References
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). 2002. Evidence report/technology assessment No. 47, systems to rate the strength of scientific evidence. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality. Retrieved December 12, 2016: http://archive.ahrq.gov/clinic/epcsums/strengthsum.pdf
- Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. 2012. Guidance for Undertaking Reviews in Health Care. New York: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, University of York. Retrieved December 12, 2016: http://www.york.ac.uk/crd/SysRev/!SSL!/WebHelp/SysRev3.htm
- Crowe M. & Sheppard L. 2011a. A review of critical appraisal tools show they lack rigor: Alternative tool structure is proposed. J Clin Epidemiol, 64, 79–89.
- Crowe M. & Sheppard L. 2011b. A general critical appraisal tool: An evaluation of construct validity. Int J Nurs Stud, 48, 1505–1516.
- Crowe M., Sheppard L. & Campbell A. 2011. Comparison of the effects of using the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool versus informal appraisal in assessing health research: A randomised trial. Int J Evid Based Health, 9, 444–449.
- Crowe M., Sheppard L. & Campbell A. 2012. Reliability analysis for a proposed critical appraisal tool demonstrated value for diverse research designs. J Clin Epidemiol, 65, 375–383.
- Gough D., Thomas J. & Oliver S. 2012. Clarifying differences between review designs and methods. Syst Rev, 1, 28.
- Grant M.J. & Booth A. 2009. A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Info Libr J, 26, 91–108.
- Hannes K., Lockwood C. & Pearson A. 2010. A comparative analysis of three online appraisal instruments' ability to assess validity in qualitative research. Qual Health Res, 20, 1736–1743.
- Higgins J.P.T. & Green S. (eds). 2011. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration. Retrieved December 12, 2016: www.cochrane-handbook.org.
- IOM, Institute of Medicine. 2011. Standards for Systematic Reviews. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, Institute of Medicine. Retrieved: http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2011/Finding-What-Works-in-Health-Care-Standards-for-Systematic-Reviews/Standards.aspx
- Khan K.S., Kunz R., Kleijnen J. & Antes G. 2003. Five steps to conducting a systematic review. J R Soc Med, 96, 118–121.
- Kmet L.M., Lee R.C. & Cook L.S. 2004. Standard quality assessment criteria for evaluating primary research papers from a variety of fields. Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research (AHFMR). HTA Initiative. Retrieved December 12, 2016: https://www.biomedcentral.com/content/supplementary/1471-2393-14-52-s2.pdf
- Lockwood C., Munn Z. & Porritt K. 2015. Qualitative research synthesis: Methodological guidance for systematic reviewers utilizing meta-aggregation. Int J Evid Based Health, 13, 179–187.
- Manchikanti L. 2008. Evidence-based medicine, systematic reviews, and guidelines in interventional pain management, part I: Introduction and general considerations. Pain Physician, 11, 161–186.
- Smetana G.W., Umscheid C.A., Chang S.M. & Matchar D.B. 2012. Methods guide for authors of systematic reviews of medical tests: A collaboration between the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) and the Journal of General Internal Medicine. In Chang, S.M., Matchar, D.B., Smetana, G.W. & Umscheid, C.A. (eds.). Methods Guide for Medical Test Reviews. Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, pp. E1–E5. Retrieved December 12, 2016: https://www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/ehc/products/447/1113/Editorial_MedTestsGuide_20120530.pdf
- Wong, L., Hickson, L (eds.). 2012. Evidence-based Practice in Audiology: Evaluating Interventions for Children and Adults with Hearing Impairment. San Diego (CA): Plural Publishing.