3.7.6.4 Data synthesis

This section should detail the approach to data synthesis, not the results of the synthesis. The review should detail how the reviewers synthesized the data extracted from included studies and detail the meta-aggregative approach and how it was applied across all included studies. . Any deviations from the methods outlined in the protocol need to be clearly documented in the review to maintain transparency.  

Data synthesis in a meta aggregative review requires the reviewers to undertake a 3 step process, beginning with:

1. Extraction of all findings from all included papers with an accompanying illustration and establishing a level of credibility for each finding;

2. Developing categories for findings that are sufficiently similar, with at least 2 findings per category;

3. Developing one or more synthesized findings of at least 2 categories.

Please note: Although findings which are not supported should be extracted from studies, they must be presented separately (see Section 2.7.11); they are not included in the meta-aggregation.

Reporting the methods of data synthesis requires reviewers to describe:

• what data was considered ‘findings’ in their review (i.e. was it limited to themes and metaphors, or did it include other analytic data from the papers that might have been an author observation rather than a thematic analysis);

• the process by which findings were identified (i.e. repeated reading of text, or selection of themes from the results section only;

• how findings were grouped in order to develop categories (i.e. was it based on similarity in wording, or concepts;

• how category descriptions were created (i.e. by single reviewer, or by consenus process between reviewers/review group members);

• how synthesized findings and their accompanying descriptions were created and finalized.