When.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
  2. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta ...

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferred_reporting_items...

    The PRISMA flow diagram, depicting the flow of information through the different phases of a systematic review. PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) is an evidence-based minimum set of items aimed at helping scientific authors to report a wide array of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, primarily used to assess the benefits and harms of a health care ...

  3. Review article - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Review_article

    A review article is an article that summarizes the current state of understanding on a topic within a certain discipline. [1] [2] A review article is generally considered a secondary source since it may analyze and discuss the method and conclusions in previously published studies.

  4. Wikipedia : Reviewing good articles

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reviewing_good...

    This guideline provides advice on how to review fairly against these criteria and hence decide whether to list a nomination as a Good article. About the process The Good article (GA) process is intentionally lightweight.

  5. Wikipedia:Good article criteria - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Good_article...

    Wikipedia:Reviewing good articlesguidelines for reviewing an article for GA status Wikipedia:WikiProject Physics/Quality Control/Reviewing Cheatsheet —useful suggestions for GA review Wikipedia:What the Good article criteria are not —GA reviews should be concluded only in accordance with the GA criteria, not personal preferences

  6. Wikipedia : Identifying reliable sources (medicine)

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying...

    Biomedical information must be based on reliable, third-party published secondary sources, and must accurately reflect current knowledge.This guideline supports the general sourcing policy with specific attention to what is appropriate for medical content in any Wikipedia article, including those on alternative medicine.

  7. Wikipedia:Peer review/Guidelines - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Peer_review/...

    Wikipedia's peer review is a way to receive ideas on how to improve articles that are already decent. It may be used for potential good article nominations, potential featured article candidates, or an article of any "grade" (but if the article isn't well-developed, please read here before asking for a peer review).

  8. Systematic review - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Systematic_review

    A systematic review is a scholarly synthesis of the evidence on a clearly presented topic using critical methods to identify, define and assess research on the topic. [1] A systematic review extracts and interprets data from published studies on the topic (in the scientific literature), then analyzes, describes, critically appraises and summarizes interpretations into a refined evidence-based ...

  9. Wikipedia:Evaluating sources - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Evaluating_sources

    First, like any restated material, review articles may have errors. In a conflict over what a paper said, the peer-reviewed publication is more authoritative and reliable than a review article's summation of the publication's findings. Second, a review article may summarize later research or findings that shed new light on earlier research.