Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28789669›Full record

ArticleSystematic reviews2017

Challenges and opportunities in country-specific research synthesis: a case study from Cameroon.

Lawrence Mbuagbaw, Lynn Cockburn

Abstract readLetter
In one paragraph

Article in Systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Lawrence MbuagbawDepartment of Health Research Methods, Evidence and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. mbuagblc@mcmaster.ca.
Lynn CockburnDepartment of Occupational Science & Occupational Therapy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundResearch synthesis is an important approach to summarizing a body of literature. Usually, the goal is to determine the effectiveness of an intervention, to determine the strength of association between two factors, to determine the prevalence of a condition, or to scope the literature. Research synthesis methods can also be used to appraise the quantity and quality of research output from institutions or countries. In the latter case, standard quantitative systematic review methodologies would not apply and investigators must borrow strategies from qualitative syntheses and bibliometric analyses to develop a complete and meaningful appraisal of the literature from a given country.

methodsIn this paper, we use the example of Cameroon to highlight some of the challenges and opportunities of appraising a body of country-specific literature. A comprehensive and exhaustive search of the literature was conducted to identify health-related literature from Cameroon published from 2005 to 2014. Titles were screened in duplicate.

resultsA total of 8624 studies were retrieved of which 721 were retained. The main challenges were making a choice of synthesis approach; selecting the right databases, data storage and management; and sustaining the team. Key opportunities include enhanced networking, a detailed appraisal of funding sources, international collaborations, language of publication, and issues with study design. The product is a comprehensive and informative body of evidence that can be used to inform policy with regards to international collaboration, location of research studies, language of publication, knowledge areas of focus, and gaps.

conclusionKnowledge synthesis approaches can be adapted for appraisal of country-specific research and offer opportunities for in-depth appraisal of research output.

Indexed as

Health PromotionHealth Services ResearchCameroonHumansCameroonResearch outputResearch synthesis

Identifiers

PMID28789669
PMCPMC5549358

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.