Knowledge Synthesis: Systematic, Scoping & Other Reviews
- Planning your review
- Knowledge Synthesis Service
- Developing your research question
- Drafting your protocol
- Creating your eligibility criteria
- Choosing sources to search
- Running your searches
- Exporting search results
- Quality assessment and data extraction
- Writing your methods section
- Equity in knowledge translation
- Workshop resources
- Tools
Need Help with a Review?
UBC Library offers a Knowledge Synthesis Service with two levels of support - a consultation and instruction level, and a collaboration and co-authorship level. Learn more and request a consultation here.
Knowledge synthesis workshops are offered regularly - please check the events calendar for the next offering, or view recordings and slides.
Before you start
Checklist
Knowledge syntheses require:
- a team
- a significant amount of time to complete
- adherence to transparent and rigorous methods
- a strong project management component
- commitment, clear and open communication among all team members
- patience to get through the learning curve of the process
Read a comprehensive Readiness Checklist provided by Unity Health Toronto.
Choosing a review that is right for you
Types of Reviews and Guidelines for Conducting and Reporting
Systematic Reviews
A systematic review uses guidelines to systematically search for, evaluate, and synthesize the entire body of evidence on a particular topic (Grant & Booth, 2009). This can be very time intensive (up to 18 months, by some estimates). Other review methods may be more appropriate for you if you have limited time, or are working alone. The PredicTER tool can give you an estimate of how much time may be needed for your review.
Health:
-
Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions (Version 6.5, 2024)
This handbook describes the Cochrane method for systematic reviews, used to investigate the effects of healthcare interventions. - PRISMA 2020 Checklist and Flow Diagram
The PRISMA 2020 Checklist includes 27 reporting items for systematic reviews. The Flow Diagram is a tool for visualizing the steps of search and screening.
- MECIR Standards
Methodological Expectations for Cochrane Intervention Reviews. Companion to information in the Cochrane Handbook.
Social Sciences and Education:
-
Campbell Collaboration: Standards
A living document describing the standards for the Campbell method of systematic review. - MECCIR Conduct and Reporting Standards
The archived MECCIR standards provide more detailed guidance on producing a Campbell review.
-
EPPI-Centre Methods References
Publications from the Evidence for Policy & Practice Centre on their systematic review and evidence synthesis methodology.
Environmental Evidence:
- Collaboration for Environmental Evidence
Guidelines and standards for evidence synthesis in environmental management. CEE provides information on appraisal tools, published and in-progress reviews, PROCEED protocol registration, networks, and training. -
PRISMA for Ecology and Evolutionary Biology (PRISMA-EcoEvo)
A 27-item checklist and guidance for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of primary research in ecology and evolutionary biology. -
ROSES RepOrting Standards for Systematic Evidence Synthesis in environmental research
Information about how to use ROSES forms for review protocols and final reports, along with detailed guidance on how they were developed and published.
Scoping Reviews
Rather than assessing a body of knowledge, scoping reviews aim to determine the potential size of a body of research on a topic, and omit critical appraisal of included studies (Grant & Booth, 2009).
- JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis
Chapter 10 provides guidance for scoping reviews. - Covidence Best Practice blog: The difference between a systematic review & scoping review
This blog post provides an explanation of the difference between a systematic review and a scoping review. - Levac et al., (2010). Scoping studies: Advancing the methodology. Implementation Sci 5 (69)
This article provides guidance on the methodology of scoping reviews.
Rapid Reviews
Rapid review is a type of systematic review which limits the duration of the review to fit within a stakeholder's time frame (Grant & Booth, 2009).
- Cochrane Rapid Reviews Methods Guidance
Cochrane's updated recommendations on rapid review methods, revised for 2024. - NCCMT Rapid Review Guidebook
Canada's National Collaborating Centre for Methods and Tools offers a guidebook detailing each step in the rapid review process. - WHO Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research. Rapid reviews to strengthen health policy and systems: a practical guide
The World Health Organization produced this guide to help practitioners conduct rapid reviews without sacrificing quality. - Methods Speaker Series [April 29, 2020]: Rapid Reviews: What Do We Know?
A presentation from UBC's Therapeutics Initiative discussing contemporary methodological research of rapid reviews.
Overview (Umbrella) of Reviews
Overviews of reviews gather and assess existing systematic reviews on a topic (Grant & Booth, 2009). They may also be called umbrella reviews, reviews of reviews, or metasyntheses.
- Cochrane Training: Overviews of Reviews
A webinar introducing the overview of reviews method. - Methods Speaker Series [February 26, 2020]: An introduction to commonly encountered scenarios when synthesizing systematic reviews in overview
A presentation from UBC's Therapeutics Initiative discussing challenges that may arise during an overview of reviews. - Reporting guideline ... PRIOR statement
The PRIOR statement includes a checklist with 27 main items that cover all steps and considerations involved in planning and conducting an overview of reviews of healthcare interventions; an explanation and elaboration document with rationale, essential elements, additional elements, and example for each item; and a flow diagram
Click here to download the checklist as a PDF.
Realist Reviews
This type of review, also called a realist synthesis, is a method for studying complex interventions in response to the perceived limitations of conventional systematic review methodology (Pawson et al. 2005).
- The RAMESES Projects (Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses)
Standards and training materials for realist syntheses and evaluations. - The Realist Review Process Workshop (UBC, March 10 2020)
Videos, slides, and handouts from a workshop hosted by UBC Library and the Health Libraries Association of British Columbia, covering background on realist reviews and presenters' experience with the process.
Narrative Literature Reviews
Literature reviews answer the question "What do we know about _?". It's a synthesis of theories and approaches to a problem or topic. They may vary by discipline and topic and may include primary sources (e.g. archival materials, datasets), as well as monographs, journal articles and proceedings.
For more information, please see UBC Library's Literature Review Guide.
Other
If there are no guidelines for a field of study, consult PRISMA:
- PRISMA 2020 Checklist and Flow Diagram. The PRISMA 2020 Checklist includes 27 reporting items for systematic reviews. The Flow Diagram is a tool for visualizing the steps of search and screening.
- PRISMA - ScR (Scoping Reviews). For reporting on scoping reviews and evidence maps.
Consider adapting and selecting the appropriate review type for your study.
Overview of Evidence Synthesis Steps
Good planning can save immense amounts of time when completing an evidence synthesis.
First steps include:
- Check whether a review has already been completed on your topic
- Write and register a protocol which includes:
- Research question
- Eligibility criteria and key definitions
- Draft search strategy
- Approach to data extraction and synthesis
- Searches run in databases (including grey literature databases if appropriate)
- Hand searching journals and websites (if appropriate)
- Export all results to Covidence
- De-duplicate results in Covidence - verifying duplicates found
- Screen title and abstracts against eligibility criteria - minimum of 2 reviewers
- Download full-text for remaining studies
- Screen full-text against eligibility criteria - minimum of 2 reviewers
- Note exclusion reasons
- Critically appraise remaining studies for risk of bias (for systematic reviews, not applicable to scoping reviews)
- Use the tool appropriate for the type of research being analyzed (e.g. RCT, qualitative, etc.)
- Extract data from the included studies based on predetermined criteria
- E.g. author, title, publication year, age of participants, application to inclusion criteria, type of intervention used
- Thematically categorize qualitative data or visually display quantitative data
- Write your review using appropriate reporting guidelines (e.g. PRISMA) - ensure all elements are documented and discussed
- Append search strategies and any other documentation that will allow the reader to see a transparent methodology for your review
Related UBC Library Guides
- Publishing a Journal Article guide provides information on how to select a journal to submit your research.
- Literature Review guide is designed for students preparing an honour's thesis, graduating paper, Master's thesis or doctoral dissertation.
- Covidence guide. UBC Library's guidance on accessing and using Covidence for your review. The Library has a subscription to Covidence and all affiliated students, faculty and staff have access to this tool.
- Last Updated: March 4, 2025