The EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy (v2.0) was developed by the Evidence in Documents, Discovery, and Analytics (EDDA) Group: Tanja Bekhuis (Principal Scientist); Eugene Tseytlin (Systems Developer); Ashleigh Faith (Taxonomist); Faina Linkov (Epidemiologist). This work was made possible, in part, by the US National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, grant no. R00LM010943.
Foundational research is described in Bekhuis T, Demner Fushman D, Crowley RS. Comparative effectiveness research designs: an analysis of terms and coverage in Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) and Emtree. Journal of the Medical Library Association (JMLA). 2013 April;101(2):92-100. PMC3634392.
Coverage of the terminology appearing in JMLA was extended with terms from MeSH, NCI Thesaurus (NCI), Emtree, the HTA Database Canadian Repository [international repository for health technology assessment], and Robert Sandieson's synonym ring for research synthesis. Collected terms were enriched with terms from the NCI Metathesaurus. Variants include synonyms for preferred terms, singular and plural forms, and American and British spellings. Definitions, if they exist, are mainly from MeSH, NCI, Emtree, and medical dictionaries.
A PDF of this taxonomy is available: DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.3769.2406/1
The EDDA Study Designs Taxonomy by Tanja Bekhuis and Eugene Tseytlin is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution–NonCommercial–ShareAlike 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). For information about this license, see https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/.
Comparative Effectiveness Research (CER) Design Terminology, NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH), Emtree, National Cancer Institute Thesaurus (NCIT), NCI Metathesaurus, HTA Database Canadian Repository [international repository for health technology assessment], Robert Sandieson synonym ring for research synthesis.