Literature reviews are not all the same

Autores/as

  • Amanda C de C Williams

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7146/torture.v27i2.97225

Resumen

I was very interested in the discussion in the Editorial of the first 2017 issue of Torture Journal which referred to two similar literature reviews with opposite conclusions (Weiss et al., 2016; Patel, Williams, & Kellezi, 2016; Patel, Kellezi, & Williams, 2014) and would like to clarify and elaborate some of the differences, which I think are of relevance to the conclusions.

Citas

Chalmers I, Altman DG (eds). Systematic reviews. London, BMJ Publishing Group, 1995

Page MJ, Shamseer L, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Sampson M, Tricco AC, Catalá-López F, Li L, Reid EK, Sarkis-Onofre R, Moher D. Epidemiology and reporting characteristics of systematic reviews of biomedical research: a crosssectional study. PLoS Med 13(5): e1002028. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1002028.

Patel N, Williams ACdeC, Kellezi B. Reviewing outcomes of psychological interventions with torture survivors : conceptual, methodological and ethical issues. Torture J 2016;26(1):2-16.

Patel N, Kellezi B, Williams ACDC. Psychological, social and welfare interventions for psychological health and well-being of torture survivors. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014, Issue 11. Art. No.: CD009317. DOI: 10.1002/14651858. CD009317.pub2.

Weiss WM, Ugueto AM, Mahmooth Z, Murray LK, Hall BJ, Nadison M, et al. Mental health interventions and priorities for research for adult survivors of torture and systematic violence: a review of the literature. Torture 2016;26(1):17-45.

Descargas

Publicado

2017-12-05

Cómo citar

C de C Williams, A. (2017). Literature reviews are not all the same. Torture Journal, 27(2). https://doi.org/10.7146/torture.v27i2.97225