Literature DB >> 22004781

Methods of synthesizing qualitative research studies for health technology assessment.

Nicola Ring1, Ruth Jepson, Karen Ritchie.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Synthesizing qualitative research is an important means of ensuring the needs, preferences, and experiences of patients are taken into account by service providers and policy makers, but the range of methods available can appear confusing. This study presents the methods for synthesizing qualitative research most used in health research to-date and, specifically those with a potential role in health technology assessment.
METHODS: To identify reviews conducted using the eight main methods for synthesizing qualitative studies, nine electronic databases were searched using key terms including meta-ethnography and synthesis. A summary table groups the identified reviews by their use of the eight methods, highlighting the methods used most generally and specifically in relation to health technology assessment topics.
RESULTS: Although there is debate about how best to identify and quality appraise qualitative research for synthesis, 107 reviews were identified using one of the eight main methods. Four methods (meta-ethnography, meta-study, meta-summary, and thematic synthesis) have been most widely used and have a role within health technology assessment. Meta-ethnography is the leading method for synthesizing qualitative health research. Thematic synthesis is also useful for integrating qualitative and quantitative findings. Four other methods (critical interpretive synthesis, grounded theory synthesis, meta-interpretation, and cross-case analysis) have been under-used in health research and their potential in health technology assessments is currently under-developed.
CONCLUSIONS: Synthesizing individual qualitative studies has becoming increasingly common in recent years. Although this is still an emerging research discipline such an approach is one means of promoting the patient-centeredness of health technology assessments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 22004781     DOI: 10.1017/S0266462311000389

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care        ISSN: 0266-4623            Impact factor:   2.188


  23 in total

Review 1.  Specific psychosocial issues of individuals undergoing genetic counseling for cancer - a literature review.

Authors:  Willem Eijzenga; Daniela E E Hahn; Neil K Aaronson; Irma Kluijt; Eveline M A Bleiker
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2013-08-31       Impact factor: 2.537

Review 2.  Meta-synthesis of qualitative research: the challenges and opportunities.

Authors:  Mohammed A Mohammed; Rebekah J Moles; Timothy F Chen
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharm       Date:  2016-04-06

3.  Meta-Synthesis of Qualitative Research on Facilitators and Barriers of Return to Work After Stroke.

Authors:  Betje Schwarz; Dolores Claros-Salinas; Marco Streibelt
Journal:  J Occup Rehabil       Date:  2018-03

4.  Developing novel evidence-based interventions to promote asthma action plan use: a cross-study synthesis of evidence from randomised controlled trials and qualitative studies.

Authors:  Nicola Ring; Ruth Jepson; Hilary Pinnock; Caroline Wilson; Gaylor Hoskins; Sally Wyke; Aziz Sheikh
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2012-11-20       Impact factor: 2.279

Review 5.  A methodological systematic review of what's wrong with meta-ethnography reporting.

Authors:  Emma F France; Nicola Ring; Rebecca Thomas; Jane Noyes; Margaret Maxwell; Ruth Jepson
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2014-11-19       Impact factor: 4.615

Review 6.  The role of schools in children and young people's self-harm and suicide: systematic review and meta-ethnography of qualitative research.

Authors:  Rhiannon Evans; Chloe Hurrell
Journal:  BMC Public Health       Date:  2016-05-14       Impact factor: 3.295

Review 7.  Qualitative systematic reviews of treatment burden in stroke, heart failure and diabetes - methodological challenges and solutions.

Authors:  Katie Gallacher; Bhautesh Jani; Deborah Morrison; Sara Macdonald; David Blane; Patricia Erwin; Carl R May; Victor M Montori; David T Eton; Fiona Smith; G David Batty; David G Batty; Frances S Mair
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2013-01-28       Impact factor: 4.615

8.  GPs' perspectives on the management of patients with multimorbidity: systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research.

Authors:  Carol Sinnott; Sheena Mc Hugh; John Browne; Colin Bradley
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2013-09-13       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Technology concept in the view of Iranian nurses.

Authors:  Marzieh Adel Mehraban; Marzieh Hassanpour; Ahmadreza Yazdannik; Sima Ajami
Journal:  Iran J Nurs Midwifery Res       Date:  2013-05

Review 10.  Treatment non-adherence in pediatric long-term medical conditions: systematic review and synthesis of qualitative studies of caregivers' views.

Authors:  Miriam Santer; Nicola Ring; Lucy Yardley; Adam W A Geraghty; Sally Wyke
Journal:  BMC Pediatr       Date:  2014-03-04       Impact factor: 2.125

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.