Writing systematic,scoping,and app reviews: summarising and appraising best evidence

Arksey H O’Malley L (2005) Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology 8(1): 19–32.

Azad-Khaneghah P Neubauer N Miguel Cruz A , et al. (2020) Mobile health app usability and quality rating scales: a systematic review. Disability and Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology 1–10. DOI:10.1080/17483107.2019.1701103

Bourton I Moher D Tugwell P , et al. (2005) A checklist to evaluate a report of a nonpharmacological trial (CLEAR NPT) was developed using consensus. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 58(12): 1233–1240.

Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (2019) CASP Checklist: 10 Questions to help you make sense of a qualitative research. Available at: https://casp-uk.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/CASP-Qualitative-Checklist-2018.pdf (accessed 15 February 2020).

Downs SH Black N (1998) The feasibility of creating a checklist for the assessment of the methodological quality both of randomised and non-randomised studies of health care interventions. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 52(6): 377–384.

Dubey D Amritphale A Sawhney A , et al. (2014) Smart phone applications as a source of information on stroke. Journal of Stroke 16(2): 86–90. DOI: 10.5853/jos.2014.16.2.86

Gough D Oliver S Thomas J (2013) An Introduction to Systematic Reviews. Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Harris JD Quatman CE Manring MM , et al. (2013) How to write a systematic review. American Journal of Sports Medicine 42(11): 2761–2768.

Hensen P David G Albright K , et al. (2019) Deriving a practical framework for the evaluation of health apps. Lancet Digital Health 1(2): e52–e54.

Hillen MA Medendrop NM Daams JG , et al. (2017) Patient-driven second opinions in oncology: A systematic review. The Oncologist 22(10): 1197–1211.

Hong QN Pluye P Fàbregues S , et al. (2018) Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) version 2018. Available at: http://mixedmethodsappraisaltoolpublic.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/127916259/MMAT_2018_criteria-manual_2018-08-01_ENG.pdf (accessed 15 February 2020).

Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, Jenkinson C, Reynolds DJ, Gavaghan DJ, and McQuay HJ (1996) Assessing the quality of reports of randomised clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? Controlled Clinical Trials 17: 1–12.

Levac D Colquhoun H O’Brien KK (2010) Scoping studies: advancing the methodology. Implementation Science 5(1): 69.

Moher D Liberati A Tetzlaff J , et al. (2009) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. BMJ 338: b2535. Available at: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2714657/ (accessed 19 December 2016).

Moshi MR Tooher R Merlin T (2018) Suitability of current evaluation frameworks for use in the health technology assessment of mobile medical applications: a systematic review. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care 34(5): 464–475.

Munter-Mas A Martinez-Nicolas A Lavie CJ , et al. (2019) A systematic review of fitness apps and their potential clinical and sports utility for objective and remote assessment of cardiovascular fitness. Sports Medicine 49(4): 587–600.

National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (2012) Methods for the development of NICE public health guidance (third edition). Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/process/pmg4/chapter/introduction

Novak I, McIntyre S, Morgan C, Campbell L, Dark L, Morton N, Stumbles E, Wilson S and Goldsmith S (2013) A systematic review of interventions for children with cerebral palsy: State of the evidence. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology 55: 885–910. DOI:10.1111/dmcn.12246.

Pati D Lorusso LN (2018) How to write a systematic review of the literature. Health Environments Research & Design Journal 11(1): 15–30.

Pluye P Gagnon MP Griffiths F , et al. (2009) A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in Mixed Studies Reviews. International Journal of Nursing Studies 46(4): 529–546.

Sterne JAC, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, et al. (2016) ROBINS-I: A tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. British Medical Journal 355. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.i4919

Schultz Petersen K, Bjorkedal STB, Torsting A and Eplov LF (2019) Occupational therapy interventions in mental health: A scoping review of recent evidence. International Journal of Therapy and Rehabilitation 26(9): https://doi.org/10.12968/ijtr.2016.0070.

Unsworth CA (2017) Review papers: getting the best occupational therapy evidence into practice. British Journal of Occupational Therapy 80(3): 143–144.

Wells GA, Shea B, O’Connell D, et al. (2012) The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) for assessing the quality of nonrandomised studies in meta-analyses. Available at: http://www.ohri.ca/programs/clinical_epidemiology/oxford.htm (accessed 20 February 2020).