Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's hospital, 209 Victoria Street, Toronto, ON, M5B 1W8, Canada.
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Aug 3;12:114. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-12-114.
A knowledge synthesis attempts to summarize all pertinent studies on a specific question, can improve the understanding of inconsistencies in diverse evidence, and can identify gaps in research evidence to define future research agendas. Knowledge synthesis activities in healthcare have largely focused on systematic reviews of interventions. However, a wider range of synthesis methods has emerged in the last decade addressing different types of questions (e.g., realist synthesis to explore mediating mechanisms and moderators of interventions). Many different knowledge synthesis methods exist in the literature across multiple disciplines, but locating these, particularly for qualitative research, present challenges. There is a need for a comprehensive manual for synthesis methods (quantitative/qualitative or mixed), outlining how these methods are related, and how to match the most appropriate knowledge synthesis method to answer a research question. The objectives of this scoping review are to: 1) conduct a systematic search of the literature for knowledge synthesis methods across multi-disciplinary fields; 2) compare and contrast the different knowledge synthesis methods; and, 3) map out the specific steps to conducting the knowledge syntheses to inform the development of a knowledge synthesis methods manual/tool.
We will search relevant electronic databases (e.g., MEDLINE, CINAHL), grey literature, and discipline-based listservs. The scoping review will consider all study designs including qualitative and quantitative methodologies (excluding economic analysis or clinical practice guideline development), and identify knowledge synthesis methods across the disciplines of health, education, sociology, and philosophy. Two reviewers will pilot-test the screening criteria and data abstraction forms, and will independently screen the literature and abstract the data. A three-step synthesis process will be used to map the literature to our objectives.
This project represents the first attempt to broadly and systematically identify, define and classify knowledge synthesis methods (i.e., less traditional knowledge synthesis methods). We anticipate that our results will lead to an accepted taxonomy for less traditional knowledge synthesis methods, and to the development and implementation of a methods manual for these reviews which will be relevant to a wide range of knowledge users, including researchers, funders, and journal editors.
知识综合试图总结特定问题的所有相关研究，可以提高对不同证据中不一致性的理解，并确定研究证据中的差距，以确定未来的研究议程。医疗保健领域的知识综合活动主要集中在干预措施的系统评价上。然而，在过去十年中，出现了更广泛的综合方法来解决不同类型的问题（例如，探索干预措施的中介机制和调节因素的现实主义综合）。在多个学科的文献中存在许多不同的知识综合方法，但找到这些方法，特别是对于定性研究，存在挑战。需要有一本综合方法（定量/定性或混合）的综合手册，概述这些方法之间的关系，以及如何将最合适的知识综合方法与回答研究问题相匹配。本范围综述的目的是：1）系统搜索跨多学科领域的知识综合方法文献；2）比较和对比不同的知识综合方法；3）制定进行知识综合的具体步骤，为知识综合方法手册/工具的开发提供信息。
我们将搜索相关的电子数据库（例如，MEDLINE、CINAHL）、灰色文献和学科特定的列表服务。该范围综述将考虑所有研究设计，包括定性和定量方法（不包括经济分析或临床实践指南制定），并确定健康、教育、社会学和哲学等学科的知识综合方法。两名审查员将对筛选标准和数据提取表格进行试点测试，并将独立筛选文献并提取数据。将使用三步综合过程将文献映射到我们的目标。
该项目代表了广泛而系统地识别、定义和分类知识综合方法（即，较少传统的知识综合方法）的首次尝试。我们预计，我们的结果将导致一个被接受的较少传统知识综合方法分类法，并开发和实施这些综述的方法手册，这将与广泛的知识用户相关，包括研究人员、资助者和期刊编辑。
