An introduction to systematic reviews

By Susan E. Sutherland. 2004

786 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: General Health Professions, Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f186ca46999e55fd59fb7ac8eb3933e452eaca5a

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In General Health Professions

In Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health

In Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Learning disruption or learning loss: using evidence from unplanned closures to inform returning to school after COVID-19 (2021, neutral): “Each study was read and memos were taken as well as key quotes from the studies in an attempt to familiarise ourselves with the studies (Gough et al., 2017).”
Interventions to reduce social isolation and loneliness among older people: an integrative review (2018, neutral): “Topic relevance assessed how well matched each study was to the focus of our review in terms of topic (Gough et al. 2012).”
Methodological Guidance Paper: High-Quality Meta-Analysis in a Systematic Review (2019, neutral): “A meta-analysis addresses questions of aggregation of results from a set of studies (Gough et al., 2017).”
From Passively Received Wisdom to Actively Constructed Knowledge: Teaching Systematic Review Skills As a Foundation of Evidence-Based Management (2014, positive): “It may not be a sensible use of resources and in some cases it may be unethical to undertake research without being properly informed about previous research” (Gough et al., 2012: 3).”
Where you search determines what you find: the effects of bibliographic databases on systematic reviews (2021, neutral): “…of the selected database(s) to a subject area of research (Rosenstreich and Wooliscroft 2012); the ability to produce relevant results (Gough et al. 2017); the ability to produce common results with other databases; and the quality of returned results in terms of their journal ratings…”
The assessment of metacognition in children aged 4–16 years: a systematic review (2017, neutral): “Hofer and Sinatra (2010) propose that unlike many linear perspectives of children’s development, metacognitive development is far from linear or one-dimensional.”
Interrater Reliability in Systematic Review Methodology: Exploring Variation in Coder Decision-Making (2018, neutral): “It can be said, therefore, that IRRs are not being reported explicitly, rigorously, and transparently, which are three defining characteristics of systematic reviews (Gough et al. 2012).”
Smarter eco-cities and their leading-edge artificial intelligence of things solutions for environmental sustainability: A comprehensive systematic review (2023, neutral): “In other words, it adds and leverages evidence to make statements based on particular conceptual positions [114].”
Realist review (2021, neutral): “Exploring how mechanisms work within a particular context is central to realist research (Gough et al., 2017).”
Citationchaser: A tool for transparent and efficient forward and backward citation chasing in systematic searching (2022, neutral): “Systematic searching is the process by which researchers seek out all possibly relevant research records from a variety of sources in an attempt to collate an unbiased and comprehensive set of bibliographic records.(1) Along with searching bibliographic databases using complex search strings,(2) sys”
How to do a good systematic review of effects in international development: a tool kit (2012, positive): “A truly comprehensive search would also include search terms in other languages, notably Spanish and Portuguese in international development, because of the sizeable body of primary studies in Latin America, as, for example, implemented by Cirera et al. (2012) in a review on free trade zones.”
Frameworks for developing impactful systematic literature reviews and theory building: What, Why and How? (2023, neutral): “To ensure the quality of findings, researchers must adhere to a review protocol (Gough et al., 2017).”
Artificial Intelligence for Student Assessment: A Systematic Review (2021, neutral): “This research is based on the use of a systematic review as a method to answer a research question through a systematic and replicable process [32].”