SZodixStudyAcademic Library
ShelvesOpen access
Study · an open academic library·Metadata from OpenAlex (CC0)·Shelves·OpenAlex metadata, de-duplicated
Judging the relative trustworthiness of research results: How to do it and why it matters
16 references·0 citing·56 second hop
Judging the relative trustworthiness of research results: How to do it and why it matters (2024)Judging the relative trustworthiness of r…Fake publications in biomedical science: red-flagging method indicates mass production (2025)Fake publications in biomedic…Implementation and Effects of Pedagogical Translanguaging in EFL Classrooms: A Systematic Review (2023)Implementation and Effects of…Do growth mindset interventions impact students’ academic achievement? A systematic review and meta-analysis with recommendations for best practices. (2022)Do growth mindset interventio…Reporting guideline checklists are not quality evaluation forms: they are guidance for writing (2020)Reporting guideline checklist…Hundreds of thousands of zombie randomised trials circulate among us (2020)Hundreds of thousands of zomb…How to … assess the quality of qualitative research (2020)How to … assess the quality o…Does explicit teaching of critical thinking improve critical thinking skills of English language learners in higher education? A critical review of causal evidence (2019)Does explicit teaching of cri…ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions (2016)ROBINS-I: a tool for assessin…A proposal for judging the trustworthiness of research findings (2014)A proposal for judging the tr…Research Design: Creating Robust Approaches for the Social Sciences (2013)Research Design: Creating Rob…Death of mixed methods? Or the rebirth of research as a craft (2010)Death of mixed methods? Or th…Weight of Evidence: a framework for the appraisal of the quality and relevance of evidence (2007)Weight of Evidence: a framewo…Combining Methods in Educational and Social Research (2004)Combining Methods in Educatio…Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies (2003)Evaluating non-randomised int…Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed-Methods Research (2002)Revisiting the Quantitative-Q…Measuring the Effects of Schooling (1992)Measuring the Effects of Scho…Equality of Educational Opportunity. (1967)Review of research in education (1973)Meta-analysis in social research (1982)INFLUENCES ON STUDENT LEARNING (1999)Classroom composition and peer effects (2002)The End of Techno-Critique: The Naked Truth about 1:1 Laptop Initiatives and Educational Change (2010)Basics of Qualitative Research: Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. (1992)Handbook of Qualitative Research (1994)Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions. (1998)Triangulation and integration: processes, claims and implications (2006)An overview of mixed methods research (2009)How to Conduct a Mixed Methods Study: Recent Trends in a Rapidly Growing Literature (2011)Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research (1963)Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? (1996)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)Evidence-based Policy (2006)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2008)Creative learning environments in education—A systematic literature review (2012)Systematic Review and Evidence Synthesis as a Practice and Scholarship Tool (2012)Technological pedagogical content knowledge – a review of the literature (2012)Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (2020)The Measurement of Observer Agreement for Categorical Data (1977)The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2011)The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for Assessing the Quality of Nonrandomised Studies in Meta-Analyses (2014)RoB 2: a revised tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials (2019)The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021)Two new Later Stone Age sites from the Final Pleistocene in the Falémé Valley, eastern Senegal (2024)How We Think (1910)The earth is round (p < .05). (1994)CONSORT 2010 Explanation and Elaboration: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials (2010)A conceptual proposal and operational definitions of the cognitive processes of complex thinking (2021)Systematic Review of Learning Generic Skills in Higher Education—Enhancing and Impeding Factors (2022)The Populist Backlash Against Globalization: A Meta-Analysis of the Causal Evidence (2024)The Sociological Imagination (1959)The Uses of Argument (2003)Common “Core” Characteristics of Mixed Methods Research (2012)The impact of attitudes and aspirations on educational attainment and participation (2012)Mixed methods research: Toward new research designs in applied linguistics (2013)Democracy and Education (2015)Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups (2007)Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (2014)Criteria for Good Qualitative Research: A Comprehensive Review (2021)Uncovering Industry 4.0 technology attributes in sustainable supply chain 4.0: A systematic literature review (2023)The role of artificial intelligence on supply chain resilience (2025)The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. (1979)Motivational processes affecting learning. (1986)Practical Meta-Analysis (2000)Why meta-analyses of growth mindset and other interventions should follow best practices for examining heterogeneity: Commentary on Macnamara and Burgoyne (2023) and Burnette et al. (2023). (2023)A Meta-Analysis on Teachers’ Growth Mindset (2024)From growth mindset to positive outcomes in L2 learning: Examining the mediating roles of autonomous motivation and engagement (2024)On Replication in Communication Science (2018)Gamification through leaderboards: An empirical study in engineering education (2019)What works in attracting and retaining teachers in challenging schools and areas? (2020)
this work references cited by second hop

References

  • 2016ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions20,225 cited
  • 2003Evaluating non-randomised intervention studies2,905 cited
  • 2002Revisiting the Quantitative-Qualitative Debate: Implications for Mixed-Methods Research1,082 cited
  • 2007Weight of Evidence: a framework for the appraisal of the quality and relevance of evidence837 cited
  • 2004Combining Methods in Educational and Social Research370 cited
  • 2022Do growth mindset interventions impact students’ academic achievement? A systematic review and meta-analysis with recommendations for best practices.302 cited
  • 1992Measuring the Effects of Schooling292 cited
  • 2020How to … assess the quality of qualitative research256 cited
  • 2013Research Design: Creating Robust Approaches for the Social Sciences213 cited
  • 2019Does explicit teaching of critical thinking improve critical thinking skills of English language learners in higher education? A critical review of causal evidence183 cited
  • 2010Death of mixed methods? Or the rebirth of research as a craft130 cited
  • 2020Reporting guideline checklists are not quality evaluation forms: they are guidance for writing93 cited
  • 2020Hundreds of thousands of zombie randomised trials circulate among us75 cited
  • 2023Implementation and Effects of Pedagogical Translanguaging in EFL Classrooms: A Systematic Review

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

68 cited
  • 2025Fake publications in biomedical science: red-flagging method indicates mass production51 cited
  • 2014A proposal for judging the trustworthiness of research findings30 cited
  • Cited by

    No citing works inside the corpus for this window.