The Centre of Excellence for Development Impact and Learning (CEDIL) develops and tests innovative methods for evaluation and evidence synthesis. Claims made in CEDIL studies are intended to inform socio-economic development in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), or research about LMICs. This paper provides an overview of how, in CEDIL-funded studies, claims arising from research (termed ‘evidence claims’ for brevity) have been justified and communicated in order to inform policy decisions relating to socio-economic development. This study addresses two important questions about research that is designed to produce findings for decision makers. First, how are the claims that arise from the findings justified? In other words, what are the criteria (evidence standards) that studies use, explicitly or implicitly, in order to justify their evidence claims? Second, how are those claims and justifications communicated in original research reports and other outputs that share the research more widely?

In the last few decades, there has been an increasing use of, and demand for, high-quality evidence among decision makers in international development. Evidence from research leads to claims about the effects of intervening in people’s lives to improve specific outcomes. However, this raises the question of how such evidence claims are framed, justified and communicated. This review aims to address this important question by reviewing research findings from impact evaluations and systematic reviews to understand the nature and the scope of evidence claims in the global South.

In the last few decades, there has been an increasing use of, and demand for, high-quality research among decision-makers in international development. Wanting to know whether, how and where interventions work, they find statements made or implied to be supported by research evidence. These statements are ‘evidence claims’. Other people may question whether the evidence supporting the claims has been compiled or scrutinised appropriately. This raises the question of how such evidence claims are framed, justified and communicated. A new review aims to address this important question by reviewing research findings from impact evaluations and systematic reviews to understand the nature and the scope of evidence claims produced from low- and middle-income country (LMIC) research. This evidence brief shares key findings from this review.