Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews and the Journal of Experimental Criminology: Reflections on the last 20 years

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
David B. Wilson ◽  
Lorraine Mazerolle ◽  
Peter Neyroud
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Campbell Collaboration ◽  
Experimental Criminology

scholarly journals Introduction to the Special Issue on Campbell Collaboration Systematic Reviews

2017 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brandy R. Maynard ◽  
Julia H. Littell ◽  
Aron Shlonsky
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Campbell Collaboration

scholarly journals The collaboration and reporting quality of social welfare systematic reviews in the Campbell Collaboration online library

2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Li-li Wei ◽  
Jing Zhang ◽  
Ying Yang ◽  
Hao-Yu Cao ◽  
Ke-hu Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Social Network ◽  
Social Welfare ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Reporting Quality ◽  
Reporting Rate ◽  
Campbell Collaboration ◽  
The Social ◽  
Online Library

Abstract Background To analyze the collaboration and reporting quality of the systematic reviews of social welfare in the Campbell collaboration online library. Methods The Campbell collaboration online library was searched for systematic reviews of social welfare and the basic information extracted in order to assess the reporting quality of systematic reviews using a MOOSE checklist. BICOMS-2 and UCINET software were used to produce the social network, and Comprehensive Meta Analysis (Version 2) and STATA 13.0 were used to analyze the related data. Results Fifty-seven systematic reviews of social welfare were included. Twenty-eight items of the included social welfare systematic reviews were rated as complete (≥70%). There were significant differences between ≤2013 and ≥ 2014 in five items. These differences were as follows: research published by one organization or more than one organization in one item, more than three authors or less than four authors in two items, and one country or more than one country in six items. It’s completed about researches with more than one organization, three authors or more than one country. Some items were found to have a low reporting rate of studies published before 2014, by one organization, with less than four authors or one country, respectively. The social network of authors and organizations showed good collaboration. Conclusions Some items could be further improved with regard to the rate of reporting systematic reviews of social welfare in the Campbell collaboration online library. This could improve the overall quality of social welfare systematic reviews.

scholarly journals PROTOCOL: Searching and reporting in Campbell Collaboration systematic reviews: An assessment of current methods

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Young ◽  
Alison Bethel ◽  
Ciara Keenan ◽  
Kate Ghezzi‐Kopel ◽  
Elizabeth Moreton ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Campbell Collaboration

scholarly journals Campbell Collaboration og arbeidet for å fremme kunnskapsbasert sosialpolitikk

2013 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Eamonn Noonan
Keyword(s):  
Social Policy ◽  
Health Services ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Quantitative Research ◽  
Research Synthesis ◽  
English Summary ◽  
Systematic Research ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Campbell Collaboration

<p>Artikkelen presenterer The Campbell Collaboration og skisserer organisasjonens aktiviteter siden 2008, da organisasjonens sekretariat ble flyttet til Nasjonalt kunnskapssenter for helsetjenesten i Oslo. Hovedfokuset for The Campbell Collaboration er produksjon av systematiske oversikter som del av en bredere innsats for å fremme kunnskapsbasert sosialpolitikk. Artikkelen omtaler trender i nyere oversikter og eksempler på tema og inklusjonskriterier for primærstudier. Artikkelen konkluderer med at en utvikling i retning av kunnskapsbasert praksis både er viktig og mulig, men at dette er avhengig av at det skapes større plass i Norge og internasjonalt for kvantitativ forskning, for systematiske forskningssynteser, og for møteplasser mellom praksis og forskning.</p><p>Noonan E. <strong>The Campbell Collaboration – contributing to evidence informed social policies</strong>. <em>Nor J Epidemiol</em> 2013; <strong>23</strong> (2): 177-180.</p><p><strong>ENGLISH SUMMARY </strong></p><p>This article presents the Campbell Collaboration and outlines the body’s activities since 2008, when its secretariat was relocated to the Norwegian Knowledge Centre for the Health Services in Oslo. The main focus of the the Campbell Collaboration is the production of systematic reviews, as part of a broader engagement for the promotion of evidence-based social policy. The article considers trends in recent reviews on matters such as choice of subject and inclusion criteria for primary studies. The concluding section suggests that the development of evidence-based practice is both important and possible. However, progress depends on creating more space both in Norway and internationally for quantitative research, for systematic research synthesis, and for enhanced dialogue between researchers and practitioners</p>

Combining Campbell Standards and the Realist Evaluation Approach

2008 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 48-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Leontien M. van der Knaap ◽  
Frans L. Leeuw ◽  
Stefan Bogaerts ◽  
Laura T. J. Nijssen
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Realist Evaluation ◽  
Suggested Approach ◽  
Campbell Collaboration ◽  
Prevention Of Violence ◽  
Evaluation Approach ◽  
Concise Description

This article presents an approach to systematic reviews that combines the Campbell Collaboration Crime and Justice standards and the realist notion of contexts-mechanisms-outcomes (CMO) configurations. Both approaches have their advantages and drawbacks, and the authors will make a case for combining both approaches to profit from their advantages without having to deal with their separate weaknesses. They proceed to discuss how their approach should be put into practice and illustrate its use by giving a concise description of an example from their own work on the effects of prevention of violence. The authors conclude with a discussion of the strengths and weaknesses of their suggested approach and state that combining Campbell standards and the realist evaluation approach should be done more often.

The Role of Systematic Reviews and the Campbell Collaboration in the Realization of Evidence-Informed Practice

2010 ◽  
Vol 39 (4) ◽  
pp. 362-368 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aron Shlonsky ◽  
Eamonn Noonan ◽  
Julia H. Littell ◽  
Paul Montgomery
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Campbell Collaboration

Nominate Clinical Questions for Systematic Reviews

ASHA Leader ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 18 (3) ◽  
pp. 60-60
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Clinical Questions

Nominate Clinical Questions for Systematic Reviews

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document