| Literature DB >> 26891718 |
Charlotte Benoot1, Karin Hannes2, Johan Bilsen1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: An increasing number of qualitative evidence syntheses papers are found in health care literature. Many of these syntheses use a strictly exhaustive search strategy to collect articles, mirroring the standard template developed by major review organizations such as the Cochrane and Campbell Collaboration. The hegemonic idea behind it is that non-comprehensive samples in systematic reviews may introduce selection bias. However, exhaustive sampling in a qualitative evidence synthesis has been questioned, and a more purposeful way of sampling papers has been proposed as an alternative, although there is a lack of transparency on how these purposeful sampling strategies might be applied to a qualitative evidence synthesis. We discuss in our paper why and how we used purposeful sampling in a qualitative evidence synthesis about 'sexual adjustment to a cancer trajectory', by giving a worked example.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26891718 PMCID: PMC4757966 DOI: 10.1186/s12874-016-0114-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol ISSN: 1471-2288 Impact factor: 4.615
Purposeful sampling strategies by Patton (2002), adapted by Suri (2011)
| Purposeful sampling strategy | Purpose (Patton, 2002) | Purpose in qualitative evidence synthesis (Suri, 2011) |
|---|---|---|
| Extreme of deviant case sampling | Learning from highly unusual manifestations of the phenomenon of interest | Focusing on how things should be or could be, rather than how things are Suitable for realist syntheses |
| Intensity sampling | Information-rich cases that manifest the phenomenon intensely, but not extremely, such as good students/ poor students, above average/below average. | To develop a comprehensive understanding of the phenomena that is been researched in the synthesis |
| Maximum variation sampling | identifying key dimensions of variations and then finding cases that vary from each other as much as possible. | To identify essential features and variable features of a phenomenon among varied contexts |
| Identifies important patterns that cut across variations | To construct an holistic understanding of the phenomenon | |
| Homogenous sampling | Picking a small, homogeneous sample. Reduces variation, simplifies analysis, facilitates group interviewing | To overcome the critique of “mixing apples and oranges”:i.e. to overcome the epistemological incommensurability of different qualitative methods |
| To describe some particular subgroup in-depth | ||
| Suitable for participatory syntheses | ||
| Typical case sampling | Illustrates or highlights what is typical, normal, average | To study how common themes recurring in the published literature might be related to the relative strengths and weaknesses of the typical methodologies or theories underpinning the typical studies |
| Critical case sampling | Permits logical generalization and maxi-mum application of information to other cases | To assist stakeholders in making informed decisions about the viability of a certain innovation |
| Snowball sampling | Seeking information from key informants about details of other information-rich cases in the field | To identify studies that are highly valued by different stakeholders |
| To identify studies outside the academic mainstream | ||
| Criterion sampling | Selecting all cases that meet some predetermined criterion of importance | To construct a comprehensive understanding of all the studies that meet certain pre-determined criteria |
| Theoretical sampling | Selecting cases that represent important theoretical constructs about the phenomenon of interest | Research synthesis who employ constant comparative methods or grounded –theory approaches |
| Confirming sampling | Selecting cases that are additional examples that fit already emergent patterns; these cases | To advocate a particular stance for ethical, moral and/or political reasons |
| Suitable for openly ideological synthesis | ||
| Disconfirming sampling | Selecting cases that do not fit. They are a source of rival interpretations as well as a way of placing boundaries around confirmed findings | To shake our complacent acceptance of popular myths and generalizations in a field |
| Stratified purposeful sampling | Sampling within samples where each stratum is fairly homogeneous | To examine variations in the manifestation of a phenomenon as any key factor associated with the phenomenon is varied. In a research synthesis, this factor may be contextual, methodological, or conceptual. |
| Opportunistic sampling | Adding cases to a sample to take advantage of unforeseen opportunities after fieldwork has begun | To be used in a research area which is at its exploratory stage or when the synthesis does not have an insider status in the relevant field of research |
| Suitable to participatory syntheses where the synthesis purpose evolves in response to the changing needs of the participant co-synthesists | ||
| Purposeful random sampling | Adds credibility to sample when potential purposeful sample is larger than one can handle. Reduces judgment within a purposeful category | To locate most of the primary research reported on a topic and then randomly select a few reports from this pool for in-depth discussion |
| Sampling politically important cases | Selecting a politically sensitive site or unit of analysis | To gain attention of different stakeholders and the synthesis findings get used. |
| Suitable for synthesis of hot topics, in which several stakeholders are interested | ||
| Convenience sampling | Involve selecting cases that are easy to access and inexpensive to study | Not a recommendable technique, because its neither purposeful, nor strategic |
| Combination or mixed purposeful sampling | To use a combination of two or more sampling strategies to select evidence that adequately addresses their purpose | To facilitate triangulation and flexibility in meeting the needs of multiple stakeholders |
Fig. 1Flow chart of the scoping review
Fig. 2Overview figure of the purposeful sampling guidance
Example of descriptive data extraction sheet
| Walker (2012) | |
|---|---|
| Data collection | Interviews together as a couple, unstructured interviews |
| Method | Grounded theory methodology |
| Research question/ goal | To present the struggles that these couples faced when trying to adapt sexually to the side effects of prostate cancer treatment |
| Sample characteristics (Age, sex) | 18 heterosexual couples |
| (m 47-83 years) | |
| (f 32 -82 years) | |
| Age patients: 65,4 y | |
| Age partners: 61 y | |
| Ethnicity: Euro-canadian or American heritage, 1 who was Afro-American | |
| Type of cancer treatment: Prostate cancer, all undergoing Adrogen Deprivation Therapy | |
| Concepts |
|
| Main theoretical arguments |
|
Intensity sampling: Example of reciprocal translation of 3 concepts
| Concepts | Walker (2011) | Gilbert (2010) | Juraskova (2003) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sexual struggling | Having a sense of loss | Altered body image | Reduced vaginal lubrication |
| Exacerbation of struggling | Avoiding communication about the sexual changes | Sticking to a coital imperative | Receiving radiotherapy combined with external radiation and brachytherapy |
| Sexual adjustment | Accepting the decision to stop sexuality | Renegotiating the practices of sexual intimacy | Sexual adjustment and quality of life |
Maximum variation sampling
| Walker ( 2011) + | Gilbert (2010) + | Juraskova (2003) + | |
|---|---|---|---|
| struggling | Having a sense of loss | Altered body image | Reduced vaginal lubrication |
| Exacerbation of struggling | Avoiding communication about the sexual changes | Sticking to a coital imperative | Receiving radiotherapy combined with external radiation and brachytherapy |
| Sexual adjustment | Accepting the decision to stop sexuality | Renegociating the practices of sexual intimacy | Sexual adjustment and quality of life |
|
|
|
|
|
Note 1: The discursive parts are the concepts coming from the included papers as a result of maximum variation sampling
Note 2: The bold parts are new findings resulting from maximum variation sampling
Disconfirming case sampling
| White (2014) | Navon (2003) | |
|---|---|---|
| Main theoretical arguments | The women colluded with the medicalization of their bodies which helped their adjustment | Despite the deceptive nature of the strategies of this patients, they are considered to be beneficial and even essential. However, their effectiveness diminishes over time due to the increasing salience of their self-deceptive nature |