Melanie Golob
DPhil in Evidence-Based Health Care
Thesis
Are 'living' evidence syntheses cost-effective and sustainable?
Research abstract
Synthesizing evidence can be costly and time intensive; because the rate of publication of primary studies is constantly increasing, the rate at which many evidence syntheses are produced and updated must increase as well. The concept of a living evidence synthesis (LES) has emerged in recent years, responding to the changing evidence landscape by updating on a bespoke schedule specific to the needs of the topic. Topic criteria include: a priority for decision-making; uncertainty in the evidence; new studies likely to be published. The field is still being refined, but common methods include regularly monitoring the evidence base, incorporating new evidence on a pre-determined threshold, and transparently communicating update status. But is this method suitably defined and operationalized? Is it feasible for all synthesis questions, or all research groups? Is it economical?
This thesis seeks to answer those questions via three studies: (1) An overview of published living systematic reviews to determine if reviews are staying alive according to current guidance; (2) A questionnaire to understand assumptions underpinning maintaining an LES and how groups plan to keep LES alive; and (3) Modeling cost and health outcomes associated with living compared to non-living evidence synthesis. These studies intend to show the solutions needed to implement LES for the sake of sustainability and cost-effectiveness in an already lengthy and resource-intensive process.
Supervisor(s)
Dr. David Nunan, Dr. Jonathan Livingstone-Banks
Biography
Melanie Golob began her DPhil in Evidence-Based Health Care in 2021. Though her academic background was in biochemistry and molecular biology, following graduate school she transitioned to a career in health care, first working at a software company that automated systematic reviews of medical evidence, then at a non-profit organization developing clinical practice guidelines. She currently manages a state-level health technology assessment program in the US.
Melanie has a master’s degree in biochemistry and molecular biology from the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), and is a member of the Guidelines International Network (G-I-N) and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). She was the 2014 winner in the written division of the Flame Challenge, an international contest designed to explain complex scientific topics to young people.
Publications
Golob MM, Livingstone-Banks J. 131 Toward a living model for health technology assessments. BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine 2022;27:A9-A10.
Lewis SZ, Coffin D, Henry LT, O’Hara S, Schofield TJ, Sostack M, Hum D, Golob M, Robinson F, Brooker M, Dumez V, Pierce GF, Srivastava A. Chapter 12: Methodology. WFH guidelines for the management of hemophilia, 3rd edition. Haemophilia. 2020;26(Suppl 6):1-158.
Lewis SZ, Feller-Kopman D, Whittington C, Golob M, Feinman T, Balekian A. Evidence-based guidelines: keeping current with the science between editions. Poster session presented at: 2019 American Thoracic Society International Conference. May 17-22, 2019; Dallas, TX.
Whittington C, Schofield TJ, Breznen B, Lewis SZ, Golob M, Battista R. Developing a training set to teach AI-based technology to distinguish real-world evidence in literature search and monitoring. Poster session presented at: 2019 AcademyHealth Annual Research Meeting. June 2-4, 2019; Washington, DC.
Research interests
Living evidence synthesis, including systematic reviews, clinical practice guidelines, and health technology assessments; systematic review automation; computable guidelines.
