Partially systematic thoughts on the history of systematic reviews.
Clicks: 472
ID: 47179
2018
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
72.2
/100
472 views
299 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #5 of 55 articles by views in Systematic reviews
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Six years after the launch of Systematic Reviews by Biomed Central, this article is part of the celebration of the journal. It contains personal reflections on the past, present and future of systematic reviews, using examples relevant to the role of systematic reviews in cataloguing and analysing research, assessing quality and planning new studies. The focus is on the most common of the various types of systematic review in health and social care, namely those assessing the effects of interventions.
| Reference Key |
clarke2018partiallysystematic
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Clarke, Mike; |
| Journal | Systematic reviews |
| Year | 2018 |
| DOI |
10.1186/s13643-018-0833-3
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.