Table 4 Potential biases that may arise in outputs of stakeholder engagement
Stage | Bias | Explanation | Mitigation |
|---|---|---|---|
Stakeholder selection | Identification bias | Purposeful selection of stakeholders using personal/organisational knowledge or unsystematic searches may result in a biased and unbalanced group of stakeholders | Use a combination of selection methods |
Network bias | Asking others to suggest potential stakeholders may result in a biased and unbalanced group of stakeholders | Use multiple starting points (suggestees) from a range of backgrounds | |
Awareness bias | Announcing an open call for stakeholder engagement may target a biased and unbalanced group of stakeholders | Advertise the open call using a range of different channels, using stakeholder analysis to identify stakeholders that may require specific forms of contact | |
Self-promotion bias | Systematically searching for potential stakeholders may select only those with an online presence, producing a biased or unbalanced group of stakeholders | Use a combination of selection methods | |
Stakeholder response | Awareness bias | Announcing an open call for stakeholder engagement may target a biased and unbalanced group of stakeholders | Advertise the open call using a range of different channels, using stakeholder analysis to identify stakeholders that may require specific forms of contact |
Access/technology bias | Stakeholders may not have the ability to respond to invitations, producing a biased, unbalanced group of stakeholders | Provide multiple modes of engagement that do not rely purely on one technology/format | |
Intimidation bias | Stakeholders may be less likely to respond if they feel their views are unlikely to be heard over the views of the majority | Provide support to minority stakeholders by tailoring contact and ensuring that views will be heard in initial invitations | |
Faith bias | Stakeholders may not engage if they believe that their views will not be heard due to failures on the part of the reviewers | Undertake stakeholder analysis to help identify and categorise potential conflicts. Ensure openness and contactability to support and facilitate response from less vocal and minority stakeholder groups | |
Apathy bias | Stakeholders may not respond if they feel others will perform their role for them | Encourage stakeholders to engage by explaining that all views are valid and important, and stress the need for a comprehensive, balanced group of stakeholders | |
On-going engagement | Commitment bias | Stakeholders may not be able to commit to involvement along the full extent of the systematic review process, causing attrition over time and leaving a biased, unbalanced group of stakeholders | Phase contact with certain stakeholders according to their likely involvement |
Timescale bias | Long timescales involved with systematic reviews may mean that attrition occurs over time as stakeholders change roles, in turn leaving a biased, unbalanced group of stakeholders | Attempt to engage with multiple stakeholders from each organisation to ensure some contacts remain | |
Resource bias | Stakeholders’ resources may be too limited to allow full engagement throughout the systematic review process, leaving a biased, unbalanced group of stakeholders | Phase contact with certain stakeholders according to their likely involvement. Minimise necessary resources needed for engagement, for example by reducing unnecessary reading | |
Access/technology bias | Stakeholders may not have the ability to respond to invitations or on-going engagement, resulting in attrition and leaving a biased, unbalanced group of stakeholders | Provide multiple modes of engagement that do not rely purely on one technology/format | |
Intimidation bias | Stakeholders may be less likely to respond if they feel their views are unlikely to be heard over the views of the majority | Provide support to minority stakeholders by tailoring contact and ensuring that views will be heard in initial invitations | |
Faith bias | Stakeholders may not engage if they believe that their views will not be heard due to failures on the part of the reviewers | Undertake stakeholder analysis to help identify and categorise potential conflicts. Ensure openness and contactability to support and facilitate response from less vocal and minority stakeholder groups | |
Apathy bias | Stakeholders may not respond if they feel others will perform their role for them | Encourage stakeholders to engage by explaining that all views are valid and important, and stress the need for a comprehensive, balanced group of stakeholders |