Synthesizing health research to make better decisions
In the fast-paced world of health-care research, having the most up-to-date discoveries at your fingertips is imperative for doctors, policy-makers and patients to make the best, most informed decisions.
But, the sheer amount of complex research available—and the fact not all of it is consistent in findings and conclusions—means it’s impossible to read everything quickly and accurately. That’s where knowledge synthesis can make all the difference.
There are many different types of knowledge syntheses, such as systematic reviews, rapid reviews and scoping reviews to summarize all pertinent studies on a question, improve understanding of inconsistencies, and define future research agendas. The results from knowledge synthesis can then be used to create policy briefs, clinical practice guidelines and patient decision aids.
For example, systematic reviews, which are the gold standard in reviewing research, take thousands of hours to complete, while rapid reviews, a type of knowledge synthesis, typically take just six to 12 weeks. However, it’s unclear whether rapid reviews are susceptible to biased results because of shortcuts in the process. What is clear is that decision makers need and expect the information quickly—often in three months or less.
Andrea Tricco, Tier 1 Canada Research Chair in Knowledge Synthesis for Knowledge Users, is leading research to advance the science of knowledge syntheses within health, including identifying and validating the best rapid review methods. She is also leading research to improve the reporting of scoping reviews and a type of systematic review that uses advanced statistical methods, called “network meta-analysis”. She has been recognized as one of the most highly cited researchers in the world.
The results of her research will directly inform knowledge synthesis groups that exist in Canada, as well as internationally, on how to provide relevant, timely and high-quality information to decision makers.