Do you want to learn more about systematic reviews or other types of evidence synthesis methods? Check out our detailed guide on this topic, which provides a deeper overview, and reviews the various steps involved in these methods. This guide will also review UCI Libraries' Evidence Synthesis Service, and let you know how our librarians can help. The information below is a quick overview of the methodology.
According to the Royal Society, 'evidence synthesis' refers to the process of bringing together information from a range of sources and disciplines to inform debates and decisions on specific issues. They generally include a methodical and comprehensive literature synthesis focused on a well-formulated research question. Their aim is to identify and synthesize all of the scholarly research on a particular topic, including both published and unpublished studies. Evidence syntheses are conducted in an unbiased, reproducible way to provide evidence for practice and policy-making, as well as to identify gaps in the research. Evidence syntheses may also include a meta-analysis, a more quantitative process of synthesizing and visualizing data retrieved from various studies.
Evidence syntheses are much more time-intensive than traditional literature reviews and require a multi-person research team. See this PredicTER tool to get a sense of a systematic review timeline (one type of evidence synthesis). Before embarking on an evidence synthesis, it's important to clearly identify your reasons for conducting one. For a list of types of evidence synthesis projects, see the Types of Evidence Synthesis tab.
One commonly used form of evidence synthesis is a systematic review. This table compares a traditional literature review with a systematic review.
|
|
Traditional Literature Review |
Systematic Review |
|
Review Question/Topic |
Topics may be broad in scope; the goal of the review may be to place one's own research within the existing body of knowledge, or to gather information that supports a particular viewpoint. |
Starts with a well-defined research question to be answered by the review. Reviews are conducted with the aim of finding all existing evidence in an unbiased, transparent, and reproducible way. |
|
Searching for Studies |
Searches may be ad hoc and based on what the author is already familiar with. Searches are not exhaustive or fully comprehensive. |
Attempts are made to find all existing published and unpublished literature on the research question. The process is well-documented and reported. |
|
Study Selection |
Often lack clear reasons for why studies were included or excluded from the review. |
Reasons for including or excluding studies are explicit and informed by the research question. |
|
Assessing the Quality of Included Studies |
Often do not consider study quality or potential biases in study design. |
Systematically assesses risk of bias of individual studies and overall quality of the evidence, including sources of heterogeneity between study results. |
|
Synthesis of Existing Research |
Conclusions are more qualitative and may not be based on study quality. |
Bases conclusion on quality of the studies and provide recommendations for practice or to address knowledge gaps. |
Evidence synthesis refers to any method of identifying, selecting, and combining results from multiple studies. For help selecting a methodology, please refer to:
Types of evidence synthesis include:
Off-campus? Please use the Software VPN and choose the group UCIFull to access licensed content. For more information, please Click here
Software VPN is not available for guests, so they may not have access to some content when connecting from off-campus.