Evidence and gap maps: a comparison of different approaches

Abstract

About this paper Campbell discussion papers include title registration forms and protocols for new evidence synthesis products being piloted for possible inclusion in the Campbell Library. In the discussion paper the authors include some reflections on the approach, and how it differs from a Campbell systematic review. The Campbell Collaboration | www.campbellcollaboration.org Campbell Library Methods papers The Campbell Library Methods Series comprises three types of publications: Methods Discussion Papers New or innovative ideas currently in development in the field of methodology, these papers are intended for discussion and do not represent official Campbell policy or guidance Methods Policy Notes Current Campbell Collaboration policy on specific methods for use in Campbell systematic reviews of intervention effects Methods Guides Guides on how to implement specific systematic review methods Disclaimer Campbell Collaboration Methods Discussion Papers are published to promote discussion of new and innovative methods in systematic reviews, making these approaches available to a broad audience. Papers are published as submitted by the authors. They are not subject to review or editing by the Campbell Collaboration. The views expressed are those of the authors, and may not be attributed to the Campbell Collaboration. Campbell Collaboration Methods Discussion Papers do not represent Campbell policy.

Mapping the evidence and gaps of interventions for pediatric chronic pain to inform policy, research, and practice: A systematic review and quality assessment of systematic reviews

“…This shift in focus facilitates the strategic identification of key gaps where little or no evidence exists or areas currently with only poor quality research. 19,22 The use of schematic visual representation of findings in evidence and gap maps also makes research evidence more easily accessible and usable to researchers and decision makers. 19,22 Our primary goal was to create a contemporary evidence and gap map of systematic reviews of all interventions for pediatric chronic pain.…”

“…19,22 The use of schematic visual representation of findings in evidence and gap maps also makes research evidence more easily accessible and usable to researchers and decision makers. 19,22 Our primary goal was to create a contemporary evidence and gap map of systematic reviews of all interventions for pediatric chronic pain. Our secondary aim was to identify gaps between existing evidence and recently identified patient-oriented research priorities for pediatric chronic pain.…”

Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): An Evidence Map of Medical Literature

“…The number of new articles per week increased steadily over the first nine weeks from one in the first week to 119 in the ninth week, dropping to 75 new articles in the final week from 17 to 23 March. Articles for which publication time data was available (n=373, 67·8%) had a median duration of eight days from submission to online publication (IQR: [4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16]. The h-index for all 550 included articles was 57, with a cumulative total of 17450 citations.…”

“…Evidence maps in this study were a variant of the Evidence Gap Map (EGM), which is a systematic approach to identifying and describing the research activity in a topic area or policy domain, often through a focussed study of systematic reviews. 14,15 EGMs have been used in a variety of research domains to characterise topic distributions and to inform priority setting in future research. 15,16…”

EviAtlas: a tool for visualising evidence synthesis databases

“…1). Several comparable evidence mapping methods now exist (of which systematic mapping is one) with important differences [10]. The popularity of systematic mapping is likely attributable to the ability to tackle both the broad concerns of interest to stakeholders and the large evidence bases associated with these diverse topics, acting as a first step for exploring an evidence base to answer questions relating to what is known about a particular topic.…”