Skip to Main Content
Skip to main content

Synthesis Review Toolkit Introduction: Synthesis Review Toolkit

Synthesis Review Toolkit

Researchers, graduate students, and healthcare professionals at some stage of knowledge inquiry may need to conduct a synthesis review. Whether it is a systematic review, realist review or other review type, embarking upon a synthesis review is no walk in the park - it is a marathon.

Synthesis reviews follow a predetermined, yet flexible, design and are an iterative process. To guide you on your journey, there are seven guides, each of which describes the key stages common to most synthesis reviews. While all stages are included, there is more detailed information on Stages 1 and 2.

Click on the "Stage" to navigate to the guide.

Stage 1 - Getting Started: Choosing what type of synthesis review is right for your research, developing your research question, scoping the literature, and writing and registering a review protocol

Stage 2 - Developing your Search: Identifying search terms, selecting databases, and creating a plan for documenting the search strategy

Stage 3 - Screening: Conducting initial waves of screening, choosing inclusion and exclusion criteria, and planning for citation disagreements

Stage 4 - Extracting Data: Organizing your data

Stage 5 - Assessing Quality: Assessment of individual quality and cumulative evidence of included sources

Stage 6 - Analysis & Synthesis: Choosing the type of data analysis to synthesize and analyze your included studies

Stage 7 - Writing your Review: Disseminating your research and structuring articles according to reporting standards

An infographic depicting the typical synthesis review cycle including the different stages to conducing a knowledge or evidence synthesis project. The simplified stages depicted in the graphic of the cycle include: Starting your review, Developing your search, Screening your Search Results, Extracting your data, Assessing the Data Quality, Analyzing and Synthesizing the data, and Writing and Publishing the review

© University of Saskatchewan
Disclaimer|Privacy