Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group Guidance Paper 4: Methods for integrating qualitative and implementation evidence within intervention effectiveness reviews
Harden, A., Thomas, James, Cargo, Margaret, Harris, Janet, Pantoja, Tomas, Flemming, Kate, Booth, Andrew, Garside, Ruth, Hannes, Karin and Noyes, Jane 2018. Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group Guidance Paper 4: Methods for integrating qualitative and implementation evidence within intervention effectiveness reviews. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology. 97, pp. 70-78.
|Authors||Harden, A., Thomas, James, Cargo, Margaret, Harris, Janet, Pantoja, Tomas, Flemming, Kate, Booth, Andrew, Garside, Ruth, Hannes, Karin and Noyes, Jane|
The Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group (CQIMG) 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 paper 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 synthesised 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.
|Journal||Journal of Clinical Epidemiology|
|Journal citation||97, pp. 70-78|
|Accepted author manuscript|
|Digital Object Identifier (DOI)||doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.11.029|
|Web address (URL)||https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.11.029|
|Online||11 Dec 2017|
|Publication process dates|
|Deposited||05 Jan 2018|
|Accepted||10 Nov 2017|
|Accepted||10 Nov 2017|
|Copyright information||© 2017 Elsevier|
This Accepted Manuscript states it is paper 4 in the series: the Version of Record is paper 5.
4views this month
9downloads this month