Topics

RESEARCH GUIDE ARCHIVE : ORIGINAL GUIDE : Annotated Bibliography Guide : RESOURCE LISTS : RESEARCH GUIDES : SUBJECT GUIDES : EVIDENCE BASED : SOURCE EVALUATION : BIBLIOGRAPHIES : WEBLIOGRAPHIES : DATABASE SEARCH RESULTS: Sources Providing Guidance, Guidelines, Lists and Database Search Results for Evaluating the Quality of Research Sources

 




*



*



RESEARCH GUIDE ARCHIVE : ORIGINAL GUIDE : 

Annotated Bibliography Guide : 

RESOURCE LISTS : 

RESEARCH GUIDES : 

SUBJECT GUIDES : 

EVIDENCE BASED : 

SOURCE EVALUATION : 

BIBLIOGRAPHIES : 

WEBLIOGRAPHIES : 

DATABASE SEARCH RESULTS: 

Sources Providing Guidance, Guidelines, Lists and Database Search Results for Evaluating the Quality of Research Sources


*



*



RESEARCH GUIDE ARCHIVE : ORIGINAL GUIDE :     

[public-health] RESOURCE LISTS :

RESEARCH GUIDES :

SUBJECT GUIDES :

EVIDENCE BASED :

SOURCE EVALUATION :

BIBLIOGRAPHIES :

WEBLIOGRAPHIES :

DATABASE SEARCH RESULTS:

Sources Providing Guidance, Guidelines, Lists and Database Search Results
for Evaluating the Quality of Research Sources




*



*




.
 
.
 
 
 
RESOURCE LISTS : 
 
RESEARCH GUIDES : 
 
SUBJECT GUIDES : 
 
EVIDENCE BASED : 
 
SOURCE EVALUATION : 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHIES : 
 
WEBLIOGRAPHIES : 
 
DATABASE SEARCH RESULTS: 
 
Sources Providing Guidance, Guidelines, Lists and Database Search Results
for Evaluating the Quality of Research Sources
 
 
.
 
.
 

========================================
========================================

SOURCE EVALUATION :

EVALUATING SOURCES :
TERM PAPERS :
RESEACH PAPERS :
RESEARCH DESIGN :
RESEARCH METHODS :
TEACHING RESEARCH SKILLS:
A Selective Bibliography of Sources That Teach Source Evaluation for Research Papers and Instruct How to Teach Source Evaluation
Posted on April 11, 2016 by jwneastro
Updated May 7, 2017 by jwneastro
.
.
SOURCE EVALUATION :
EVALUATING SOURCES :
TERM PAPERS :
RESEACH PAPERS :
RESEARCH DESIGN :
RESEARCH METHODS :
TEACHING RESEARCH SKILLS:
A Selective Bibliography of Sources That Teach Source Evaluation
for Research Papers and Instruct How to Teach Source Evaluation
.
.
WEBBIB1516
.
.
A Selective Bibliography of Sources That Teach Source Evaluation
for Research Papers and Instruct How to Teach Source Evaluation
.
.
Selected Books
Successful Strategies for Teaching Undergraduate Research
Editors      Marta Deyrup, Beth Bloom
Publisher  Scarecrow Press, 2013
ISBN 0810887177, 9780810887176
Length       204 pages
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Undergraduates and library research: what’s changed, what hasn’t, what now? /
Mary W. George —
The State of Teaching Today. Research questions and the research question:
what are we teaching when we teach research? /
Heidi L.M. Jacobs —
 Understanding the relationship between good research and good writing /
Barbara J. D’Angelo —
 Toward the “good” research assignment: a librarian speaks /
Roberta Tipton —
 Toward the “good” research assignment: an academic speaks /
Willilamjames Hull Hoffer —
 Teaching new media as a form of writing: explorations in evolving genres /
James Elmborg —
 From punitive policing to proactive prevention: approaches to teaching information
ethics in the college classroom / Maria T. Accardi —
 Assessing the information research process /
Stephanie Sterling Brasley. —
 The Strategies in Action: Four Ideas That Work. Sources before search:
a scaffolded approach to teaching research /
Stephanie N. Otis —
 RAIDS for research /
Sara D Miller, Nancy C. DeJoy, Benjamin M. Oberdock —
 College students as Wikipedia editors: new pathways to information literacy /
Davida Scharf —
 Training the trainer: librarians as faculty coaches and workshop designers /
Beth Bloom.
*
The Research Paper: A Guide to Library and Internet Research
Authors     Dawn Rodrigues, Raymond J. Rodrigues
Edition       3, illustrated
Publisher  Prentice Hall, 2003
ISBN 0130982563, 9780130982568
Length       259 pages
*
Research Papers
Authors     William Coyle, Joe Law
Edition       16
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2013
ISBN 1133713017, 9781133713012
Length       272 pages
*
Building Better Essays
Cengage Advantage Books
New 1st Editions in Developmental English Series
Author       Gina Hogan
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2012
ISBN 0495905178, 9780495905172
Length       272 pages
*
Quality Research Papers:
For Students of Religion and Theology
Authors    
Nancy Jean Vyhmeister, Terry Dwain Robertson
Publisher  Harper Collins, 2014
ISBN 0310514037, 9780310514039
Length       304 pages
*
Real Essays with Readings:
Writing for Success in College, Work, and Everyday Life
Author       Susan Anker
Publisher  Macmillan, 2011
ISBN 0312648081, 9780312648084
Length       912 pages
*
Research Paper Handbook: Your Complete Guide
Research Paper Handbook Series
Author       James D. Lester
Publisher  Good Year Books, 2005
ISBN 1596470763, 9781596470767
Length       232 pages
*
Writing the Research Paper: A Handbook
Authors     Anthony Winkler, Jo Ray McCuen-Metherell
Edition       7, illustrated
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2007
ISBN 1413011713, 9781413011715
Length       360 pages
*
Writing the Research Paper: A Handbook
Authors    
Anthony C. Winkler, Jo Ray McCuen-Metherell
Edition       8
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2011
ISBN 1133169023, 9781133169024
Length       360 pages
*
Principles of Writing Research Papers
Penguin academics
Author       James D. Lester
Edition       2, illustrated
Publisher  Penguin Academics, 2007
Original from    the University of Virginia
Digitized   Nov 24, 2009
ISBN 032142610X, 9780321426109
Length       266 pages
*
Writing, Reading, and Research
Authors     Richard Veit, Christopher Gould
Edition       8, illustrated
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2009
ISBN 0547191049, 9780547191041
Length       640 pages
*
The Johns Hopkins Guide to Digital Media
UPCC book collections on Project MUSE
Author       Marie-Laure Ryan
Editors      Marie-Laure Ryan, Lori Emerson, Benjamin J. Robertson
Edition       illustrated
Publisher  JHU Press, 2013
ISBN 142141225X, 9781421412252
Length       553 pages
*
MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers
Authors    
Joseph Gibaldi,
Modern Language Association of America
Edition       4, illustrated, reprint
Publisher 
Modern Language Association of America, 1995
ISBN 0873525655, 9780873525657
Length       293 pages
*
A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations,
Seventh Edition:
Chicago Style for Students and Researchers
Chicago Guides to Writing, Editing, and
Author       Kate L. Turabian
Contributors      Wayne C. Booth, Gregory G. Colomb,
Joseph M. Williams, Wayne C. University of Chicago Press Staff
Edition       revised
Publisher  University of Chicago Press, 2009
ISBN 0226823385, 9780226823386
Length       436 pages
*
The Sundance Writer:
A Rhetoric, Reader, and Research Guide, Brief
Author       Mark Connelly
Edition       5
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2012
ISBN 113371370X, 9781133713708
Length       752 pages
*
The Wadsworth Handbook
Authors     Laurie G. Kirszner, Stephen R. Mandell
Edition       10
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2013
ISBN 1285500121, 9781285500126
Length       864 pages
*
Usability of Complex Information Systems:
Evaluation of User Interaction
Editors      Michael Albers, Brian Still
Edition       illustrated
Publisher  CRC Press, 2010
ISBN 1439828954, 9781439828953
Length       399 pages
*
Fusion: Integrated Reading and Writing, Book 2
Authors    
Dave Kemper, Verne Meyer, John Van Rys, Patrick Sebranek
Edition       2
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2015
ISBN 1305537947, 9781305537941
Length       656 pages
*
Quick Access: Essays and Term Papers
Quick Access
Author       Research and Education Association
Publisher  Research & Education Assoc., 2009
ISBN 0738607282, 9780738607283
Length       4 pages
*
A Guide to MLA Documentation
Author       Joseph F. Trimmer
Edition       9, illustrated, annotated
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2012
ISBN 1111837074, 9781111837075
Length       48 pages
*
Insightful Writing: A Process Rhetoric with Readings
Authors     David Sabrio, Mitchell Burchfield
Edition       illustrated
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2008
ISBN 0618870261, 9780618870264
Length       336 pages
*
The Chicago Manual of Style
Author       University of Chicago. Press
Contributor        University of Chicago
Publisher  University of Chicago Press, 2003
ISBN 0226104036, 9780226104034
*
The Curious Researcher:
A Guide to Writing Research Papers
Author       Bruce Ballenger
Edition       7, illustrated
Publisher  Pearson Education, 2011
ISBN 0205172873, 9780205172870
Length       348 pages
*
Writing Research Papers Across the Curriculum
Advantage (Thomson)
Advantage series
Author       Susan M. Hubbuch
Edition       5, illustrated
Publisher  Thomson Wadsworth, 2004
ISBN 1413002374, 9781413002379
Length       450 pages
*
Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper: Evaluating Sources
University of Southern California Libraries
*
Purpose of Guide
Types of Research Designs
  1. Choosing a Research Problem
  2. Preparing to Write
  3. The Abstract
  4. The Introduction
  5. The Literature Review
  6. The Methodology
  7. The Results
Using Non-Textual Elements
  1. The Discussion
  2. The Conclusion
  3. Proofreading Your Paper
  4. Citing Sources
Annotated Bibliography
Giving an Oral Presentation
Grading Someone Else’s Paper
How to Manage Group Projects
Writing a Book Review
Writing a Case Study
Writing a Field Report
Writing a Policy Memo
Writing a Research Proposa
.
.
.
How to Write a Research Paper
*
How to Write an Annotated Bibliography
*
How to Find and Write Book Reviews:
Databases and Search Engine Searches for Finding Book Reviews
Digital Humanities and Digital Initiatives Sources
*
DISSERTATIONS: Finding and Writing Dissertations and Theses
*
Faculty Credentialing
*
GOVERNMENT PUBLICATION MANUALS :
Government Writing Manuals Guides and Handbooks
*
Grey Literature Sources and Tools
*
INFORMATION LITERACY AND FRIENDS
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT GUIDE SERIES:
COPYRIGHT, Intellectual Property and Plagiarism Sources
 *
Fair Use Under Copyright Law:
Fair Use Books, Websites and Database Search Results
*
JOURNAL CITATION RANKING SUBJECT LISTS FEATURING SCIMAGO:
Citation Analysis, Journal Rankings and Rankings Within Disciplines
and Faculty Assessment and Credentialing
*
How to Create a Literature Review
*
Media Literacy and News Literacy
*
How to Create a Meta-Analysis and a Systematic Review
*
NEWS: Newspapers News and News Archive Resources
*
Plain English Writing Books and Database Search Results
*
REFWORKS
 *
STATISTICS:
Databases, Sources and Database Search Results
for Statisitical Data Compilations and Publications
Including an Extensive Section of United States
Government Agencies with Database Search Results
from Nineteen Database Search Links for Each Agency
*https://tinyurl.com/y7yd7cy2

https://tinyurl.com/yarbs28l

*


Research Guide Directory : Discussion Group Directory
*
 *
[PDF] Evaluating Sources of Information
PK Hurley – Online Text and Course Materials – Citeseer
*
Articles
Writing Centers and Libraries: One-Stop Shopping for Better Term Papers
DOI:10.1080/02763870802101310
Rachel Cookea* & Carol Bledsoeb
pages 119-127
Published online: 12 Dec 2008
The Reference Librarian
Volume 49,  Issue 2, 2008
*
MacDonald, A. B.
(2010).
Multiple Visions of the Research Paper:
How Compositionists and Librarians Understand, Represent, and Teach
the Research Process
(Doctoral dissertation, Auburn University).
*
Donahue, A. E., and Gamtso, C.
(2010).
Term papers, Google, and library anxiety:
how can information literacy improve students’ research skills?.
*
*
DATABASE SEARCH RESULTS: Penn State Summon Search
2,767 results
(“term paper” OR “term papers” OR “research paper” OR “research papers”) AND (“source evaluation” OR “evaluating sources”)
.
.
Evaluating Sources: Overview
Related OWL  Content

·         Suggested Resources

.
.

Evaluating Sources to Answer a Research Question

You will want your research paper to be respected and credible.
Therefore, after you identify sources relevant to your research,
you need to determine whether they can help answer your research question.
There are four questions to ask when evaluating sources:
  1. How well does the source answer the research question?
  2. Is the information provided by an expert?
  3. Is the source valid?
  4. Is there a variety of sources?
FROM Suny Empire State College
OR

ESC Online Writing Center

.
.

Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper:
Evaluating Sources

.
Types of Research Designs
    Toggle Dropdown
    1. Choosing a Research Problem
    Toggle Dropdown
    2. Preparing to Write
    Toggle Dropdown
    3. The Abstract
    Toggle Dropdown
    4. The Introduction
    Toggle Dropdown
    5. The Literature Review
    Toggle Dropdown
    6. The Methodology
    Toggle Dropdown
    7. The Results
    Toggle Dropdown
    8. The Discussion
    Toggle Dropdown
    9. The Conclusion
    Toggle Dropdown
    10. Proofreading Your Paper
    Toggle Dropdown
    11. Citing Sources
    Toggle Dropdown
    Annotated Bibliography
    Giving an Oral Presentation
    Toggle Dropdown
    Grading Someone Else’s Paper
    How to Manage Group Projects
    Toggle Dropdown
    Writing a Book Review
    Toggle Dropdown
    Writing a Case Study
    Writing a Field Report
    Toggle Dropdown
    Writing a Policy Memo
    Writing a Research Proposal
    Acknowledgements
.
.

Elements of a Research Proposal and Report

2005 © David S. Walonick, Ph.D.

The Research Proposal and Report

.
.
The methods section of a research paper provides
the information by which a study’s validity is judged.
Therefore, it requires a clear and precise description
of how an experiment was done, and the rationale for
why specific experimental procedures were chosen.
The methods section should describe what was done
to answer the research question, describe how it was
done, justify the experimental design, and explain how
the results were analyzed. Scientific writing is direct
and orderly. Therefore, the methods section structure
should: describe the materials used in the study, explain
how the materials were prepared for the study, describe
the research protocol, explain how measurements were
made and what calculations were performed, and state
which statistical tests were done to analyze the data.
Once all elements of the methods section are written,
subsequent drafts should focus on how to present those
elements as clearly and logically as possibly.
The description of preparations, measurements, and the
protocol should be organized chronologically. For clarity,
when a large amount of detail must be presented, information
should be presented in sub-sections according to topic.
Material in each section should be organized by topic from
most to least important.
.
.
EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE
Amber Huett and David MacMillan
June 2011
UNA Center for Writing Excellence
 
Evidence Based Practice in nursing focuses on the idea that medical practices ought to be developed and adapted based on an ongoing cycle of evidence, theory, and research. As changes in practice prompt further research, the theories developed from that research serve as evidence to
produce more changes in practice. The implementation of Evidence Based Practice in nursing, also called Systematic Review, requires the review of such research with the intention of targeting and improving inadequate practice.
 
The systematic review of outside research attempts to make sense of the large body of information available in order to implement change effectively. The available research may be qualitative, quantitative, or evidence based. How can this research be applied on an individual basis to improve patient care?
 
Evidence Based Practice involves the following six steps:
 
Assess the need for change
 
Locate the best evidence
 
Synthesize evidence
 
Design the change
 
Implement and evaluate
 
Integrate and maintain changes
 
OR
.
.
McMillan, James H., and Sally Schumacher.
Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry.
Pearson Higher Ed, 2014.
 
.
Polit-O’Hara, Denise, and Cheryl Tatano Beck.
Essentials of nursing research:
Methods, appraisal, and utilization.
Vol. 1. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2006.
.
Greenhalgh, Trisha.
How to read a paper:
The basics of evidence-based medicine.
John Wiley and Sons, 2014.
.
Grinnell Jr, Richard M., and Yvonne A. Unrau.
Social work research and evaluation:
Foundations of evidence-based practice.
Oxford University Press, 2010.
.
Sanderson, Ian.
“Is it ‘what works’ that matters?
Evaluation and evidencebased policymaking.”
Research papers in education 18, no. 4 (2003): 331-345.
*
Author   Coleman, Vernon
Title      PAPER DOCTORS: A CRITICAL ASSESSMENT OF MEDICAL RESEARCH
Place      London
Publisher      Temple Smith
Year       1977
Pages     170
ISBN       0-85117-109-5
Language      English
Publication Type        Book, booklet
Subject Area        Applied and Professional Ethics – Scientific Research; Human Experimentation – General
Keywords (TELS) Wissenschaftliches Fehlverhalten*; Wissenschaftsethik*; Humanexperiment
scientific misconduct*; ethics of science*; human experimentation
*
Author    Selvan, Mano S; Subbian, Saravana; Cantor, Scott B; Rodriguez, Alma; Smith, Martin L; Walsh, Garrett L
Title         Ethics of transparency in research reports.
Source     Indian journal of medical ethics
Volume/Issue Vol. 8 (1)
Year         2011
Publication Date     2011-01
Pages       31-6
ISSN         0974-8466
Language         English
Publication Type     Article (journal article)
Subject Area   Policy Guidelines / Institutional Review Boards / Review Committees; Social Control of Human Experimentation
Keywords (TELS)     Humanexperiment*; Richtlinie*; Humanexperiment; Soziale Kontrolle
human experimentation*; guidelines*; human experimentation; social control
Keywords (MeSH)    Cost-Benefit Analysis; Data Interpretation, Statistical; Drug Evaluation/ statistics & numerical data; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Information Dissemination/ ethics*; Research Report*
Classification (BRL)         18.2*; 18.6
Abstract Transparency in research methods and results is now widely seen as an imperative if the healthcare and research enterprise is to be truly successful. A patient-centred focus in the conduct of clinical care includes its safety, effectiveness, efficiency, equity, and timeliness. Innovative ways are being developed to understand, disseminate, and rapidly apply the best evidence to care delivery. In this article, we demonstrate the use of simple and appropriate statistics in research reports that should help healthcare providers apply knowledge to practice by making it easier for them to understand clinical medicine.
*
Author    Groves, T
Title         What makes a high quality clinical research paper?
Source     Oral diseases
Volume/Issue Vol. 16 (4)
Year         2010
Publication Date     2010-05
Pages       313-5
ISSN         1601-0825
Language         English
Publication Type     Article (journal article)
Subject Area   Applied and Professional Ethics – Journalism / Mass Media; Policy Guidelines / Institutional Review Boards / Review Committees
Keywords (TELS)     Publikationswesen*; Ethik*; Humanexperiment; Richtlinie
publishing*; ethics*; human experimentation; guidelines
Keywords (MeSH)    Clinical Trials as Topic*; Ethics, Research*; Guidelines as Topic; Humans; Journalism, Medical/ standards*; Periodicals as Topic; Publishing/ standards*; Writing/ standards*
Classification (BRL)         1.3.7*; 18.2
Abstract The quality of a research paper depends primarily on the quality of the research study it reports. However, there is also much that authors can do to maximise the clarity and usefulness of their papers. Journals’ instructions for authors often focus on the format, style, and length of articles but do not always emphasise the need to clearly explain the work’s science and ethics: so this review reminds researchers that transparency is important too. The research question should be stated clearly, along with an explanation of where it came from and why it is important. The study methods must be reported fully and, where appropriate, in line with an evidence based reporting guideline such as the CONSORT statement for randomised controlled trials. If the study was a trial the paper should state where and when the study was registered and state its registration identifier. Finally, any relevant conflicts of interest should be declared.
*
EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE
Amber Huett and David MacMillan
June 2011
UNA Center for Writing Excellence
 *
Evidence Based Practice in nursing focuses on the idea that medical practices ought to be developed and adapted based on an ongoing cycle of evidence, theory, and research. As changes in practice prompt further research, the theories developed from that research serve as evidence to
produce more changes in practice. The implementation of Evidence Based Practice in nursing, also called Systematic Review, requires the review of such research with the intention of targeting and improving inadequate practice.
The systematic review of outside research attempts to make sense of the large body of information available in order to implement change effectively. The available research may be qualitative, quantitative, or evidence based. How can this research be applied on an individual basis to improve patient care?
Evidence Based Practice involves the following six steps:
Assess the need for change
Locate the best evidence
Synthesize evidence
Design the change
Implement and evaluate
Integrate and maintain changes
OR
*
McMillan, James H., and Sally Schumacher.
Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry.
Pearson Higher Ed, 2014.
*
Polit-O’Hara, Denise, and Cheryl Tatano Beck.
Essentials of nursing research:
Methods, appraisal, and utilization.
Vol. 1. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2006.
*
Greenhalgh, Trisha.
How to read a paper:
The basics of evidence-based medicine.
John Wiley and Sons, 2014.
*
Grinnell Jr, Richard M., and Yvonne A. Unrau.
Social work research and evaluation:
Foundations of evidence-based practice.
Oxford University Press, 2010.
*
Sanderson, Ian.
“Is it ‘what works’ that matters?
Evaluation and evidencebased policymaking.”
Research papers in education 18, no. 4 (2003): 331-345.
*
*
==========================================
Database Search Results
for Source Evaluation for Research Reports
==========================================
*
*
Google Books
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (BLOGS)
========================================
Content Sample of SOURCES FOUND WITH
GOOGLE DOMAIN NAME WEB SEARCH (BLOGS)
 ========================================
*
Evid Based Nurs 2003;6:36-40 doi:10.1136/ebn.6.2.36
EBN users’ guide
Evaluation of qualitative research studies
*
What’s Wrong with Wikipedia?
Harvard Guide to Using Sources
A Publication of the Harvard College Writing Program
  •  

Site Navigation

The Myth of the Off-Limits Source

Chelsea blog 2by Chelsea Lee
Proper citation is an important component of any APA Style paper.
However, many readers believe certain sources aren’t allowed in
APA Style, and they write to us looking for a definitive list of what is
off limits. Two of the most common questions are about whether it’s
okay to cite websites and whether sources have to have been
published within a certain time frame to be cited, such as the last
5 or 10 years.
Blog Post Contents
Reliable Sources
Primary Sources
Up-to-Date Sources
.
Additional Posts in this Group APA Blog Posts
 

April 02, 2015

Keywords in APA Style

Timothy McAdooby Timothy McAdoo
What are keywords?
.

February 04, 2015

How to Cite a Hashtag in #APAStyle

Timothy McAdooby Timothy McAdoo
Note: To learn how to cite individual tweets or posts that include hashtags, see our post on citing social media. This post is about how to talk about the hashtags themselves.
.

October 21, 2014

Student Webinars for Psychology: Tests and Measures & Statistics

.

May 09, 2014

Comparing MLA and APA: Citing Resources

.

October 24, 2013

How Do I Cite a Search in APA Style?

by Jeff Hume-Pratuch
.
snip
*
EPC Evidence-Based Reports | Agency for Healthcare Research

Search All EPC Reports

This search provides complete titles of released evidence reports,
comparative effectiveness reviews, technical briefs, Technology
Assessment Program reports, and U.S. Preventive Services Task
Force evidence syntheses.

Overview

Under the Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPC) Program of
the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, 5-year contracts
are awarded to institutions in the United States and Canada to
serve as EPCs. The EPCs review all relevant scientific literature on
a wide spectrum of clinical and health services topics to produce
various types of evidence reports. These reports may be used for
informing and developing coverage decisions, quality measures,
educational materials and tools, clinical practice guidelines, and
research agendas. The EPCs also conduct research on methodology
of evidence synthesis.

Participating EPCs

The following list provides contact information and Web sites
where available for the 13 Evidence-based Practice Centers
currently funded by the Agency for Healthcare Research and
Quality.

EPC Topic Nomination and Selection

The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) serves
as the science partner with private-sector and public organizations
in their efforts to improve the quality, effectiveness, and
appropriateness of health care delivery in the United States, and to
expedite the translation of evidence-based research findings into
improved health care services. In this context, AHRQ awards task
order contracts to its Evidence-based Practice Centers (EPCs) to
undertake scientific analysis and evidence syntheses on topics of
high priority to its stakeholders, which includes public and private
health care payers, providers, and the health care community in
general.

Resources for Researchers

EPCs produce technical reports on systematic review methodological
topics and other types of evidence synthesis-related reports such as
reports summarizing future research needs for a given topic.
In addition, EPCs, the Scientific Resource Center, and other
AHRQ-funded entities have produced tools and software to aid
researchers.

Effective Health Care Program Stakeholder Guide

Guide for partners in the Effective Health Care Program program.
Page last reviewed November 2016
Page originally created April 2013
Internet Citation: EPC Evidence-Based Reports. Content last reviewed
November 2016. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, Rockville, MD.
http://www.ahrq.gov/research/findings/evidence-based-reports/index.html
*

Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
This page documents an English Wikipedia content guideline.

Contents

·  6 Notes
*

References for College Papers

Steven Dutch, Natural and Applied Sciences, University of Wisconsin – Green Bay
First – time Visitors: Please visit Site Map and Disclaimer.

“General Principles for References

  • Use the most original source possible.
  • Use the most up-to-date and reliable source available.
  • Your paper is only as good as its weakest source.
.
snip
.

The Following ARE Acceptable References

  • Scholarly Periodicals
  • Scholarly Books
  • Reputable Translations of Foreign Works
  • Student Theses
  • Research Forums or Hotlines on the Internet
  • Internet Periodicals by Reputable Organizations
Most of the information in academia does not flow through books! The real information flow is through periodicals. Even here, acceptability varies. Scientific American is acceptable for most college research papers, but not for a graduate thesis.
Scholarly books serve several purposes:
  • They collect related articles on a subject from scattered sources.
  • They contain specially-written articles contributed by various authorities to summarize the state of research on a subject.
  • They summarize the results of research over a long period of time that would be too lengthy to publish as a periodical article. They can also include details that would be too obscure to merit inclusion in a journal article.
*

Why the “Research Paper” Isn’t Working

I recently returned from a brief encounter with some fascinating ideas at “4Cs” – the annual meeting of the Conference on College Composition and Communication.

By

April 12, 2011
Inside Higher Ed
 
*

Brain-Work: The C-EBLIP Blog

The Centre for Evidence Based Library and Information Practice (C-EBLIP) blog with topics related to research, evidence based library and information practice, and librarianship

More Data Please! Research Methods, Libraries, and Geospatial Data Catalogs: C-EBLIP Journal Club, August 25, 2016

Posted on October 4, 2016
by Kristin Bogdan
Engineering and GIS Librarian
University Library, University of Saskatchewan
*

Evaluating scientific research quality for better skeptical analysis

Contents
Where to find real science information?
Impact factor and peer review
Authorities or experts
Science or Not also provided a “checklist” of Red Flags or warning signs of a non-expert
Hierarchy of evidence
—————-
Therefore, what are the highest quality types of evidence? In order of best to worst,
Secondary reviews published in peer-reviewed, high-impact journals.
Cohort studies (retrospective studies).   
Case-control studies.   
Cross sectional surveys.
Case reports
Animal or cell culture studies.
Meeting abstract or poster presentation.
Press releases or news reports.
—————-
Clinical significance
The TL;DR version
Key citations
 ===================================================================
 MORE DATABASE SEARCH RESULTS FOR Source Evaluation for Research Reports
===================================================================
*
Google News
*
Google Images
*
Google Videos
*
Penn State Summon Search
 
407,483 results
*
Purdue Primo Database FROM Proquest / ExLibris

170,935  for Everything

*
TRIP Database
*
PogoFrog
*
*
United States
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Database
*
PUBMED
*
BioMed Central
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (GOV)
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (ORG)
Google Domain Limited Web Search (EDU)
 *
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (PUBMED)
 *
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (SCIENCEDIRECT)
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (JSTOR)
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (NEWS)
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (IMAGES)
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (VIDEOS)
*
 
========================================
========================================

SOURCE EVALUATION : EVALUATING SOURCES :
TERM PAPERS : RESEACH PAPERS : RESEARCH DESIGN :
RESEARCH METHODS : TEACHING RESEARCH SKILLS:
A Selective Bibliography of Sources That Teach
Source Evaluation for Research Papers and
Instruct How to Teach Source Evaluation

Posted on April 11, 2016 by jwneastro
 
.
 
.
 
 
SOURCE EVALUATION :
 
EVALUATING SOURCES :
 
TERM PAPERS :
 
RESEACH PAPERS :
 
RESEARCH DESIGN :
 
RESEARCH METHODS :
 
TEACHING RESEARCH SKILLS:
 
A Selective Bibliography of Sources That Teach Source Evaluation
for Research Papers and Instruct How to Teach Source Evaluation
 
 
.
 
.
 
WEBBIB1516
 
 
.
 
.
 
 
A Selective Bibliography of Sources That Teach Source Evaluation
for Research Papers and Instruct How to Teach Source Evaluation
 
.
 
.
 
 
 
Successful Strategies for Teaching Undergraduate Research
Editors      Marta Deyrup, Beth Bloom
Publisher  Scarecrow Press, 2013
ISBN 0810887177, 9780810887176
Length       204 pages
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Undergraduates and library research: what’s changed, what hasn’t, what now? /
Mary W. George —
The State of Teaching Today. Research questions and the research question:
what are we teaching when we teach research? /
Heidi L.M. Jacobs —
 Understanding the relationship between good research and good writing /
Barbara J. D’Angelo —
 Toward the “good” research assignment: a librarian speaks /
Roberta Tipton —
 Toward the “good” research assignment: an academic speaks /
Willilamjames Hull Hoffer —
 Teaching new media as a form of writing: explorations in evolving genres /
James Elmborg —
 From punitive policing to proactive prevention: approaches to teaching information
ethics in the college classroom / Maria T. Accardi —
 Assessing the information research process /
Stephanie Sterling Brasley. —
 The Strategies in Action: Four Ideas That Work. Sources before search:
a scaffolded approach to teaching research /
Stephanie N. Otis —
 RAIDS for research /
Sara D Miller, Nancy C. DeJoy, Benjamin M. Oberdock —
 College students as Wikipedia editors: new pathways to information literacy /
Davida Scharf —
 Training the trainer: librarians as faculty coaches and workshop designers /
Beth Bloom.
 
 
.
 
The Research Paper: A Guide to Library and Internet Research
Authors     Dawn Rodrigues, Raymond J. Rodrigues
Edition       3, illustrated
Publisher  Prentice Hall, 2003
ISBN 0130982563, 9780130982568
Length       259 pages
 
 
.
 
Research Papers
Authors     William Coyle, Joe Law
Edition       16
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2013
ISBN 1133713017, 9781133713012
Length       272 pages
 
 
.
 
Building Better Essays
Cengage Advantage Books
New 1st Editions in Developmental English Series
Author       Gina Hogan
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2012
ISBN 0495905178, 9780495905172
Length       272 pages
 
 
.
 
Quality Research Papers:
For Students of Religion and Theology
Authors    
Nancy Jean Vyhmeister, Terry Dwain Robertson
Publisher  Harper Collins, 2014
ISBN 0310514037, 9780310514039
Length       304 pages
 
 
.
 
Real Essays with Readings:
Writing for Success in College, Work, and Everyday Life
Author       Susan Anker
Publisher  Macmillan, 2011
ISBN 0312648081, 9780312648084
Length       912 pages
 
 
 
.
 
Research Paper Handbook: Your Complete Guide
Research Paper Handbook Series
Author       James D. Lester
Publisher  Good Year Books, 2005
ISBN 1596470763, 9781596470767
Length       232 pages
 
 
.
 
Writing the Research Paper: A Handbook
Authors     Anthony Winkler, Jo Ray McCuen-Metherell
Edition       7, illustrated
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2007
ISBN 1413011713, 9781413011715
Length       360 pages
 
 
.
 
Writing the Research Paper: A Handbook
Authors    
Anthony C. Winkler, Jo Ray McCuen-Metherell
Edition       8
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2011
ISBN 1133169023, 9781133169024
Length       360 pages
 
 
.
 
Principles of Writing Research Papers
Penguin academics
Author       James D. Lester
Edition       2, illustrated
Publisher  Penguin Academics, 2007
Original from    the University of Virginia
Digitized   Nov 24, 2009
ISBN 032142610X, 9780321426109
Length       266 pages
 
 
.
 
Writing, Reading, and Research
Authors     Richard Veit, Christopher Gould
Edition       8, illustrated
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2009
ISBN 0547191049, 9780547191041
Length       640 pages
 
 
.
 
The Johns Hopkins Guide to Digital Media
UPCC book collections on Project MUSE
Author       Marie-Laure Ryan
Editors      Marie-Laure Ryan, Lori Emerson, Benjamin J. Robertson
Edition       illustrated
Publisher  JHU Press, 2013
ISBN 142141225X, 9781421412252
Length       553 pages
 
 
.
 
MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers
Authors    
Joseph Gibaldi,
Modern Language Association of America
Edition       4, illustrated, reprint
Publisher 
Modern Language Association of America, 1995
ISBN 0873525655, 9780873525657
Length       293 pages
 
 
.
 
A Manual for Writers of Research Papers, Theses, and Dissertations,
Seventh Edition:
Chicago Style for Students and Researchers
Chicago Guides to Writing, Editing, and
Author       Kate L. Turabian
Contributors      Wayne C. Booth, Gregory G. Colomb,
Joseph M. Williams, Wayne C. University of Chicago Press Staff
Edition       revised
Publisher  University of Chicago Press, 2009
ISBN 0226823385, 9780226823386
Length       436 pages
 
 
 
 
.
 
 
The Sundance Writer:
A Rhetoric, Reader, and Research Guide, Brief
Author       Mark Connelly
Edition       5
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2012
ISBN 113371370X, 9781133713708
Length       752 pages
 
 
 
.
 
The Wadsworth Handbook
Authors     Laurie G. Kirszner, Stephen R. Mandell
Edition       10
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2013
ISBN 1285500121, 9781285500126
Length       864 pages
 
 
.
 
Usability of Complex Information Systems:
Evaluation of User Interaction
Editors      Michael Albers, Brian Still
Edition       illustrated
Publisher  CRC Press, 2010
ISBN 1439828954, 9781439828953
Length       399 pages
 
 
.
 
Fusion: Integrated Reading and Writing, Book 2
Authors    
Dave Kemper, Verne Meyer, John Van Rys, Patrick Sebranek
Edition       2
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2015
ISBN 1305537947, 9781305537941
Length       656 pages
 
 
 
.
 
Quick Access: Essays and Term Papers
Quick Access
Author       Research and Education Association
Publisher  Research & Education Assoc., 2009
ISBN 0738607282, 9780738607283
Length       4 pages
 
.
 
A Guide to MLA Documentation
Author       Joseph F. Trimmer
Edition       9, illustrated, annotated
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2012
ISBN 1111837074, 9781111837075
Length       48 pages
 
 
.
 
Insightful Writing: A Process Rhetoric with Readings
Authors     David Sabrio, Mitchell Burchfield
Edition       illustrated
Publisher  Cengage Learning, 2008
ISBN 0618870261, 9780618870264
Length       336 pages
 
 
.
 
The Chicago Manual of Style
Author       University of Chicago. Press
Contributor        University of Chicago
Publisher  University of Chicago Press, 2003
ISBN 0226104036, 9780226104034
 
 
.
 
 
The Curious Researcher:
A Guide to Writing Research Papers
Author       Bruce Ballenger
Edition       7, illustrated
Publisher  Pearson Education, 2011
ISBN 0205172873, 9780205172870
Length       348 pages
 
 
.
 
Writing Research Papers Across the Curriculum
Advantage (Thomson)
Advantage series
Author       Susan M. Hubbuch
Edition       5, illustrated
Publisher  Thomson Wadsworth, 2004
ISBN 1413002374, 9781413002379
Length       450 pages
 
 
.
 
Organizing Your Social Sciences Research Paper: Evaluating Sources
University of Southern California Libraries
 
 
 
Purpose of Guide
Types of Research Designs
  1. Choosing a Research Problem
  2. Preparing to Write
  3. The Abstract
  4. The Introduction
  5. The Literature Review
  6. The Methodology
  7. The Results
Using Non-Textual Elements
  1. The Discussion
  2. The Conclusion
  3. Proofreading Your Paper
  4. Citing Sources
Annotated Bibliography
Giving an Oral Presentation
Grading Someone Else’s Paper
How to Manage Group Projects
Writing a Book Review
Writing a Case Study
Writing a Field Report
Writing a Policy Memo
Writing a Research Proposa
 
 
.
 
.
 
.
 
How to Write a Research Paper
 
 
.
 
How to Write an Annotated Bibliography
 
 
.
 
How to Find and Write Book Reviews:
Databases and Search Engine Searches for Finding Book Reviews
 
 
.
 
Digital Humanities and Digital Initiatives Sources
 
 
.
 
DISSERTATIONS: Finding and Writing Dissertations and Theses
 
 
.
 
Faculty Credentialing
 
 
.
 
GOVERNMENT PUBLICATION MANUALS :
Government Writing Manuals Guides and Handbooks
 
 
.
 
Grey Literature Sources and Tools
 
 
.
 
INFORMATION LITERACY AND FRIENDS
 
 
.
 
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT GUIDE SERIES:
COPYRIGHT, Intellectual Property and Plagiarism Sources
 
 
.
 
Fair Use Under Copyright Law:
Fair Use Books, Websites and Database Search Results
 
 
.
 
JOURNAL CITATION RANKING SUBJECT LISTS FEATURING SCIMAGO:
Citation Analysis, Journal Rankings and Rankings Within Disciplines
and Faculty Assessment and Credentialing
 
 
.
 
How to Create a Literature Review
 
 
.
 
Media Literacy and News Literacy
 
 
.
 
How to Create a Meta-Analysis and a Systematic Review
 
 
.
 
NEWS: Newspapers News and News Archive Resources
 
 
.
 
Plain English Writing Books and Database Search Results
 
 
.
 
REFWORKS
 
 
 
STATISTICS:
Databases, Sources and Database Search Results
for Statisitical Data Compilations and Publications
Including an Extensive Section of United States
Government Agencies with Database Search Results
 
.
 
Research Guide Directory : Discussion Group Directory
 
 
.
 
.
 
 
[PDF] Evaluating Sources of Information
PK Hurley – Online Text and Course Materials – Citeseer
 
 
.
 
Articles
Writing Centers and Libraries: One-Stop Shopping for Better Term Papers
DOI:10.1080/02763870802101310
Rachel Cookea* & Carol Bledsoeb
pages 119-127
Published online: 12 Dec 2008
The Reference Librarian
Volume 49,  Issue 2, 2008
 
 
 
 
.
 
MacDonald, A. B.
(2010).
Multiple Visions of the Research Paper:
How Compositionists and Librarians Understand, Represent, and Teach
the Research Process
(Doctoral dissertation, Auburn University).
 
 
.
 
Donahue, A. E., and Gamtso, C.
(2010).
Term papers, Google, and library anxiety:
how can information literacy improve students’ research skills?.
 
 
.
 
DATABASE SEARCH RESULTS: Penn State Summon Search
 
 
.

The Critical Assessment of Research:
Traditional and New Methods of Evaluation
Chandos information professional series
Authors    Alan Bailin, Ann Grafstein
Publisher    Chandos, 2010
Original from    University of Chicago
Digitized    Apr 18, 2011
ISBN    1843345439, 9781843345435
Length    121 pages
*
Educational Research:
Why ‘What Works’ Doesn’t Work
Volume 1 of Educational Research
Editors    Paul Smeyers, Marc Depaepe
Edition    illustrated, reprint
Publisher
Springer Science & Business Media, 2007
ISBN    1402053088, 9781402053085
Length    196 pages
*
Managing Quality in Qualitative Research
Qualitative Research Kit
Author    Uwe Flick
Edition    reprint
Publisher    SAGE, 2008
ISBN    144620524X, 9781446205242
Length    160 pages
 
*
A Bird’s-Eye View of Assessment:
Selections from Editor’s Notes
Volume 10 of Assessment Update Special Collections
Editor    Trudy W. Banta
Publisher    John Wiley & Sons, 2011
ISBN    1118109155, 9781118109151
Length    96 pages
*

“evaluation of research” OR “evaluating research” OR “research evaluation” OR (assessment AND “quality of research”)
*
Handbook of Family Literacy
Editor    Barbara Hanna Wasik
Edition    illustrated, reprint
Publisher    Routledge, 2012
ISBN    0415884578, 9780415884570
Length    479 pages
*
Organizations and Strategies in Astronomy, Volume 3
Volume 256; Volume 266; Volume 280; Volume 296;
Volume 310 of Astrophysics and Space Science Library :
a series of books on the recent developments of space
science and of general geophysics and astrophysics
Astrophysics and Space Science Library, ISSN 0067-0057
Organizations and Strategies in Astronomy, André Heck
Editor    Andre Heck
Edition    illustrated
Publisher    Springer Science & Business Media, 2002
ISBN    1402008120, 9781402008122
Length    238 pages
*
Library Assessment in Higher Education
Author    Joseph R. Matthews
Publisher    Greenwood Publishing Group, 2007
ISBN    031309487X, 9780313094873
Length    146 pages
*
Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research:
The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems
Editors    Henk F. Moed, Wolfgang Glänzel, Ulrich Schmoch
Edition    illustrated
Publisher    Springer Science & Business Media, 2004
ISBN    1402027028, 9781402027024
Length    800 pages
*
Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation
Volume 9 of Information Science and Knowledge Management
Author    Henk F. Moed
Edition    illustrated
Publisher    Springer Science & Business Media, 2006
ISBN    1402037147, 9781402037146
Length    348 pages
*

Evidence-Based Prevention
Prevention Practice Kit
Editors    Katherine Raczynski,
Michael Waldo, Jonathan P. Schwartz,
Arthur M. Horne
Publisher    SAGE Publications, 2012
ISBN    1483307654, 9781483307657
Length    96 pages
*
The SAGE Handbook of Social Work Research
Sage Handbooks
Author    Ian Shaw
Edition    illustrated
Publisher    SAGE Publications, 2009
ISBN    1412934982, 9781412934985
Length    572 pages
*
 
An Introduction to Qualitative Research
Author    Uwe Flick
Publisher    SAGE, 2009
ISBN    1446241319, 9781446241318
Length    528 pages
*
Issues in Discovery, Experimental,
and Laboratory Medicine:
2011 Edition
Contributor    Q. Ashton Acton, PhD
Publisher    ScholarlyEditions, 2012
ISBN    1464963509, 9781464963506
Length    3453 pages
*
The Quality of Qualitative Research
Introducing Qualitative Methods series
Author    Clive Seale
Publisher    SAGE, 1999
ISBN    144627621X, 9781446276211
Length    224 pages
*
How to Do Research: A Psychologist’s Guide
Author    Jonathan St. B. T. Evans
Edition    illustrated
Publisher    Taylor & Francis, 2005
ISBN    1841695424, 9781841695426
Length    126 pages
 
*
.
 
Purpose of Guide
Types of Research Designs
  1. Choosing a Research Problem
  2. Preparing to Write
  3. The Abstract
  4. The Introduction
  5. The Literature Review
  6. The Methodology
  7. The Results
Using Non-Textual Elements
  1. The Discussion
  2. The Conclusion
  3. Proofreading Your Paper
  4. Citing Sources
Annotated Bibliography
Giving an Oral Presentation
Grading Someone Else’s Paper
How to Manage Group Projects
Writing a Book Review
Writing a Case Study
Writing a Field Report
Writing a Policy Memo
Writing a Research Proposa
 
 
.
 
.
 
.
 
How to Write a Research Paper
 
 
.
 
How to Write an Annotated Bibliography
 
 
.
 
How to Find and Write Book Reviews:
Databases and Search Engine Searches for Finding Book Reviews
 
 
.
 
Digital Humanities and Digital Initiatives Sources
 
 
.
 
DISSERTATIONS: Finding and Writing Dissertations and Theses
 
.
 
Faculty Credentialing
 
 
.
 
GOVERNMENT PUBLICATION MANUALS :
Government Writing Manuals Guides and Handbooks
 
 
.
 
Grey Literature Sources and Tools
 
 
.
 
INFORMATION LITERACY AND FRIENDS
 
 
.
 
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT GUIDE SERIES:
COPYRIGHT, Intellectual Property and Plagiarism Sources
 
 
.
 
Fair Use Under Copyright Law:
Fair Use Books, Websites and Database Search Results
 
 
.
 
JOURNAL CITATION RANKING SUBJECT LISTS FEATURING SCIMAGO:
Citation Analysis, Journal Rankings and Rankings Within Disciplines
and Faculty Assessment and Credentialing
 
 
.
 
How to Create a Literature Review
 
 
.
 
Media Literacy and News Literacy
 
 
.
 
How to Create a Meta-Analysis and a Systematic Review
 
 
.
 
NEWS: Newspapers News and News Archive Resources
 
 
.
 
Plain English Writing Books and Database Search Results
 
 
.
 
REFWORKS
 
 *

 *
STATISTICS:
Databases, Sources and Database Search Results
for Statisitical Data Compilations and Publications
Including an Extensive Section of United States
Government Agencies with Database Search Results
from Nineteen Database Search Links for Each Agency
https://tinyurl.com/y7yd7cy2

https://tinyurl.com/yarbs28l

*

 
.
 
Research Guide Directory : Discussion Group Directory
 
 
.
 
.
 
 
[PDF] Evaluating Sources of Information
PK Hurley – Online Text and Course Materials – Citeseer
 
 
.
 
Articles
Writing Centers and Libraries: One-Stop Shopping for Better Term Papers
DOI:10.1080/02763870802101310
Rachel Cookea* & Carol Bledsoeb
pages 119-127
Published online: 12 Dec 2008
The Reference Librarian
Volume 49,  Issue 2, 2008
 
 
 
 
.
 
MacDonald, A. B.
(2010).
Multiple Visions of the Research Paper:
How Compositionists and Librarians Understand, Represent, and Teach
the Research Process
(Doctoral dissertation, Auburn University).
 
 
.
 
Donahue, A. E., and Gamtso, C.
(2010).
Term papers, Google, and library anxiety:
how can information literacy improve students’ research skills?.
 
 
.
 
DATABASE SEARCH RESULTS: Penn State Summon Search
 (“term paper” OR “term papers” OR “research paper” OR “research papers”)
AND (“source evaluation” OR “evaluating sources”)
2,774 results
Source Types
Content Sample

MLA handbook for writers of research papers

1999, 5th ed.

MLA handbook for writers of research papers

2009, 7th ed.
The MLA Handbook is published by the Modern Language Association, the authority
on MLA documentation style. Widely adopted in high schools, colleges, and…

The elements of library research: what every student needs to know

2008
To do solid academic research, college students need to look beyond the computer search engine.
This short, practical book introduces students to the important…

10 steps in writing the research paper

1989, 4th ed.

The Little, Brown guide to writing research papers

1985, 2nd ed.

Writing Centers and Libraries: One-Stop Shopping for Better Term Papers

The Reference Librarian, 09/2008, Volume 49, Issue 2

Beyond Consultation: A New Model for Librarian’s Office Hours

Public Services Quarterly, 09/2008, Volume 4, Issue 3

Writing a research paper: students explain their process

Reference Services Review, 11/2015, Volume 43, Issue 4

Writing research papers: a complete guide

2012, 14th ed.
.
.
.

The Critical Assessment of Research:
Traditional and New Methods of Evaluation
Chandos information professional series
Authors    Alan Bailin, Ann Grafstein
Publisher    Chandos, 2010
Original from    University of Chicago
Digitized    Apr 18, 2011
ISBN    1843345439, 9781843345435
Length    121 pages
*
Educational Research:
Why ‘What Works’ Doesn’t Work
Volume 1 of Educational Research
Editors    Paul Smeyers, Marc Depaepe
Edition    illustrated, reprint
Publisher
Springer Science & Business Media, 2007
ISBN    1402053088, 9781402053085
Length    196 pages
*
Managing Quality in Qualitative Research
Qualitative Research Kit
Author    Uwe Flick
Edition    reprint
Publisher    SAGE, 2008
ISBN    144620524X, 9781446205242
Length    160 pages
*
A Bird’s-Eye View of Assessment:
Selections from Editor’s Notes
Volume 10 of Assessment Update Special Collections
Editor    Trudy W. Banta
Publisher    John Wiley & Sons, 2011
ISBN    1118109155, 9781118109151
Length    96 pages
*

“evaluation of research” OR “evaluating research” OR “research evaluation” OR (assessment AND “quality of research”)
*
Handbook of Family Literacy
Editor    Barbara Hanna Wasik
Edition    illustrated, reprint
Publisher    Routledge, 2012
ISBN    0415884578, 9780415884570
Length    479 pages
*
Organizations and Strategies in Astronomy, Volume 3
Volume 256; Volume 266; Volume 280; Volume 296;
Volume 310 of Astrophysics and Space Science Library :
a series of books on the recent developments of space
science and of general geophysics and astrophysics
Astrophysics and Space Science Library, ISSN 0067-0057
Organizations and Strategies in Astronomy, André Heck
Editor    Andre Heck
Edition    illustrated
Publisher    Springer Science & Business Media, 2002
ISBN    1402008120, 9781402008122
Length    238 pages
*
Library Assessment in Higher Education
Author    Joseph R. Matthews
Publisher    Greenwood Publishing Group, 2007
ISBN    031309487X, 9780313094873
Length    146 pages
*
Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research:
The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems
Editors    Henk F. Moed, Wolfgang Glänzel, Ulrich Schmoch
Edition    illustrated
Publisher    Springer Science & Business Media, 2004
ISBN    1402027028, 9781402027024
Length    800 pages
*
Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation
Volume 9 of Information Science and Knowledge Management
Author    Henk F. Moed
Edition    illustrated
Publisher    Springer Science & Business Media, 2006
ISBN    1402037147, 9781402037146
Length    348 pages
*

Evidence-Based Prevention
Prevention Practice Kit
Editors    Katherine Raczynski,
Michael Waldo, Jonathan P. Schwartz,
Arthur M. Horne
Publisher    SAGE Publications, 2012
ISBN    1483307654, 9781483307657
Length    96 pages
*
The SAGE Handbook of Social Work Research
Sage Handbooks
Author    Ian Shaw
Edition    illustrated
Publisher    SAGE Publications, 2009
ISBN    1412934982, 9781412934985
Length    572 pages
An Introduction to Qualitative Research
Author    Uwe Flick
Publisher    SAGE, 2009
ISBN    1446241319, 9781446241318
Length    528 pages
*
Issues in Discovery, Experimental,
and Laboratory Medicine:
2011 Edition
Contributor    Q. Ashton Acton, PhD
Publisher    ScholarlyEditions, 2012
ISBN    1464963509, 9781464963506
Length    3453 pages
*
The Quality of Qualitative Research
Introducing Qualitative Methods series
Author    Clive Seale
Publisher    SAGE, 1999
ISBN    144627621X, 9781446276211
Length    224 pages
*
How to Do Research: A Psychologist’s Guide
Author    Jonathan St. B. T. Evans
Edition    illustrated
Publisher    Taylor & Francis, 2005
ISBN    1841695424, 9781841695426
Length    126 pages
*
Braskamp, Larry A., and John C. Ory. 
Assessing Faculty Work: Enhancing Individual and Institutional Performance.
Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series
. Jossey-Bass Inc.,
350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104, 1994.
*
Armijo‐Olivo, Susan, Carla R. Stiles, Neil A. Hagen, Patricia D. Biondo, and Greta G. Cummings.
“Assessment of study quality for systematic reviews:
a comparison of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool
and the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool: methodological research.”
Journal of evaluation in clinical practice 18, no. 1 (2012): 12-18.
*
Hall, C. Michael.
“Publish and perish?
Bibliometric analysis, journal ranking and the assessment of research quality in tourism.”
Tourism Management 32, no. 1 (2011): 16-27.
*
Muldoon, Matthew F., Steven D. Barger, Janine D. Flory, and Stephen B. Manuck.
“What are quality of life measurements measuring?.”
BMJ: British Medical Journal 316, no. 7130 (1998): 542.
*
Glasziou, Paul, Jan Vandenbroucke, and Iain Chalmers. ”
Assessing the quality of research.” 
BMJ: British Medical Journal
 328, no. 7430 (2004): 39.
*
Lee, Kirby P., Marieka Schotland, Peter Bacchetti, and Lisa A. Bero.
“Association of journal quality indicators with methodological quality of clinical research articles.”
JAMA 287, no. 21 (2002): 2805-2808.
*
Weiskopf, Nicole Gray, and Chunhua Weng.
“Methods and dimensions of electronic health record data quality assessment:
enabling reuse for clinical research.”
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 20, no. 1 (2013): 144-151.

*
Shea, Beverley J., Candyce Hamel, George A. Wells, Lex M. Bouter, Elizabeth Kristjansson,
Jeremy Grimshaw, David A. Henry, and Maarten Boers.
“AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool
to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews.”
Journal of clinical epidemiology 62, no. 10 (2009): 1013-1020.
*
Akkerman, Sanne, Wilfried Admiraal, Mieke Brekelmans, and Heinze Oost.
“Auditing quality of research in social sciences.”
Quality & Quantity 42, no. 2 (2008): 257-274.
*
Cheek, Julianne, Bridget Garnham, and James Quan.
“What’s in a number? Issues in providing evidence of impact and quality of research (ers).” 
Qualitative Health Research
 16, no. 3 (2006): 423-435.
*
Oxman, Andrew D., and Gordon H. Guyatt.
“Validation of an index of the quality of review articles.”
Journal of clinical epidemiology 44, no. 11 (1991): 1271-1278.
*
Rapley, Mark.
Quality of life research: A critical introduction.
Sage, 2003.
*
Campos-Outcalt, Douglas, Janet Senf, Arleen J. Watkins, and Stan Bastacky.
“The effects of medical school curricula, faculty role models, and biomedical research support
on choice of generalist physician careers: a review and quality assessment of the literature.” 
Academic Medicine
 70, no. 7 (1995): 611-9.
*
Tan, David L.
“The assessment of quality in higher education: A critical review of the literature and research.” 
Research in higher education
 24, no. 3 (1986): 223-265.
*
Taylor, Jim.
“The assessment of research quality in UK universities: Peer review or metrics?.” 
British Journal of Management
 22, no. 2 (2011): 202-217.
*
Roberts, Sir Gareth. 
Review of research assessment
.
London: RA Review, 2003.
*
Chase, Richard B.
“A classification and evaluation of research in operations management.”
Journal of Operations Management 1, no. 1 (1980): 9-14.
*
Seale, Clive.
“Quality in qualitative research.” 
Qualitative inquiry
 5, no. 4 (1999): 465-478.
*
Smith, Richard.
“Measuring the social impact of research: difficult but necessary.” 
BMJ: British Medical Journal
 323, no. 7312 (2001): 528.

*
Lombard, Matthew, Jennifer Snyder‐Duch, and Cheryl Campanella Bracken.
“Content analysis in mass communication: Assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability.” 
Human communication research
 28, no. 4 (2002): 587-604.
*
Valentine, Jeffrey C., and Harris Cooper.
“A systematic and transparent approach for assessing
the methodological quality of intervention effectiveness research:
the Study Design and Implementation Assessment Device (Study DIAD).”
Psychological methods 13, no. 2 (2008): 130.
*
Furlong, John, and Alis Oancea.
“Assessing quality in applied and practice-based educational research: A framework for discussion.” 
Review of Australian research in education: counterpoints on the quality and impact of educational research––
a special issue of the Australian Educational Researcher
 6 (2005): 89-104.
*
Lexchin, Joel, Lisa A. Bero, Benjamin Djulbegovic, and Otavio Clark.
“Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review.” 
Bmj
 326, no. 7400 (2003): 1167-1170.
*
Dusenbury, Linda, Rosalind Brannigan, Mathea Falco, and William B. Hansen.
“A review of research on fidelity of implementation:
implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings.” 
Health education research
 18, no. 2 (2003): 237-256.
*
Chalmers, Iain, and Paul Glasziou.
“Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence.” 
Obstetrics & Gynecology
 114, no. 6 (2009): 1341-1345.
*
Geuna, Aldo, and Ben R. Martin.
“University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison.” 
Minerva
 41, no. 4 (2003): 277-304.
*
Olivo, Susan Armijo, Luciana Gazzi Macedo, Inae Caroline Gadotti, Jorge Fuentes,
Tasha Stanton, and David J. Magee.
“Scales to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials: a systematic review.” 
Physical therapy
 88, no. 2 (2008): 156.
*
Schmoch, Ulrich, and Torben Schubert.
“Are international co-publications an indicator for quality of scientific research?.” 
Scientometrics
 74, no. 3 (2007): 361-377.
*
Tooth, Leigh, Robert Ware, Chris Bain, David M. Purdie, and Annette Dobson.
“Quality of reporting of observational longitudinal research.”
American Journal of Epidemiology 161, no. 3 (2005): 280-288.
*
Sanderson, Simon, Iain D. Tatt, and Julian PT Higgins.
“Tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies in epidemiology:
a systematic review and annotated bibliography.”
International journal of epidemiology 36, no. 3 (2007): 666-676.
*
Barker, Katharine.
“The UK Research Assessment Exercise:
the evolution of a national research evaluation system.” 
Research Evaluation
 16, no. 1 (2007): 3-12.
*
Elton, Lewis.
“The UK research assessment exercise: unintended consequences.” 
Higher Education Quarterly
 54, no. 3 (2000): 274-283.
*
Moed, Henk F.
“The future of research evaluation
rests with an intelligent combination of advanced metrics and transparent peer review.” 
Science and Public Policy (SPP)
 34, no. 8 (2007).
*
Staniszewska, Sophie, Jo Brett, Carole Mockford, and Rosemary Barber.
“The GRIPP checklist: strengthening the quality of patient and public involvement reporting in research.” 
International journal of technology assessment in health care
 27, no. 04 (2011): 391-399.
*
Popay, Jennie, Anne Rogers, and Gareth Williams.
“Rationale and standards for the systematic review of qualitative literature in health services research.” 
Qualitative health research
 8, no. 3 (1998): 341-351.
Ivanitskaya, Lana, Irene O. Boyle, and Anne Marie Casey.
“Health information literacy and competencies of information age students:
results from the interactive online Research Readiness Self-Assessment (RRSA).”
Journal of Medical Internet Research 8, no. 2 (2006): e6.
*
Hanney, Stephen R., Miguel A. Gonzalez-Block, Martin J. Buxton, and Maurice Kogan.
“The utilisation of health research in policy-making:
concepts, examples and methods of assessment.” 
Health research policy and systems
 1, no. 1 (2003): 2.
*
Northcott, Deryl, and Simon Linacre.
“Producing spaces for academic discourse:
The impact of research assessment exercises and journal quality rankings.” 
Australian Accounting Review
 20, no. 1 (2010): 38-54.
*
Gough, David.
“Weight of evidence: a framework for the appraisal of the quality and relevance of evidence.” 
Research papers in education
 22, no. 2 (2007): 213-228.
*
Lee, Frederic S.
“The Research Assessment Exercise,
the state and the dominance of mainstream economics in British universities.”
Cambridge Journal of Economics 31, no. 2 (2007): 309-325.
*
Besley, Tina. 
Assessing the quality of educational research in higher education: International perspectives
.
Sense Publishers, 2009.
*
Wortman, Paul M.
“Judging research quality.”
The handbook of research synthesis (1994): 97-109.
*
Foster, Peter.
“‘Never mind the quality, feel the impact’: a methodological assessment of teacher research
sponsored by the Teacher Training Agency.” 
British Journal of Educational Studies
 47, no. 4 (1999): 380-398.
*
Doyle, J. R., and A. J. Arthurs.
“Judging the quality of research in business schools: The UK as a case study.” 
Omega
 23, no. 3 (1995): 257-270.
*
Barnett-Page, Elaine, and James Thomas.
“Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review.” 
BMC medical research methodology
 9, no. 1 (2009): 59.
*
Vaughn, John.
“Accreditation, commercial rankings, and new approaches
to assessing the quality of university research and education programmes in the United States.” 
Higher Education in Europe
 27, no. 4 (2002): 433-441.
*
Adams, Guy B., and Jay D. White.
“Dissertation research in public administration and cognate fields:
An assessment of methods and quality.” 
Public Administration Review
 (1994): 565-576.
*
Emerson, John D., Elisabeth Burdick, David C. Hoaglin, Frederick Mosteller, and Thomas C. Chalmers.
“An empirical study of the possible relation of treatment differences to quality scores
in controlled randomized clinical trials.” 
Controlled clinical trials
 11, no. 5 (1990): 339-352.
*
Korhonen, Pekka, Risto Tainio, and Jyrki Wallenius.
“Value efficiency analysis of academic research.” 
European Journal of Operational Research
 130, no. 1 (2001): 121-132.
*
Al-Benna, Sammy, Durayd Alzoubaidi, and Yazan Al-Ajam.
“Evidence-based burn care—an assessment of the methodological quality of research published
in burn care journals from 1982 to 2008.” 
Burns
 36, no. 8 (2010): 1190-1195.
*
Tashakkori, Abbas, and Charles Teddlie.
“Quality of inferences in mixed methods research: Calling for an integrative framework.” 
Advances in mixed methods research
 (2008): 101-119.
*
Hicks, Diana.
“Evolving regimes of multi-university research evaluation.” 
Higher Education
 57, no. 4 (2009): 393-404.
*
Jin, Bihui, and Ronald Rousseau.
“Evaluation of research performance and scientometric indicators in China.”
In Handbook of quantitative science and technology research,
pp. 497-514. Springer Netherlands, 2004.
*
Tomlinson, Stephan.
“The research assessment exercise and medical research.”
British Medical Journal 320, no. 7235 (2000): 636.
*
Burla, Laila, Birte Knierim, Jurgen Barth, Katharina Liewald, Margreet Duetz, and Thomas Abel.
“From text to codings: intercoder reliability assessment in qualitative content analysis.” 
Nursing research
 57, no. 2 (2008): 113-117.
*
Orton, Lois, Ffion Lloyd-Williams, David Taylor-Robinson, Martin O’Flaherty, and Simon Capewell.
“The use of research evidence in public health decision making processes: systematic review.” 
PloS one
 6, no. 7 (2011): e21704.
*
Hemingway, Harry, Peter Philipson, Ruoling Chen, Natalie K. Fitzpatrick, Jacqueline Damant,
Martin Shipley, Keith R. Abrams et al.
“Evaluating the quality of research into a single prognostic biomarker:
a systematic review and meta-analysis of 83 studies of C-reactive protein
in stable coronary artery disease.” 
PLoS Med
 7, no. 6 (2010): e1000286.
*
Van der Meulen, Barend, and Arie Rip.
“Evaluation of societal quality of public sector research in the Netherlands.” 
Research Evaluation
 9, no. 1 (2000): 11-25.
*
Howley, Lisa, Karen Szauter, Linda Perkowski, Maurice Clifton, and Nancy McNaughton.
“Quality of standardised patient research reports in the medical education literature:
review and recommendations.”
Medical education 42, no. 4 (2008): 350-358.
*
Oppenheim, Charles.
“The correlation between citation counts and the 1992 research assessment exercise ratings
for British research in genetics, anatomy and archaeology.” 
Journal of documentation
 53, no. 5 (1997): 477-487.
*
Long, Andrew F., and Mary Godfrey.
“An evaluation tool to assess the quality of qualitative research studies.”
International Journal of Social Research Methodology 7, no. 2 (2004): 181-196.
*
Rey-Rocha, Jesús, M. José Martín-Sempere, Jesús Martínez-Frías, and Fernando López-Vera.
“Some misuses of journal impact factor in research evaluation.” 
Cortex
 37, no. 4 (2001): 595-597.
*
Falchikov, Nancy, and David Boud.
“Student self-assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis.”
Review of Educational Research 59, no. 4 (1989): 395-430.
Lundh, Andreas, and Peter C. Gøtzsche.
“Recommendations by Cochrane Review Groups for assessment of the risk of bias in studies.” 
BMC medical research methodology
 8, no. 1 (2008): 22.
*
Durant, Robert H. ”
“Checklist for the evaluation of research articles.”
Journal of adolescent health 15, no. 1 (1994): 4-8.
*
Van Raan, Anthony FJ, and Th N. Van Leeuwen.
“Assessment of the scientific basis of interdisciplinary, applied research:
application of bibliometric methods in nutrition and food research.” 
Research Policy
 31, no. 4 (2002): 611-632.
*
Smedley, Brian D., and M. Alfred Haynes, eds. 
The unequal burden of cancer: an assessment of NIH research and programs
for ethnic minorities and the medically underserved
.
National Academies Press, 1999.
*
McCann, Russell A., Christina M. Armstrong, Nancy A. Skopp, Amanda Edwards-Stewart,
Derek J. Smolenski, Jennifer D. June, Melinda Metzger-Abamukong, and Greg M. Reger.
“Virtual reality exposure therapy for the treatment of anxiety disorders:
an evaluation of research quality.” 
Journal of anxiety disorders
 28, no. 6 (2014): 625-631.
*
Tijssen, Robert, Martijn Visser, and Thed van Leeuwen.
“Benchmarking international scientific excellence:
Are highly cited research papers an appropriate frame of reference?.”
Scientometrics 54, no. 3 (2002): 381-397.
*
Lawani, Stephen.
“Some bibliometric correlates of quality in scientific research.” 
Scientometrics
 9, no. 1-2 (1986): 13-25.
*
Patrick, William J., and Elizabeth C. Stanley.
“Teaching and research quality indicators and the shaping of higher education.”
Research in Higher Education 39, no. 1 (1998): 19-41.
*
Allen, Chiharu S., Qi Chen, Victor L. Willson, and Jan N. Hughes.
“Quality of research design moderates effects of grade retention on achievement:
A meta-analytic, multilevel analysis.” 
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis
 31, no. 4 (2009): 480-499.
*
Wright, Bradley E., Lepora J. Manigault, and Tamika R. Black.
“Quantitative Research Measurement in Public Administration An Assessment of Journal Publications.” 
Administration & Society
 35, no. 6 (2004): 747-764.
*
Sombatsompop, Narongrit, Teerasak Markpin, Wutthisit Yochai, and M. Saechiew.
“An evaluation of research performance for different subject categories using Impact Factor Point Average (IFPA) index:
Thailand case study.”
Scientometrics 65, no. 3 (2005): 293-305.
*
Cho, Mildred K., and Lisa A. Bero.
“Instruments for assessing the quality of drug studies published in the medical literature.”
JAMA 272, no. 2 (1994): 101-104.
*
Lee, Frederic S., and Sandra Harley.
“Peer review, the research assessment exercise and the demise of non-mainstream economics.” 
Capital and Class
 22, no. 3 (1998): 23-51.
*
Jefferson, Tom, Melanie Rudin, Suzanne Brodney Folse, and Frank Davidoff.
“Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies.” 
The Cochrane Library
 (2006).
*

Kajermo, Kerstin Nilsson, Gun Nordström, Åsa Krusebrant, and Hjördis Björvell.
“Barriers to and facilitators of research utilization, as perceived
by a group of registered nurses in Sweden.”
Journal of advanced nursing 27, no. 4 (1998): 798-807.
*
Groot, Tom, and Teresa Garcia-Valderrama.
“Research quality and efficiency: An analysis of assessments and management issues
in Dutch economics and business research programs.”
Research Policy 35, no. 9 (2006): 1362-1376.
*
Boaz, Annette, and Deborah Ashby. 
Fit for purpose?: assessing research quality for evidence based policy and practice
.
London: ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice, 2003.
*
Oxman, Andrew D., Gordon H. Guyatt, Joel Singer, Charlie H. Goldsmith, Brian G. Hutchison,
Ruth A. Milner, and David L. Streiner.
“Agreement among reviewers of review articles.”
Journal of clinical epidemiology 44, no. 1 (1991): 91-98.
*
Moed, Henk F.
Citation analysis in research evaluation.
Vol. 9. Springer Science & Business Media, 2006.
*
Weingart, Peter.
“Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences?.” 
Scientometrics
 62, no. 1 (2005): 117-131.
*
Dixon-Woods, Mary, Alex Sutton, Rachel Shaw, Tina Miller, Jonathan Smith,
Bridget Young, Sheila Bonas, Andrew Booth, and David Jones.
“Appraising qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews:
a quantitative and qualitative comparison of three methods.”
Journal of health services research & policy 12, no. 1 (2007): 42-47.
*
Schünemann, Holger J., Andrew D. Oxman, Jan Brozek, Paul Glasziou, Patrick Bossuyt,
Stephanie Chang, Paola Muti, Roman Jaeschke, and Gordon H. Guyatt.
Schünemann, Holger J., Andrew D. Oxman, Jan Brozek, Paul Glasziou, Patrick Bossuyt, Stephanie Chang, Paola Muti, Roman Jaeschke, and Gordon H. Guyatt. “GRADE: assessing the quality of evidence for diagnostic recommendations.” Evidence Based Medicine 13, no. 6 (2008): 162-163.
Evidence Based Medicine 13, no. 6 (2008): 162-163.
*
Brown, Lawrence D., and Ronald J. Huefner.
“The familiarity with and perceived quality of accounting journals:
views of senior accounting faculty in leading US MBA programs.” 
Contemporary Accounting Research
 11, no. 1 (1994): 223-250.
*
Seale, Clive.
“Validity, reliability and the quality of research.” 
Researching society and culture
 (2004): 71-83.
*
De Jong, Stefan PL, Pleun Van Arensbergen, Floortje Daemen,
Barend Van Der Meulen, and Peter Van Den Besselaar.
“Evaluation of research in context: an approach and two cases.” 
Research Evaluation
 20, no. 1 (2011): 61-72.
*
Tijssen, Robert JW.
“Scoreboards of research excellence.” 
Research Evaluation
 12, no. 2 (2003): 91-103.
*
Hammerschlag, R., and M. M. Morris.
“Clinical trials comparing acupuncture with biomedical standard care:
A criteria-based evaluation of research design and reporting.”
Complementary Therapies in Medicine 5, no. 3 (1997): 133-140.
*
Luukkonen‐Gronow, Terttu.
“Scientific research evaluation: a review of methods and various contexts of their application.”
R&D Management 17, no. 3 (1987): 207-221.
*
Paul, Ray J.
“Measuring research quality: the United Kingdom government’s research assessment exercise.” 
European Journal of Information Systems
 17, no. 4 (2008): 324-329.
*
Sanz-Menéndez, Luis.
“Research actors and the state: research evaluation
and evaluation of science and technology policies in Spain.”
Research Evaluation 5, no. 1 (1995): 79-88.
 
*
Parsons, Nicholas R., Richard Hiskens, Charlotte L. Price, Juul Achten, and Matthew L. Costa.
“A systematic survey of the quality of research reporting in general orthopaedic journals.”
J Bone Joint Surg Br 93, no. 9 (2011): 1154-1159.
*
Gibbons, Michael, and Luke Georghiou. 
Evaluation of Research. A Selection of Current Practices
.
OECD Publications Service, Sales and Distribution Division,
2, rue Andre-Pascal, 75775 Paris, France., 1987.
*
Cagan, Ross.
“The San Francisco declaration on research assessment.”
(2013): 869-870.
*
Hammersley, Martyn.
“The issue of quality in qualitative research.” 
International Journal of Research & Method in Education
 30, no. 3 (2007): 287-305.
*
Boaden, Ruth J., and Jan J. Cilliers.
“Quality and the research assessment exercise: just one aspect of performance?.” 
Quality Assurance in Education
 9, no. 1 (2001): 5-13.
*
Bornmann, Lutz.
“What is societal impact of research and how can it be assessed? A literature survey.”
Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64, no. 2 (2013): 217-233.
*
Bero, Lisa A., and Drummond Rennie.
“Influences on the quality of published drug studies.” 
International journal of technology assessment in health care

12, no. 02 (1996): 209-237.
*
Westerheijden, Don F., Bjorn Stensaker, and Maria João Rosa, eds. 
Quality assurance in higher education: Trends in regulation, translation and transformation
.
Vol. 20. Springer Science & Business Media, 2007.
*
Goh, C. H., C. W. Holsapple, L. E. Johnson, and J. Tanner.
“An empirical assessment of influences on POM research.”
Omega 24, no. 3 (1996): 337-345.
*
Langfeldt, Liv.
“Expert panels evaluating research: decision-making and sources of bias.” 
Research Evaluation
 13, no. 1 (2004).
*
Merenstein, Joel, Goutham Rao, and Frank D Amico.
“Clinical research in family medicine: quantity and quality of published articles.”
FAMILY MEDICINE-KANSAS CITY- 35, no. 4 (2003): 284-288.
Bessant, John, Sue Birley, Cary Cooper, Sandra Dawson, John Gennard, Maureen Gardiner, Andrew Gray et al.
“The state of the field in UK management research: reflections of the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE) Panel.” 
British Journal of Management
 14, no. 1 (2003): 51-68.
*
Franceschet, Massimo, and Antonio Costantini.
“The effect of scholar collaboration on impact and quality of academic papers.”
Journal of informetrics 4, no. 4 (2010): 540-553.
*
Jensen, Jason L., and Robert Rodgers.
“Cumulating the intellectual gold of case study research.”
Public Administration Review 61, no. 2 (2001): 235-246.
*
Donovan, Claire, and Linda Butler.
“Testing novel quantitative indicators of research’quality’, esteem and’user engagement’:
an economics pilot study.” 
Research Evaluation
 16, no. 4 (2007).
*
Brophy, Robert H., Michael J. Gardner, Omar Saleem, and Robert G. Marx.
“An assessment of the methodological quality of research published in The American Journal of Sports Medicine.” 
The American journal of sports medicine
 33, no. 12 (2005): 1812-1815.
*
Bence, Valerie, and Charles Oppenheim.
“The evolution of the UK’s Research Assessment Exercise: publications, performance and perceptions.”
Journal of Educational Administration and History 37, no. 2 (2005): 137-155.
*
Bence, Valerie, and Charles Oppenheim.
“The influence of peer review on the research assessment exercise.”
Journal of Information Science 30, no. 4 (2004): 347-368.
*
Bence, Valerie, and Charles Oppenheim.
“The role of academic journal publications in the UK Research Assessment Exercise.” 
Learned Publishing
 17, no. 1 (2004): 53-68.
*
Ha, Tam Cam, Say Beng Tan, and Khee Chee Soo.
“The journal impact factor: too much of an impact?.”
Annals-Academy Of Medicine Singapore 35, no. 12 (2006): 911.
*
Shaw, Ian, and Matthew Norton.
“Kinds and quality of social work research.”
British Journal of Social Work 38, no. 5 (2008): 953-970.
*
Sheikh, Aziz.
“Publication ethics and the research assessment exercise:
reflections on the troubled question of authorship.”
Journal of Medical Ethics 26, no. 6 (2000): 422-426.
*
Hammell, Karen Whalley.
“Informing client-centred practice through qualitative inquiry:
Evaluating the quality of qualitative research.” 
The British Journal of Occupational Therapy
 65, no. 4 (2002): 175-184.
*
Sparkes, Andrew C., and Brett Smith.
“Judging the quality of qualitative inquiry: Criteriology and relativism in action.” 
Psychology of sport and exercise
 10, no. 5 (2009): 491-497.
*
Abramo, Giovanni, and Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo.
“Evaluating research: from informed peer review to bibliometrics.”
Scientometrics 87, no. 3 (2011): 499-514.
*
Patrick, William J., and Elizabeth C. Stanley.
“Assessment of research quality.”
Research in Higher Education 37, no. 1 (1996): 23-42.
*
Leitch, Claire M., Frances M. Hill, and Richard T. Harrison.
“The philosophy and practice of interpretivist research in entrepreneurship:
Quality, validation, and trust.”
Organizational Research Methods 13, no. 1 (2010): 67-84.
*
Bridges, David.
“Research quality assessment in education: impossible science, possible art?.” 
British Educational Research Journal
 35, no. 4 (2009): 497-517.
*
Bleakley, C., and Domhnall MacAuley.
“The quality of research in sports journals.” 
British journal of sports medicine
 36, no. 2 (2002): 124-125.
*
Liao, Chien Hsiang.
“How to improve research quality? Examining the impacts of collaboration intensity
and member diversity in collaboration networks.”
Scientometrics 86, no. 3 (2011): 747-761.
*
McAllister, Paul R., Richard C. Anderson, and Francis Narin.
“Comparison of peer and citation assessment of the influence of scientific journals.”
Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology 31, no. 3 (1980): 147-152.
*
Roulston, Kathryn.
“Considering quality in qualitative interviewing.” 
Qualitative Research
 10, no. 2 (2010): 199-228.
*
Reynolds, Joanna, James Kizito, Nkoli Ezumah, Peter Mangesho, Elizabeth Allen, and Clare Chandler.
“Quality assurance of qualitative research: a review of the discourse.” 
Health Research Policy and Systems
 9, no. 1 (2011): 43.
*
Delaney, Anthony, Sean M. Bagshaw, Andre Ferland, Kevin Laupland, Braden Manns, and Christopher Doig.
“The quality of reports of critical care meta-analyses in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews:
an independent appraisal.” 
Critical care medicine
 35, no. 2 (2007): 589-594.
*
Gibbs, Graham. ”
“The relationship between quality in research and quality in teaching.” 
Quality in Higher Education
 1, no. 2 (1995): 147-157.
*
Jarwal, Som D., Andrew M. Brion, and Maxwell L. King.
“Measuring research quality using the journal impact factor, citations and ‘Ranked Journals’:
blunt instruments or inspired metrics?.”
Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 31, no. 4 (2009): 289-300.
*
Cave, Martin. 
“The use of performance indicators in higher education: The challenge of the quality movement
.”
Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 1997.
*
Goodall, Amanda H.
“Highly cited leaders and the performance of research universities.” 
Research Policy
 38, no. 7 (2009): 1079-1092.
*
Lindsay, Roger, Rosanna Breen, and Alan Jenkins.
“Academic research and teaching quality: the views of undergraduate and postgraduate students.” 
Studies in Higher Education
 27, no. 3 (2002): 309-327.
*
Li, Feng, Yong Yi, Xiaolong Guo, and Wei Qi.
“Performance evaluation of research universities in Mainland China, Hong Kong and Taiwan:
based on a two-dimensional approach.” 
Scientometrics
 90, no. 2 (2012): 531-542.
*
Lewison, Grant, Graham Thornicroft, George Szmukler, and Michele Tansella.
“Fair assessment of the merits of psychiatric research.”
The British Journal of Psychiatry 190, no. 4 (2007): 314-318.
*
GEISLER, ELIEZER.
“The mires of research evaluation.” 
The Scientist
 15, no. 10 (2001): 35-35.
*
Crawford, Cindy C., M. T. Huynh, A. Kepple, and W. B. Jonas.
“Systematic assessment of the quality of research studies of conventional and alternative treatment (s)
of primary headache.”
Pain Physician 12, no. 2 (2009): 461-70.
*
Funtowicz, Silvio O., and Jerome R. Ravetz.
“Science for the post-normal age.”
Futures 25, no. 7 (1993): 739-755.
*
*
DATABASE SEARCH RESULTS
*
*
(“RESEARCH REPORTS” OR “JOURNAL ARTICLES” OR “RESEARCH STUDIES”) AND
(“evaluating sources” OR “source evaluation” OR “critical assessment”) AND
(“PEER  REVIEWED” OR “EVIDENCE BASED” OR QUALITY OR QUANTITATIVE OR
QUALITATIVE OR ACCURACY OR VALIDITY)

*
*
Google Books
*
Google Scholar
*
Google Images
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (IMAGES)
*
Google News
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (NEWS)
*

Google Domain Limited Web Search (BLOGS)
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (VIDEOS)
*
YouTube
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (PUBMED)
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (SCIENCEDIRECT)
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (JSTOR)
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (NCJRS)
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (GOV)
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (ORG)
*
Google Domain Limited Web Search (ERIC/EDU)
*
Penn State Summon Search
*
Purdue Primo Search FROM Ex Libris/Alma

8,501  for Everything

*
.
 
Research Guide Directory : Discussion Group Directory
 
 
.
 
.
 
How to Write a Research Paper
 
 
.
 
How to Write an Annotated Bibliography
 
 
.
 
How to Find and Write Book Reviews:
Databases and Search Engine Searches for Finding Book Reviews
 
 
.
 
Digital Humanities and Digital Initiatives Sources
 
 
.
 
DISSERTATIONS: Finding and Writing Dissertations and Theses
 
 
.
 
Faculty Credentialing
 
 
.
 
GOVERNMENT PUBLICATION MANUALS :
Government Writing Manuals Guides and Handbooks
 
 
.
 
Grey Literature Sources and Tools
 
 
.
 
INFORMATION LITERACY AND FRIENDS
 
 
.
 
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND COPYRIGHT GUIDE SERIES:
COPYRIGHT, Intellectual Property and Plagiarism Sources
 
 
.
 
Fair Use Under Copyright Law:
Fair Use Books, Websites and Database Search Results
 
 
.
 
JOURNAL CITATION RANKING SUBJECT LISTS FEATURING SCIMAGO:
Citation Analysis, Journal Rankings and Rankings Within Disciplines
and Faculty Assessment and Credentialing
 
 
.
 
How to Create a Literature Review
 
 
.
 
Media Literacy and News Literacy
 
 
.
 
How to Create a Meta-Analysis and a Systematic Review
 
 
.
 
NEWS: Newspapers News and News Archive Resources
 
 
.
 
Plain English Writing Books and Database Search Results
 
 
.
 
REFWORKS
 
 
 
STATISTICS:
Databases, Sources and Database Search Results
for Statisitical Data Compilations and Publications
Including an Extensive Section of United States
Government Agencies with Database Search Results
 
.
 
Research Guide Directory : Discussion Group Directory
 
.
.
 
[PDF] Evaluating Sources of Information
PK Hurley – Online Text and Course Materials – Citeseer
 
 
.
 
Articles
Writing Centers and Libraries: One-Stop Shopping for Better Term Papers
DOI:10.1080/02763870802101310
Rachel Cookea* & Carol Bledsoeb
pages 119-127
Published online: 12 Dec 2008
The Reference Librarian
Volume 49,  Issue 2, 2008
 
 
 
 
.
 
MacDonald, A. B.
(2010).
Multiple Visions of the Research Paper:
How Compositionists and Librarians Understand, Represent, and Teach
the Research Process
(Doctoral dissertation, Auburn University).
 
 
.
 
Donahue, A. E., and Gamtso, C.
(2010).
Term papers, Google, and library anxiety:
how can information literacy improve students’ research skills?.
 
 
.
 
DATABASE SEARCH RESULTS: Penn State Summon Search
 (“term paper” OR “term papers” OR “research paper” OR “research papers”)
AND (“source evaluation” OR “evaluating sources”)
2,774 results
Source Types
Content Sample

MLA handbook for writers of research papers

1999, 5th ed.

MLA handbook for writers of research papers

2009, 7th ed.
The MLA Handbook is published by the Modern Language Association, the authority
on MLA documentation style. Widely adopted in high schools, colleges, and…

The elements of library research: what every student needs to know

2008
To do solid academic research, college students need to look beyond the computer search engine.
This short, practical book introduces students to the important…

10 steps in writing the research paper

1989, 4th ed.

The Little, Brown guide to writing research papers

1985, 2nd ed.

Writing Centers and Libraries: One-Stop Shopping for Better Term Papers

The Reference Librarian, 09/2008, Volume 49, Issue 2

Beyond Consultation: A New Model for Librarian’s Office Hours

Public Services Quarterly, 09/2008, Volume 4, Issue 3

Writing a research paper: students explain their process

Reference Services Review, 11/2015, Volume 43, Issue 4

Writing research papers: a complete guide

2012, 14th ed.
.
.
.

The Critical Assessment of Research:
Traditional and New Methods of Evaluation
Chandos information professional series
Authors    Alan Bailin, Ann Grafstein
Publisher    Chandos, 2010
Original from    University of Chicago
Digitized    Apr 18, 2011
ISBN    1843345439, 9781843345435
Length    121 pages
*
Educational Research:
Why ‘What Works’ Doesn’t Work
Volume 1 of Educational Research
Editors    Paul Smeyers, Marc Depaepe
Edition    illustrated, reprint
Publisher
Springer Science & Business Media, 2007
ISBN    1402053088, 9781402053085
Length    196 pages
*
Managing Quality in Qualitative Research
Qualitative Research Kit
Author    Uwe Flick
Edition    reprint
Publisher    SAGE, 2008
ISBN    144620524X, 9781446205242
Length    160 pages
*
A Bird’s-Eye View of Assessment:
Selections from Editor’s Notes
Volume 10 of Assessment Update Special Collections
Editor    Trudy W. Banta
Publisher    John Wiley & Sons, 2011
ISBN    1118109155, 9781118109151
Length    96 pages
*

“evaluation of research” OR “evaluating research” OR “research evaluation” OR (assessment AND “quality of research”)
*
Handbook of Family Literacy
Editor    Barbara Hanna Wasik
Edition    illustrated, reprint
Publisher    Routledge, 2012
ISBN    0415884578, 9780415884570
Length    479 pages
*
Organizations and Strategies in Astronomy, Volume 3
Volume 256; Volume 266; Volume 280; Volume 296;
Volume 310 of Astrophysics and Space Science Library :
a series of books on the recent developments of space
science and of general geophysics and astrophysics
Astrophysics and Space Science Library, ISSN 0067-0057
Organizations and Strategies in Astronomy, André Heck
Editor    Andre Heck
Edition    illustrated
Publisher    Springer Science & Business Media, 2002
ISBN    1402008120, 9781402008122
Length    238 pages
*
Library Assessment in Higher Education
Author    Joseph R. Matthews
Publisher    Greenwood Publishing Group, 2007
ISBN    031309487X, 9780313094873
Length    146 pages
*
Handbook of Quantitative Science and Technology Research:
The Use of Publication and Patent Statistics in Studies of S&T Systems
Editors    Henk F. Moed, Wolfgang Glänzel, Ulrich Schmoch
Edition    illustrated
Publisher    Springer Science & Business Media, 2004
ISBN    1402027028, 9781402027024
Length    800 pages
*
Citation Analysis in Research Evaluation
Volume 9 of Information Science and Knowledge Management
Author    Henk F. Moed
Edition    illustrated
Publisher    Springer Science & Business Media, 2006
ISBN    1402037147, 9781402037146
Length    348 pages
*

Evidence-Based Prevention
Prevention Practice Kit
Editors    Katherine Raczynski,
Michael Waldo, Jonathan P. Schwartz,
Arthur M. Horne
Publisher    SAGE Publications, 2012
ISBN    1483307654, 9781483307657
Length    96 pages
*
The SAGE Handbook of Social Work Research
Sage Handbooks
Author    Ian Shaw
Edition    illustrated
Publisher    SAGE Publications, 2009
ISBN    1412934982, 9781412934985
Length    572 pages
An Introduction to Qualitative Research
Author    Uwe Flick
Publisher    SAGE, 2009
ISBN    1446241319, 9781446241318
Length    528 pages
*
Issues in Discovery, Experimental,
and Laboratory Medicine:
2011 Edition
Contributor    Q. Ashton Acton, PhD
Publisher    ScholarlyEditions, 2012
ISBN    1464963509, 9781464963506
Length    3453 pages
*
The Quality of Qualitative Research
Introducing Qualitative Methods series
Author    Clive Seale
Publisher    SAGE, 1999
ISBN    144627621X, 9781446276211
Length    224 pages
*
How to Do Research: A Psychologist’s Guide
Author    Jonathan St. B. T. Evans
Edition    illustrated
Publisher    Taylor & Francis, 2005
ISBN    1841695424, 9781841695426
Length    126 pages
*
Braskamp, Larry A., and John C. Ory. 
Assessing Faculty Work: Enhancing Individual and Institutional Performance.
Jossey-Bass Higher and Adult Education Series
. Jossey-Bass Inc.,
350 Sansome Street, San Francisco, CA 94104, 1994.
*
Armijo‐Olivo, Susan, Carla R. Stiles, Neil A. Hagen, Patricia D. Biondo, and Greta G. Cummings.
“Assessment of study quality for systematic reviews:
a comparison of the Cochrane Collaboration Risk of Bias Tool
and the Effective Public Health Practice Project Quality Assessment Tool: methodological research.”
Journal of evaluation in clinical practice 18, no. 1 (2012): 12-18.
*
Hall, C. Michael.
“Publish and perish?
Bibliometric analysis, journal ranking and the assessment of research quality in tourism.”
Tourism Management 32, no. 1 (2011): 16-27.
*
Muldoon, Matthew F., Steven D. Barger, Janine D. Flory, and Stephen B. Manuck.
“What are quality of life measurements measuring?.”
BMJ: British Medical Journal 316, no. 7130 (1998): 542.
*
Glasziou, Paul, Jan Vandenbroucke, and Iain Chalmers. ”
Assessing the quality of research.” 
BMJ: British Medical Journal
 328, no. 7430 (2004): 39.
*
Lee, Kirby P., Marieka Schotland, Peter Bacchetti, and Lisa A. Bero.
“Association of journal quality indicators with methodological quality of clinical research articles.”
JAMA 287, no. 21 (2002): 2805-2808.
*
Weiskopf, Nicole Gray, and Chunhua Weng.
“Methods and dimensions of electronic health record data quality assessment:
enabling reuse for clinical research.”
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 20, no. 1 (2013): 144-151.

*
Shea, Beverley J., Candyce Hamel, George A. Wells, Lex M. Bouter, Elizabeth Kristjansson,
Jeremy Grimshaw, David A. Henry, and Maarten Boers.
“AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool
to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews.”
Journal of clinical epidemiology 62, no. 10 (2009): 1013-1020.
*
Akkerman, Sanne, Wilfried Admiraal, Mieke Brekelmans, and Heinze Oost.
“Auditing quality of research in social sciences.”
Quality & Quantity 42, no. 2 (2008): 257-274.
*
Cheek, Julianne, Bridget Garnham, and James Quan.
“What’s in a number? Issues in providing evidence of impact and quality of research (ers).” 
Qualitative Health Research
 16, no. 3 (2006): 423-435.
*
Oxman, Andrew D., and Gordon H. Guyatt.
“Validation of an index of the quality of review articles.”
Journal of clinical epidemiology 44, no. 11 (1991): 1271-1278.
*
Rapley, Mark.
Quality of life research: A critical introduction.
Sage, 2003.
*
Campos-Outcalt, Douglas, Janet Senf, Arleen J. Watkins, and Stan Bastacky.
“The effects of medical school curricula, faculty role models, and biomedical research support
on choice of generalist physician careers: a review and quality assessment of the literature.” 
Academic Medicine
 70, no. 7 (1995): 611-9.
*
Tan, David L.
“The assessment of quality in higher education: A critical review of the literature and research.” 
Research in higher education
 24, no. 3 (1986): 223-265.
*
Taylor, Jim.
“The assessment of research quality in UK universities: Peer review or metrics?.” 
British Journal of Management
 22, no. 2 (2011): 202-217.
*
Roberts, Sir Gareth. 
Review of research assessment
.
London: RA Review, 2003.
*
Chase, Richard B.
“A classification and evaluation of research in operations management.”
Journal of Operations Management 1, no. 1 (1980): 9-14.
*
Seale, Clive.
“Quality in qualitative research.” 
Qualitative inquiry
 5, no. 4 (1999): 465-478.
*
Smith, Richard.
“Measuring the social impact of research: difficult but necessary.” 
BMJ: British Medical Journal
 323, no. 7312 (2001): 528.

*
Lombard, Matthew, Jennifer Snyder‐Duch, and Cheryl Campanella Bracken.
“Content analysis in mass communication: Assessment and reporting of intercoder reliability.” 
Human communication research
 28, no. 4 (2002): 587-604.
*
Valentine, Jeffrey C., and Harris Cooper.
“A systematic and transparent approach for assessing
the methodological quality of intervention effectiveness research:
the Study Design and Implementation Assessment Device (Study DIAD).”
Psychological methods 13, no. 2 (2008): 130.
*
Furlong, John, and Alis Oancea.
“Assessing quality in applied and practice-based educational research: A framework for discussion.” 
Review of Australian research in education: counterpoints on the quality and impact of educational research––
a special issue of the Australian Educational Researcher
 6 (2005): 89-104.
*
Lexchin, Joel, Lisa A. Bero, Benjamin Djulbegovic, and Otavio Clark.
“Pharmaceutical industry sponsorship and research outcome and quality: systematic review.” 
Bmj
 326, no. 7400 (2003): 1167-1170.
*
Dusenbury, Linda, Rosalind Brannigan, Mathea Falco, and William B. Hansen.
“A review of research on fidelity of implementation:
implications for drug abuse prevention in school settings.” 
Health education research
 18, no. 2 (2003): 237-256.
*
Chalmers, Iain, and Paul Glasziou.
“Avoidable waste in the production and reporting of research evidence.” 
Obstetrics & Gynecology
 114, no. 6 (2009): 1341-1345.
*
Geuna, Aldo, and Ben R. Martin.
“University research evaluation and funding: An international comparison.” 
Minerva
 41, no. 4 (2003): 277-304.
*
Olivo, Susan Armijo, Luciana Gazzi Macedo, Inae Caroline Gadotti, Jorge Fuentes,
Tasha Stanton, and David J. Magee.
“Scales to assess the quality of randomized controlled trials: a systematic review.” 
Physical therapy
 88, no. 2 (2008): 156.
*
Schmoch, Ulrich, and Torben Schubert.
“Are international co-publications an indicator for quality of scientific research?.” 
Scientometrics
 74, no. 3 (2007): 361-377.
*
Tooth, Leigh, Robert Ware, Chris Bain, David M. Purdie, and Annette Dobson.
“Quality of reporting of observational longitudinal research.”
American Journal of Epidemiology 161, no. 3 (2005): 280-288.
*
Sanderson, Simon, Iain D. Tatt, and Julian PT Higgins.
“Tools for assessing quality and susceptibility to bias in observational studies in epidemiology:
a systematic review and annotated bibliography.”
International journal of epidemiology 36, no. 3 (2007): 666-676.
*
Barker, Katharine.
“The UK Research Assessment Exercise:
the evolution of a national research evaluation system.” 
Research Evaluation
 16, no. 1 (2007): 3-12.
*
Elton, Lewis.
“The UK research assessment exercise: unintended consequences.” 
Higher Education Quarterly
 54, no. 3 (2000): 274-283.
*
Moed, Henk F.
“The future of research evaluation
rests with an intelligent combination of advanced metrics and transparent peer review.” 
Science and Public Policy (SPP)
 34, no. 8 (2007).
*
Staniszewska, Sophie, Jo Brett, Carole Mockford, and Rosemary Barber.
“The GRIPP checklist: strengthening the quality of patient and public involvement reporting in research.” 
International journal of technology assessment in health care
 27, no. 04 (2011): 391-399.
*
Popay, Jennie, Anne Rogers, and Gareth Williams.
“Rationale and standards for the systematic review of qualitative literature in health services research.” 
Qualitative health research
 8, no. 3 (1998): 341-351.
Ivanitskaya, Lana, Irene O. Boyle, and Anne Marie Casey.
“Health information literacy and competencies of information age students:
results from the interactive online Research Readiness Self-Assessment (RRSA).”
Journal of Medical Internet Research 8, no. 2 (2006): e6.
*
Hanney, Stephen R., Miguel A. Gonzalez-Block, Martin J. Buxton, and Maurice Kogan.
“The utilisation of health research in policy-making:
concepts, examples and methods of assessment.” 
Health research policy and systems
 1, no. 1 (2003): 2.
*
Northcott, Deryl, and Simon Linacre.
“Producing spaces for academic discourse:
The impact of research assessment exercises and journal quality rankings.” 
Australian Accounting Review
 20, no. 1 (2010): 38-54.
*
Gough, David.
“Weight of evidence: a framework for the appraisal of the quality and relevance of evidence.” 
Research papers in education
 22, no. 2 (2007): 213-228.
*
Lee, Frederic S.
“The Research Assessment Exercise,
the state and the dominance of mainstream economics in British universities.”
Cambridge Journal of Economics 31, no. 2 (2007): 309-325.
*
Besley, Tina. 
Assessing the quality of educational research in higher education: International perspectives
.
Sense Publishers, 2009.
*
Wortman, Paul M.
“Judging research quality.”
The handbook of research synthesis (1994): 97-109.
*
Foster, Peter.
“‘Never mind the quality, feel the impact’: a methodological assessment of teacher research
sponsored by the Teacher Training Agency.” 
British Journal of Educational Studies
 47, no. 4 (1999): 380-398.
*
Doyle, J. R., and A. J. Arthurs.
“Judging the quality of research in business schools: The UK as a case study.” 
Omega
 23, no. 3 (1995): 257-270.
*
Barnett-Page, Elaine, and James Thomas.
“Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review.” 
BMC medical research methodology
 9, no. 1 (2009): 59.
*
Vaughn, John.
“Accreditation, commercial rankings, and new approaches
to assessing the quality of university research and education programmes in the United States.” 
Higher Education in Europe
 27, no. 4 (2002): 433-441.
*
Adams, Guy B., and Jay D. White.
“Dissertation research in public administration and cognate fields:
An assessment of methods and quality.” 
Public Administration Review
 (1994): 565-576.
*
Emerson, John D., Elisabeth Burdick, David C. Hoaglin, Frederick Mosteller, and Thomas C. Chalmers.
“An empirical study of the possible relation of treatment differences to quality scores
in controlled randomized clinical trials.” 
Controlled clinical trials
 11, no. 5 (1990): 339-352.
*
Korhonen, Pekka, Risto Tainio, and Jyrki Wallenius.
“Value efficiency analysis of academic research.” 
European Journal of Operational Research
 130, no. 1 (2001): 121-132.
*
Al-Benna, Sammy, Durayd Alzoubaidi, and Yazan Al-Ajam.
“Evidence-based burn care—an assessment of the methodological quality of research published
in burn care journals from 1982 to 2008.” 
Burns
 36, no. 8 (2010): 1190-1195.
*
Tashakkori, Abbas, and Charles Teddlie.
“Quality of inferences in mixed methods research: Calling for an integrative framework.” 
Advances in mixed methods research
 (2008): 101-119.
*
Hicks, Diana.
“Evolving regimes of multi-university research evaluation.” 
Higher Education
 57, no. 4 (2009): 393-404.
*
Jin, Bihui, and Ronald Rousseau.
“Evaluation of research performance and scientometric indicators in China.”
In Handbook of quantitative science and technology research,
pp. 497-514. Springer Netherlands, 2004.
*
Tomlinson, Stephan.
“The research assessment exercise and medical research.”
British Medical Journal 320, no. 7235 (2000): 636.
*
Burla, Laila, Birte Knierim, Jurgen Barth, Katharina Liewald, Margreet Duetz, and Thomas Abel.
“From text to codings: intercoder reliability assessment in qualitative content analysis.” 
Nursing research
 57, no. 2 (2008): 113-117.
*
Orton, Lois, Ffion Lloyd-Williams, David Taylor-Robinson, Martin O’Flaherty, and Simon Capewell.
“The use of research evidence in public health decision making processes: systematic review.” 
PloS one
 6, no. 7 (2011): e21704.
*
Hemingway, Harry, Peter Philipson, Ruoling Chen, Natalie K. Fitzpatrick, Jacqueline Damant,
Martin Shipley, Keith R. Abrams et al.
“Evaluating the quality of research into a single prognostic biomarker:
a systematic review and meta-analysis of 83 studies of C-reactive protein
in stable coronary artery disease.” 
PLoS Med
 7, no. 6 (2010): e1000286.
*
Van der Meulen, Barend, and Arie Rip.
“Evaluation of societal quality of public sector research in the Netherlands.” 
Research Evaluation
 9, no. 1 (2000): 11-25.
*
Howley, Lisa, Karen Szauter, Linda Perkowski, Maurice Clifton, and Nancy McNaughton.
“Quality of standardised patient research reports in the medical education literature:
review and recommendations.”
Medical education 42, no. 4 (2008): 350-358.
*
Oppenheim, Charles.
“The correlation between citation counts and the 1992 research assessment exercise ratings
for British research in genetics, anatomy and archaeology.” 
Journal of documentation
 53, no. 5 (1997): 477-487.
*
Long, Andrew F., and Mary Godfrey.
“An evaluation tool to assess the quality of qualitative research studies.”
International Journal of Social Research Methodology 7, no. 2 (2004): 181-196.
*
Rey-Rocha, Jesús, M. José Martín-Sempere, Jesús Martínez-Frías, and Fernando López-Vera.
“Some misuses of journal impact factor in research evaluation.” 
Cortex
 37, no. 4 (2001): 595-597.
*
Falchikov, Nancy, and David Boud.
“Student self-assessment in higher education: A meta-analysis.”
Review of Educational Research 59, no. 4 (1989): 395-430.
Lundh, Andreas, and Peter C. Gøtzsche.
“Recommendations by Cochrane Review Groups for assessment of the risk of bias in studies.” 
BMC medical research methodology
 8, no. 1 (2008): 22.
*
Durant, Robert H. ”
“Checklist for the evaluation of research articles.”
Journal of adolescent health 15, no. 1 (1994): 4-8.
*
Van Raan, Anthony FJ, and Th N. Van Leeuwen.
“Assessment of the scientific basis of interdisciplinary, applied research:
application of bibliometric methods in nutrition and food research.” 
Research Policy
 31, no. 4 (2002): 611-632.
*
Smedley, Brian D., and M. Alfred Haynes, eds. 
The unequal burden of cancer: an assessment of NIH research and programs
for ethnic minorities and the medically underserved
.
National Academies Press, 1999.
*
McCann, Russell A., Christina M. Armstrong, Nancy A. Skopp, Amanda Edwards-Stewart,
Derek J. Smolenski, Jennifer D. June, Melinda Metzger-Abamukong, and Greg M. Reger.
“Virtual reality exposure therapy for the treatment of anxiety disorders:
an evaluation of research quality.” 
Journal of anxiety disorders
 28, no. 6 (2014): 625-631.
*
Tijssen, Robert, Martijn Visser, and Thed van Leeuwen.
“Benchmarking international scientific excellence:
Are highly cited research papers an appropriate frame of reference?.”
Scientometrics 54, no. 3 (2002): 381-397.
*
Lawani, Stephen.
“Some bibliometric correlates of quality in scientific research.” 
Scientometrics
 9, no. 1-2 (1986): 13-25.
*
Patrick, William J., and Elizabeth C. Stanley.
“Teaching and research quality indicators and the shaping of higher education.”
Research in Higher Education 39, no. 1 (1998): 19-41.
*
Allen, Chiharu S., Qi Chen, Victor L. Willson, and Jan N. Hughes.
“Quality of research design moderates effects of grade retention on achievement:
A meta-analytic, multilevel analysis.” 
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis
 31, no. 4 (2009): 480-499.
*
Wright, Bradley E., Lepora J. Manigault, and Tamika R. Black.
“Quantitative Research Measurement in Public Administration An Assessment of Journal Publications.” 
Administration & Society
 35, no. 6 (2004): 747-764.
*
Sombatsompop, Narongrit, Teerasak Markpin, Wutthisit Yochai, and M. Saechiew.
“An evaluation of research performance for different subject categories using Impact Factor Point Average (IFPA) index:
Thailand case study.”
Scientometrics 65, no. 3 (2005): 293-305.
*
Cho, Mildred K., and Lisa A. Bero.
“Instruments for assessing the quality of drug studies published in the medical literature.”
JAMA 272, no. 2 (1994): 101-104.
*
Lee, Frederic S., and Sandra Harley.
“Peer review, the research assessment exercise and the demise of non-mainstream economics.” 
Capital and Class
 22, no. 3 (1998): 23-51.
*
Jefferson, Tom, Melanie Rudin, Suzanne Brodney Folse, and Frank Davidoff.
“Editorial peer review for improving the quality of reports of biomedical studies.” 
The Cochrane Library
 (2006).
*

Kajermo, Kerstin Nilsson, Gun Nordström, Åsa Krusebrant, and Hjördis Björvell.
“Barriers to and facilitators of research utilization, as perceived
by a group of registered nurses in Sweden.”
Journal of advanced nursing 27, no. 4 (1998): 798-807.
*
Groot, Tom, and Teresa Garcia-Valderrama.
“Research quality and efficiency: An analysis of assessments and management issues
in Dutch economics and business research programs.”
Research Policy 35, no. 9 (2006): 1362-1376.
*
Boaz, Annette, and Deborah Ashby. 
Fit for purpose?: assessing research quality for evidence based policy and practice
.
London: ESRC UK Centre for Evidence Based Policy and Practice, 2003.
*
Oxman, Andrew D., Gordon H. Guyatt, Joel Singer, Charlie H. Goldsmith, Brian G. Hutchison,
Ruth A. Milner, and David L. Streiner.
“Agreement among reviewers of review articles.”
Journal of clinical epidemiology 44, no. 1 (1991): 91-98.
*
Moed, Henk F.
Citation analysis in research evaluation.
Vol. 9. Springer Science & Business Media, 2006.
*
Weingart, Peter.
“Impact of bibliometrics upon the science system: Inadvertent consequences?.” 
Scientometrics
 62, no. 1 (2005): 117-131.
*
Dixon-Woods, Mary, Alex Sutton, Rachel Shaw, Tina Miller, Jonathan Smith,
Bridget Young, Sheila Bonas, Andrew Booth, and David Jones.
“Appraising qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews:
a quantitative and qualitative comparison of three methods.”
Journal of health services research & policy 12, no. 1 (2007): 42-47.
*
Schünemann, Holger J., Andrew D. Oxman, Jan Brozek, Paul Glasziou, Patrick Bossuyt,
Stephanie Chang, Paola Muti, Roman Jaeschke, and Gordon H. Guyatt.
Schünemann, Holger J., Andrew D. Oxman, Jan Brozek, Paul Glasziou, Patrick Bossuyt, Stephanie Chang, Paola Muti, Roman Jaeschke, and Gordon H. Guyatt. “GRADE: assessing the quality of evidence for diagnostic recommendations.” Evidence Based Medicine 13, no. 6 (2008): 162-163.
Evidence Based Medicine 13, no. 6 (2008): 162-163.
*
Brown, Lawrence D., and Ronald J. Huefner.
“The familiarity with and perceived quality of accounting journals:
views of senior accounting faculty in leading US MBA programs.” 
Contemporary Accounting Research
 11, no. 1 (1994): 223-250.
*
Seale, Clive.
“Validity, reliability and the quality of research.” 
Researching society and culture
 (2004): 71-83.
*
De Jong, Stefan PL, Pleun Van Arensbergen, Floortje Daemen,
Barend Van Der Meulen, and Peter Van Den Besselaar.
“Evaluation of research in context: an approach and two cases.” 
Research Evaluation
 20, no. 1 (2011): 61-72.
*
Tijssen, Robert JW.
“Scoreboards of research excellence.” 
Research Evaluation
 12, no. 2 (2003): 91-103.
*
Hammerschlag, R., and M. M. Morris.
“Clinical trials comparing acupuncture with biomedical standard care:
A criteria-based evaluation of research design and reporting.”
Complementary Therapies in Medicine 5, no. 3 (1997): 133-140.
*
Luukkonen‐Gronow, Terttu.
“Scientific research evaluation: a review of methods and various contexts of their application.”
R&D Management 17, no. 3 (1987): 207-221.
*
Paul, Ray J.
“Measuring research quality: the United Kingdom government’s research assessment exercise.” 
European Journal of Information Systems
 17, no. 4 (2008): 324-329.
*
Sanz-Menéndez, Luis.
“Research actors and the state: research evaluation
and evaluation of science and technology policies in Spain.”
Research Evaluation 5, no. 1 (1995): 79-88.