Jennifer Stone

Jennifer Stone

Grant-Funded Researcher (A)

School of Public Health

Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences

Eligible to supervise Masters and PhD - email supervisor to discuss availability.

Dr Jennifer Stone is a highly accomplished Research Fellow at JBI, University of Adelaide. With a strong background in psychology, Dr Stone has dedicated her career to working with vulnerable populations, particularly children and adolescents with developmental trauma and in refugee resettlement. Dr Stone entered the field of clinical epidemiology in 2013 and has a specific focus on evidence synthesis methodology. This field focuses on producing novel methodologies for systematically reviewing and synthesising existing research to provide reliable and comprehensive evidence for healthcare decision-making.

Dr Stone has been in the vanguard of research into risk of bias assessment of primary research for use in evidence synthesis and has made several transformational developments within this field. Such developments include a tool to assess methodological bias across analytic study designs, a new classification system for understanding components of bias, and a quantitative bias assessment framework that progresses bias assessments to the adjustment of pooled meta-analytic results to account for systematic error in study results. Through her research, Dr Stone has initiated an important and necessary paradigm shift in the approaches taken to risk of bias assessment and bias adjustment in evidence synthesis. Her extensive experience and knowledge contribute to the advancement of evidence-based practice, ultimately benefiting healthcare professionals, policymakers, and most importantly, the individuals who rely on evidence-based interventions and treatments.

Dr Stone is currently supervising Higher Degree by Research students at The University of Adelaide, focusing on systematic reviews in various clinical areas and evidence synthesis methodology. Dr. Stone's supervision provides an incredible opportunity for students to benefit from her expertise in evidence synthesis methodology. Whether students are interested in evidence synthesis methodology, trauma-related research, or any other relevant areas, Dr. Stone can provide valuable guidance and support to help students navigate their research journey.

Dr Stone’s research interests are in methodological bias assessment in primary clinical research for use in evidence synthesis. Dr Stone has also spent time in The Netherlands studying in the area of preclinical (animal) systematic review methodology and risk of bias assessment of laboratory animal studies.

Dr Stone is actively seeking students who are eager to collaborate and develop research programs in evidence synthesis or psychology, tailored to their individual interests and passions. By working closely with Dr Stone, students have the opportunity to embark on exciting projects that address significant social and health-related questions, while making substantial contributions to the field. Below are a few available projects that serve as a starting point for students interested in joining forces with Dr Stone.


Projects available to Honours and HDR students

Evidence synthesis methodology
Evidence synthesis is the process of systematically gathering, evaluating, and integrating research evidence from multiple studies to generate comprehensive and reliable summaries of knowledge on a particular topic. Through rigorous methods, including systematic reviews and meta-analyses, evidence synthesis aims to inform evidence-based decision-making, contribute to scientific knowledge, and support the development of policies and interventions in various fields, including healthcare, education, and social sciences. There are several research programs available to students in this field that focus on methodological advancements.

One research program centres around bias assessment and adjustment methods in meta-analysis. This involves developing and refining techniques to identify and address various sources of bias that can affect the results of meta-analyses. By enhancing the accuracy and reliability of meta-analytic findings, researchers can improve the quality of evidence and inform evidence-based decision-making in various domains.

Another research program in evidence synthesis revolves around systematic reviews of aetiology and risk. This program aims to systematically analyse and synthesise existing literature to investigate the causes and risk factors associated with specific conditions or outcomes. Through rigorous study selection, data extraction, and synthesis procedures, researchers can provide comprehensive and reliable insights into the factors that contribute to the development or occurrence of certain health conditions. This research program is crucial for identifying preventive measures, informing public health strategies, and advancing our understanding of the underlying causes of various phenomena.

Predatory publishing/ Journalology
Deceptive journals pose a significant challenge to the integrity of scholarly publishing. These predatory publications mimic legitimate academic journals, employing questionable practices such as fake peer review, minimal editorial oversight, and misleading indexing claims. Identifying deceptive journals requires a comprehensive understanding of their characteristics. Developing a classification system that encompasses these criteria can aid in the identification of deceptive journals and help researchers avoid submitting their work to such venues.

This research program involves creating a ranking system for academic journals based on legitimacy considering various factors. A robust ranking system would require careful validation and a comparison with existing systems to ensure its effectiveness and reliability. By providing researchers with a transparent and credible tool for evaluating journals, the ranking system can help promote responsible publishing practices and safeguard the integrity of scientific research.

Communicating healthcare science
In the age of misinformation and widespread access to information, understanding how lay audiences interpret and comprehend scientific research is crucial. This research program aims to investigate the knowledge and understanding of lay audiences when it comes to crucial aspects of scientific research, particularly in the field of health science.

This body of research will delve into the knowledge gaps and challenges faced by lay audiences when engaging with scientific research. It will explore how lay individuals comprehend complex research methodologies, statistical analyses, and the significance of various study designs. Moreover, the investigation will assess the understanding of lay audiences regarding the quality and reliability of evidence. By shedding light on these aspects, this research will provide insights into the potential misconceptions and gaps in knowledge among lay audiences when engaging with scientific research in the field of health science.

Perverse organisations
What makes an organisation psychopathic? Organisational psychopathy refers to the presence of psychopathic traits or behaviours in a corporate or organisational context. This includes lack of empathy, manipulation, charm, deceitfulness, and disregard for ethical standards. It impacts workplace dynamics, culture, and overall functioning, leading to toxic environments, conflict, and reduced productivity. Individuals with psychopathic traits may be more likely to attain positions of power due to their manipulative behaviour and charismatic qualities. Understanding these traits is essential for fostering healthy environments, promoting well-being, and ensuring organisational success. Areas of exploration include the organisation's personality profile, individual factors, and their impact on team dynamics, innovation, attrition, productivity, and integrity in organisational settings.


Ramsay Grant - Long-COVID and ME/ CFS

WHO - IRS for preventing malaria

FHMS Research Leaders Award

  • Current Higher Degree by Research Supervision (University of Adelaide)

    Date Role Research Topic Program Degree Type Student Load Student Name
    2024 Principal Supervisor The Epidemiology of Thyroid Cancer in Tonga Master of Clinical Science Master Full Time Dr Sione Frisco Folau
    2024 Principal Supervisor Compliance and Toxicity of Total Neoadjuvant Therapy in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Master of Clinical Science Master Full Time Mr Warren Seow
    2023 Principal Supervisor The effectiveness of surgical vs non-surgical treatments for early hypopharyngeal cancer: A systematic review protocol Master of Clinical Science Master Full Time Dr Delu Gunasekera
    2023 Principal Supervisor Effectiveness of adjuvant radiotherapy versus surgery alone on salivary gland malignancies in adults: A systematic review Master of Philosophy (Clinical Science) Master Full Time Dr Sione Frisco Folau
  • Past Higher Degree by Research Supervision (University of Adelaide)

    Date Role Research Topic Program Degree Type Student Load Student Name
    2022 - 2023 Co-Supervisor Prophylactic tranexamic acid use in orthognathic surgery: a systematic review Master of Clinical Science Master Full Time Dr Hooman Baghaie
  • Position: Grant-Funded Researcher (A)
  • Phone: 83132272
  • Email:
  • Campus: North Terrace
  • Org Unit: JBI

Connect With Me
External Profiles