| Literature DB >> 19448052 |
YunKyung Chang1, Corrine I Voils, Margarete Sandelowski, Vic Hasselblad, Jamie L Crandell.
Abstract
Reports of qualitative studies typically do not offer much information on the numbers of respondents linked to any one finding. This information may be especially useful in reports of basic, or minimally interpretive, qualitative descriptive studies focused on surveying a range of experiences in a target domain, and its lack may limit the ability to synthesize the results of such studies with quantitative results in systematic reviews. Accordingly, the authors illustrate strategies for deriving plausible ranges of respondents expressing a finding in a set of reports of basic qualitative descriptive studies on antiretroviral adherence and suggest how the results might be used. These strategies have limitations and are never appropriate for use with findings from interpretive qualitative studies. Yet they offer a temporary workaround for preserving and maximizing the value of information from basic qualitative descriptive studies for systematic reviews. They show also why quantitizing is never simply quantitative.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2009 PMID: 19448052 PMCID: PMC2784172 DOI: 10.1177/0193945909334434
Source DB: PubMed Journal: West J Nurs Res ISSN: 0193-9459 Impact factor: 1.967