Exact(36)
Reviewers and readers of test accuracy reviews need to check that the results or limitations of quality assessment are incorporated in the abstract and conclusion of the review.
The tendency for some reviewers to consistently score higher (or lower) than others, the impact on overall reviewer agreement, and statistical methods to detect bias (and enhance overall fairness of reviews), need to be further investigated.
The choice between frequent performance coaching and annual reviews need not be a choice at all.
To harness this potential, however, interventionists and authors of systematic reviews need tools to appraise the evidence generated by these designs.
These findings suggest that the methodologies of systematic reviews of acupuncture need to be improved and that many systematic reviews need to be redone using improved methods.
"Reviews need reducing not increasing!
Similar(24)
"Raisin," which got middling reviews, needed a few weeks to take off.
"This whole culture of quarterly reviews needs to be disrupted.
Secondly, some reviews needed updating.
Every producer, publisher or consumer of systematic reviews needs to be aware that reporting standards exist.
Ways of supporting these authors and how to provide dedicated time to convert systematic reviews needs further consideration.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com