Table 3 Considerations for developing and conducting desk reviews
For whom: Dissemination | |
1.1 | What is your plan for dissemination? Who is the primary end-user of the desk review and how will you ensure that they receive it? |
1.2 | What language is most commonly spoken by the end-users? Will the desk review need to be translated? Who will do the translation and who will check it? |
1.3 | What is your plan for evaluating the application and utility of the desk review in informing humanitarian response? |
When: Determining the timeline | |
2.1 | When does this desk review need to be available to be useful for reasonably informing humanitarian response? |
Where: Defining the target population and context | |
3.1 | Where is the target population and how are they defined in terms of geographic, social, and cultural characteristics? |
3.2 | Which sociocultural factors require particular attention? |
Why: Defining the rationale and purpose | |
4.1 | Why has the particular agency or stakeholder requested the review at this time? |
4.2 | What is the purpose/objective(s)? How will it be used? |
4.3 | What gaps in knowledge among humanitarian responders will this desk review fill? |
What: Defining the question and scope | |
5.1 | What aspects of mental health and psychosocial wellbeing, socio-cultural context and humanitarian response are most relevant to the context and purpose of the desk review? |
5.2 | Information from which populations (person, place and time) and issues might provide relevant data to inform mental health and psychosocial practices in the target population? |
Who: Selection of the research team | |
6.1 | How many people are needed to achieve the objectives/purpose within the timeline? |
6.2 | Are there experts on mental health and psychosocial support from the specified target population/context available and able to contribute? |
6.3 | If the conduct of the desk review requires a large team(s), how will communication and tasks be coordinated? |
6.4 | What regional experts and stakeholders will review the report? |
How: Selection of data collection and synthesis methods | |
7.1 | What data sources (e.g., academic, websites, agency reports, news sources, etc.) are relevant to the scope of the desk review? |
7.2 | What languages need to be included in the search? |
7.3 | What (combination of) search terms will identify the relevant literature? |
7.4 | Does the search strategy produce an adequate and manageable number of results (maximize sensitivity and specificity) relative to the resources available to conduct the review? |
7.4 | How will search results be documented? |
7.5 | How will literature be literature be reviewed to extract and synthesize relevant information? (e.g. use of structured recording forms) |
7.6 | How will reading and writing tasks be organized among team members. How will the final report be edited and formatted? |
7.7 | What level of detail is important for each section of the desk review? |
7.8 | Who will edit the final report for accuracy and consistent style? |