Clinical Social Work Journal

, Volume 39, Issue 4, pp 362–368 | Cite as

The Role of Systematic Reviews and the Campbell Collaboration in the Realization of Evidence-Informed Practice

  • Aron ShlonskyEmail author
  • Eamonn Noonan
  • Julia H. Littell
  • Paul Montgomery
Original Paper


Evidence-informed practice asks practitioners and policy-makers to integrate current best evidence with client context in order to provide meaningful and potentially effective services across a range of presenting problems. Done correctly, systematic reviews are a crucial part of this process, providing social workers and other helping professionals with transparent, rigorous, and informative syntheses of research in a given area. This paper makes clear the need for systematic reviews in social work, briefly explains what systematic reviews are and how they are made, and describes the role of the Campbell Collaboration in creating a world library of systematic reviews.


Systematic review Evidence-based practice Evidence-informed practice Meta-analysis Campbell Collaboration 


  1. Atkins, D., Best, D., Briss, P. A., Eccles, M., Falck-Ytter, Y., Flottorp, S., et al. (2004). Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ, 328(7454), 1490.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Becker, B. J. (1990). Item characteristics and gender differences on the SAT-M for mathematically able youths. American Educational Research Journal, 27(1), 65–87.Google Scholar
  3. Campbell, D. T. (1969). Reforms as experiments. American Psychologist, 24, 409–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. CEBC. (2010). The California evidence-based clearinghouse for child welfare, from
  5. Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence. (2010). Blueprints for violence prevention, 2010, from
  6. Chalmers, I. (2005). If evidence-informed policy works in practice, does it matter if it doesn’t work in theory? Evidence and policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 1(2), 227–242.Google Scholar
  7. Coalition for Evidence. (2010). Government-wide evaluation initiative FY11: budget summary, from
  8. Entwistle, V. A., Sheldon, T. A., Sowden, A., & Watt, I. S. (1998). Evidence-informed patient choice. Practical issues of involving patients in decisions about health care technologies. International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care, 14(2), 212–225.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gambrill, E. (1999). Evidence-based practice: An alternative to authority-based practice. Families in Society, 80, 341–350.Google Scholar
  10. Gambrill, E. (2008). Providing more effective, ethical services: The philosophy and process of evidence-based (informed) practice. In D. Lindsey & A. Shlonsky (Eds.), Child welfare research: Advances for practice and policy (pp. 51–65). New York: Oxford.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gambrill, E. (2010). Evidence-informed practice: Antidote to propaganda in the helping professions? Research on Social Work Practice, 20(3), 302–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gibbs, L. E. (2003). Evidence-based practice for the helping professions: A practical guide with integrated multimedia. Pacific Grove, Calif: Brooks/Cole-Thomson Learning.Google Scholar
  13. Gibbs, L., & Gambrill, E. (2002). Evidence-based practice: Counterarguments to objections. Research on Social Work Practice, 12(3), 452–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Guyatt, G. H. (1991). Editorial: Evidence-based medicine. ACP Journal Club, 14(2), A-16.Google Scholar
  15. Hargreaves, D. H. (1991). Revitalising educational research: Lessons from the past and proposals for the future. Cambridge Journal of Education, 29(2), 239–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Higgins, J., & Green, S. (2008). Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions. Chichester, UK: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Liberati, A., Altman, D. G., Tetzlaff, J., Mulrow, C., Gotzsche, P. C., Ioannidis, J. P., et al. (2009). The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(10), e1–e34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lipsey, M. (2009). The primary factors that characterize effective interventions with juvenile offenders: A meta-analytic overview. Victims and Offenders, 4, 124–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Littell, J. H. (2008). Evidence-based or biased? The quality of published reviews of evidence-based practices. Children and Youth Services Review, 30, 1299–1317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Littell, J. H., Popa, M., & Forsythe, B. (2005). Multisystemic therapy for social, emotional, and behavioral problems in youth aged 10–17. Cochrane Database Syst Rev(3).Google Scholar
  21. Littell, J. H., & Shlonsky, A. (2010). Making sense of meta-analysis: A critique of “effectiveness of long-term psychodynamic psychotherapy”. Clinical Social Work Journal. doi:  10.1007/s10615-010-0308-z.
  22. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62(10), 1006–1012.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Noyes, J., Popay, J., Pearson, A., Hannes, K., & Booth, A. (2009). Cochrane qualitative research methods group. Qualitative research and cochrane reviews. In J. Higgins & S. Green (Eds.), Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.0.2. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
  24. Oxman, A. D., Bjorndal, A., Becerra-Posada, F., Gibson, M., Block, M. A., Haines, A., et al. (2010). A framework for mandatory impact evaluation to ensure well informed public policy decisions. Lancet, 375(9712), 427–431.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rosen, A., & Proctor, E. K. (2002). Standards for evidence-based social work practice. In A. R. Roberts & J. G. Greene (Eds.), The social worker’s desk reference (pp. 743–747). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Sackett, D. L., Richardson, W. S., Rosenberg, W., & Haynes, R. B. (1997). Evidence-based medicine: How to practice and teach EBM. New York: Churchill Livingstone.Google Scholar
  27. SAMHSA. (2010). National registry of evidence-based programs and practices, from
  28. Sandelowski, M., & Barroso, J. (2005). Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  29. Scher, L., Maynard, R., & Stagner, M. (2006). Interventions intended to reduce pregnancy- related outcomes among adolescents. Campbell Systematic Reviews(12).Google Scholar
  30. Schriger, D. L. (2001). Analyzing the relationship of exercise and health: methods, assumptions, and limitations. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise, 33(6), 359–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Shlonsky, A., Saini, M., & Wu, M. (2007). The recurrence of child maltreatment: Predictive validity of risk assessment instruments. Campbell Library of Systematic Reviews.Google Scholar
  32. Smedslund, G., Hagen, K., Steiro, A., Johme, T., Dalsbø, T., & Rud, M. (2006). Work programmes for welfare recipients. Campbell Systematic Reviews(9).Google Scholar
  33. Smedslund, G., Dalsbo, T. K., Steiro, A. K., Winsvold, A., & Clench-Aas, J. (2007). Cognitive behavioural therapy for men who physically abuse their female partner. Cochrane Database Syst Rev(3).Google Scholar
  34. Thaler, R. H., & Sunstein, C. R. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth and happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  35. van der Windt, D., Simons, E., Riphagen, I. I., Ammendolia, C., Verhagen, A., Laslett, M., et al. (2010). Physical examination for lumbar radiculopathy due to disc herniation in patients with low-back pain. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews(2).Google Scholar
  36. Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (2009). The spirit level: Why equality is better for everyone. New York: Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar
  37. Winokur, M., Holtan, A., & Valentine, D. (2009). Kinship care for the safety, permanency, and well-being of children removed from the home for maltreatment. Cochrane Database Syst Rev(1).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Aron Shlonsky
    • 1
    Email author
  • Eamonn Noonan
    • 2
  • Julia H. Littell
    • 3
  • Paul Montgomery
    • 4
  1. 1.Factor-Inwentash Faculty of Social WorkUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Campbell CollaborationOsloNorway
  3. 3.Graduate School of Social Work and Social ResearchBryn Mawr CollegeLower Merion TwpUSA
  4. 4.Centre for Evidence Based InterventionUniversity of OxfordOxfordUK

Personalised recommendations