Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.


  • This page a key component of the ACTS COVID-19 Guidance to Action Collaborative Learning Community's  effort to enhance the COVID-19 knowledge ecosystem (see here for an overview of this effort).
  • The key use case we're focused on initially in this effort is optimizing how 'living guidance' (e.g., CDS, eCQMs, eCase Reports) being deployed by Collaborative participants focused on targets such as anticoagulation and testing/triage for COVID-19 can be kept up to date most efficiently and effectively by leveraging 'living recommendations/guidelines' on these topics. And, in turn, informing these guidelines with living systematic reviews that are likewise fed in more automated ways by proactive signaling about important new studies on these targets.
  • Collaborative participants such as the Veterans Administration, American College of Emergency Physicians, University of Minnesota, the AU Living Guidelines/University of Melbourne, NACHC, C19HCC Digital Guidelines WG and others have ways they're currently managing this supply chain - and they'll be documenting these in the 'Participant Windows' that are 'child pages' under this Participant Summary Window.
  • The tables below synthesize how Collaborative participants are managing the COVID-19 knowledge supply chain - augmented with best practice tools and strategies from GIN and its members, SRDR, COKA and other Collaborative participants. The knowledge ecosystem/supply chain approaches and resources documented in these tables should include enhancements that Collaborative participants (and others) can use to improve their current efforts and results.
  • Pages under this page are 'Participant Windows' for Learning Community members to share information about their Collaborative-related knowledge supply chain efforts with others - and to provide raw material for this Participant Window Summary page. The goal is for the teams maintaining the individual Participant Window pages to enable others to benefit from what they are doing and learning within the evidence/guidance ecosystem. And in return, enable others to provide strategies, tools and other input help to the teams responsible for each page accelerate their own ecosystem enhancement efforts.
  • The 3 tables below synthesize highlights about ecosystem approaches, tips, and needs across Collaborative participants - as reflected in what they are sharing in their respective Participant Windows. These tables also include other key information (e.g., regarding tools, strategies, needs) provided by other Collaborative participants and not otherwise captured in individual Participant Windows.
  • The collaborative This Collaborative Learning Community aims to generate important benefits to Collaborative participants (and patients they ultimately serve) from this sharing and cross fertilization. We will use the table at the bottom of this page to document and amplify/spread these benefits.

Identify (Search/Screen) Primary Studies (See this CoP page)

Synthesize Evidence (including assessing quality) (See this CoP page)



  • manual key word literature searches, SME awareness of studies (ACEP/EC)
  • SMEs review content, track in spreadsheet (ACEP/EC)

Pearls/Tips Learned/Tools
Desired Approach
  • Curated article, review every few weeks based on keywords and filters, with direct links to PDFs to speed content access (ACEP/EC).

  • 3rd party reviews the studies and provides summary of key data in easily digestible format (ACEP/EC)

  • Standards for sharing  (ACEP/EC)
Needs to Achieve Desired Approach

Check all that apply

__Better source/input materials [Details: ]

__Common format/terminologies for managing/sharing data [Details: ]

__Other [Details:]


Use an online administrative interface for processing records (rather than Excel) and a more elegant front-end solution for displaying the inventory

_x_Better source/input materials [Details: ] Harvest from all high-yield, high-quality sources

_x_Common format/terminologies for managing/sharing data [Details: ] COVID-END taxonomy

_x_Consistency of outcomes [Details:]

_x_Engagement with primary researchers and upstream stakeholders [Details: When gaps in the best-available evidence related to the pandemic response are identified (e.g., a taxonomy category in the inventory has no high-quality evidence synthesis available) engaging researchers and research funders may help to set priorities for research needed to fill gaps)]

_x_Engagement with decision makers and other downstream stakeholders [Details:] Regulator interactions with government officials in many Canadian provinces and in many other countries


Check all that apply

__Better source/input materials [Details: ]

__Common format/terminologies for managing/sharing data [Details: ]

__Other [Details:]

Support We Can Provide Other Participants


Identify published systematic and rapid reviews from trusted sources (including VA ESP Covid-19 Evidence Reviews and Cochrane) and present these in the COVID-END inventoryAdd decision-relevant information to each document included in the inventory in order to support easier assessments of relevance, including:

  • flagging review search dates (to support assessments of how up-to-date the evidence is);

appraising and reporting quality using AMSTAR 1 tool (to provide information about the quality of each review);

  • identifying which reviews are living and which have a GRADE evidence profile; and
  • creating declarative titles for ease of understanding and applicability for policymaker end user.

The COVID-END Inventory aims to identify best current evidence in the four taxonomies, and to identify those reviews that are living, up to date, high quality and where there is a GRADE evidence profile. Inventory also provides link to the underlying reviews in addition to outputs described above.

COVID-END ... aims also to commission living systematic reviews to address high priority areas that may not have been sufficiently addressed by evidence synthesis researchers.

Further outputs include resources for researchers and guidelines developers that are proposing to conduct a systematic review or develop clinical practice guidelines – aimed at reducing inadvertent and inappropriate duplication of effort and increasing the quality of reviews and guidelines produced



Benefits Realized by Collaborative participants from their engagement in this work

OrganizationActivity Generating BenefitImpact from the Activity (to organizations, patients, other)

Quick Links to Participant Windows