Evidence Review

VEGA Puzzle Graphic

The foundation of all subsequent guidance and curriculum/training materials is thorough evaluation and synthesis of the existing evidence in the three topic areas. PreVAiL includes researchers and government and other organizational partners, many of whom have experience and expertise with systematic reviews, evidence syntheses and guideline development.  PreVAiL members, and other experts as needed, will serve as members of the Evidence Review Groups.

Evidence Review Methods and Process

The WHO Guideline Development Process is being used by each Evidence Review Group. Methods consultants with expertise in conducting systematic reviews and use of the GRADE method, including those from the McMaster Evidence Review and Synthesis Centre (MERSC), and McMaster GRADE (MacGrade) provide input on review methodology; external reviewers will be solicited to ensure validity of the findings. Briefly, the steps are:

  1. Scope the review: develop the guiding questions and inclusion/exclusion criteria;
  2. Identify the evidence: conduct comprehensive searches for all available evidence and retrieve all studies that meet inclusion criteria; identify existing and relevant guidelines and systematic reviews and assess these using established instruments;
  3. Evaluate the evidence: assess the quality of individual studies that meet inclusion criteria;
  4. Develop recommendations: use/adapt the GRADE method (as used by WHO) to synthesize the evidence, and assess the direction and strength of recommended actions

A key part of this process will be to integrate the feedback from the consultation process and environmental scan activities, and especially input from the National Guidance and Implementation Committee (NGIC) and other sources of information, such as qualitative and mixed methods research on people’s experiences of violence and of health and social services. These feasibility and plausibility considerations will be applied to the evidence-based recommendations in order to create useable best practices, i.e., the Foundational Guidance described in the project overview.

Each Review Group is composed of content experts, including a Chair; a PreVAiL Lead who acts as a liaison to the group, and oversees the work of expert staff assigned to conducting the review tasks, taking meeting notes and drafting report sections. For efficiency, and to reduce duplication, existing high-quality systematic reviews and guidelines are being updated and adapted, as appropriate.

Review Groups

Oversight & Cross Topic Synthesis Committee
H. MacMillan, N. Wathen, D. Stewart

Child Maltreatment Review Group
Lead/Liaison: H. MacMillan
Chair: J. Barlow
Membership: T. Afifi, J. Fluke; F. Gardner; J. Mercy; C. Mikton; P. Scribano; H. Taussig; L. Tonmyr; C. Waddell; C. Wekerle
Staff lead: Jill McTavish/C. McKee

IPV Review Group
Lead/Liaison: D. Stewart
Chair: M. Ford-Gilboe
Membership: J. Coben; P. Chandra; S. Oram; C. Garcia-Moreno; K. Hegarty; C. Varcoe; S. Vigod
Staff lead: J. MacGregor

Child Exposure to IPV Review Group
Lead/Liaison: N. Wathen
Chair: S. Jack
Membership: M. Chartier; E. Howarth; K. Georgiades; A. Gonzalez; M. Hébert; A. Guedes; A.M. Pietrantonio; J. Sareen
Staff lead: J. MacGregor/M. Gauld

Methods Consultants
M. Boyle, G. Feder, C. Garcia-Moreno, K. Georgiades, N. Santesso, D. Sherifali