Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 5, 2026

The Participant-Reported Implementation Update and Score PRIUS: A Novel Method for Capturing Implementation-Related Data Over Time
Published on: February 19, 2021
"Further details are needed!" Reflections on the reporting in quantitative systematic reviews submitted to JBI
1Nottingham Centre for Evidence Based Healthcare, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK.
Abstract:
JBI Evidence Synthesis receives quantitative systematic reviews that employ a wide range of high-quality and innovative methods to address their review questions. While the systematic reviews must follow JBI methodologies or those endorsed by JBI, common issues are noted related to the methods and results of systematic reviews. This commentary describes the 4 most common issues identified across quantitative systematic reviews from the experience of a senior associate editor of the journal.
More Related Videos
13:44Project-Based Learning Guidelines for Health Sciences Students: An Analysis with Data Mining and Qualitative Techniques
Published on: December 9, 2022
08:36Author Spotlight: Evaluating the Adjuvant Efficacy and Safety of Angong Niuhuang Pill in Viral Encephalitis Treatment
Published on: April 19, 2024
Related Concept Videos
Ethics in Research
Data Reporting and Recording
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Bioequivalence studies: Biowaivers
Bias in Epidemiological Studies