JBI Evidence Synthesis methodology issue

We are excited to feature a selection of methodology-themed papers focusing on methodological guidance for conducting evidence synthesis in a special issue of JBI Evidence Synthesis.  

The issue includes new additions to the journal’s Risk of Bias series, including the revised JBI critical appraisal tool for assessing risk of bias in quasi-experimental studies, along with an accompanying paper summarising the different tool structures and approaches to risk of bias assessment. A video extract of the accompanying paper, 'Common tool structures and approaches to risk of bias assessment: implications for systematic reviewers', is presented by the lead author.

Also in this issue is a paper from members of the JBI Adelaide GRADE Centre, 'Implementing GRADE in systematic reviews that adhere to JBI methodological conduct'.  This paper provides a comprehensive explanation of which JBI methodologies are suitable for GRADE assessment, and how to apply the GRADE approach in a JBI systematic review.

In a response to a commentary piece on redundant systematic reviews, the senior editors of JBI Evidence Synthesis share their thoughts on how to address the proliferation of “zombie reviews" (ie, protocols or registrations that are abandoned without a complete review). To tackle this problem, they offer a comprehensive list of steps the evidence synthesis community should take, many of which are already embedded in our journal's practices. A video abstract accompanies this paper.

This special issue also includes methodology papers such as 'Comparisons of the mean differences and standardized mean differences for continuous outcome measures on the same scale' and a number of papers relating to meta-analysis, including:

Determining the conclusiveness of meta analysis

Meta-analysis on studies with heterogeneous and partially observed covariates

Comparison of bias adjustment in meta-analysis using data-based and opinion-based methods

Several protocols in this issue specifically demonstrate how scoping reviews can be used to conduct methodological research, illustrating the utility of scoping reviews beyond the boundaries of clinical evidence.

Additionally, we are pleased to present a pilot study mapping the alignment of publications in JBI Evidence Synthesis to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 3, which relates to global health and well-being. This two-part study included a desktop audit of published systematic and scoping reviews and an author survey. Tracking authors' awareness of the SDGs and their intention to use them in their synthesis work is an important step to helping the JBI Collaboration work toward meeting the SDG targets by producing locally contextualised evidence. The paper, 'From agenda to action: JBI Evidence Synthesis and the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals' is complemented by a short video of the authors discussing the study and its importance.

Go to the special issue of JBI Evidence Synthesis which is released for JBI Methodology Month. JBI Methodology Month highlights the latest developments from JBI’s unique methodologies and the free access resources available to students, clinicians, researchers, policymakers and anyone interested in evidence-based decision making and evidence-based practice.