Literature DB >> 29242095

Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series-paper 5: methods for integrating qualitative and implementation evidence within intervention effectiveness reviews.

Angela Harden1, James Thomas2, Margaret Cargo3, Janet Harris4, Tomas Pantoja5, Kate Flemming6, Andrew Booth4, Ruth Garside7, Karin Hannes8, Jane Noyes9.   

Abstract

The Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group develops and publishes guidance on the synthesis of qualitative and mixed-method evidence from process evaluations. Despite a proliferation of methods for the synthesis of qualitative research, less attention has focused on how to integrate these syntheses within intervention effectiveness reviews. In this article, we report updated guidance from the group on approaches, methods, and tools, which can be used to integrate the findings from quantitative studies evaluating intervention effectiveness with those from qualitative studies and process evaluations. We draw on conceptual analyses of mixed methods systematic review designs and the range of methods and tools that have been used in published reviews that have successfully integrated different types of evidence. We outline five key methods and tools as devices for integration which vary in terms of the levels at which integration takes place; the specialist skills and expertise required within the review team; and their appropriateness in the context of limited evidence. In situations where the requirement is the integration of qualitative and process evidence within intervention effectiveness reviews, we recommend the use of a sequential approach. Here, evidence from each tradition is synthesized separately using methods consistent with each tradition before integration takes place using a common framework. Reviews which integrate qualitative and process evaluation evidence alongside quantitative evidence on intervention effectiveness in a systematic way are rare. This guidance aims to support review teams to achieve integration and we encourage further development through reflection and formal testing.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords:  Cochrane collaboration; Implementation research; Mixed methods research; Process evaluations; Qualitative evidence synthesis; Qualitative research; Systematic reviews

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29242095     DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.11.029

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol        ISSN: 0895-4356            Impact factor:   6.437


  25 in total

Review 1.  Survivor, family and professional experiences of psychosocial interventions for sexual abuse and violence: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

Authors:  Sarah J Brown; Grace J Carter; Gemma Halliwell; Katherine Brown; Rachel Caswell; Emma Howarth; Gene Feder; Lorna O'Doherty
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2022-10-04

Review 2.  Implementation and Effectiveness of Integrating Palliative Care Into Ambulatory Care of Noncancer Serious Chronic Illness: Mixed Methods Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Linda C Chyr; Lyndsay DeGroot; Julie M Waldfogel; Susan M Hannum; Danetta H Sloan; Valerie T Cotter; Allen Zhang; JaAlah-Ai Heughan; Renee F Wilson; Karen A Robinson; Sydney M Dy
Journal:  Ann Fam Med       Date:  2022 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 5.707

Review 3.  Clients' perceptions and experiences of targeted digital communication accessible via mobile devices for reproductive, maternal, newborn, child, and adolescent health: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

Authors:  Heather Mr Ames; Claire Glenton; Simon Lewin; Tigest Tamrat; Eliud Akama; Natalie Leon
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-10-14

Review 4.  Effects of consumers and health providers working in partnership on health services planning, delivery and evaluation.

Authors:  Dianne Lowe; Rebecca Ryan; Lina Schonfeld; Bronwen Merner; Louisa Walsh; Lisa Graham-Wisener; Sophie Hill
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-09-15

5.  End-of-life care preferences of older patients with multimorbidity: protocol of a mixed-methods systematic review.

Authors:  Ana Isabel Gonzalez-Gonzalez; Christine Schmucker; Julia Nothacker; Truc Sophia Nguyen; Maria-Sophie Brueckle; Jeanet Blom; Marjan van den Akker; Kristian Röttger; Odette Wegwarth; Tammy Hoffmann; Ferdinand M Gerlach; Sharon E Straus; Joerg J Meerpohl; Christiane Muth
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2020-07-06       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 6.  Accumulating Evidence for Dance/Movement Therapy in Cancer Care.

Authors:  Sharon W Goodill
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2018-09-28

Review 7.  Communication Technology Use by Caregivers of Adolescents With Mental Health Issues: Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ronelle Jansen; Marianne Reid
Journal:  JMIR Mhealth Uhealth       Date:  2020-08-19       Impact factor: 4.773

8.  Effects of integrated economic and health interventions with women's groups on health-related knowledge, behaviours and outcomes in low-income and middle-income countries: a systematic review protocol.

Authors:  Sapna Desai; Kala M Mehta; Roopal Jyoti Singh; Allie K Westley; Osasuyi Dirisu; Connie Wong; Thomas De Hoop; Gary L Darmstadt
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-07-12       Impact factor: 2.692

9.  Tailored or adapted interventions for adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and at least one other long-term condition: a mixed methods review.

Authors:  Emma J Dennett; Sadia Janjua; Elizabeth Stovold; Samantha L Harrison; Melissa J McDonnell; Anne E Holland
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2021-07-26

10.  Factors that impact on recruitment to randomised trials in health care: a qualitative evidence synthesis.

Authors:  Catherine Houghton; Maura Dowling; Pauline Meskell; Andrew Hunter; Heidi Gardner; Aislinn Conway; Shaun Treweek; Katy Sutcliffe; Jane Noyes; Declan Devane; Jane R Nicholas; Linda M Biesty
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-10-07
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.