Introduction to Special Issue: External Validity and Policy

Westbrook, T’Pring R.

doi:10.1177/0193841x17707908

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The “Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation” (GRADE) system, and the AMSTAR 2 and ROBIS systems, both appraise the quality of the recommendations from complex umbrella overviews. Quality in this context usually signifies the internal validity rather than the external generalisability of the syntheses, which restricts the practical implications of GRADE scores …”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A typology of systematic reviews for synthesising evidence on health care

MacEntee

2019

Gerodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives The objectives of this paper are to (a) Review published references to systematic reviews; (b) offer a typology of systematic reviews for synthesising evidence on health care; and (c) summarise the guides for designing, reporting and appraising the reviews. Background Systematic reviews play a role in finding, synthesising, transferring and implementing evidence for healthcare policy, practice guidelines and allocation of health resources. They have been particularly successful in confirming or synthesising evidence for health care by meta‐analysing aggregated data from multiple randomised controlled trials. However, concerns about the limitations of evidence from controlled trials have prompted interest in other review methods capable of locating and appraising evidence from more diverse, and possibly more realistic, healthcare situations. Methods An iterative citation‐tracking process with Google Search and grey literature identified 204 papers on previous typologies and methods of systematic reviews. Results and Conclusions There are six types of systematic reviews: narrative; meta‐analysis; scoping; qualitative; umbrella; and realist. Each type has distinct objectives, characteristics and attributes, but with much overlapping of methods and guides. Sensitivity to the need for qualitative evidence on complex human responses to ill‐health and health care has broadened the objectives and methods of health‐related systematic reviews to find, appraise and synthesis useful evidence for practice guidelines, healthcare policy and allocation of health resources.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A typology of systematic reviews for synthesising evidence on health care

MacEntee

2019

Gerodontology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Introduction to Special Issue: External Validity and Policy

Cited by 1 publication

References 7 publications

A typology of systematic reviews for synthesising evidence on health care

A typology of systematic reviews for synthesising evidence on health care

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About