Korábbi változatok

From COVID-END:

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 inventory

Categorise into four mutually exclusive taxonomies: clinical management, public health measures,  health system arrangements and economic and social resources.

Add 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.

---

• (From Sara Loree: CDC and WHO are combining their COVID databases; OSF databased of COVID-19 intervention trials; WHO Librarian Reserve Corps)

From COVID-END

Match response to need (in this case, a prototypical 25-year-old policy analyst being asked by senior decision-makers for best evidence across a broad range of issues on very short timelines)

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

---

• Resources and tools for researchers considering and conducting
  COVID-19 evidence syntheses (From COVID-END Synthesizing WG)
• (from Sara Loree: OSF protocol for living evidence summary)

Check all that apply

__Better source/input materials [Details: ]

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

__Other [Details:]

From COVID-END:

_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: ]

__Consistency of outcomes [Details:]

__Engagement with primary researchers and upstream stakeholders [Details:]

__Engagement with decision makers and other downstream stakeholders [Details:]

__Other [Details:]

From COVID-END

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 has also established an international horizon scanning group that meets monthly, an equity group that aims to identify means of increasing the visibility of measures aimed at reducing inequity, and 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

---