What is knowledge synthesis?
The Canadian Institutes of Health Research defines knowledge synthesis as “the contextualization and integration of research findings of individual research studies within the larger body of knowledge on the topic. A synthesis must be reproducible and transparent in its methods, using quantitative and/or qualitative methods. It could take the form of a systematic review, follow the methods developed by the Cochrane Collaboration, result from a consensus conference or expert panel or synthesize qualitative or quantitative results.”
Knowledge synthesis was initially developed for health research, but is increasingly used in the social sciences, natural sciences, and other disciplines. It is also known as evidence synthesis.
Note that knowledge synthesis projects require a team and take substantial time to complete.
Learn more about knowledge synthesis on the Canadian Institutes of Health Research website.
Types of reviews
Knowledge synthesis reviews differ from narrative literature reviews; they follow formal guidelines and procedures. At UBC, common review types include:
Systematic reviews: have a focused research question and include a quality assessment of included studies.
Scoping reviews: seek to comprehensively map the literature on a given topic; generally do not include a quality assessment.
Rapid reviews: use adapted systematic or scoping review methods to produce a synthesis more quickly.
To learn more about these and other types of knowledge synthesis reviews, please see the Knowledge Synthesis Research Guide.
Guidance and reporting
Guidelines on how to conduct reviews vary depending on the type of review and the subject area. Some organizations which have provided guidance on review conduct include Cochrane, Campbell Collaboration, JBI, and Collaboration for Environmental Evidence. More details on these guidance documents are available on the Knowledge Synthesis Research Guide.
Many journals expect reviews to adhere to reporting standards, such as those from PRISMA. Note that reporting guidelines like PRISMA don’t provide details on how to conduct reviews, just on how to report methods.