tetano
Editor, Senior Moderator
PLoS One
. 2024 Nov 27;19(11):e0314657.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0314657. eCollection 2024. The evolution and adaptation of evidence synthesis during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada: Perspectives of evidence synthesis producers
Tricia Corrin[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Eric B Kennedy[SUP] 1 [/SUP]
Affiliations
The demand for evidence syntheses to inform urgent decision-making surged during the pandemic. The challenging circumstances of the pandemic created significant hurdles for both those requesting and creating evidence syntheses, leading to the refinement and adjustment of evidence synthesis practices. This research sought to capture and explore how the field of evidence synthesis evolved and adapted during the pandemic from the perspective of those who produced evidence syntheses in Canada. In this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were carried out between October 2022 to January 2023. Twenty-two participants from 19 different organizations across seven provinces and one territory were interviewed. This included producers of evidence syntheses from academic institutions, not-for-profit organizations, and provincial and federal government. Data analysis was conducted thematically using a phenomenological approach. Results indicated the evidence synthesis landscape drastically changed during the pandemic including short timelines to produce syntheses and changes in the volume, types, and quality of literature included in them. Due to the changing landscape and different needs of requestors, evidence synthesis methodologies evolved, synthesis products were tailored, and quality assessment tools were adapted. In addition, the use of artificial intelligence, processes for engaging subject matter experts and patient-citizen partners, and the coordination of the evidence synthesis community changed. The findings of this study contribute to the ongoing dialogue surrounding evidence synthesis to inform decision-making, and highlights the importance of flexibility and necessity of continuously evolving methodologies to meet the demands of frequently changing landscapes. The lessons learned from this study can help inform future strategies for improving evidence synthesis practices not only in the face of public health emergencies, but also in everyday practice.
. 2024 Nov 27;19(11):e0314657.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0314657. eCollection 2024. The evolution and adaptation of evidence synthesis during the COVID-19 pandemic in Canada: Perspectives of evidence synthesis producers
Tricia Corrin[SUP] 1 [/SUP], Eric B Kennedy[SUP] 1 [/SUP]
Affiliations
- PMID: 39602442
- PMCID: PMC11602041
- DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0314657
The demand for evidence syntheses to inform urgent decision-making surged during the pandemic. The challenging circumstances of the pandemic created significant hurdles for both those requesting and creating evidence syntheses, leading to the refinement and adjustment of evidence synthesis practices. This research sought to capture and explore how the field of evidence synthesis evolved and adapted during the pandemic from the perspective of those who produced evidence syntheses in Canada. In this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were carried out between October 2022 to January 2023. Twenty-two participants from 19 different organizations across seven provinces and one territory were interviewed. This included producers of evidence syntheses from academic institutions, not-for-profit organizations, and provincial and federal government. Data analysis was conducted thematically using a phenomenological approach. Results indicated the evidence synthesis landscape drastically changed during the pandemic including short timelines to produce syntheses and changes in the volume, types, and quality of literature included in them. Due to the changing landscape and different needs of requestors, evidence synthesis methodologies evolved, synthesis products were tailored, and quality assessment tools were adapted. In addition, the use of artificial intelligence, processes for engaging subject matter experts and patient-citizen partners, and the coordination of the evidence synthesis community changed. The findings of this study contribute to the ongoing dialogue surrounding evidence synthesis to inform decision-making, and highlights the importance of flexibility and necessity of continuously evolving methodologies to meet the demands of frequently changing landscapes. The lessons learned from this study can help inform future strategies for improving evidence synthesis practices not only in the face of public health emergencies, but also in everyday practice.