Workstream

Synthesis of evidence regarding the same day and urgent care workforce

To undertake and publish evidence reviews in priority areas to inform onward project work.

We will undertake and publish evidence reviews in areas that are likely to inform further project work.

• Rapid reviews: Understanding methodological approaches used in the evidence base, understandings, gaps, and future research priorities in a domain; abbreviated appraisal; descriptive summary that may provide some guidance for time-sensitive interim decisions for policy and systems.
• Realist reviews: Applying a realist approach to knowledge synthesis to produce a ‘programme theory’ that can assist policy-makers in responding to time-sensitive or emerging issues, supporting (interim) recommendations for practice, and which are suitable for further testing, while preserving the core elements of realist methodology.
• Scoping reviews: Determining scope or coverage of a body of literature on a given topic, the volume of literature and studies available, and an overview (broad or detailed) of its focus and gaps; potentially as a precursor to a systematic review, omitting quality / methodological assessment at this stage; less intended to guide policy or practice in the interim.
• Systematic reviews: synthesising and summarising research evidence in a reproducible manner. Meta-analysis and health economic analysis will be applied where appropriate to provide definitive evidence on effect and cost outcomes.

Reviews are likely to draw upon published and grey literature, and stakeholder contributions where methodologically appropriate. We will focus on issues identified in the stakeholder consultation, service mapping and data review. We will undertake a review on middle range theories early on in the workplan to inform the development of subsequent projects.