Target audience:
Researchers conducting scoping studies, systematic reviews and/or impact evaluations, and users wanting to understand approaches to evidence mapping. The session will also be useful for individuals and organisation which propagate evidence-based policy agenda. The session is appropriate for participants of any level.
Objectives:
This session will explore commonalities and differences in various methodological approaches toward evidence mapping (evidence and gap maps, EGMs), Illustrate recent examples of EGMs, and discuss their use in informing research and policy. The session is part of the process for the Campbell Collaboration to establish policies and procedures for publishing EGMs in the Campbell Library.
Description:
The session will commence brief presentations by each panellist followed by a moderated discussion and active interaction with the audience. The first presentation by Campbell is a review of different approaches to producing and using evidence maps by different organisations (Collaboration for Environmental Science (CEE), EvidenceMap.org, Evidence Based Synthesis Program (ESP), Evidence Gap Maps (3ie), Scientific Uncertainties (SBU), and Global Evidence Mapping Initiative). 3ie will then present a map of maps in the international development sector, the 3ie online platform for the visualisation of evidence maps, and adding gender and equity dimensions to evidence maps. The Centre for Evidence and Implementation will give an outline of the EGM in the context of children at risk which is one of the EGMs in the Campbell Collaboration’s EGM pilot programme. The final by Swedish Agency for Health Technology Assessment and Assessment of Social Services (SBU) will demonstrate their approach identifying evidence gaps (‘scientific uncertainties’) and their use to inform policy and research with examples.
The proposed format for the discussion is as follows:
- Chair gives brief introduction of panelists and discussion guidelines – 5 minutes.
- Panelist position presentations (15 minutes each).
- Moderated discussion (10-15 minutes).
- Audience interaction (15-20 minutes).
Sample questions in addition to those from audience are:
- How is the scope of evidence maps determined?
- Are EGMs a complement or substitute for traditional scoping studies?
- What can be done to leverage the introduction and use of EGMs at a larger scale?
- What is being done to build capacity for EGMs?