Making evidence synthesis more useful for management and policy-making
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Demands from health policy-makers and managers for syntheses of evidence that are useful, rigorous and relevant are fuelling interest in the development of methods that can allow the integration of diverse types of evidence.
“Demands from health policy-makers and managers for syntheses of evidence that are useful, rigorous and relevant are fuelling interest in the development of methods that can allow the integration of diverse types of evidence [66].”
From Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups (2006) · cites this paper as [66]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 25 · Cited by 143
- Authors
- Sheldon, T. A.
- Affiliations
- University of York (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Sheldon, Trevor A
- ORCID
- Sheldon, Trevor A
- Venue
- Journal of Health Services Research & Policy
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2005-07
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1_suppl
- Pages
- 1-5
- ISSN
- 1355-8196 (ISSN-L)
- 1758-1060
- OpenAlex
- W2121033112
- Cited by
- 143
- References
- 25
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 13
- FWCI
- 13.86
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Health Services Research & Policy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- Health Canada
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Evaluation and Performance Assessment
- Keywords
- evidence synthesis, health policy, health management, research utilization, evidence-based decision making
- MeSH terms
- United Kingdom, Practice Patterns, Physicians', Policy Making, State Medicine, Evidence-Based Medicine
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
