Evidence Review, Synthesis and Generation
Protocol and planification for evidence generation strategy
Protocol and planification for evidence generation strategy
Protocol planification in evidence review and synthesis ensures methodological transparency and reduces bias by establishing predefined criteria for evidence selection and analysis. It allows for comprehensive evidence synthesis, offering more robust conclusions through a clearer understanding of the clinical value of interventions.
Our offering includes
- Systematic review, narrative review, scoping review, and umbrella review
- Evidence gap analysis
- Assessment of the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of therapeutic interventions
- Health-related quality of life (HRQoL)
- Disease epidemiology
- Burden of disease
- Assessing the feasibility of performing meta-analysis
- Conventional meta-analysis
- Network meta-analysis and indirect treatment comparisons
- Value communication, including scientific journals and conferences publications and presentations
Contact Us
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
Drawing a protocol for evidence review, synthesis, and generation is crucial as it minimizes bias, ensures consistency and reproducibility, enhances efficiency and focus, and helps identify gaps in knowledge to guide future research.
Clevidence has expert teams with specialized knowledge in systematic reviews and meta-analyses, ensuring rigorous and transparent methodologies. We conduct comprehensive literature searches across multiple databases to gather all relevant studies. Use of statistical software performs robust data analyses and generate reliable insights. Additionally, Clevidence complies guidelines and regulatory standards to meet the specific client needs, with the aim of provide technically rigourous reports.
Proven Success with Evidence Review and Synthesis
Informing Healthcare Decision-Making
Clevidence’s team has conducted several systematic reviews and meta-analyses, including network meta-analyses and indirect treatment comparisons, in accordance with the highest methodological standards to synthesize evidence for comparative effectiveness analyses of health technologies. These reviews have generated evidence that is valuable for guiding clinical decision-making and supporting health technology assessment (HTA) processes.
The services supported policy decisions that enhanced treatment accessibility and resource efficiency.
