A move to more systematic and transparent approaches in qualitative evidence synthesis: update on a review of published papers

dc.contributor.authorHannes, K.
dc.contributor.authorMacaitis, K.
dc.date.issued2012
dc.description.abstractIn 2007, the journal Qualitative Research published a review on qualitative evidence syntheses conducted between 1988 and 2004. It reported on the lack of explicit detail regarding methods for searching, appraisal and synthesis, and a lack of emerging consensus on these issues. We present an update of this review for the period 2005–8. Not only has the amount of published qualitative evidence syntheses doubled, but authors have also become more transparent about their searching and critical appraisal procedures. Nevertheless, for the synthesis component of the qualitative reviews, a black box remains between what people claim to use as a synthesis approach and what is actually done in practice. A detailed evaluation of how well authors master their chosen approach could provide important information for developers of particular methods, who seem to succeed in playing the game according to the rules. Clear methodological instructions need to be developed to assist others in applying these synthesis methods.
dc.description.statementofresponsibilityKarin Hannes and Kirsten Macaitis
dc.identifier.citationQualitative Research, 2012; 12(4):402-442
dc.identifier.doi10.1177/1468794111432992
dc.identifier.issn1468-7941
dc.identifier.issn1741-3109
dc.identifier.orcidMacaitis, K. [0000-0002-7496-3729]
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/2440/77219
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherSage Publications
dc.rights© The Author(s) 2012
dc.source.urihttps://doi.org/10.1177/1468794111432992
dc.subjectQualitative evidence synthesis
dc.subjectsystematic review
dc.titleA move to more systematic and transparent approaches in qualitative evidence synthesis: update on a review of published papers
dc.typeJournal article
pubs.publication-statusPublished

Files