№ lp_2_3_01690
File format: docx
Character count: 5636
File size: 684 KB
This document provides a critical appraisal checklist for evaluating expert opinions in the context of JBI systematic reviews, focusing on the identification and assessment of sources, logical argumentation, and literature reference.
Note:
Year
Price: 8 / 10 USD
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
The file will be delivered to the email address provided at checkout within 12 hours.
Don’t have cryptocurrency yet?
You can still complete your purchase in a few minutes:- Buy Crypto in a trusted app (Coinbase, Kraken, Cash App or any similar service).
- In the app, tap Send.
- Select network, paste our wallet address.
- Send the exact amount shown above.
The final amount may vary slightly depending on the payment method.
The file will be sent to the email address provided at checkout within 24 hours.
The product description is provided for reference. Actual content and formatting may differ slightly.
Year:
2015
Region / City:
Adelaide, South Australia
Topic:
Systematic Review, Critical Appraisal, Evidence-Based Healthcare
Document Type:
Guideline
Organization / Institution:
JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute)
Authors:
McArthur A, Klugarova J, Yan H, Florescu S
Target Audience:
Healthcare Professionals, Researchers, Policy Developers
Period of Validity:
N/A
Date of Approval:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Year:
2019
Unit title:
Module A – Textual Conversations – Ted Hughes & Sylvia Plath
Duration:
30 hours (36 x 50 min periods)
Focus:
Textual Conversation
Assessment:
Discursive Feature article
Outcome:
EA12-6, EA12-7, EA12-8, EA12-9
Texts:
Ted Hughes, Birthday Letters, Sylvia Plath, Ariel
Target Audience:
Year 12 Students
Institution:
Educational Curriculum
Region:
Australia
Author:
Educational team/teacher
Type:
Educational Unit
Year:
2026
Region / City:
Caribbean
Theme:
Human Rights, Regional Jurisprudence
Document Type:
Official Response
Institution:
Caribbean Court of Justice
Author:
Caribbean Court of Justice
Target Audience:
Governments, International Human Rights Bodies
Effective Period:
N/A
Approval Date:
N/A
Date of Revisions:
N/A
Year:
2026
Session:
30th Session of the Council
Type of document:
Submission template for textual proposals
Organization:
International Seabed Authority (ISA)
Delegation:
Germany
Relevant provision:
Draft regulation 52
Purpose:
Proposal for amendments, additions, or deletions to draft regulations
Submission method:
Email to [email protected]
Content format:
Text with tracked changes
Scope:
Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan performance assessment
Target audience:
Council delegates and relevant regulatory bodies
Year:
2014–2016
Region / City:
New South Wales, Australia
Subject:
Advanced English
Document Type:
Syllabus Notes
Institution:
New South Wales Education Standards Authority (NESA)
Authors:
Curriculum Development Team
Target Audience:
HSC students and teachers
Prescribed Texts:
Shakespeare, William, The Tempest, Cambridge University Press, 2014; Atwood, Margaret, Hag-Seed, Hogarth/Penguin Random House, 2016
Topics Covered:
Comparative study of texts, textual analysis, motifs, allusion, intertextuality, critical and creative response, context influence, analytical and evaluative language, composition skills
Assessment Style:
HSC style questions focusing on textual conversation and comparative study
Year:
2018
Institution:
University of Texas at Arlington
Course Code:
English 2350 Section 001
Instructor:
Dr. Ana Savic
Office Hours:
MW 12:10-1:00 p.m.
Class Schedule:
MWF 10:00-10:50 a.m., PH 100
Course Type:
Undergraduate English Literature Course
Required Texts:
How to Interpret Literature, Dracula (Norton Critical Edition), “The Dead” – Case Studies in Contemporary Criticism, North by Northwest (film)
Recommended Texts:
The Bedford Glossary of Critical and Literary Terms, MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers
Assessment:
Participation, quizzes, essays, midterm exam, research paper, final exam
Academic Integrity Policy:
UT Arlington Honor Code adherence required
Plagiarism Policy:
Zero tolerance, disciplinary measures in accordance with university regulations
Target Audience:
Current and prospective English majors
Course Objectives:
Development of literary analysis, interpretation, and research skills using critical theory frameworks
Learning Outcomes:
Application of literary terms, independent critical thinking, research synthesis, proper MLA documentation
Year:
2026
Region / City:
United Kingdom
Subject:
English literature, textual analysis
Document type:
Educational resource
Institution:
Department of English and Literacy
Author:
Not specified
Target audience:
Students studying English literature
Content:
Extracts from classic literature with comprehension questions and model answers
Format:
Reading passages with guided questions and answers
Educational level:
Secondary / High School
Year:
2023
Region / City:
Global
Topic:
Evidence-based Health Care, Systematic Reviews, Critical Appraisal Tools
Document Type:
Checklist
Organization:
JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute)
Author:
Barker TH, Habibi N, Aromataris E, Stone JC, Leonardi-Bee J, Sears K, et al.
Target Audience:
Researchers, healthcare professionals, academics
Period of Validity:
2023
Approval Date:
2023
Date of Last Review:
2023
Date of Revision:
2023
Description:
A checklist for critically appraising quasi-experimental studies as part of systematic reviews.
Year:
2015
Region / City:
Adelaide, South Australia
Topic:
Systematic Review, Critical Appraisal, Evidence-Based Healthcare
Document Type:
Guideline
Organization / Institution:
JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute)
Authors:
McArthur A, Klugarova J, Yan H, Florescu S
Target Audience:
Healthcare Professionals, Researchers, Policy Developers
Period of Validity:
N/A
Date of Approval:
N/A
Date of Changes:
N/A
Note:
Year
Organization:
JBI
Institution:
Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Adelaide
Country:
Australia
Field:
evidence-based healthcare
Document type:
critical appraisal checklist and methodological guidance
Scope:
case series studies
Context of use:
JBI Systematic Reviews
Authors:
Munn Z; Barker T; Moola S; Tufanaru C; Stern C; McArthur A; Stephenson M; Aromataris E
Source journal:
JBI Evidence Synthesis
DOI:
10.11124/JBISRIR-D-19-00099
Intended audience:
healthcare researchers and systematic reviewers
Source type:
methodological guidance document
Methodological focus:
assessment of bias, reporting quality, and statistical analysis
Peer review status:
approved by the JBI Scientific Committee
Year:
2020
Region / City:
South Australia
Topic:
Systematic reviews, Critical appraisal, Cohort studies
Document Type:
Research methodology tool
Organization / Institution:
JBI (University of Adelaide)
Author:
Moola S, Munn Z, Tufanaru C, Aromataris E, Sears K, Sfetcu R, Currie M, Qureshi R, Mattis P, Lisy K, Mu P-F
Target Audience:
Researchers, healthcare practitioners, systematic review reviewers
Period of Application:
2020 onwards
Approval Date:
2020
Date of Modifications:
Not specified
Organization:
Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI)
Document type:
Critical appraisal tool / checklist
Topic:
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs)
Target audience:
Researchers conducting systematic reviews
Year:
2020
Source:
JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis
Format:
Checklist for individual participants in parallel group RCTs
Purpose:
Assess methodological quality and risk of bias in RCTs
Reference:
Tufanaru C, Munn Z, Aromataris E, Campbell J, Hopp L. Chapter 3: Systematic reviews of effectiveness
Year:
2015
Region / city:
South Australia, Adelaide
Subject:
Evidence-based healthcare, Systematic reviews, Critical appraisal
Document type:
Checklist
Organization / institution:
JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute)
Author:
McArthur A, Klugarova J, Yan H, Florescu S
Target audience:
Researchers, healthcare professionals, systematic reviewers
Period of validity:
N/A
Approval date:
N/A
Date of revisions:
N/A
Organization:
JBI (Joanna Briggs Institute)
Institutional affiliation:
Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Adelaide
Country:
Australia
Document type:
Critical appraisal checklist
Source series:
JBI Critical Appraisal Tools
Intended use:
Systematic reviews and evidence synthesis
Study design addressed:
Case control studies
Review methodology:
Evidence-based healthcare
Authors cited:
Moola S; Munn Z; Tufanaru C; Aromataris E; Sears K; Sfetcu R; Currie M; Qureshi R; Mattis P; Lisy K; Mu P-F
Referenced publication:
JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis
Publication year:
2020
Assessment criteria:
Bias, confounding, exposure measurement, statistical analysis
Response options:
Yes; No; Unclear; Not applicable
Source type:
Methodological guidance document
Year:
2020
Region / City:
South Australia
Topic:
Systematic Reviews, Critical Appraisal, Healthcare Research
Document Type:
Research Guideline
Institution:
University of Adelaide, JBI
Author:
Tufanaru C, Munn Z, Aromataris E, Campbell J, Hopp L
Target Audience:
Researchers, Healthcare Professionals
Period of Application:
Not specified
Approval Date:
Not specified
Date of Modifications:
Not specified
Year:
2015
Region / city:
Adelaide
Topic:
Evidence-based healthcare, systematic reviews, critical appraisal tools
Document type:
Research methodology
Institution:
The Joanna Briggs Institute
Author:
Aromataris E, Fernandez R, Godfrey C, Holly C, Kahlil H, Tungpunkom P
Target audience:
Healthcare professionals, researchers
Period of validity:
N/A
Approval date:
N/A
Date of last change:
N/A
Year:
2017
Region / city:
Adelaide, Australia
Topic:
Evidence-based healthcare, critical appraisal, systematic reviews
Document type:
Checklist
Organization:
The Joanna Briggs Institute
Author:
Moola S, Munn Z, Tufanaru C, Aromataris E, Sears K, Sfetcu R, Currie M, Qureshi R, Mattis P, Lisy K, Mu P-F
Target audience:
Researchers, healthcare professionals
Effective period:
N/A
Approval date:
N/A
Modification date:
N/A
Year:
2017
Region / City:
Adelaide, Australia
Topic:
Evidence-based healthcare, systematic reviews
Document type:
Checklist
Organization:
The Joanna Briggs Institute
Author:
Tufanaru C, Munn Z, Aromataris E, Campbell J, Hopp L
Target audience:
Healthcare professionals, researchers
Period of validity:
Ongoing
Date of approval:
2017
Date of last revision:
N/A