Quan Nha Hong

General Health Professions · 2014–2019

A researcher in the Science corpus: 5 papers; trusts 17 researchers and is trusted by 1 researcher here, as inferred from the citation graph.

Subfields

• General Health Professions — 47 citations into it; #4,561 of 4,781 by trust here, #2,764 by citations
• Statistics and Probability — 34 citations into it; #12,606 of 12,932 by trust here, #7,914 by citations
• Management Science and Operations Research — 22 citations into it
• Sociology and Political Science — 22 citations into it
• Education — 14 citations into it

Whom Quan Nha Hong trusts overall

Their strongest outbound trust, strongest first, inferred from their citations.

1. Pierre Pluye
2. M. Sandelowski
3. Kimberly A. Neuendorf
4. R. Whittemore
5. Mieke Heyvaert
6. J. D. Creswell
7. Alan Bryman
8. J. Fereday
9. Marie-Pierre Gagnon
10. D. Gough

Who trusts Quan Nha Hong overall

1. Cindy Stern
2. Pierre Pluye
3. C. Bryan
4. Araceli Gonzalez-Reyes
5. Diane Lorenzetti
6. P. Baker

Papers from Quan Nha Hong's perspective

Ordered by how strongly the researchers Quan Nha Hong trusts endorse each paper. Same corpus, a different order for every researcher.

1. Assessing Risk of Bias in Included Studies
2. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction-GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. (Journal of Clinical Epidemiology)
3. A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in Mixed Studies Reviews. (International Journal of Nursing Studies)
4. How expert are the experts? An exploration of the concept of 'expert' within Delphi panel techniques. (Nurse Researcher)
5. Mixed methods research synthesis: definition, framework, and potential (Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology)
6. The integrative review: updated methodology. (Journal of Advanced Nursing)
7. Clarifying differences between review designs and methods (Systematic Reviews)
8. Using Qualitative Evidence in Decision Making for Health and Social Interventions: An Approach to Assess Confidence in Findings from Qualitative Evidence Syntheses (GRADE-CERQual) (PLoS Medicine)
9. Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis (Qualitative Health Research)
10. Reviewing studies with diverse designs: the development and evaluation of a new tool. (Journal of Evaluation In Clinical Practice)

Their papers

• Convergent and sequential synthesis designs: implications for conducting and reporting systematic reviews of qualitative and quantitative evidence (2017) — 614 citations
• Improving the usefulness of a tool for appraising the quality of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies, the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) (2018) — 878 citations
• Improving the content validity of the mixed methods appraisal tool: a modified e-Delphi study. (2019) — 817 citations
• The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018 for information professionals and researchers (2018) — 3,722 citations
• Combining the power of stories and the power of numbers: mixed methods research and mixed studies reviews. (2014) — 1,245 citations