Affiliation:
1. Norwegian Institute of Public Health
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Evidence synthesis organisations worldwide are trying to meet commissioners’ need for rapid responses to their evidence synthesis commissions. In this project we piloted an intensive process, working to complete an evidence synthesis within six-weeks, rather than the standard lead time of 4-6 months. There were three objectives:
1) To develop a plan for and conduct an evidence synthesis in six weeks or less (“intensive pilot”)
2) To register time used for the intensive pilot
3) To evaluate the intensive pilot process and identify barriers, facilitators, learning points, areas for improvement or future implementation ideas.
Methods
The two project teams divided the pilot into three phases: Pre-planning, planning and intensive. During the pre-planning phase commissions were identified and researchers were recruited. During the planning phase the team interacted with the commissioner, completed the evidence synthesis protocol, and planned how they were going to work together during the intensive phase. During the intensive phase the team implemented their plan and completed the evidence synthesis they were assigned. We held reflective meetings and kept evaluator notes throughout the process.
Results
The team was able to achieve the project objectives. They developed and implemented a plan for conducting an evidence synthesis in six weeks. They registered their times use. During the pilot process the team reflected on and evaluated the process itself to identify barriers, facilitators, learning points, areas for improvement or future implementation ideas. The involved researchers preferred working in this intensive way. They felt that time use was more effective, and they were more focused. However, there are implications for project leadership and implementation that should be considered before implementing an intensive approach in future evidence synthesis projects.
Conclusions
The involved researchers preferred working intensively with one evidence synthesis over being involved with many projects at the same time. They felt that time use was more effective, and they were able to complete the tasks in a focused way. However, there are several implications for project management, leadership and further implementation that should be considered before implementing an intensive approach in future evidence syntheses.
Publisher
Research Square Platform LLC
Reference23 articles.
1. Beyond Toyota: How to root out waste and pursue perfection;Womack JP;Harvard Business Rev,1996
2. Automating risk of bias assessment in systematic reviews: a real-time mixed methods comparison of human researchers to a machine learning system;Jardim PSJ;BMC Med Res Methodol,2022
3. Muller AE, Ames HMR, Himmels JPW, Jardim PSJ, Nguyen HL, Rose CJ et al. Implementation of machine learning in evidence syntheses in the Cluster for Reviews and Health Technology Assessments: Final report 2020–2021. 2021.
4. Machine learning in systematic reviews: Comparing automated text clustering with Lingo3G and human researcher categorization in a rapid review;Muller AE;Res Synthesis Methods,2022
5. The effect of machine learning tools for evidence synthesis on resource use and time-to-completion: protocol for a retrospective pilot study;Muller AE;Syst Reviews,2023