According to Uttley & Montgomery (2017), knowledge syntheses benefit from team working, as co-production is an essential part of high-quality research synthesis. However, despite their reputation as transparent and rigorous products, they are influenced by the people who conduct them and this in turn could affect the resulting conclusions.
A review team should be comprised of experienced methodologists, information specialists, statisticians, and content experts.
The National Academies (2011) recommend that teams should include members from different disciplines in order to avoid bias. They add that the number of team members depends on the complexity and scope of the review, however they highlight the importance of these members in a team:
Project management is defined by the Project Management Institute as "the application of knowledge, skills, tools, and techniques to project activities to meet the project requirements". The five main processes of project management include:
There are a variety of project management software tools that streamline projects you may be working on, such as knowledge syntheses. Some recommendations include:
Training is a crucial component to successfully managing a knowledge synthesis project.
If you're interested in learning more about the different types of knowledge syntheses and how to select the most appropriate one for your research, watch the webinar Knowledge synthesis for knowledge users from Cochrane Learning Live in partnership with GESI: the Global Evidence Synthesis Initiative with Dr. Andrea C. Tricco.
If you're interested in learning about how to analyzing and reporting results from systematic reviews and meta-analyses and learn about critical appraisal, enroll in the free online course CERTaIN: Knowledge Synthesis: Systematic Reviews and Clinical Decision Making.
If you'd like to know more about screening and eligibility criteria, take a look at this webinar titled "Screening for studies in systematic reviews, scoping reviews, and other knowledge syntheses: Strategies for improvement", and these training materials and webinar slides. To read more about eligibility criteria, go to this page. To read more about screening, go to this page.
A report by Gillies et al. (2009) shows that although a lack of time poses as the largest barrier in the full completion of a Cochrane review, co-author communication also poses as a barrier, among others. It is not uncommon for review teams to consist of team members that live in different time zones, speak different languages, or do not personally know everyone on the team. Baker et al. (2010) therefore recommend that teams "establish effective communication strategies at the onset of the project. It may be useful to develop a documented communications plan" (p. 449) It is essential that teams maintain consistent personal communication with one another through email, video calls, conference calls, and resource sharing platforms.
|Meeting planning tools||agreeAdate, Time and Date|
|Voice and video communication||Google Hangouts, Microsoft Teams, Zoom, Skype|
|Sharing files & collaboration platforms||Dropbox, Sendthisfile, Google Drive, Microsoft OneDrive, Bit.ai, Box, Jumpshare|
|Remote desktop software||LogMeIn, Chrome Remote Desktop, Remote Utilities for Windows|
Read more about the role and importance of the team in conducting a knowledge synthesis:
Gerstein Science Information Centre
9 King's College Circle
Toronto, ON, M5S 1A5
About web accessibility. Tell us about a web accessibility problem.
About online privacy and data collection.
© University of Toronto. All rights reserved.