Publication Date
In 2025 | 0 |
Since 2024 | 3 |
Since 2021 (last 5 years) | 3 |
Since 2016 (last 10 years) | 5 |
Since 2006 (last 20 years) | 6 |
Descriptor
Comparative Analysis | 6 |
Computer Software | 6 |
Evaluators | 3 |
Accuracy | 2 |
Artificial Intelligence | 2 |
Evaluation Methods | 2 |
Randomized Controlled Trials | 2 |
Reliability | 2 |
Risk | 2 |
Attribution Theory | 1 |
Barriers | 1 |
More ▼ |
Source
Research Synthesis Methods | 6 |
Author
Armijo-Olivo, Susan | 1 |
Azza Warraitch | 1 |
Baumann, Niki | 1 |
Benoît Rihoux | 1 |
Campbell, Sandy | 1 |
Chang Xu | 1 |
Craig, Rodger | 1 |
Joey S. W. Kwong | 1 |
Johanna Kappenberg | 1 |
Kristin Hadfield | 1 |
Lifeng Lin | 1 |
More ▼ |
Publication Type
Journal Articles | 6 |
Reports - Research | 4 |
Reports - Evaluative | 2 |
Information Analyses | 1 |
Education Level
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Reem El Sherif; Pierre Pluye; Quan Nha Hong; Benoît Rihoux – Research Synthesis Methods, 2024
Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) is a hybrid method designed to bridge the gap between qualitative and quantitative research in a case-sensitive approach that considers each case holistically as a complex configuration of conditions and outcomes. QCA allows for multiple conjunctural causation, implying that it is often a combination of…
Descriptors: Comparative Analysis, Qualitative Research, Statistical Analysis, Researchers
Yuan Tian; Xi Yang; Suhail A. Doi; Luis Furuya-Kanamori; Lifeng Lin; Joey S. W. Kwong; Chang Xu – Research Synthesis Methods, 2024
RobotReviewer is a tool for automatically assessing the risk of bias in randomized controlled trials, but there is limited evidence of its reliability. We evaluated the agreement between RobotReviewer and humans regarding the risk of bias assessment based on 1955 randomized controlled trials. The risk of bias in these trials was assessed via two…
Descriptors: Risk, Randomized Controlled Trials, Classification, Robotics
Qusai Khraisha; Sophie Put; Johanna Kappenberg; Azza Warraitch; Kristin Hadfield – Research Synthesis Methods, 2024
Systematic reviews are vital for guiding practice, research and policy, although they are often slow and labour-intensive. Large language models (LLMs) could speed up and automate systematic reviews, but their performance in such tasks has yet to be comprehensively evaluated against humans, and no study has tested Generative Pre-Trained…
Descriptors: Peer Evaluation, Research Reports, Artificial Intelligence, Computer Software
Wanner, Amanda; Baumann, Niki – Research Synthesis Methods, 2019
Background: Both PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE contain records from the MEDLINE database. However, there are subtle differences in content, functionality, and search syntax between the two. There are many instances in which researchers may wish to search both interfaces, such as when conducting supplementary searching for a systematic review to retrieve…
Descriptors: Search Strategies, Databases, Medical Research, Medical Evaluation
Armijo-Olivo, Susan; Craig, Rodger; Campbell, Sandy – Research Synthesis Methods, 2020
Background: Evidence from new health technologies is growing, along with demands for evidence to inform policy decisions, creating challenges in completing health technology assessments (HTAs)/systematic reviews (SRs) in a timely manner. Software can decrease the time and burden by automating the process, but evidence validating such software is…
Descriptors: Comparative Analysis, Computer Software, Decision Making, Randomized Controlled Trials
Schild, Anne H. E.; Voracek, Martin – Research Synthesis Methods, 2013
Graphs are an essential part of scientific communication. Complex datasets, of which meta-analyses are textbook examples, benefit the most from visualization. Although a number of graph options for meta-analyses exist, the extent to which these are used was hitherto unclear. A systematic review on graph use in meta-analyses in three disciplines…
Descriptors: Graphs, Meta Analysis, Medicine, Psychology