Protocol for the development of guidance for collaborator and partner engagement in health care evidence syntheses

Peter Tugwell, Vivian Welch, Olivia Magwood, Alex Todhunter-Brown, Elie Akl, Tom Concannon, Joanne Khabsa, Richard Morley, Holger Schünemann, Lyubov Lytvyn, Arnav Agarwal, Alba Antequera, Marc T. Avey, Pauline Campbell, Christine Chang, Stephanie Chang, Leonila Dans, Omar Dewidar, Davina Ghersi, Ian D. GrahamGlen Hazlewood, Jennifer Hilgart, Tanya Horsley, Denny John, Janet Jull, Lara Maxwell, Chris McCutcheon, Zachary Munn, Francesco Nonino, Jordi Pardo Pardo, Roses Parker, Kevin Pottie, Gabriel Rada, Alison Riddle, Anneliese Synnot, Elizabeth Tanjong Ghogomu, Eve Tomlinson, Karin Toupin-April, Jennifer Petkovic

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Citation (Scopus)
43 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background
Involving collaborators and partners in research may increase relevance and uptake, while reducing health and social inequities. Collaborators and partners include people and groups interested in health research: health care providers, patients and caregivers, payers of health research, payers of health services, publishers, policymakers, researchers, product makers, program managers, and the public. Evidence syntheses inform decisions about health care services, treatments, and practice, which ultimately affect health outcomes.

Our objectives are to:

A. Identify, map, and synthesize qualitative and quantitative findings related to engagement in evidence syntheses

B. Explore how engagement in evidence synthesis promotes health equity

C. Develop equity-oriented guidance on methods for conducting, evaluating, and reporting engagement in evidence syntheses

Methods
Our diverse, international team will develop guidance for engagement with collaborators and partners throughout multiple sequential steps using an integrated knowledge translation approach:

1. Reviews. We will co-produce 1 scoping review, 3 systematic reviews and 1 evidence map focusing on (a) methods, (b) barriers and facilitators, (c) conflict of interest considerations, (d) impacts, and (e) equity considerations of engagement in evidence synthesis.

2. Methods study, interviews, and survey. We will contextualise the findings of step 1 by assessing a sample of evidence syntheses reporting on engagement with collaborators and partners and through conducting interviews with collaborators and partners who have been involved in producing evidence syntheses. We will use these findings to develop draft guidance checklists and will assess agreement with each item through an international survey.

3. Consensus. The guidance checklists will be co-produced and finalised at a consensus meeting with collaborators and partners.

4. Dissemination. We will develop a dissemination plan with our collaborators and partners and work collaboratively to improve adoption of our guidance by key organizations.

Conclusion
Our international team will develop guidance for collaborator and partner engagement in health care evidence syntheses. Incorporating partnership values and expectations may result in better uptake, potentially reducing health inequities.
Original languageEnglish
Article number134
Number of pages10
JournalSystematic Reviews
Volume12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2 Aug 2023

Keywords

  • Coproduction
  • Engagement
  • Evidence synthesis
  • Stakeholder
  • Systematic reviews

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Protocol for the development of guidance for collaborator and partner engagement in health care evidence syntheses'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this