A qualitative study into the difficulties experienced by healthcare decision makers when reading a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy review View Full Text


Ontology type: schema:ScholarlyArticle      Open Access: True


Article Info

DATE

2013-05-16

AUTHORS

Zhivko Zhelev, Ruth Garside, Christopher Hyde

ABSTRACT

BackgroundCochrane reviews are one of the best known and most trusted sources of evidence-based information in health care. While steps have been taken to make Cochrane intervention reviews accessible to a diverse readership, little is known about the accessibility of the newcomer to the Cochrane library: diagnostic test accuracy reviews (DTARs). The current qualitative study explored how healthcare decision makers, who varied in their knowledge and experience with test accuracy research and systematic reviews, read and made sense of DTARs.MethodsA purposive sample of clinicians, researchers and policy makers (n = 21) took part in a series of think-aloud interviews, using as interview material the first three DTARs published in the Cochrane library. Thematic qualitative analysis of the transcripts was carried out to identify patterns in participants’ ‘reading’ and interpretation of the reviews and the difficulties they encountered.ResultsParticipants unfamiliar with the design and methodology of DTARs found the reviews largely inaccessible and experienced a range of difficulties stemming mainly from the mismatch between background knowledge and level of explanation provided in the text. Experience with systematic reviews of interventions did not guarantee better understanding and, in some cases, led to confusion and misinterpretation. These difficulties were further exacerbated by poor layout and presentation, which affected even those with relatively good knowledge of DTARs and had a negative impact not only on their understanding of the reviews but also on their motivation to engage with the text. Comparison between the readings of the three reviews showed that more accessible presentation, such as presenting the results as natural frequencies, significantly increased participants’ understanding.ConclusionsThe study demonstrates that authors and editors should pay more attention to the presentation as well as the content of Cochrane DTARs, especially if the reports are aimed at readers with various levels of background knowledge and experience. It also raises the question as to the anticipated target audience of the reports and suggests that different groups of healthcare decision-makers may require different modes of presentation. More... »

PAGES

32

References to SciGraph publications

Identifiers

URI

http://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1186/2046-4053-2-32

DOI

http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-32

DIMENSIONS

https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1048974221

PUBMED

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23680077


Indexing Status Check whether this publication has been indexed by Scopus and Web Of Science using the SN Indexing Status Tool
Incoming Citations Browse incoming citations for this publication using opencitations.net

JSON-LD is the canonical representation for SciGraph data.

TIP: You can open this SciGraph record using an external JSON-LD service: JSON-LD Playground Google SDTT

[
  {
    "@context": "https://springernature.github.io/scigraph/jsonld/sgcontext.json", 
    "about": [
      {
        "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/11", 
        "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
        "name": "Medical and Health Sciences", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/1117", 
        "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
        "name": "Public Health and Health Services", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Communication", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Comprehension", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Delivery of Health Care", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Diagnostic Tests, Routine", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Humans", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Interviews as Topic", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Professional Competence", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Publishing", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Qualitative Research", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Reading", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Reproducibility of Results", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Research Design", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "inDefinedTermSet": "https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/", 
        "name": "Review Literature as Topic", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }
    ], 
    "author": [
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Veysey Building, Salmon Pool Lane, EX2 4SG, Exeter, UK", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.8391.3", 
          "name": [
            "Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Veysey Building, Salmon Pool Lane, EX2 4SG, Exeter, UK"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "familyName": "Zhelev", 
        "givenName": "Zhivko", 
        "id": "sg:person.01343671465.82", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01343671465.82"
        ], 
        "type": "Person"
      }, 
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "European Centre for Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Knowledge Spa, Royal Cornwall Hospital, TR1 3HD, Truro, UK", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.416116.5", 
          "name": [
            "European Centre for Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Knowledge Spa, Royal Cornwall Hospital, TR1 3HD, Truro, UK"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "familyName": "Garside", 
        "givenName": "Ruth", 
        "id": "sg:person.01024532450.24", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01024532450.24"
        ], 
        "type": "Person"
      }, 
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Veysey Building, Salmon Pool Lane, EX2 4SG, Exeter, UK", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.8391.3", 
          "name": [
            "Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Veysey Building, Salmon Pool Lane, EX2 4SG, Exeter, UK"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "familyName": "Hyde", 
        "givenName": "Christopher", 
        "id": "sg:person.07555101222.32", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.07555101222.32"
        ], 
        "type": "Person"
      }
    ], 
    "citation": [
      {
        "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/bf02599218", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1031814036", 
          "https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02599218"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "sg:pub.10.1080/08858199309528246", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1058343474", 
          "https://doi.org/10.1080/08858199309528246"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "sg:pub.10.1186/1471-2288-3-25", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1048548616", 
          "https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-3-25"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "sg:pub.10.1186/1471-2288-6-9", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1013425283", 
          "https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-6-9"
        ], 
        "type": "CreativeWork"
      }
    ], 
    "datePublished": "2013-05-16", 
    "datePublishedReg": "2013-05-16", 
    "description": "BackgroundCochrane reviews are one of the best known and most trusted sources of evidence-based information in health care. While steps have been taken to make Cochrane intervention reviews accessible to a diverse readership, little is known about the accessibility of the newcomer to the Cochrane library: diagnostic test accuracy reviews (DTARs). The current qualitative study explored how healthcare decision makers, who varied in their knowledge and experience with test accuracy research and systematic reviews, read and made sense of DTARs.MethodsA purposive sample of clinicians, researchers and policy makers (n = 21) took part in a series of think-aloud interviews, using as interview material the first three DTARs published in the Cochrane library. Thematic qualitative analysis of the transcripts was carried out to identify patterns in participants\u2019 \u2018reading\u2019 and interpretation of the reviews and the difficulties they encountered.ResultsParticipants unfamiliar with the design and methodology of DTARs found the reviews largely inaccessible and experienced a range of difficulties stemming mainly from the mismatch between background knowledge and level of explanation provided in the text. Experience with systematic reviews of interventions did not guarantee better understanding and, in some cases, led to confusion and misinterpretation. These difficulties were further exacerbated by poor layout and presentation, which affected even those with relatively good knowledge of DTARs and had a negative impact not only on their understanding of the reviews but also on their motivation to engage with the text. Comparison between the readings of the three reviews showed that more accessible presentation, such as presenting the results as natural frequencies, significantly increased participants\u2019 understanding.ConclusionsThe study demonstrates that authors and editors should pay more attention to the presentation as well as the content of Cochrane DTARs, especially if the reports are aimed at readers with various levels of background knowledge and experience. It also raises the question as to the anticipated target audience of the reports and suggests that different groups of healthcare decision-makers may require different modes of presentation.", 
    "genre": "article", 
    "id": "sg:pub.10.1186/2046-4053-2-32", 
    "isAccessibleForFree": true, 
    "isPartOf": [
      {
        "id": "sg:journal.1046628", 
        "issn": [
          "2046-4053"
        ], 
        "name": "Systematic Reviews", 
        "publisher": "Springer Nature", 
        "type": "Periodical"
      }, 
      {
        "issueNumber": "1", 
        "type": "PublicationIssue"
      }, 
      {
        "type": "PublicationVolume", 
        "volumeNumber": "2"
      }
    ], 
    "keywords": [
      "diagnostic test accuracy review", 
      "Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy reviews", 
      "test accuracy review", 
      "Cochrane Library", 
      "healthcare decision makers", 
      "systematic review", 
      "accuracy review", 
      "Cochrane intervention reviews", 
      "evidence-based information", 
      "test accuracy research", 
      "qualitative study", 
      "intervention reviews", 
      "health care", 
      "thematic qualitative analysis", 
      "ConclusionsThe study", 
      "purposive sample", 
      "presentation", 
      "current qualitative study", 
      "review", 
      "report", 
      "participants", 
      "good knowledge", 
      "clinicians", 
      "different groups", 
      "care", 
      "ResultsParticipants", 
      "study", 
      "intervention", 
      "levels", 
      "range of difficulties", 
      "experience", 
      "think-aloud interviews", 
      "group", 
      "healthcare", 
      "difficulties", 
      "knowledge", 
      "qualitative analysis", 
      "negative impact", 
      "cases", 
      "interview material", 
      "interviews", 
      "understanding", 
      "policy makers", 
      "transcripts", 
      "more attention", 
      "confusion", 
      "target audience", 
      "decision makers", 
      "frequency", 
      "patterns", 
      "misinterpretation", 
      "samples", 
      "makers", 
      "levels of explanation", 
      "library", 
      "accuracy research", 
      "impact", 
      "comparison", 
      "analysis", 
      "different modes", 
      "series", 
      "results", 
      "authors", 
      "poor layout", 
      "diverse readership", 
      "accessibility", 
      "part", 
      "information", 
      "newcomers", 
      "questions", 
      "research", 
      "attention", 
      "content", 
      "explanation", 
      "sense", 
      "audience", 
      "materials", 
      "text", 
      "interpretation", 
      "readership", 
      "range", 
      "researchers", 
      "motivation", 
      "source", 
      "reading", 
      "design", 
      "step", 
      "mismatch", 
      "readers", 
      "editors", 
      "background knowledge", 
      "methodology", 
      "mode", 
      "accessible presentation", 
      "layout", 
      "natural frequencies"
    ], 
    "name": "A qualitative study into the difficulties experienced by healthcare decision makers when reading a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy review", 
    "pagination": "32", 
    "productId": [
      {
        "name": "dimensions_id", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "pub.1048974221"
        ]
      }, 
      {
        "name": "doi", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "10.1186/2046-4053-2-32"
        ]
      }, 
      {
        "name": "pubmed_id", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "23680077"
        ]
      }
    ], 
    "sameAs": [
      "https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-32", 
      "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1048974221"
    ], 
    "sdDataset": "articles", 
    "sdDatePublished": "2022-12-01T06:30", 
    "sdLicense": "https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/", 
    "sdPublisher": {
      "name": "Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project", 
      "type": "Organization"
    }, 
    "sdSource": "s3://com-springernature-scigraph/baseset/20221201/entities/gbq_results/article/article_584.jsonl", 
    "type": "ScholarlyArticle", 
    "url": "https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-32"
  }
]
 

Download the RDF metadata as:  json-ld nt turtle xml License info

HOW TO GET THIS DATA PROGRAMMATICALLY:

JSON-LD is a popular format for linked data which is fully compatible with JSON.

curl -H 'Accept: application/ld+json' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1186/2046-4053-2-32'

N-Triples is a line-based linked data format ideal for batch operations.

curl -H 'Accept: application/n-triples' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1186/2046-4053-2-32'

Turtle is a human-readable linked data format.

curl -H 'Accept: text/turtle' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1186/2046-4053-2-32'

RDF/XML is a standard XML format for linked data.

curl -H 'Accept: application/rdf+xml' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1186/2046-4053-2-32'


 

This table displays all metadata directly associated to this object as RDF triples.

241 TRIPLES      21 PREDICATES      138 URIs      126 LITERALS      20 BLANK NODES

Subject Predicate Object
1 sg:pub.10.1186/2046-4053-2-32 schema:about N0a2c212da6c1446da8c50c3abb5a4c82
2 N0e2721cad6134d21bc18d7d8e05843eb
3 N1cd744aca3904613b85b119d9737c603
4 N2f5b370fb746426c8fd1142473ef1de9
5 N332f2123adc54ca49541c092f1fec979
6 N3d45a25f66054f6cad7c568d2860b2dc
7 N3d76e869a0024125a2d5a8509577a967
8 N4ce2d6b079c3437a90b226a57420ee41
9 N5844106556fa499f9a4dcbf125056067
10 N712baed9278d400ebcfdf7f4ace3b02c
11 N87eefaba9e4c4b2dba538a332b752737
12 N896274fcce7342f29de974d9a8c21293
13 Ne82f213b712d4511aea811ee931bb56b
14 anzsrc-for:11
15 anzsrc-for:1117
16 schema:author Ne9e5c24edfe140e4b91331677d7ffff9
17 schema:citation sg:pub.10.1007/bf02599218
18 sg:pub.10.1080/08858199309528246
19 sg:pub.10.1186/1471-2288-3-25
20 sg:pub.10.1186/1471-2288-6-9
21 schema:datePublished 2013-05-16
22 schema:datePublishedReg 2013-05-16
23 schema:description BackgroundCochrane reviews are one of the best known and most trusted sources of evidence-based information in health care. While steps have been taken to make Cochrane intervention reviews accessible to a diverse readership, little is known about the accessibility of the newcomer to the Cochrane library: diagnostic test accuracy reviews (DTARs). The current qualitative study explored how healthcare decision makers, who varied in their knowledge and experience with test accuracy research and systematic reviews, read and made sense of DTARs.MethodsA purposive sample of clinicians, researchers and policy makers (n = 21) took part in a series of think-aloud interviews, using as interview material the first three DTARs published in the Cochrane library. Thematic qualitative analysis of the transcripts was carried out to identify patterns in participants’ ‘reading’ and interpretation of the reviews and the difficulties they encountered.ResultsParticipants unfamiliar with the design and methodology of DTARs found the reviews largely inaccessible and experienced a range of difficulties stemming mainly from the mismatch between background knowledge and level of explanation provided in the text. Experience with systematic reviews of interventions did not guarantee better understanding and, in some cases, led to confusion and misinterpretation. These difficulties were further exacerbated by poor layout and presentation, which affected even those with relatively good knowledge of DTARs and had a negative impact not only on their understanding of the reviews but also on their motivation to engage with the text. Comparison between the readings of the three reviews showed that more accessible presentation, such as presenting the results as natural frequencies, significantly increased participants’ understanding.ConclusionsThe study demonstrates that authors and editors should pay more attention to the presentation as well as the content of Cochrane DTARs, especially if the reports are aimed at readers with various levels of background knowledge and experience. It also raises the question as to the anticipated target audience of the reports and suggests that different groups of healthcare decision-makers may require different modes of presentation.
24 schema:genre article
25 schema:isAccessibleForFree true
26 schema:isPartOf N92c8e92d53c64ad882a0203ca91aca9f
27 Ne04a66fcb9e345efbe7738b700ce0273
28 sg:journal.1046628
29 schema:keywords Cochrane Library
30 Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy reviews
31 Cochrane intervention reviews
32 ConclusionsThe study
33 ResultsParticipants
34 accessibility
35 accessible presentation
36 accuracy research
37 accuracy review
38 analysis
39 attention
40 audience
41 authors
42 background knowledge
43 care
44 cases
45 clinicians
46 comparison
47 confusion
48 content
49 current qualitative study
50 decision makers
51 design
52 diagnostic test accuracy review
53 different groups
54 different modes
55 difficulties
56 diverse readership
57 editors
58 evidence-based information
59 experience
60 explanation
61 frequency
62 good knowledge
63 group
64 health care
65 healthcare
66 healthcare decision makers
67 impact
68 information
69 interpretation
70 intervention
71 intervention reviews
72 interview material
73 interviews
74 knowledge
75 layout
76 levels
77 levels of explanation
78 library
79 makers
80 materials
81 methodology
82 misinterpretation
83 mismatch
84 mode
85 more attention
86 motivation
87 natural frequencies
88 negative impact
89 newcomers
90 part
91 participants
92 patterns
93 policy makers
94 poor layout
95 presentation
96 purposive sample
97 qualitative analysis
98 qualitative study
99 questions
100 range
101 range of difficulties
102 readers
103 readership
104 reading
105 report
106 research
107 researchers
108 results
109 review
110 samples
111 sense
112 series
113 source
114 step
115 study
116 systematic review
117 target audience
118 test accuracy research
119 test accuracy review
120 text
121 thematic qualitative analysis
122 think-aloud interviews
123 transcripts
124 understanding
125 schema:name A qualitative study into the difficulties experienced by healthcare decision makers when reading a Cochrane diagnostic test accuracy review
126 schema:pagination 32
127 schema:productId N2691d86be3bb48e8abc73043328c7603
128 Nf64bf294588242418a819cf39cb7b3b5
129 Nfe5a9f875eb9471f809440c885b9d071
130 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1048974221
131 https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-32
132 schema:sdDatePublished 2022-12-01T06:30
133 schema:sdLicense https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/
134 schema:sdPublisher Nc659143ad9884d14b59986c4d18644a4
135 schema:url https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-2-32
136 sgo:license sg:explorer/license/
137 sgo:sdDataset articles
138 rdf:type schema:ScholarlyArticle
139 N0a2c212da6c1446da8c50c3abb5a4c82 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
140 schema:name Diagnostic Tests, Routine
141 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
142 N0e2721cad6134d21bc18d7d8e05843eb schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
143 schema:name Publishing
144 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
145 N1cd744aca3904613b85b119d9737c603 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
146 schema:name Review Literature as Topic
147 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
148 N245cb272eb3c4acdba266387344e75ef rdf:first sg:person.01024532450.24
149 rdf:rest Nfa1fd3aea97e484d97eed76fd687f035
150 N2691d86be3bb48e8abc73043328c7603 schema:name dimensions_id
151 schema:value pub.1048974221
152 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
153 N2f5b370fb746426c8fd1142473ef1de9 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
154 schema:name Reproducibility of Results
155 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
156 N332f2123adc54ca49541c092f1fec979 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
157 schema:name Qualitative Research
158 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
159 N3d45a25f66054f6cad7c568d2860b2dc schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
160 schema:name Professional Competence
161 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
162 N3d76e869a0024125a2d5a8509577a967 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
163 schema:name Humans
164 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
165 N4ce2d6b079c3437a90b226a57420ee41 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
166 schema:name Delivery of Health Care
167 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
168 N5844106556fa499f9a4dcbf125056067 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
169 schema:name Interviews as Topic
170 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
171 N712baed9278d400ebcfdf7f4ace3b02c schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
172 schema:name Research Design
173 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
174 N87eefaba9e4c4b2dba538a332b752737 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
175 schema:name Communication
176 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
177 N896274fcce7342f29de974d9a8c21293 schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
178 schema:name Reading
179 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
180 N92c8e92d53c64ad882a0203ca91aca9f schema:issueNumber 1
181 rdf:type schema:PublicationIssue
182 Nc659143ad9884d14b59986c4d18644a4 schema:name Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project
183 rdf:type schema:Organization
184 Ne04a66fcb9e345efbe7738b700ce0273 schema:volumeNumber 2
185 rdf:type schema:PublicationVolume
186 Ne82f213b712d4511aea811ee931bb56b schema:inDefinedTermSet https://www.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/
187 schema:name Comprehension
188 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
189 Ne9e5c24edfe140e4b91331677d7ffff9 rdf:first sg:person.01343671465.82
190 rdf:rest N245cb272eb3c4acdba266387344e75ef
191 Nf64bf294588242418a819cf39cb7b3b5 schema:name doi
192 schema:value 10.1186/2046-4053-2-32
193 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
194 Nfa1fd3aea97e484d97eed76fd687f035 rdf:first sg:person.07555101222.32
195 rdf:rest rdf:nil
196 Nfe5a9f875eb9471f809440c885b9d071 schema:name pubmed_id
197 schema:value 23680077
198 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
199 anzsrc-for:11 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
200 schema:name Medical and Health Sciences
201 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
202 anzsrc-for:1117 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
203 schema:name Public Health and Health Services
204 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
205 sg:journal.1046628 schema:issn 2046-4053
206 schema:name Systematic Reviews
207 schema:publisher Springer Nature
208 rdf:type schema:Periodical
209 sg:person.01024532450.24 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.416116.5
210 schema:familyName Garside
211 schema:givenName Ruth
212 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01024532450.24
213 rdf:type schema:Person
214 sg:person.01343671465.82 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.8391.3
215 schema:familyName Zhelev
216 schema:givenName Zhivko
217 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01343671465.82
218 rdf:type schema:Person
219 sg:person.07555101222.32 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.8391.3
220 schema:familyName Hyde
221 schema:givenName Christopher
222 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.07555101222.32
223 rdf:type schema:Person
224 sg:pub.10.1007/bf02599218 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1031814036
225 https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02599218
226 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
227 sg:pub.10.1080/08858199309528246 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1058343474
228 https://doi.org/10.1080/08858199309528246
229 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
230 sg:pub.10.1186/1471-2288-3-25 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1048548616
231 https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-3-25
232 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
233 sg:pub.10.1186/1471-2288-6-9 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1013425283
234 https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-6-9
235 rdf:type schema:CreativeWork
236 grid-institutes:grid.416116.5 schema:alternateName European Centre for Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Knowledge Spa, Royal Cornwall Hospital, TR1 3HD, Truro, UK
237 schema:name European Centre for Environment and Human Health, University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Knowledge Spa, Royal Cornwall Hospital, TR1 3HD, Truro, UK
238 rdf:type schema:Organization
239 grid-institutes:grid.8391.3 schema:alternateName Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Veysey Building, Salmon Pool Lane, EX2 4SG, Exeter, UK
240 schema:name Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), University of Exeter Medical School, University of Exeter, Veysey Building, Salmon Pool Lane, EX2 4SG, Exeter, UK
241 rdf:type schema:Organization
 




Preview window. Press ESC to close (or click here)


...