Skip to Main Content

Evidence Synthesis Reviews

Choosing your team

All evidence synthesis reviews (apart from narrative reviews): ​

  • Need a minimum of 3 authors​
  • Need clinical expertise ​
  • Need methodological expertise ​
  • May need statistical expertise​
  • May need librarian expertise​

All authors must meet the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors’ criteria for authorship​

  • Contributors who do not meet criteria for authorship must be listed in acknowledgements

Defining the Role of Authors and Contributors. (2024). International Committee of Medical Journal Editors.  https://www.icmje.org/recommendations/browse/roles-and-responsibilities/defining-the-role-of-authors-and-contributors.html

Time required

  • Rapid and narrative - weeks​
  • Systematic and scoping reviews – 12 months​
  • Umbrella reviews – 3-6 months​

Automation and AI use

RAISE recommendations

The Responsible use of AI in evidence SynthEsis (RAISE) recommendations provides a framework for ensuring responsible use of AI and automation across all roles within the evidence synthesis ecosystem. This statement has been endorsed by all major evidence synthesis review platforms. 

Thomas J, Flemyng E, Noel-Storr, A. et al. Responsible use of AI in evidence SynthEsis (RAISE): recommendations for practice (version 2.2; updated 7 November2025). In: Open Science Framework [https://osf.io/], Washington DC: Center for Open Science. DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/FWAUD

Flemyng, E., Noel-Storr, A., Macura, B., Gartlehner, G., Thomas, J., Meerpohl, J. J., Jordan, Z., Minx, J., Eisele-Metzger, A., Hamel, C., Jemioło, P., Porritt, K., & Grainger, M. (2025). Position statement on artificial intelligence (AI) use in evidence synthesis across Cochrane, the Campbell Collaboration, JBI, and the Collaboration for Environmental Evidence 2025. JBI evidence synthesis, 23(11), 2162–2166. https://doi.org/10.11124/JBIES-25-00480

Use of automation

  • A full systematic review was completed in 2 weeks using automation tools​

Clark, J., et al. (2020). A full systematic review was completed in 2 weeks using automation tools: A case study. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 121: 81-90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2020.01.008​

Use of AI ​

  • AI can speed up particular tasks​
  • AI has been used to complete reviews within hours, but with highly questionable methodology

Pearson, H. AI slashes time to produce gold-standard medical reviews-but sceptics urge caution. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-025-01942-y

Library class: Overview of Systematic, Scoping and Other Evidence Synthesis Reviews

Step into the world of evidence synthesis and learn what’s involved in systematic reviews, scoping reviews and more.  

This session provides an overview of various types of evidence synthesis reviews. Learn about the differences in the methodologies, requirements, and processes for Systematic Reviews, Scoping Reviews, and more. Offered by NSLHD Libraries in conjunction with RNS ICU Research’s A/Prof Rosalind Elliott.

Watch a recording of this class 

We also offer the more advanced Undertaking Systematic, Scoping and Other Evidence Synthesis Reviews, parts I and II.