Not checked for notices yet.

Patient experiences of co-designed rehabilitation interventions: protocol for a rapid review

Meg E Morris, Matthew Knight, Susan C Slade and 5 more

BMJ Open · 2022

doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056927

References 30

1.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
2.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
3.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
4.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
5.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
6.
Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews · 2008
No notice
7.
Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research: ENTREQ · 2012
No notice
8.
Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 statement · 2015
No notice
9.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
10.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
11.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
12.
What outcomes are associated with developing and implementing co-produced interventions in acute healthcare settings? A rapid evidence synthesis · 2017
No notice
13.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
14.
Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings: introduction to the series · 2018
No notice
15.
Engaging patients to improve quality of care: a systematic review · 2018
No notice
16.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
17.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
18.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
19.
Synthesis without meta-analysis (SWiM) in systematic reviews: reporting guideline · 2020
No notice
20.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
21.
Research co-design in health: a rapid overview of reviews · 2020
No notice
22.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
23.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
24.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
25.
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews · 2021
No notice
26.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
27.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
28.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
29.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library
30.
This reference’s wording can’t be shown under the paper’s licence.
Not in our library

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.