Skip to main content

Table 1 Stages in the creation of the one-stop shop

From: Developing and refining the methods for a ‘one-stop shop’ for research evidence about health systems

Stage Activities Activities by source Outcomes
1 – Developing a taxonomy • Developed and iteratively refined a taxonomy of health system topics during stage 1 of content building Taxonomy development • Prototype for a taxonomy
• Drew on existing categorization schemes • Included systematic reviews (n = 616)
o System-wide schemes such as WHO’s “building blocks” [11] o Reviews of effects* (n = 513)
o Domain-specific schemes such as those related to human resources policy [13], pharmaceutical policy [12], and implementation strategies [7] ■ Cochrane reviews of effects (n = 184)
• Began building a repository of systematic reviews and systematic review protocols • Used it to code progressively larger bundles of systematic reviews and systematic review protocols and made adjustments as needed o Reviews addressing questions other than effects (cumulative n = 103)
Preliminary content building (phase 1) • Included Cochrane protocols of reviews of effects (n = 64)
• Searched Medline (OVID) from 1966 to September 2006 (n = 848 reviews requiring eligibility assessment and, if eligible, coding)
• Hand searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) up to Issue 3, 2007 (n = 3,308 reviews and review protocols requiring eligibility assessment and, if eligible, coding)
2 – Building content and adding value to that content • Expanded breadth of searches Content building (phase 2) • Current taxonomy and cross-cutting taxonomy (Table 2)
• Expanded scope of documents to include review-derived products • Hand searched key databases and journals • Comprehensive set of:*
o CDSR for overviews of systematic reviews, systematic reviews and systematic reviews in progress (i.e., protocols) up to issue 7, 2012 and monitored each issue thereafter o Systematic reviews (n = 4,240):
• Iteratively refined the taxonomy during phase 2 of content building and complemented it with a cross-cutting taxonomy o Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE) for systematic reviews up to April 2012 and monitored CRD News or a direct feed thereafter ■ Reviews of effects (n = 3,378 of which 585 are Cochrane reviews)
o Rx for Change up to 2010 and monitored annual or semi-annual updates thereafter ■ Reviews addressing questions other than effects (n = 862)
o Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group’s reference database for qualitative reviews up to July 2012 and monitored it regularly thereafter o Systematic reviews in progress (n = 423)
• Began providing added value for existing content (e.g., for systematic reviews: assessing their methodological quality, coding them according to how recently searches were conducted and the countries in which included studies were conducted, and linking them to structured decision-relevant summaries) o 15 journals for qualitative reviews from the first issue of 2004 to the last issue of 2008** (but hand searching not continued thereafter because of overlap with other sources) o Review-derived products (n = 183)
• Continuous scanning of listservs ■ Overviews of systematic reviews (n = 58)
o Evidence Updates and KT+ for systematic reviews identified by McMaster PLUS ■ Evidence briefs (n = 125)
o Listservs administered by PAHO EQUIDAD, PHCRIS, Sax Institute among • ‘Added value’ coding available for all existing content
• Review of websites for systematic reviews and reviewed-derived products (unless otherwise noted) up to June 2012 then continuous scanning
o 3Ie (International Initiative for Impact and Evaluation)
o Alliance for Health Policy and Systems Research
o Campbell Collaboration
o Canadian Institutes of Health Research ‘Evidence on Tap’ and ‘KT Synthesis’ programs
o Department for International Development (UK)
o Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Coordinating Centre (EPPI-Centre)
o Evidence-Based Practice Centers (EPC), Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ)
o Evidence-Informed Policy Networks for evidence briefs [18]
o McMaster Health Forum for evidence briefs
o WHO Regional Office for Europe/Health Evidence Network/European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies for evidence briefs
3 – Expanding the types of content • Expanded scope of documents to include: Content building – phase 3 • Comprehensive set of:*
• Hand searched CDSR up to issue 10, 2012 of the CDSR for systematic reviews being planned (i.e., registered titles) and monitored each issue thereafter o Systematic reviews being planned (n = 220)
o Systematic reviews being planned   o Health reform descriptions (n = 1,107)
o Economic evaluations and costing studies • Hand searched two databases maintained by the Centre for Reviews and Dissemination o Health system descriptions (n = 232)
o Health reform descriptions o PROSPERO up to October 2012 for systematic reviews being planned, and monitor it regularly thereafter o Economic evaluations and costing studies published since 2003 (n = 2,236)
o Health system descriptions o Economic Evaluation Database up to October 2012 for economic evaluations and costing studies and monitored it regularly thereafter • Partial (and soon to be comprehensive) set of links to studies included in systematic reviews, with the links assigned names based on the countries where the studies were conducted to facilitate immediate access to more locally applicable studies (91% of reviews now have links)
• Providing more added value for existing content (e.g., links to studies included in systematic reviews) • Hand searched Health Policy Monitor up to October 2012 for descriptions of health system reforms and monitored it regularly thereafter
• Hand searched the websites of the European Observatory on Health Systems and Policies, World Health Organization headquarters and all regional offices and World Bank up to October 2012 for health system descriptions and monitored them regularly thereafter
4 – Continuously updating the one-stop shop • Refined and executed procedures for continuously updating the one-stop shop in all seven supported languages • Continue to monitor sources from the above stages, assess eligibility, categorize them, and add value to the content • Procedures document for maintenance (with excerpts available upon request)
   • Continue to identify new potential sources and more efficient ways of accessing these sources, as well as new potential types of documents • Agreements with partners to ensure the one-stop shop is functional in Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Portuguese, Russian and Spanish
  1. *All numbers in this list are cumulative and include the documents identified in the previous stage.
  2. **We hand searched three journals that had published two or more qualitative reviews of which we were already aware, namely the International Journal of Nursing Studies, Journal of Advanced Nursing, and Patient Education and Counseling. We also hand searched 12 journals that had published two or more policy-relevant reviews of any type, namely the American Journal of Managed Care, Evidence-based Healthcare & Public Health, Health Expectations, Health Policy, Health Policy & Planning, International Journal for Quality in Health Care, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, Journal of Health Services Research & Policy, Medical Care, Medical Care Research and Review, Psychiatric Services, and Social Science & Medicine.