Home  ›  Systematic Reviews Are the Cornerstone of Which of the Following?

Systematic Reviews Are the Cornerstone of Which of the Following?

Written By Friday, April 15, 2022 Add Comment Edit

RAND Research Using Literature and Systematic Reviews

As a method, the literature review includes such elements as narrative or descriptive analysis, logic models, systematic reviews, and meta analysis.

The following research was conducted past a range of RAND divisions, programs, and centers using these methods.

  • Using Existing Systematic Reviews in Circuitous Systematic Reviews 2008

    Evelyn P. Whitlock, Jennifer South. Lin, Roger Chou, Paul G. Shekelle, Karen A. Robinson

    Drawing from their collective feel, the authors outline a serial of steps that tin help reviewers achieve reasoned decisions most the incorporation of existing systematic reviews and enumerate potential hazards to consider in doing and so.

  • Systematic Reviews for Occupational Safety and Wellness Questions: Resources for Evidence Synthesis 2016

    Susanne Hempel, Lea Xenakis, Marjorie Danz

    This report provides applied guidance to execute a systematic review and considerations and available resources specific to prove synthesis for occupational prophylactic and health questions.

  • Twelve Recommendations for Integrating Existing Systematic Reviews Into New Reviews: EPC Guidance 2016

    Karen A. Robinson, Roger Chou, Nancy D. Berkman, Sydne Newberry, Rongwei Fu, Lisa Hartling, Donna Thou. Dryden, Mary Butler, Michelle Foisy, Johanna Anderson, et al.

    As time and toll constraints in the behave of systematic reviews increment, the need to consider the use of existing systematic reviews also increases. We adult guidance on the integration of systematic reviews into new reviews.

  • A Proposed Approach May Help Systematic Reviews Retain Needed Expertise While Minimizing Bias from Nonfinancial Conflicts of Interest 2014

    Meera Viswanathan, Timothy S. Carey, Suzanne E. Belinson, Elise Berliner, Stephanie M. Chang, Elaine Graham, Jeanne-Marie Guise, Stanley Ip, Margaret A. Maglione, Douglas C. McCrory, et al.

    We sought to create practical guidance on ensuring adequate clinical or content expertise while maintaining independence of judgment on systematic review teams.

  • Surveillance and Identification of Signals for Updating Systematic Reviews: Implementation and Early Experience 2016

    Sydne Newberry, Paul G. Shekelle, Nadera Ahmadzai, Aneesa Motala, Alexander Tsertsvadze, Margaret A. Maglione, Mohammed T. Ansari, Susanne Hempel, Sophia Tsouros, Jennifer J. Schneider Chafen, et al.

    The question of how to make up one's mind when a systematic review needs to be updated is of considerable importance. Developing and implementing a surveillance process for quickly identifying Comparative Effectiveness Reviews (CERs) in demand of updating.

  • AHRQ Series on Complex Intervention Systematic Reviews: Selecting Analytic Approaches 2017

    Meera Viswanathan, Melissa McPheeters, M. Hassan Murad, Mary Butler, Emily E. Devine, Michele P. Dyson, Jeanne-Marie Guise, Leila C. Kahwati, Jeremy North. V. Miles, Emerge C. Morton

    Reviewers may elect to revise their analytic arroyo based on new or irresolute considerations during the course of a systematic review, merely they should guard against bias through transparency of reporting.

  • Assessment, Evolution and Evaluation (GRADE) Summary of Findings (SoF) Tables to Ameliorate Understanding in the Presentation of Systematic Review Results: A Three-Arm, Randomised, Controlled, Not-Inferiority Trial 2018

    Juan Jose Yepes-Nunez, Rebecca L. Morgan, Lawrence Mbuagbaw, Alonso Carrasco-Labra, Stephanie G. Chang, Susanne Hempel, Paul Grand. Shekelle, Mark Helfand, Tejan Baldeh, Holger J. Schünemann

    This report is an important first step in understanding how to nowadays circuitous information to the multitude of systematic reviews users in an understandable and accessible way.

  • Challenges in Systematic Reviews of Qualitative Research 2014

    Gerardo Melendez-Torres, Sean Grant

    Systematic reviews of qualitative research are useful, but pose challenges for researchers. Many debates over their value arise from the tension between the positivistic, aggregative approach of systematic reviews of intervention effectiveness and the interpretive nature of most qualitative research.

  • Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses in CAM: Contribution and Challenges 2010

    Klaus Linde, Ian D. Coulter

    This book chapter gives an introduction on how to read and how to do a systematic review or a meta-assay, and discusses advances and limita­tions of this method.

  • Diagnosing and Managing Common Food Allergies: A Systematic Review 2010

    Jennifer J. Schneider Chafen, Sydne Newberry, Marc Riedl, Dena M. Bravata, Margaret A. Maglione, Marika Booth, Vandana Sundaram, Neil Thou. Paige, Ali Towfigh, Benjamin J. Hulley, et al.

    This systematic review of scientific knowledge on food allergies institute that testify for the prevalence and management of food allergy is limited by a lack of compatible criteria for making a diagnosis.

  • Delivery of Genomic Medicine for Common Chronic Adult Diseases: A Systematic Review 2008

    Maren T. Scheuner, Pauline Sieverding, Paul Chiliad. Shekelle

    Synthesizes electric current information on genetic health services for common developed-onset atmospheric condition by examining studies that have addressed the outcomes, consumer information needs, delivery, and challenges in integrating these services.

dicktrupoo.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.prgs.edu/research/methods-centers/qualitative-and-mixed-methods/research/systematic-reviews.html

0 Response to "Systematic Reviews Are the Cornerstone of Which of the Following?"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel