Skip to main content

Table 2 Evidence map presentations and domains used to classify data in the evidence maps

From: What is an evidence map? A systematic review of published evidence maps and their definitions, methods, and products

Author, year Evidence map presentations Classic PICOTS Study design Sample size (N) Disorder/condition Systematic review domains Other, specify
Population characteristics Intervention Comparators Outcomes Timing Setting Literature size Estimated effect/association Confidence in estimate  
Title: description of map(s); all identified studies represented
Explicit, published (n = 26)
Althuis, 2013 [35] “Evidence map of publications of sugar-sweetened beverages by outcome and study type”(F2): flow diagram; yes, “Evidence map of published cohort and intervention studies of sugar-sweetened beverages by outcome and key study features” (F3): flow diagram and cross-tabular table hybrid; yes x    x x x x x      
Antsee, 2011 [40] “The matrix” (F1): cross-tabular table with color-coded subdivisions in each cell; yes x       x       Prevention area: several important areas within HIV prevention research that represent potential for novel and innovative research of interest (e.g., education, behavior, service delivery, descriptive epidemiology, international adaptability, etc.)
Bailey, 2014 [44] “Distribution of included prevention studies” (T1), “Distribution of included disorder established treatment studies” (T2), “Distribution of included relapse prevention studies” (T3): cross-tabular table; each table is a subset   x      x   x     Intervention type: larger categories interventions fall within (e.g. psychological, biological, service, universal, at-risk)
Berger, 2014 [45] "Frequency of intervention comparisons within outcome groups, by baseline health status in trials" (F2), "Frequency of intervention comparisons among cardiometabolic outcomes, by baseline health in trials" (F3): bubble plot using color and bubble size; yes x   x x       x    
Bonell, 2013 [46] "Countries of primary research of studies included in the evidence map"(F3), "Health topics of the references included in the evidence map" (F4), "School/grade level of the references included in the evidence map" (F5), "Aspect of the school examined in the references included in the evidence map" (F6): bar chart, yes       x     x    Health topic
Brennan, 2014 [43] “Example evidence map for associational studies for childcare food and beverage policies and environments” (F2), “Example evidence map for intervention studies for childcare food and beverage policies and environments” (F3): conceptual model mapping strategy to outcomes; no, example only   x   x        x   Short/intermediate/long-term outcome groups
Chung, 2011 [39] “Studies stratified by design and anatomic region imaged” (F4), “Studies stratified by design and device category” (F5): bubble plot and cross-tabular hybrid, within each cell bubbles of varying size and color; yes   x      x x      
Coast, 2012 [47] "Relationships between postnatal depression and poverty identified in the mapping" (T3): cross-tabular table; yes       x x x   x x   Poverty indicator
Also present table of study characteristics (T1); yes
Coeytaux, 2014 [48, 49] "Characteristics of Systematic Reviews Evaluating Yoga for All Eligible Conditions" (T1): cross-tabular table; yes        x x x x    SR quality, SR methods
"RCTs evaluating yoga" (F2): bubble plot with bubble size; yes
DeFrank, 2014 [42] “Number of studies assessing categories of psychological harms and rates of overdiagnosis” (F2): bar graph with color-coded subdivisions; yes   x         x    Assessing burden/frequency/both
El-Behadli, 2015 [50] "Evidence in Peer-Reviewed Publications of Translation Methods" (T2), "Evidence in Peer-Reviewed JournalsRegardingRestandardization of Translations" (T3): cross-tabular table; yes              Language, screener translated, translation methods
Greer, 2012 [38] “Summary of studies on wheeled mobility service delivery” (T2): Cross-tabular table; yes     x          Elements of service delivery: factors important to individuals when considering wheeled mobility options, children’s caregivers’ and parents’ opinions about the wheeled mobility used by their child, user satisfaction
Hempel, 2014 [51] "Evidence map of mindfulness": bubble plot; yes   x       x x x x   
Hempel, 2014 [41, 58] “Evidence map of acupuncture for pain” (F3), “Evidence map of acupuncture for wellness” (F4),“Evidence map of acupuncture formental health” (F5): bubble plots with color and bubble size as dimensions in addition to x and y axes; each diagram is a subset          x x x x  
Hempel, 2014 [52] "Evidence map of tai chi" (F2): bubble plot; yes         x x x x   
Hitch, 2012 [53] "Available evidence by diagnosis and focused psychological therapy" (T2), "Availableevidence by diagnosis and level of evidence" (T3), "Quality of evidence by intervention" (T4): cross-tabular format; yes   x        x    x  
Jaramillo, 2013 [37] “Map of Evidence for Osteoarthritis Template” (F3): cross-tabular table; no Online appendix version has research questions all mapped to grid              Studies are not classified this map classifies research question developed from workshop discussions
Kadiyala, 2014 [54] "Mapping the agriculture-nutrition pathways in India"(F1) with "Number of studies included in the evidence review by agriculture-nutrition pathways and study design" (T2): conceptual model with companion cross-tabular display; yes     x   x x    x    pathways between factors
Nihashi, 2013 [36] “Current clinical evidence on PET in glioma” (F2): three dimensional cross-tabular visualizationusing color and stacked discs of varying size; yes   x x      x      
Northway, 2005 [55] "Examples of key concerns and good practice" (T2): cross-tabular; examples only              
Sawicki, 2015 [56] "Microbiome Outcomes Examined by Fiber Type" (F4), "Other Health Outcomes Examined with the Microbiome by Fiber Type" (F5): bubble plots, yes   x   x     x   x    
Singh, 2012 [57] "Interventions for prediabetes investigated in systematic reviews" (T4), "Outcomes assessed in systematic reviews of prediabetes" (T5), "Ratings of authors’ overall conclusions about interventions"(T6): cross-tabular, yes   x   x       x x x  
Vallarino, 2015 [59] "Evidence map of all 29 studies of psychological interventions for the early stages of bipolar disorder" (F2): flow chart; yes   x        x x    
Wang, 2015 [60] "Bubble Plot of LCS Studies by Study Duration and by Health Outcome Groups" (F3): bubble plot, yes x    x    x x   x    Study duration
"Study Design and Population Characteristics" (T2): cross-tabular, yes
Explicit, online (n = 8)
GEM [16, 62, 64, 65] “Example of ‘interventions and study design output’” (T3): Cross-tabular table; no, “example only”, “Example of ‘detailed study characteristics output (extract only)’” (T4): evidence table; no “example only x x   x   x x x x     
Headspace [17, 61, 63, 66]    x      x   x     
Callahan, 2012 [63] “Distribution of included universal preventive studies” (F2), “Distribution of included indicated and selective preventive studies” (F3), “Distribution of included studies to treat a diagnosed depressive disorder” (F4): Flow diagram; each diagram is a subset              
De Silva, 2013 [61] “The distribution of included trials in categories during second-stage screening” (F2): flow diagram; yes              
Liu, 2010 [66] “Distribution of included… studies” (F2): flow diagram; yes