For clinicians who want to contribute to research, learning new methods is a vital part of that transition, but it comes with its own challenges. Conducting an evidence review means developing an understanding of the methodology while managing the practical work of screening papers, extracting information and keeping track of decisions.
For Murungi Gamukama, a Speech and Language Therapy professional and postgraduate student at the University of York, developing these skills is part of an ambition to bring research into her clinical work with children. Her recent review examined the diversity of participants represented in studies of childhood apraxia of speech, giving her an opportunity to investigate who was included in the research while putting review methods into practice.
Having previously focused primarily on clinical work, Murungi hopes to contribute to the evidence that informs care. Her studies are helping her develop the research skills to pursue that ambition, and a tutor’s recommendation introduced her to Covidence as a way to manage her reviews.
One of her first concerns was how to identify duplicate records among her search results. She wondered whether she would need to check each one herself. Covidence’s handling of duplicates addressed that worry. Once she began screening, she could also see how many records she had worked through and how many remained.
“You don’t really have to follow through complicated steps,” she said. “Things are quite straightforward.”
Working independently on the assessment, Murungi valued being able to follow the papers through each stage and see which needed her attention next. Keeping track of progress was built into the place where she was doing the work.
“The systematic alignment of the papers gives you the flow of this: this is how much you need to do screening, this is how much you have screened, this is how much you need to carry on with extraction, these are the complete ones.”
The difference from her previous approach was particularly clear during data extraction. Before using Covidence, Murungi read papers, highlighted relevant passages and typed the information into Word or spreadsheets. That meant moving between the source material and a separate document to build her record of the evidence.
In Covidence, she could read a paper beside her extraction template and enter the relevant information as she worked. She could adapt the template’s questions to what she needed to collect, then use the same structure across the papers in her review. This brought the source material and the task of recording data together, while leaving her in control of what information to extract.
For her review of participant diversity, the ability to organise information around her research question was especially relevant. Covidence provided a structure she could tailor to the work, and she could download the completed extraction for further analysis. The reading, interpretation and analysis remained hers; the software supported the organisation and collection of the evidence those tasks depended on.
Continuing from screening into extraction therefore felt like a natural progression. She could carry on working with the studies in Covidence, rather than setting up a separate extraction process in Word or a spreadsheet.
“I don’t need to really look any further,” she recalled thinking. “I can just proceed with this.”
As her academic work expanded across multiple reviews, Murungi also appreciated being able to keep separate projects organised and move between them. What began as a tutor’s recommendation had become a way of working she wanted to continue using. By the time of the interview, she had recommended Covidence to two other people, explaining how it had made data extraction easier for her.
She was also looking ahead to returning home and asking how she could continue accessing Covidence beyond her university studies. Her plans are to continue working with children while making research a greater part of her practice.
Learning to conduct reviews is part of that development. Covidence has supported her by making the practical process easier to manage, from keeping track of studies to collecting the information needed for analysis. Murungi hopes to take that experience into a career in which she can contribute to the evidence informing clinical care as well as use it.
About Murungi Gamukama
Institution: University of York
Uses Covidence for:
• Screening
• Data extraction
• Custom extraction templates
Key benefit: Faster, easier data extraction in one place, with less manual copying between tools.
Murungi Gamukama is a Speech and Language Therapy professional and postgraduate student at the University of York. Alongside her clinical work, she is building her research skills through evidence reviews and systematic review methodology, with a particular interest in combining clinical practice with evidence generation to improve outcomes for children with communication disorders.
