Evidence mapping: illustrating an emerging methodology to improve evidence-based practice in youth mental health

• Published in: Journal of evaluation in clinical practice 2010-12, Vol.16 (6), p.1025-1030
• Main Authors: Hetrick, Sarah E., Parker, Alexandra G., Callahan, Patrick, Purcell, Rosemary
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adolescent; Adult; Child; evidence mapping; evidence-based practice; Evidence-Based Practice - organization & administration; Humans; interventions; knowledge transfer; Mental Disorders - therapy; mental health; Mental Health Services - standards; Quality Assurance, Health Care - methods; Young Adult; youth
• ISSN: 1356-1294; 1365-2753
• DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2008.01112.x

Rationale, aims and objectives  Within the field of evidence‐based practice, a process termed ‘evidence mapping’ is emerging as a less exhaustive yet systematic and replicable methodology that allows an understanding of the extent and distribution of evidence in a broad clinical area, highlighting both what is known and where gaps in evidence exist. This article describes the general principles of mapping methodology by using illustrations derived from our experience conducting an evidence map of interventions for youth mental‐health disorders. Methods  Evidence maps are based on an explicit research question relating to the field of enquiry, which may vary in depth, but should be informed by end‐users. The research question then drives the search for, and collection of, appropriate studies utilizing explicit and reproducible methods at each stage. This includes clear definition of components of the research question, development of a thorough and reproducible search strategy, development of explicit inclusion and exclusion criteria, and transparent decisions about the level of information to be obtained from each study. Discussion  Evidence mapping is emerging as a rigorous methodology for gathering and disseminating up‐to‐date information to end‐users. Thoughtful planning and assessment of available resources (e.g. staff, time, budget) are required by those applying this methodology to their particular field of clinical enquiry given the potential scope of the work. The needs of the end‐user need to be balanced with available resources. Information derived needs to be effectively communicated, with the uptake of that evidence into clinical practice the ultimate aim.