Meta-synthesis of Qualitative Research
Summarize methodological approaches that can be applied to the analysis of qualitative research.
Define the scope of and review question for a meta-synthesis of qualitative research.
Undertake a systematic literature search using standard tools and frameworks.
Examine critical appraisal tools for assessing the quality of research papers.
KeywordsMeta-synthesis Qualitative research synthesis Systematic review Meta-ethnography Meta-summary Narrative synthesis
- Banning JH. Ecological triangulation: an approach for qualitative meta-synthesis. US Department of Education, School of Education, Colorado State University, Colorado; 2005.Google Scholar
- Barnett-Page E, Thomas J. Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review, Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating (EPPI) Centre, Social Science Research Unit Institute of Education, London 01/09; 2007.Google Scholar
- Crotty M. The foundations of social research: meaning and perspective in the research process. St Leonards: Sage; 1998.Google Scholar
- Dawson A, Nkowane A, Whelan A. Approaches to improving the contribution of the nursing and midwifery workforce to increasing universal access to primary health care for vulnerable populations: a systematic review. Hum Resour Health. 2015;13:97. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12960-015-0096-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Denzin NK, Lincoln YS. The Sage handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 2011.Google Scholar
- Glenton C, Colvin CJ, Carlsen B, Swartz A, Lewin S, Noyes J, Rashidian A. Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of lay health worker programmes to improve access to maternal and child health: qualitative evidence synthesis. Cochrane Database of Syst Rev. 2013;10. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010414.pub2.
- Guba EG. The paradigm dialog. Newberry Park: Sage; 1990.Google Scholar
- Hannes K, Lockwood C. Qualitative evidence synthesis: choosing the right approach. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell; 2012.Google Scholar
- Hannes K, Behrens J, Bath-Hextall F. There is no such thing as a one dimensional hierarchy of evidence: a critique and a perspective. Vienna, Austria: Paper presented at the Cochrane Colloquium; 2015.Google Scholar
- Harden A, Thomas J, Cargo M, Harris J, Pantoja T, Flemming K, Booth A, Garside R, Hannes K, Noyes J. Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance paper 4: methods for integrating qualitative and implementation evidence within intervention effectiveness reviews. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;In Press, Accepted Manuscript. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.11.029.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Harris JL, Booth A, Cargo M, Hannes K, Harden A, Flemming K, Garside R, Pantoja T, Thomas J, Noyes J. Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series-paper 6: methods for question formulation, searching and protocol development for qualitative evidence synthesis. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;In Press, Corrected Proof. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.10.023.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Lewin S, Glenton C, Munthe-Kaas H, Carlsen B, Colvin CJ, Gülmezoglu M, Noyes J, Booth A, Garside R, Rashidian A. Using qualitative evidence in decision making for health and social interventions: an approach to assess confidence in findings from qualitative evidence syntheses (GRADE-CERQual). PLoS Med. 2015;12(10):e1001895. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Martsolf DS, Draucker CB, Cook CB, Ross R, Stidham AW, Mweemba P. A meta-summary of qualitative findings about professional services for survivors of sexual violence. Qual Rep. 2010;15(3):489–506.Google Scholar
- Noyes J, Hannes K, Booth A, Harris J, Harden A, Popay J, Pearson A, Cargo M, Pantoja T. Qualitative research and cochrane reviews. In: Higgins J, Green S, editors. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.3.0. The Cochrane Collaboration. 2015. http://qim.cochrane.org/supplemental-handbook-guidance
- Noyes J, Booth A, Flemming K, Garside R, Harden A, Lewin S, Pantoja T, Hannes K, Cargo M, Thomas J. Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance paper 2: methods for assessing methodological limitations, data extraction and synthesis, and confidence in synthesized qualitative findings. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017;In Press, Corrected Proof. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.020.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Onwuegbuzie AJ, Leech NL, Collins KM. Qualitative analysis techniques for the review of the literature. Qual Rep. 2012;17(28):1–28.Google Scholar
- Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: Sage; 1997.Google Scholar
- Sandelowski M, Barroso J. Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. New York: Springer; 2006.Google Scholar
- Schreiber R, Crooks D, Stern PN. Qualitative meta-analysis. In: Morse M, editor. Completing a qualitative project: details and dialogue. Thousand Oaks: Sage; 1997. p. 311–26.Google Scholar
- Shaw R. Conducting literature reviews. In: Forreste MA, editor. Doing qualitative research in psychology: a practical guide. London: Sage; 2010. p. 39–56.Google Scholar
- Stansfield C, Thomas J, Kavanagh J. ‘Clustering’ documents automatically to support scoping reviews of research: a case study. Res Synth Methods. 2013;4(3):230–41.Google Scholar
- Walder K, Molineux M. Occupational adaptation and identity reconstruction: a grounded theory synthesis of qualitative studies exploring adults’ experiences of adjustment to chronic disease, major illness or injury. J Occup Sci. 2017;24(2):225. https://doi.org/10.1080/14427591.2016.1269240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Pawson R. Development of methodological guidance, publication standards and training materials for realist and meta-narrative reviews: the RAMESES (Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Syntheses–Evolving Standards) project. Health Serv Deliv Res. 2014;2(30):1. https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr02300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar