Strengthen your evidence base with expert-led, technology-enhanced evidence synthesis

HTA bodies typically require a systematic literature review as the primary method for identifying and appraising the clinical evidence base. Where head-to-head trial data is unavailable, an indirect treatment comparison (most commonly an NMA or MAIC) is needed to establish relative effectiveness against the relevant comparator. 

A feasibility assessment is usually conducted before the NMA to evaluate whether the evidence network supports a valid quantitative synthesis. Evidence mapping can be a useful precursor where the landscape is complex or poorly understood. Genesis Research Group designs evidence synthesis programs that anticipate HTA requirements from the outset and integrate directly with HEOR modeling and value dossier development.

A systematic literature review (SLR) is a comprehensive, pre-specified, and reproducible review of all available evidence on a defined question, conducted to a methodological standard that allows the process to be audited and replicated. A targeted literature review (TLR) is a more focused, pragmatic review designed to answer a specific question efficiently, typically where a full SLR is not required or where timelines do not permit one. SLRs are generally required for HTA submissions and peer-reviewed publications; TLRs are more commonly used for internal strategy support, evidence gap analysis, and rapid evidence generation.

Evidence mapping is a structured method for cataloging the available literature on a broad topic, identifying what evidence exists, where the gaps are, and what further research may be needed. It is particularly useful early in the evidence generation process, when teams need to understand the landscape before committing to a specific review methodology. Evidence maps can also inform feasibility assessments for quantitative synthesis methods such as network meta-analysis.

A feasibility assessment evaluates whether the available evidence is sufficient and sufficiently comparable to support a network meta-analysis (NMA) or other indirect treatment comparison. It assesses the evidence network, which studies exist, what comparators they include, and whether the populations, interventions, and outcomes are homogeneous enough for a valid quantitative synthesis. A feasibility assessment is a critical first step before investing in a full NMA, and its findings often shape the evidence generation strategy for a product.

HTA bodies require robust, transparent, and reproducible evidence to assess the relative clinical and economic value of a new health technology. Systematic literature reviews provide the clinical evidence base; indirect treatment comparisons provide comparative effectiveness data when head-to-head trials are unavailable; and evidence gap analyses identify where additional data is needed. Genesis designs evidence synthesis programs with HTA requirements in mind from the outset, integrating review outputs directly with HEOR modeling and value dossier development.

EVID AI is a full-spectrum, AI-powered evidence synthesis platform built for rapid evidence queries, targeted reviews, literature surveillance, and end-to-end SLRs. Developed in-house by our scientists through real-world project delivery, it is available both as a service and for direct client access. It allows us to provide: Literature reviews of higher quality and comprehensiveness, plus faster delivery; Ongoing reviews for competitor intelligence to keep ahead of the evidence base; Rapid answers to ad-hoc questions; Efficient landscape reviews; Quick-turnaround regulatory and HTA response generation; and Optional AI-enhanced workflows for searching, screening, and summarizing evidence, guided and validated by human expertise.

Evidence synthesis should ideally begin early in development, when there is still time to use the findings to shape evidence generation strategy, trial design, and endpoint selection. An early systematic review or evidence map can identify gaps to be addressed before HTA submission, and a feasibility assessment can determine whether the emerging evidence base will support indirect treatment comparisons at launch. Genesis supports evidence synthesis at every stage, from early landscape review through post-launch evidence monitoring.

Yes. Genesis Research Group provides ongoing evidence synthesis support through both project-based engagements and Flexible Integrated Team (FIT) arrangements. Ongoing support is particularly valuable for competitor intelligence, where regular evidence updates are needed to track the evolving landscape, and for products with multiple indications or geographies requiring sustained review activity.