UWM Libraries Research and Course Guides: Evidence Synthesis Reviews: Preparing for an Evidence Synthesis Review

Planning templates, trackers, and resources

Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review Student Resources
Free student resources, supplement to Booth et al. (2022). Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review.

Steps of Evidence Synthesis Review

Developing a Protocol

Determine research question
Search to see if the evidence synthesis review has already been completed or registered
Complete and pre-register protocol that includes:
- Introduction/background
- Research Question
- Objectives
- Definitions
- Study inclusion/exclusion criteria
- Information sources (i.e. Databases, specific journals if hand searching, grey literature)
- Search strategy
- Data collection, selection, and management processes
- Data synthesis and analysis criteria and rationale

Protocol Templates

Evidence Synthesis Protocol Template
This document is based on the PRISMA Statement (evidence-based minimum set of items for reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analyses) extensions for systematic review protocols and scoping reviews, and materials developed by The Campbell Collaboration.
Inclusive Systematic Review Registration Form
This Systematic Review Registration Form is intended as a general-purpose registration form. The form is designed to be applicable to reviews across disciplines (i.e., psychology, economics, law, physics, or any other field) and across review types (i.e., scoping review, review of qualitative studies, meta-analysis, or any other type of review). That means that the reviewed records may include research reports as well as archive documents, case law, books, poems, etc. This form, therefore, is a fall-back for more specialized forms and can be used if no specialized form or registration platform is available.

From University of Melbourne Libraries

Common Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria - University of Melbourne
PDF of Inclusion/Exclusion Criteria

Protocol Registration

Registries will help you find evidence synthesis reviews that are currently in process or have been recently completed. It is also recommended that you register your review so that others can see your review in process. Certain funding agencies may require registration.

For more information on why you should register, consult Registering a Systematic Review.

Straus, S., & Moher, D. (2010). Registering systematic reviews. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association Journal, 182(1), 13–14. https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.081849

Registries for Health Sciences

Cochrane Collaboration Registry
International organization, produces and disseminates systematic reviews of health sciences fields.
PROSPERO Systematic Review Registry
International prospective register of systematic reviews for health outcomes only. No scoping reviews.
Research Registry
Register a variety forms of research and search for registered SRs and research studies.

Registries for other Disciplines

Campbell Collaboration
Register evidence synthesis reviews for the social sciences.
Open Science Framework Registry
Each registration is a part of the scientific record and given a clear timestamp. They can be updated and will be highlighted to promote the transparency of the study.
Collaboration for Environmental Evidence
CEE seeks to promote and deliver evidence syntheses on issues of greatest concern to environmental policy and practice as a public service.

Guidelines, Standards, and Checklists

Guidelines, standards, and checklists should be identified at the beginning of the study and reported in the protocol
Specific guidelines, standards, and checklists may be required for specific publications

PRISMA
PRISMA is an evidence-based minimum set of items for reporting in systematic reviews and meta-analyses. PRISMA primarily focuses on the reporting of reviews evaluating the effects of interventions, but can also be used as a basis for reporting systematic reviews with objectives other than evaluating interventions (e.g. evaluating aetiology, prevalence, diagnosis or prognosis).
PRISMA for protocols, scoping reviews
Several extensions of the PRISMA Statement have been developed to facilitate the reporting of different types or aspects of systematic reviews.
ROSES
RepOrting standards for Systematic Evidence Syntheses in environmental research
Non-Intervention, Reproducible, and Open Systematic Reviews (NIRO-SR)
NIRO-SR is a checklist composed of two parts that provide itemised guidance on the preparation of a systematic review protocol for pre-registration (Part A) and reporting the review (Part B) in a reproducible and transparent manner.
MOOSE
Checklist for Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology
Joanna Briggs Institute Manual
The JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis provides guidance to authors for the conduct and preparation of JBI systematic reviews and evidence syntheses. The JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis has separate chapters devoted synthesis of different types of evidence and to address different types of review questions. Includes checklists, reporting guidelines, and conducting guidelines
Methodological Expectations of Cochrane Intervention Reviews (MECIR)
Standards for the conduct and reporting of new Cochrane Intervention Reviews, reporting of protocols and the planning, conduct and reporting of updates
Campbell Collaboration - Methodological Expectations of Campbell Collaboration Intervention Reviews (MECCIR)
The MECCIR guides the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. Although the list of requirements may seem quite long, they are the building blocks of a high quality systematic review or EGM, and most of the items are straightforward to implement.
Equator Network (Health Research)
Reporting guidelines for main study types