10,781 cited
  • 2014A scoping review of scoping reviews: advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency3,074 cited
  • 2016A scoping review on the conduct and reporting of scoping reviews2,242 cited
  • 2016The Mass Production of Redundant, Misleading, and Conflicted Systematic Reviews and Meta‐analyses1,481 cited
  • 2011'Scoping the scope' of a cochrane review1,259 cited
  • 2012Evidence summaries: the evolution of a rapid review approach1,232 cited
  • 2015A scoping review of rapid review methods1,145 cited
  • 2017Same family, different species: methodological conduct and quality varies according to purpose for five types of knowledge synthesis122 cited
  • 2016Opening-up the definition of systematic literature review: the plurality of worldviews, methodologies and methods for reviews and syntheses57 cited
  • 2017Intersectorality and social participation as coping policies for health inequities-worldwide

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

30 cited

Cited by

No citing works inside the corpus for this window.