Literature DB >> 34291384

Ensuring Prevention Science Research is Synthesis-Ready for Immediate and Lasting Scientific Impact.

Emily A Hennessy1, Rebecca L Acabchuk2, Pieter A Arnold3, Adam G Dunn4, Yong Zhi Foo5, Blair T Johnson6, Sonya R Geange3,7, Neal R Haddaway8,9,10, Shinichi Nakagawa5, Witness Mapanga11, Kerrie Mengersen12, Matthew J Page13, Alfredo Sánchez-Tójar14, Vivian Welch15, Luke A McGuinness16.   

Abstract

When seeking to inform and improve prevention efforts and policy, it is important to be able to robustly synthesize all available evidence. But evidence sources are often large and heterogeneous, so understanding what works, for whom, and in what contexts can only be achieved through a systematic and comprehensive synthesis of evidence. Many barriers impede comprehensive evidence synthesis, which leads to uncertainty about the generalizability of intervention effectiveness, including inaccurate titles/abstracts/keywords terminology (hampering literature search efforts), ambiguous reporting of study methods (resulting in inaccurate assessments of study rigor), and poorly reported participant characteristics, outcomes, and key variables (obstructing the calculation of an overall effect or the examination of effect modifiers). To address these issues and improve the reach of primary studies through their inclusion in evidence syntheses, we provide a set of practical guidelines to help prevention scientists prepare synthesis-ready research. We use a recent mindfulness trial as an empirical example to ground the discussion and demonstrate ways to ensure the following: (1) primary studies are discoverable; (2) the types of data needed for synthesis are present; and (3) these data are readily synthesizable. We highlight several tools and practices that can aid authors in these efforts, such as using a data-driven approach for crafting titles, abstracts, and keywords or by creating a repository for each project to host all study-related data files. We also provide step-by-step guidance and software suggestions for standardizing data design and public archiving to facilitate synthesis-ready research.
© 2021. Society for Prevention Research.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Evidence synthesis; Meta-data; Reporting; Reproducibility; Synthesis-ready research; Transparency

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34291384      PMCID: PMC8776892          DOI: 10.1007/s11121-021-01279-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prev Sci        ISSN: 1389-4986


  20 in total

1.  Detecting and avoiding likely false-positive findings - a practical guide.

Authors:  Wolfgang Forstmeier; Eric-Jan Wagenmakers; Timothy H Parker
Journal:  Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc       Date:  2016-11-23

2.  Predicting the time needed for environmental systematic reviews and systematic maps.

Authors:  Neal R Haddaway; Martin J Westgate
Journal:  Conserv Biol       Date:  2018-10-24       Impact factor: 6.560

3.  The Tamiflu fiasco and lessons learnt.

Authors:  Yogendra Kumar Gupta; Meenakshi Meenu; Prafull Mohan
Journal:  Indian J Pharmacol       Date:  2015 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 1.200

4.  Gauging the Purported Costs of Public Data Archiving for Long-Term Population Studies.

Authors:  Simon Robin Evans
Journal:  PLoS Biol       Date:  2016-04-08       Impact factor: 8.029

5.  Analysis of the time and workers needed to conduct systematic reviews of medical interventions using data from the PROSPERO registry.

Authors:  Rohit Borah; Andrew W Brown; Patrice L Capers; Kathryn A Kaiser
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2017-02-27       Impact factor: 2.692

6.  CONSORT-SPI 2018 Explanation and Elaboration: guidance for reporting social and psychological intervention trials.

Authors:  Sean Grant; Evan Mayo-Wilson; Paul Montgomery; Geraldine Macdonald; Susan Michie; Sally Hopewell; David Moher
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2018-07-31       Impact factor: 2.279

7.  A study of the impact of data sharing on article citations using journal policies as a natural experiment.

Authors:  Garret Christensen; Allan Dafoe; Edward Miguel; Don A Moore; Andrew K Rose
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-12-18       Impact factor: 3.240

8.  Outcome pre-specification requires sufficient detail to guard against outcome switching in clinical trials: a case study.

Authors:  Brennan C Kahan; Vipul Jairath
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2018-05-02       Impact factor: 2.279

9.  Open Science Is Liberating and Can Foster Creativity.

Authors:  Willem E Frankenhuis; Daniel Nettle
Journal:  Perspect Psychol Sci       Date:  2018-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.