scholarly journals Developing a reporting guideline to improve meta-ethnography in health research: the eMERGe mixed-methods study

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maggie Cunningham ◽  
Emma F France ◽  
Nicola Ring ◽  
Isabelle Uny ◽  
Edward AS Duncan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Qualitative Evidence ◽  
The Impact

BackgroundMeta-ethnography is a commonly used methodology for qualitative evidence synthesis. Research has identified that the quality of reporting of published meta-ethnographies is often poor and this has limited the utility of meta-ethnography findings to influence policy and practice.ObjectiveTo develop guidance to improve the completeness and clarity of meta-ethnography reporting.Methods/designThe meta-ethnography reporting guidance (eMERGe) study followed the recommended approach for developing health research reporting guidelines and used a systematic mixed-methods approach. It comprised (1) a methodological systematic review of guidance in the conduct and reporting of meta-ethnography; (2) a review and audit of published meta-ethnographies, along with interviews with meta-ethnography end-users, to identify good practice principles; (3) a consensus workshop and two eDelphi (Version 1, Duncan E, Swinger K, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK) studies to agree guidance content; and (4) the development of the guidance table and explanatory notes.ResultsResults from the methodological systematic review and the audit of published meta-ethnographies revealed that more guidance was required around the reporting of all phases of meta-ethnography conduct and, in particular, the synthesis phases 4–6 (relating studies, translating studies into one another and synthesising translations). Following the guidance development process, the eMERGe reporting guidance was produced, comprising 19 items grouped into the seven phases of meta-ethnography.LimitationsThe finalised guidance has not yet been evaluated in practice; therefore, it is not possible at this stage to comment on its utility. However, we look forward to evaluating its uptake and usability in the future.ConclusionsThe eMERGe reporting guidance has been developed following a rigorous process in line with guideline development recommendations. The guidance is intended to improve the clarity and completeness of reporting of meta-ethnographies, and to facilitate use of the findings within the guidance to inform the design and delivery of services and interventions in health, social care and other fields. The eMERGe project developed a range of training materials to support use of the guidance, which is freely available atwww.emergeproject.org(accessed 26 March 2018). Meta-ethnography is an evolving qualitative evidence synthesis methodology and future research should refine the guidance to accommodate future methodological developments. We will also investigate the impact of the eMERGe reporting guidance with a view to updating the guidance.Study registrationThis study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015024709 for the stage 1 systematic review.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

scholarly journals Study protocol of a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis using two different approaches: Healthcare related needs and desires of older people with post-stroke aphasia

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. e039348
Author(s):  
Nadine Janis Pohontsch ◽  
Thorsten Meyer ◽  
Yvonne Eisenmann ◽  
Maria-Inti Metzendorf ◽  
Verena Leve ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Older People ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Treatment Success ◽  
Qualitative Studies ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Healthcare Needs ◽  
Qualitative Evidence

IntroductionStroke is a frequent disease in the older population of Western Europe with aphasia as a common consequence. Aphasia is known to impede targeting treatment to individual patients’ needs and therefore may reduce treatment success. In Germany, the postacute care of patients who had stroke is provided by different healthcare institutions of different sectors (rehabilitation, nursing and primary care) with substantial difficulties to coordinate services. We will conduct two qualitative evidence syntheses (QESs) aiming at exploring distinct healthcare needs and desires of older people living with poststroke aphasia. We thereby hope to support the development of integrated care models based on needs of patients who are very restricted to communicate them. Since various methods of QESs exist, the aim of the study embedding the two QESs was to determine if findings differ according to the approach used.Methods and analysisWe will conduct two QESs by using metaethnography (ME) and thematic synthesis (ThS) independently to synthesise the findings of primary qualitative studies. The main differences between these two methods are the underlying epistemologies (idealism (ME) vs realism (ThS)) and the type of research question (emerging (ME) vs fixed (ThS)).We will search seven bibliographical databases. Inclusion criteria comprise: patients with poststroke aphasia, aged 65 years and older, studies in German/English, all types of qualitative studies concerning needs and desires related to healthcare or the healthcare system. The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, follows Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines and includes three items from the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the synthesis of Qualitative Research checklist.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented on national conferences.

scholarly journals University students’ representations of Europe and self-identification as Europeans: a synthesis of qualitative evidence for future policy formulation

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther Cores-Bilbao ◽  
María del Carmen Méndez-García ◽  
M. Carmen Fonseca-Mora
Keyword(s):  
University Students ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Foreign Language Learning ◽  
Educational Interventions ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Qualitative Evidence ◽  
The Impact

AbstractThe current European context is characterised by the emergence of socio-political tensions that threaten to derail the cohesion objectives traditionally promoted by the authorities of the European Union. With EU citizenship in the shadow of Brexit, the fear of dismemberment of the current Europe of the 28 looms over a renewed debate on concepts like European identity, European citizenship or EU legitimacy and the involvement of its constituents in European affairs, as well as the role of education for promoting democratic awareness among young Europeans. This work aims to collect, appraise and synthesise qualitative evidence obtained in primary research exploring the perceptions of European university students about their civic and cultural identity. This systematic analysis sets out to identify predictors of positive self-identification with the EU and its institutions, focusing on the impact that different educational interventions have had on the attitudes and perceptions expressed by university students, and the importance of foreign language learning in the results obtained. The authors report their assessment of quality of the findings in a Cochrane-style qualitative evidence synthesis (QES), based on the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) method. The 12 informed findings described in this study support decision-making in future education policy formulation.

scholarly journals Patient and carer involvement in palliative care research: An integrative qualitative evidence synthesis review

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (8) ◽  
pp. 969-984 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleni Chambers ◽  
Clare Gardiner ◽  
Jill Thompson ◽  
Jane Seymour
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Training Support ◽  
Care Research ◽  
Qualitative Evidence ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
Facilitators And Barriers ◽  
The Impact

Background: Patient/carer involvement in palliative care research has been reported as complex, difficult and less advanced compared to other areas of health and social care research. There is seemingly limited evidence on impact and effectiveness. Aim: To examine the evidence regarding patient/carer involvement in palliative care research and identify the facilitators, barriers, impacts and gaps in the evidence base. Design: Qualitative evidence synthesis using an integrative review approach and thematic analysis. Data sources: Electronic databases were searched up to March 2018. Additional methods included searching websites and ongoing/unpublished studies, author searching and contacting experts. Eligibility criteria were based on the SPICE (Setting, Perspective, Intervention, Comparison, Evaluation) framework. Two quality assessments on methodology and involvement were undertaken. Results: A total of 93 records were included. Eight main themes were identified, mainly concerning facilitators and barriers to effective patient and carer involvement in palliative care research: definitions/roles, values/principles, organisations/culture, training/support, networking/groups, perspectives/diversity, relationships/communication and emotions/impact. Evidence on the impact of involvement was limited, but when carried out effectively, involvement brought positive benefits for all concerned, improving the relevance and quality of research. Evidence gaps were found in non-cancer populations and collaborative/user-led involvement. Conclusion: Evidence identified suggests that involvement in palliative care research is challenging, but not dissimilar to that elsewhere. The facilitators and barriers identified relate mainly to the conduct of researchers at an individual level; in particular, there exists a reluctance among professionals to undertake involvement, and myths still perpetuate that patients/carers do not want to be involved. A developed infrastructure, more involvement-friendly organisational cultures and a strengthening of the evidence base would also be beneficial.

scholarly journals Qualitative evidence synthesis for complex interventions and guideline development: clarification of the purpose, designs and relevant methods

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. e000882 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kate Flemming ◽  
Andrew Booth ◽  
Ruth Garside ◽  
Özge Tunçalp ◽  
Jane Noyes
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Complex Interventions ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Synthesis Methods ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Qualitative Evidence ◽  
Broad Term

This paper is one of a series exploring the implications of complexity for systematic reviews and guideline development, commissioned by the WHO. The paper specifically explores the role of qualitative evidence synthesis. Qualitative evidence synthesis is the broad term for the group of methods used to undertake systematic reviews of qualitative research evidence. As an approach, qualitative evidence synthesis is increasingly recognised as having a key role to play in addressing questions relating to intervention or system complexity, and guideline development processes. This is due to the unique role qualitative research can play in establishing the relative importance of outcomes, the acceptability, fidelity and reach of interventions, their feasibility in different settings and potential consequences on equity across populations. This paper outlines the purpose of qualitative evidence synthesis, provides detail of how qualitative evidence syntheses can help establish understanding and explanation of the complexity that can occur in relation to both interventions and systems, and how qualitative evidence syntheses can contribute to evidence to decision frameworks. It provides guidance for the choice of qualitative evidence synthesis methods in the context of guideline development for complex interventions, giving ‘real life’ examples of where this has occurred. Information to support decision-making around choice qualitative evidence synthesis methods in the context of guideline development is provided. Approaches for reporting qualitative evidence syntheses are discussed alongside mechanisms for assessing confidence in the findings of a review.

scholarly journals How do middle-aged and older adults with chronic hip pain view their health problem and its care? A protocol for a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (11) ◽  
pp. e053084
Author(s):  
Travis Haber ◽  
Rana S Hinman ◽  
Fiona Dobson ◽  
Samantha Bunzli ◽  
Michelle Hall
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Data Extraction ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Hip Pain ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Middle Aged ◽  
Qualitative Evidence ◽  
Prisma Statement ◽  
Registration Number

IntroductionChronic hip pain in middle-aged and older adults is common and disabling. Patient-centred care of chronic hip pain requires a comprehensive understanding of how people with chronic hip pain view their health problem and its care. This paper outlines a protocol to synthesise qualitative evidence of middle-aged and older adults' views, beliefs, expectations and preferences about their chronic hip pain and its care.Methods and analysisWe will perform a qualitative evidence synthesis using a framework approach. We will conduct this study in accord with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) Statement and the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the synthesis of Qualitative research checklist. We will search MEDLINE, CINAHL, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE and PsycINFO using a comprehensive search strategy. A priori selection criteria include qualitative studies involving samples with a mean age over 45 and where 80% or more have chronic hip pain. Two or more reviewers will independently screen studies for eligibility, assess methodological strengths and limitations using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme qualitative studies checklist, perform data extraction and synthesis and determine ratings of confidence in each review finding using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation—Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research approach. Data extraction and synthesis will be guided by the Common-Sense Model of Self-Regulation. All authors will contribute to interpreting, refining and finalising review findings. This protocol is registered on PROSPERO and reported according to the PRISMA Statement for Protocols (PRISMA-P) checklist.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval is not required for this systematic review as primary data will not be collected. The findings of the review will be disseminated through publication in an academic journal and scientific conferences.PROSPERO registration numberPROSPERO registration number: CRD42021246305.

scholarly journals Public engagement and crowdfunding for health research: A global qualitative evidence synthesis and TDR pilot

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eneyi E Kpokiri ◽  
Clarisse Sri-Pathmanathan ◽  
Priyanka Shrestha ◽  
Sana Navaid ◽  
Teerawat Wiwatpanit ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Public Engagement ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Mixed Methods Research ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Mitigation Strategies ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Middle Income ◽  
Pilot Programme ◽  
The Public ◽  
Qualitative Evidence

Background: Many exceptional researchers, especially in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs) face structural disadvantages in applying for research grants. Public engagement and crowdfunding make it possible for researchers to directly seek support from the public, by engaging large groups of people who make small contributions to support a project. This manuscript synthesizes global qualitative evidence and describes a WHO-TDR public engagement and crowdfunding pilot programme. Methods: We searched six databases for primary qualitative and mixed-methods research. We used a thematic synthesis approach and assessed our findings using the GRADE-CERQual approach. A crowdfunding approach to finance research studies was tested through a pilot programme, with a focus on infectious diseases of poverty. TDR Global mentors provided support for five finalists to engage the public and develop crowdfunding campaigns. Results: Nine studies were included in the qualitative evidence synthesis. Themes were developed into seven key findings, including the need for extensive public engagement, the potential for crowdfunding to open a communication channel between researchers and the public, key correlates of crowdfunding success and the risks of crowdfunding health research with associated mitigation strategies. The TDR pilot programme received 121 entries from 37 countries. Five LMIC-based researchers received training and joined a working group. Three researchers launched their crowdfunding campaigns, met their goals and received substantial monetary and non-monetary contributions. Conclusion: Public engagement provides a foundation for effective crowdfunding for health research. Our evidence synthesis and pilot data provide practical strategies for LMIC researchers to engage the public and conduct crowdfunding campaigns.

scholarly journals Children and young people's experiences of living with developmental coordination disorder/dyspraxia: study protocol for a qualitative evidence synthesis

2021 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. 28
Author(s):  
Áine O'Dea ◽  
Susan Coote ◽  
Katie Robinson
Keyword(s):  
Developmental Coordination Disorder ◽  
Research Policy ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Complex Interventions ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Policy And Practice ◽  
Everyday Activities ◽  
Qualitative Evidence ◽  
Coordination Disorder

Background Children with developmental coordination disorder (DCD) face significant challenges to deal with everyday activities due to underlying motor proficiency difficulties. These challenges affect children and young people’s participation; that is, involvement in daily life situations. Recent years have seen a growing body of qualitative research examining children’s experiences of living with DCD.  Meta-ethnographic synthesis offers a rigorous approach to bring together the findings of discrete qualitative studies to be synthesised in order to advance the conceptual understanding of living with DCD, which is not well conceptualised in the literature to date. Conducting a meta-ethnographic synthesis will help to illuminate the meaning of children and young people’s experiences of DCD regarding their involvement in everyday activities and situations. Aim This study aims to systematically review and synthesise qualitative literature regarding children and young people’s experiences and views of everyday life and living with DCD. Methods The method of qualitative evidence synthesis that will be followed in this review is a meta-ethnography. The eMERGe and PRISMA reporting guidelines will be adhered to. Ten databases will be searched; Academic Search Complete, AMED, CINAHL, ERIC, MEDLINE, PsychArticles, PsychInfo, EMBASE, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science. The Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist will be used by two independent reviewers to appraise all included papers. PROSPERO registration number CRD42019129178 Discussion The findings of this meta-ethnography will endeavour to inform future research, policy and practice. In particular, the results will help to inform the design of future complex interventions to meet the needs of children and young people with DCD. Dissemination will involve the publication of the results in a peer-reviewed journal. Increasingly researchers and policymakers are calling for services to be informed by the perspective and voice of children with DCD. Therefore, a policy brief will be published so that the findings are widely available.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document