Article type
Abstract
Background: Historically, evidence synthesis strategies focused on answering whether or not something works (ie, questions relating to effectiveness). There now exists a multitude of approaches, methods, and methodologies to conduct evidence synthesis to answer a broad array of questions. Enabling researchers to ensure they are undertaking the “right” evidence synthesis approach to respond to a clinical or policy question appropriately has strategic implications from a broader evidence-based health care perspective. As such, we have developed the first living Evidence Synthesis Taxonomy to classify and categorize the multitude of evidence synthesis approaches.
Objective: Our objective was to develop an online and living taxonomy of evidence synthesis approaches to assist authors in identifying an appropriate review type and provide structure to the field of evidence synthesis.
Methods: Our Evidence Synthesis Taxonomy is a global initiative with an advisory board consisting of over 150 evidence synthesis experts from across Cochrane, JBI, Campbell, GRADE, GIN, and other cognate groups. The development of our taxonomy has been informed by several projects and methods, including a scoping review of previous categorization systems, consultation with our international board, multiple online and in-person workshops, and a round of consensus gathering surveys.
Results: The Evidence Synthesis Taxonomy categories and classifies individual review approaches into evidence synthesis families. Within each family, individual review types and subtypes have been grouped and key characteristics identified. Each individual review type then outlines methodological guidance, software, strengths/weaknesses, indications, reporting standards, risk of bias tools, and other information relevant to systematic review authors. The Evidence Synthesis Taxonomy is available as a living wiki platform.
Conclusions: Our taxonomy will pave the way to harmonizing evidence synthesis. It will assist the academic and broader community in improving the ability to navigate the complexities of evidence synthesis, reducing redundant evidence synthesis efforts, saving scarce research resources, and ensuring evidence synthesis projects are conducted to a higher standard. The taxonomy will ensure and facilitate the translation of evidence from syntheses into policy and practice, and as a comprehensive resource, will be of benefit to many in the international community of knowledge generation and translation.
Objective: Our objective was to develop an online and living taxonomy of evidence synthesis approaches to assist authors in identifying an appropriate review type and provide structure to the field of evidence synthesis.
Methods: Our Evidence Synthesis Taxonomy is a global initiative with an advisory board consisting of over 150 evidence synthesis experts from across Cochrane, JBI, Campbell, GRADE, GIN, and other cognate groups. The development of our taxonomy has been informed by several projects and methods, including a scoping review of previous categorization systems, consultation with our international board, multiple online and in-person workshops, and a round of consensus gathering surveys.
Results: The Evidence Synthesis Taxonomy categories and classifies individual review approaches into evidence synthesis families. Within each family, individual review types and subtypes have been grouped and key characteristics identified. Each individual review type then outlines methodological guidance, software, strengths/weaknesses, indications, reporting standards, risk of bias tools, and other information relevant to systematic review authors. The Evidence Synthesis Taxonomy is available as a living wiki platform.
Conclusions: Our taxonomy will pave the way to harmonizing evidence synthesis. It will assist the academic and broader community in improving the ability to navigate the complexities of evidence synthesis, reducing redundant evidence synthesis efforts, saving scarce research resources, and ensuring evidence synthesis projects are conducted to a higher standard. The taxonomy will ensure and facilitate the translation of evidence from syntheses into policy and practice, and as a comprehensive resource, will be of benefit to many in the international community of knowledge generation and translation.