The evolution of systematic evidence reviews: Past and future developments and their implications for policy analysis

Author:

Lemire Sebastian1,Peck Laura R.1ORCID,Porowski Allan1

Affiliation:

1. Abt Associates Maryland Rockville USA

Abstract

AbstractEvidence reviews are widely used to summarize findings from existing studies and, as such, are an important base for policy analysis. Over the past 50 years, three waves of evidence reviews have emerged: (1) the meta‐analysis wave, (2) the mixed‐methods synthesis wave, and (3) the core components wave. The present article first describes these waves and reflects on the benefits and limitations of each wave in the context of policy analysis. Informed by this historical account, the article then identifies and discusses three trends that are likely to influence future directions of evidence reviews: (1) using data science tools, (2) embedding an equity focus, and (3) translating research into practice. The concluding discussion connects these developments to public policy, identifying how evidence from systematic evidence reviews informs—or could better inform—policy decisions.Related ArticlesNunes Silva, Carlos. 2012. “Policy and Evidence in a Partisan Age: The Great Disconnect—By Paul Gary Wyckoff.” Politics & Policy 40(3): 541–43. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2012.00363.x.Sinclair, Thomas A. P. 2006. “Previewing Policy Sciences: Multiple Lenses and Segmented Visions.” Politics & Policy 34(3): 481–504. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747‐1346.2006.00025.x.Smith‐Walter, Aaron, Holly L. Peterson, Michael D. Jones, and Ashley Nicole Reynolds Marshall. 2016. “Gun Stories: How Evidence Shapes Firearm Policy in the United States.” Politics & Policy 44(6): 1053–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12187.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

Political Science and International Relations,Sociology and Political Science

Reference79 articles.

1. Common components of parenting programs for children birth to eight years of age involved with child welfare services

2. The Common Elements of Engagement in Children's Mental Health Services: Which Elements for Which Outcomes?

3. Realist Review: Current Practice and Future Prospects;Berg Rigmor C.;Journal of Research Practice,2016

4. Complex interventions reduce use of urgent healthcare in adults with asthma: Systematic review with meta-regression

5. Blase Karen andDeanFixsen.2013.Core Intervention Components: Identifying and Operationalizing What Makes Programs Work. Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.https://aspe.hhs.gov/reports/core‐intervention‐components‐identifying‐operationalizing‐what‐makes‐programs‐work‐0.

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3