Her scientific interests lie mostly in Environmental health, Psychological intervention, Systematic review, Solid fuel and Stove. Her Environmental health research is multidisciplinary, relying on both Relative risk and Risk factor. Her Psychological intervention study combines topics in areas such as Program evaluation and Scope.
Her work carried out in the field of Systematic review brings together such families of science as Meta-analysis, Nursing, Health informatics and Management science. Her Stove research incorporates themes from Scale and Environmental protection. The concepts of her Risk assessment study are interwoven with issues in Evidence-based practice, Gerontology and Public health.
Eva Rehfuess mainly investigates Psychological intervention, Environmental health, Public health, Systematic review and Health policy. Her biological study spans a wide range of topics, including Intervention, Randomized controlled trial, Applied psychology, Clinical study design and Population health. The study incorporates disciplines such as Developing country, Stove and Risk factor in addition to Environmental health.
The Global health research Eva Rehfuess does as part of her general Public health study is frequently linked to other disciplines of science, such as Grading, therefore creating a link between diverse domains of science. Her research integrates issues of Meta-analysis, Management science and Evidence-based medicine in her study of Systematic review. Her Health policy research incorporates elements of Health services research and Evidence-based practice.
Eva Rehfuess mainly focuses on Environmental health, Psychological intervention, Public health, Health policy and Pandemic. Her research in Environmental health intersects with topics in Clinical study design, Observational study and Confidence interval. Her Psychological intervention study also includes fields such as
In general Public health study, her work on Social determinants of health often relates to the realm of Equity, thereby connecting several areas of interest. Her Health policy research includes themes of Knowledge management, Health services research, Systematic review and Population health. The various areas that Eva Rehfuess examines in her Systematic review study include Private sector, Actuarial science and Risk assessment.
Her main research concerns Environmental health, Psychological intervention, Data collection, Pandemic and Observational study. Her study in Environmental health is interdisciplinary in nature, drawing from both Purchasing and Confidence interval. Her study looks at the relationship between Psychological intervention and fields such as Clinical study design, as well as how they intersect with chemical problems.
Her studies in Meta-analysis integrate themes in fields like Ecological study and Health care. She integrates several fields in her works, including Empirical research and Systematic review. Her research in Systematic review intersects with topics in Multiple-criteria decision analysis, Health policy, Health administration and Critical appraisal.
This overview was generated by a machine learning system which analysed the scientist’s body of work. If you have any feedback, you can contact us here.
A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease and injury attributable to 67 risk factors and risk factor clusters in 21 regions, 1990-2010: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010
Stephen S. Lim;Theo Vos;Abraham D. Flaxman;Goodarz Danaei.
The Lancet (2012)
Solid fuel use for household cooking: country and regional estimates for 1980-2010.
Sophie Bonjour;Heather Adair-Rohani;Jennyfer Wolf;Nigel G. Bruce.
Environmental Health Perspectives (2013)
Millions Dead: How Do We Know and What Does It Mean? Methods Used in the Comparative Risk Assessment of Household Air Pollution
Kirk R. Smith;Nigel Bruce;Kalpana Balakrishnan;Heather Adair-Rohani.
Annual Review of Public Health (2014)
The need for a complex systems model of evidence for public health
Harry Rutter;Natalie Savona;Ketevan Glonti;Jo Bibby.
The Lancet (2017)
Risk of low birth weight and stillbirth associated with indoor air pollution from solid fuel use in developing countries
Daniel P. Pope;Vinod Mishra;Lisa Thompson;Amna Rehana Siddiqui.
Epidemiologic Reviews (2010)
Making sense of complexity in context and implementation: the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions (CICI) framework
Lisa M. Pfadenhauer;Ansgar Gerhardus;Kati Mozygemba;Kristin Bakke Lysdahl.
Implementation Science (2017)
Using logic models to capture complexity in systematic reviews
Laurie M. Anderson;Mark Petticrew;Eva Rehfuess;Rebecca Armstrong.
Research Synthesis Methods (2011)
Enablers and Barriers to Large-Scale Uptake of Improved Solid Fuel Stoves: A Systematic Review
Eva Annette Rehfuess;Elisa Puzzolo;Debbi Stanistreet;Daniel Pope.
Environmental Health Perspectives (2013)
Synthesizing evidence on complex interventions: how meta-analytical, qualitative, and mixed-method approaches can contribute
Mark Petticrew;Eva Rehfuess;Jane Noyes;Julian P.T. Higgins;Julian P.T. Higgins.
Journal of Clinical Epidemiology (2013)
WHO indoor air quality guidelines on household fuel combustion: Strategy implications of new evidence on interventions and exposure–risk functions
Nigel Bruce;Nigel Bruce;Dan Pope;Eva Rehfuess;Kalpana Balakrishnan.
Atmospheric Environment (2015)
If you think any of the details on this page are incorrect, let us know.
We appreciate your kind effort to assist us to improve this page, it would be helpful providing us with as much detail as possible in the text box below: