The DOI matches its DataCite record, with a small difference in title or year; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews: A product from the ESRC Methods Programme
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
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?
In the citing paper
“This may lead to delayed or missed autism diagnosis, misdiagnosis and ultimately ineffective treatment and support.16”
From Approaches to improving mental healthcare for autistic people: Systematic review (2024) · cites this paper as [16]
In the citing paper
“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.”
From The impact of digital interventions on help-seeking behaviour for mental health problems: a systematic literature review (2022) · cites this paper as [16]
Citations
Cites
Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary?
Jadad, A. R., Moore, R. A., Carroll, D., Jenkinson, C., Reynolds, D. J. M., Gavaghan, D. J., & McQuay, H. J. (1996) · Controlled Clinical Trials · doi:10.1016/0197-2456(95)00134-4 · Cited by 17,582
Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health
Campbell, M. (2000) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.321.7262.694 · Cited by 3,474
Writing narrative literature reviews for peer-reviewed journals: secrets of the trade
Green, B. N., Johnson, C. D., & Adams, A. (2006) · Journal of Chiropractic Medicine · doi:10.1016/s0899-3467(07)60142-6 · Cited by 2,224
Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions
Rychetnik, L., Frommer, M., Hawe, P., & Shiell, A. (2002) · Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health · doi:10.1136/jech.56.2.119 · Cited by 1,042
Systematic Review: Why sources of heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be investigated
Thompson, S. G. (1994) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.309.6965.1351 · Cited by 1,017
Integrating qualitative research with trials in systematic reviews
Thomas, J., Harden, A., Oakley, A., Oliver, S., Sutcliffe, K., Rees, R., Brunton, G., & Kavanagh, J. (2004) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7446.1010 · Cited by 515
Evidence-based Policy: In Search of a Method
Pawson, R. (2002) · Evaluation · doi:10.1177/1358902002008002512 · Cited by 403
Roen, K., Arai, L., Roberts, H., & Popay, J. (2006) · Social Science & Medicine · doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2006.02.013 · Cited by 106
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Shamseer, L., Moher, D., Clarke, M., Ghersi, D., Liberati, A., Petticrew, M., Shekelle, P., Stewart, L. A., & the PRISMA-P Group (2015) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.g7647 · Cited by 13,120
Self-citationSynthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: reporting guideline
Campbell, M., McKenzie, J. E., Sowden, A., Katikireddi, S. V., Brennan, S. E., Ellis, S., Hartmann-Boyce, J., Ryan, R., Shepperd, S., Thomas, J., et al. (2020) · BMJ · doi:10.1136/bmj.l6890 · Cited by 4,628
Self-citationClement, S., Schauman, O., Graham, T., Maggioni, F., Evans-Lacko, S., Bezborodovs, N., Morgan, C., Rüsch, N., Brown, J. S. L., & Thornicroft, G. (2015) · Psychological Medicine · doi:10.1017/s0033291714000129 · Cited by 3,152
“Narrative synthesis was undertaken because of substantial methodological and clinical heterogeneity between studies (Popay et al. 2006).”
The role of telehealth during COVID-19 outbreak: a systematic review based on current evidence
Monaghesh, E., & Hajizadeh, A. (2020) · BMC Public Health · doi:10.1186/s12889-020-09301-4 · Cited by 1,941
Synthesizing information systems knowledge: A typology of literature reviews
Paré, G., Trudel, M.-C., Jaana, M., & Kitsiou, S. (2015) · Information & Management · doi:10.1016/j.im.2014.08.008 · Cited by 1,987
Metadata
- 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
