eCite Digital Repository

Not all systematic reviews are created equal: Considerations for appraisal

Citation

Schlosser, RW and Wendt, O and Sigafoos, J, Not all systematic reviews are created equal: Considerations for appraisal, Evidence-based Communication Assessment and Intervention, 1, (3) pp. 138-150. ISSN 1748-9539 (2007) [Refereed Article]

DOI: doi:10.1080/17489530701560831

Abstract

Systematic reviews can be a tremendous asset in the implementation of evidence-based practice, because they minimize some of the most-documented barriers to evidence-based practice. For example, by reading systematic reviews, clinicians may save time that would otherwise be dedicated to locating and appraising individual studies. Further, clinicians can rely on someone else's reviewing expertise, which reduces the knowledge and skill burden otherwise imposed on them. However, empirical studies have repeatedly demonstrated that there is great variability in the quality of systematic reviews. Thus, in order to harness their potential, it is imperative that clinicians distinguish high-quality systematic reviews from those of low quality. In this paper, we aim to discuss considerations for appraising the quality of systematic reviews. © 2007 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

Item Details

Item Type:Refereed Article
Research Division:Education
Research Group:Specialist Studies in Education
Research Field:Special Education and Disability
Objective Division:Education and Training
Objective Group:Other Education and Training
Objective Field:Special Needs Education
Author:Sigafoos, J (Professor Jeffrey Sigafoos)
ID Code:49336
Year Published:2007
Deposited By:Education
Deposited On:2007-08-01
Last Modified:2009-10-26
Downloads:0

Repository Staff Only: item control page