Shannon Shisler is an Editor with the Campbell International Development Coordinating Group. In this blog post, she shares her thoughts about the role, and explains how she came to be involved with Campbell. Would you like to join one of our editorial teams? Get in touch!
3ie staff meeting in Washington, DC in 2022 (Shannon is in
the front row, fourth from the left)
Through my work as a Senior Evaluation Specialist at the International Initiative for Impact Evaluation (3ie), I have provided technical leadership on various synthesis projects, including systematic reviews on electrification, social cohesion, aquaculture, childhood immunisation, deepening agricultural markets and women’s empowerment. I have also led evidence and gap maps (EGMs) related to food security in humanitarian crises and sexual and reproductive health and rights.
Valuable professional experience
It was in the context of these evidence synthesis projects that it became clear to me how valuable it was to receive feedback from a Campbell peer review. I immediately started asking about how I could get more involved. I have always believed that service to your professional community is a benefit not only to research science more generally, but to also to the individual who serves (e.g., through learning and networking opportunities, among others). Thus, I was thrilled to join the editorial team in May of 2021 as a Campbell editor for the International Development Coordinating Group (IDCG). My work with Campbell fits seamlessly into my professional life because 3ie sponsors and hosts the IDCG secretariat, so I fulfil my role as editor as an integrated part of my 3ie work.
Of course, this work does not come without challenges. If I had a magic wand, one problem I would solve is the relative lack of funding available for editorial and capacity-building work. These activities are essential to creating better evidence, yet it is difficult to find donors to support them. Every editor I have worked with cares deeply about helping others to produce high-quality actionable evidence, and this process seems largely undervalued.
Gold standard evidence syntheses
The benefits of a peer review through Campbell cannot be understated. With sectoral experts, information specialists, and methodological experts all reviewing submissions, Campbell editorial teams ensure that gold standard methodologies for synthesis are applied, so that reviewers are able to reach valid, reliable and unbiased conclusions. This process also supports transparency and reproducibility in synthesis work, which is just as important as it is in primary studies.
Despite the challenges we face, the future of synthesis looks bright. The advances we are making in AI and machine learning assisted processes will reduce the time and resources needed to reliably synthesise evidence. At 3ie we are testing the use of classifiers to improve our screening processes, and the results look very promising.
I also see a future of continuous evidence surveillance whereby syntheses become ‘living’. By prospectively adding evidence as it becomes available, systematic reviews and EGMs can remain up-to-date and timely, increasing our ability to provide rapid answers to pressing policy questions.
I am so excited to have a front row seat to the ways that evidence synthesis will evolve as we continue to improve our ability to provide better evidence for a better world.