Jelena Savović

Datos Biográficos

ID7192501
NOMBREJelena Savović
NOMBRESJelena
APELLIDOSavović
FIRMASAVOVIĆ J
AFILIACIONESUniversity Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust
ORCID0000-0002-2861-0578
VERIFICADOSí
TOTAL DE OBRAS7
TOTAL DE CITAS0
TOTAL COMO AUTOR7
TOTAL COMO EDITOR0
PRIMER AÑO DE PUBLICACIÓN2011
AÑO MÁS RECIENTE DE PUBLICACIÓN2026
ÍNDICE H0

  • Involving community members in designing behavioural weight management programmes

    Open AccessThomas H Moore, Theresa HM Moore et al.ARTICLEBMC Public Health2026

    Our review identified substantial levels of community involvement (leadership or collaboration) in planning BWMPs, but less so in their delivery, and rarely in evaluation. Greater involvement of communities in evaluation would ensure programmes focus on what matters most to them. Reporting of community involvement, especially costs and time involved, should be improved to allow for shared learning

  • The positive and negative consequences of stress and its relationship with coping in medical students

    Open AccessAmy Elizabeth Manley, Lucy Biddle et al.ARTICLEMedical Teacher2025

    Rates of mental health problems among medical students have prompted efforts to reduce stress during medical training. However, stress can be motivating and is a feature of clinical work. This qualitative study explores what makes an experience stressful, and how medical students respond to such experiences. In-depth interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 15 medical students. Experiences were distressing when they threatened student…

  • Healthcare leaders and professionals’ perspectives of the Icon programme to prevent abusive head trauma in infants

    Open AccessJulie M Brose, Julie Mytton et al.ARTICLEBMC Public Health2025

    Staff are willing and able to deliver the ICON programme, including, where necessary, delivering the key messages in a format acceptable to families varying situations, if given the workload and training to do so. Those in leadership positions influence the likelihood of successful adoption, delivery and longer-term mainstreaming, if they are able to prioritise the programme. Understanding the barriers and facilitators to ICON's delivery has the …

  • RoB 2

    Open AccessJonathan Sterne, Jelena Savović et al.ARTICLEBMJ2019

    Assessment of risk of bias is regarded as an essential component of a systematic review on the effects of an intervention. The most commonly used tool for randomised trials is the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool. We updated the tool to respond to developments in understanding how bias arises in randomised trials, and to address user feedback on and limitations of the original tool.

  • Robis

    Open AccessPenny Whiting, Jelena Savović et al.ARTICLEJournal of Clinical Epidemiology2016

  • Robins-I

    Open AccessJonathan Sterne, Jonathan AC Sterne et al.ARTICLEBMJ2016

    Non-randomised studies of the effects of interventions are critical to many areas of healthcare evaluation, but their results may be biased. It is therefore important to understand and appraise their strengths and weaknesses. We developed ROBINS-I (“Risk Of Bias In Non-randomised Studies - of Interventions”), a new tool for evaluating risk of bias in estimates of the comparative effectiveness (harm or benefit) of interventions from studies that d…

  • The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials

    Open AccessJulian P T Higgins, D G Altman et al.ARTICLEBMJ2011

    Flaws in the design, conduct, analysis, and reporting of randomised trials can cause the effect of an intervention to be underestimated or overestimated. The Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for assessing risk of bias aims to make the process clearer and more accurate