Cited by 2,070Meta-analysis and systematic reviewsDelphi Technique in ResearchQualitative Research Methods and Applications

Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews: A product from the ESRC Methods Programme

Popay, Jennie, Roberts, Helen, Sowden, Amanda, Petticrew, Mark, Arai, Lisa, Rodgers, Mark, Britten, Nicky, Roen, Katrina +1 more·2006·Lancaster University

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.13140/2.1.1018.4643

Cites

0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Difficulties distinguishing autistic traits from mental health symptoms may lead to delayed or missed autism diagnosis, misdiagnosis and ultimately ineffective treatment and support.

    “This may lead to delayed or missed autism diagnosis, misdiagnosis and ultimately ineffective treatment and support.16”
  • Because identified studies were heterogeneous, the review did not conduct a meta-analysis and instead conducted a narrative synthesis.

    “Because identified studies featured heterogeneous population sub-groups, intervention types and outcomes, we did not conduct a meta-analysis. We conducted a narrative synthesis Popay, Roberts (16) and extracted the number of comparisons showing a positive effect and the number of comparisons showing statistically significant effects.”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Popay, J., Roberts, H., Sowden, A., Petticrew, M., Arai, L., Rodgers, M., Britten, N., Roen, K., & Duffy, S.
Venue
Lancaster University
Publisher
Lancaster University
Published
2006
OpenAlex
W145325731
Cited by
2,070
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 122 · 2025: 129 · 2024: 112 · 2023: 126 · 2022: 111 · 2021: 294 · 2020: 277 · 2019: 189 · 2018: 129 · 2017: 116 · 2016: 115 · 2015: 98 · 2014: 88 · 2013: 58 · 2012: 34
FWCI
6.84
Type
book
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Lancaster University eBooks
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
Keywords
narrative synthesis, systematic reviews, review methodology, research guidance

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