U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

NCBI Bookshelf. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Cunningham M, France EF, Ring N, et al. Developing a reporting guideline to improve meta-ethnography in health research: the eMERGe mixed-methods study. Southampton (UK): NIHR Journals Library; 2019 Feb. (Health Services and Delivery Research, No. 7.4.)

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

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

Show details

References

1.
Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC). Increasing Research and Innovation in Health and Social Care. London: DHSC; 2015. URL: www​.gov.uk/government​/publications/2010-to-2015-government-policy-research-and-innovation-in-health-and-social-care​/2010-to-2015-government-policy-research-and-innovation-in-health-and-social-care (accessed 3 May 2017).
2.
Uny I, France EF, Noblit GW. Steady and delayed: explaining the different development of meta-ethnography in health care and education. Ethnogr Educ 2017;12:243–57. 10.1080/17457823.2017.1282320 [CrossRef]
3.
Dalton J, Booth A, Noyes J, Sowden AJ. Potential value of systematic reviews of qualitative evidence in informing user-centred health and social care: findings from a descriptive overview. J Clin Epidemiol 2017;88:37–46. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.04.020 [PubMed: 28450254] [CrossRef]
4.
Gülmezoglu AM, Chandler J, Shepperd S, Pantoja T. Reviews of qualitative evidence: a new milestone for Cochrane. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013;11:ED000073. 10.1002/14651858.ED000073 [PubMed: 24524152] [CrossRef]
5.
Pearson A, Wiechula R, Court A, Lockwood C. The JBI model of evidence-based healthcare. Int J Evid Based Healthc 2005;3:207–15. 10.1111/j.1479-6988.2005.00026.x [PubMed: 21631749] [CrossRef]
6.
Campbell R, Pound P, Morgan M, Daker-White G, Britten N, Pill R, et al. Evaluating meta-ethnography: systematic analysis and synthesis of qualitative research. Health Technol Assess 2011;15(43). 10.3310/hta15430 [PubMed: 22176717] [CrossRef]
7.
Booth A. Cochrane or Cock-eyed? How Should We Conduct Systematic Reviews of Qualitative Research? 2001. URL: www​.leeds.ac.uk/educol​/documents/00001724.htm (accessed 26 March 2018).
8.
Noyes J, Hannes K, Booth A, Harris J, Harden A, Popay J, et al. Chapter 20: Qualitative Research and Cochrane Reviews. In Higgins JPT, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.3.0 (updated October 2015). 2015. URL: http://methods​.cochrane​.org/qi/supplemental-handbook-guidance (accessed 26 March 2018).
9.
Munro SA, Lewin SA, Smith HJ, Engel ME, Fretheim A, Volmink J. Patient adherence to tuberculosis treatment: a systematic review of qualitative research. PLOS Med 2007;4:e238. 10.1371/journal.pmed.0040238 [PMC free article: PMC1925126] [PubMed: 17676945] [CrossRef]
10.
Nunes V, Neilson J, O’Flynn N, Calvert N, Kuntze S, Smithson H, et al. Clinical Guidelines and Evidence Review for Medicines Adherence: Involving Patients in Decisions about Prescribed Medicines and Supporting Adherence. London: National Collaborating Centre for Primary Care and Royal College of General Practitioners; 2009. [PubMed: 21834197]
11.
Pound P, Britten N, Morgan M, Yardley L, Pope C, Daker-White G, Campbell R. Resisting medicines: a synthesis of qualitative studies of medicine taking. Soc Sci Med 2005;61:133–55. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2004.11.063 [PubMed: 15847968] [CrossRef]
12.
Downe S, Finlayson K, Tunçalp Ö, Gülmezoglu AM. Factors that influence the uptake of routine antenatal services by pregnant women: a qualitative evidence synthesis (protocol). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016;10:CD012392. 10.1002/14651858.CD012392 [CrossRef]
13.
Kastner M, Antony J, Soobiah C, Straus SE, Tricco AC. Conceptual recommendations for selecting the most appropriate knowledge synthesis method to answer research questions related to complex evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2016;73:43–9. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.11.022 [PubMed: 26912124] [CrossRef]
14.
Noyes J, Booth A, Flemming K, Garside R, Angela H, Lewin S, et al. Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group Guidance series-paper 3: methods for assessing methodological limitations, data extraction and synthesis, and confidence in synthesized qualitative findings. J Clin Epidemiol 2018;97:49–58. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.06.020 [PubMed: 29247700] [CrossRef]
15.
Noyes J, Lewin S. Chapter 6: Supplemental Guidance on Selecting a Method of Qualitative Evidence Synthesis, and Integrating Qualitative Evidence with Cochrane Intervention Reviews. In Noyes J, Booth A, Hannes K, Harden A, Harris J, Lewin S, Lockwood C, editors. Supplementary Guidance for Inclusion of Qualitative Research in Cochrane Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 1 (updated August 2011). Cochrane Collaboration Qualitative Methods Group; 2011.
16.
Paterson BL. ‘It Looks Great but How do I know if it Fits?’: An Introduction to Meta-Synthesis Research. In Hannes K, Lockwood C, editors. Synthesizing Qualitative Research. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2011. pp. 1–20. 10.1002/9781119959847.ch1 [CrossRef]
17.
Hannes K, Macaitis K. A move to more systematic and transparent approaches in qualitative evidence synthesis: update on a review of published papers. Qual Res 2012;12:402–42. 10.1177/1468794111432992 [CrossRef]
18.
Dixon-Woods M, Booth A, Sutton AJ. Synthesizing qualitative research: a review of published reports. Qual Res 2007;7:375–422. 10.1177/1468794107078517 [CrossRef]
19.
Thorne S, Jensen L, Kearney MH, Noblit G, Sandelowski M. Qualitative metasynthesis: reflections on methodological orientation and ideological agenda. Qual Health Res 2004;14:1342–65. 10.1177/1049732304269888 [PubMed: 15538004] [CrossRef]
20.
Tricco AC, Antony J, Soobiah C, Kastner M, Cogo E, MacDonald H, et al. Knowledge synthesis methods for generating or refining theory: a scoping review reveals that little guidance is available. J Clin Epidemiol 2016;73:36–42. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2015.11.021 [PubMed: 26891951] [CrossRef]
21.
Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network and British Thoracic Society. SIGN 153 – British Guideline on the Management of Asthma. A National Clinical Guideline. 2016. URL: www​.brit-thoracic.org​.uk/standards-of-care​/guidelines/btssign-british-guideline-on-the-management-of-asthma/ (accessed 26 March 2018).
22.
Ring N, Jepson R, Hoskins G, Wilson C, Pinnock H, Sheikh A, Wyke S. Understanding what helps or hinders asthma action plan use: a systematic review and synthesis of the qualitative literature. Patient Educ Couns 2011;85:e131–43. 10.1016/j.pec.2011.01.025 [PubMed: 21396793] [CrossRef]
23.
Ring N, Jepson R, Ritchie K. Methods of synthesizing qualitative research studies for health technology assessment. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2011;27:384–90. 10.1017/S0266462311000389 [PubMed: 22004781] [CrossRef]
24.
Campbell R, Pound P, Pope C, Britten N, Pill R, Morgan M, Donovan J. Evaluating meta-ethnography: a synthesis of qualitative research on lay experiences of diabetes and diabetes care. Soc Sci Med 2003;56:671–84. 10.1016/S0277-9536(02)00064-3 [PubMed: 12560003] [CrossRef]
25.
Noblit G, Hare D. Meta-Ethnography: Synthesiszing Qualitative Studies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1988. 10.4135/9781412985000 [CrossRef]
26.
Toye F, Seers K, Allcock N, Briggs M, Carr E, Barker K. Meta-ethnography 25 years on: challenges and insights for synthesising a large number of qualitative studies. BMC Med Res Methodol 2014;14:80. 10.1186/1471-2288-14-80 [PMC free article: PMC4127190] [PubMed: 24951054] [CrossRef]
27.
Toye F, Seers K, Allcock N, Briggs M, Carr E, Andrews J, Barker K. ‘Trying to pin down jelly’ – exploring intuitive processes in quality assessment for meta-ethnography. BMC Med Res Methodol 2013;13:46. 10.1186/1471-2288-13-46 [PMC free article: PMC3639821] [PubMed: 23517438] [CrossRef]
28.
Finfgeld-Connett D, Johnson ED. Literature search strategies for conducting knowledge-building and theory-generating qualitative systematic reviews. J Adv Nurs 2013;69:194–204. 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2012.06037.x [PMC free article: PMC3424349] [PubMed: 22591030] [CrossRef]
29.
France EF, Ring N, Thomas R, Noyes J, Maxwell M, Jepson R. A methodological systematic review of what’s wrong with meta-ethnography reporting. BMC Med Res Methodol 2014;14:119. 10.1186/1471-2288-14-119 [PMC free article: PMC4277825] [PubMed: 25407140] [CrossRef]
30.
Plint AC, Moher D, Morrison A, Schulz K, Altman DG, Hill C, Gaboury I. Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review. Med J Aust 2006;185:263–7. [PubMed: 16948622]
31.
Moher D, Schulz KF, Altman DG. The CONSORT statement: revised recommendations for improving the quality of reports of parallel-group randomised trials. Lancet 2001;357:1191–4. 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04337-3 [PubMed: 11323066] [CrossRef]
32.
Moher DL, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Ann Intern Med 2009;151:264–9. 10.7326/0003-4819-151-4-200908180-00135 [PubMed: 19622511] [CrossRef]
33.
Davidoff F, Batalden P, Stevens D, Ogrinc G, Mooney S, SQUIRE Development Group. Publication guidelines for improvement studies in health care: evolution of the SQUIRE Project. Ann Intern Med 2008;149:670–6. 10.7326/0003-4819-149-9-200811040-00009 [PubMed: 18981488] [CrossRef]
34.
Tong A, Flemming K, McInnes E, Oliver S, Craig J. Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research: ENTREQ. BMC Med Res Methodol 2012;12:181. 10.1186/1471-2288-12-181 [PMC free article: PMC3552766] [PubMed: 23185978] [CrossRef]
35.
Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. BMC Med 2013;11:21. 10.1186/1741-7015-11-21 [PMC free article: PMC3558331] [PubMed: 23360677] [CrossRef]
36.
Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Westhorp G, Buckingham J, Pawson R. RAMESES publication standards: meta-narrative reviews. BMC Med 2013;11:20. 10.1186/1741-7015-11-20 [PMC free article: PMC3558334] [PubMed: 23360661] [CrossRef]
37.
Moher D, Schulz KF, Simera I, Altman DG. Guidance for developers of health research reporting guidelines. PLOS Med 2010;7:e1000217. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000217 [PMC free article: PMC2821895] [PubMed: 20169112] [CrossRef]
38.
Lewin S, Glenton C, Munthe-Kaas H, Carlsen B, Colvin CJ, Gülmezoglu M, et al. 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:e1001895. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1001895 [PMC free article: PMC4624425] [PubMed: 26506244] [CrossRef]
39.
France EF, Cunningham M, Ring N, Uny I, Duncan EAS, Jepson RG, et al. Improving reporting of meta-ethnography: the eMERGe reporting guidance [published online ahead of print January 15 2019]. J Adv Nurs 2019. 10.1111/jan.13809 [PMC free article: PMC7594209] [PubMed: 30644123] [CrossRef]
40.
France EF, Cunningham M, Ring N, Uny I, Duncan EAS, Jepson RG, et al. Improving reporting of meta-ethnography: the eMERGe reporting guidance [published online ahead of print January 15 2019]. Psycho-oncology 2019. 10.1002/pon.4915 [PubMed: 30644150] [CrossRef]
41.
France EF, Cunningham M, Ring N, Uny I, Duncan EAS, Jepson RG, et al. Improving reporting of meta-ethnography: the eMERGe reporting guidance [published online ahead of print January 15 2019]. Review of Education 2019. 10.1002/rev3.3147 [CrossRef]
42.
France EF, Cunningham M, Ring N, Uny I, Duncan EAS, Jepson RG, et al. Improving reporting of meta-ethnography: the eMERGe reporting guidance. BMC Med Res Methodol 2019;19:25. 10.1186/s12874-018-0600-0 [PMC free article: PMC6359764] [PubMed: 30709371] [CrossRef]
43.
France EF, Ring N, Noyes J, Maxwell M, Jepson R, Duncan E, et al. Protocol-developing meta-ethnography reporting guidelines (eMERGe). BMC Med Res Methodol 2015;15:103. 10.1186/s12874-015-0068-0 [PMC free article: PMC4660777] [PubMed: 26606922] [CrossRef]
44.
Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Young B, Jones D, Sutton AJ. Integrative Approaches to Qualitative And Quantitative Evidence. London: Health Development Agency; 2004.
45.
Turner SP. Sociological Explanation As Translation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press; 1980.
46.
Britten N, Campbell R, Pope C, Donovan J, Morgan M, Pill R. Using meta ethnography to synthesise qualitative research: a worked example. J Health Serv Res Policy 2002;7:209–15. 10.1258/135581902320432732 [PubMed: 12425780] [CrossRef]
47.
Kinn LG, Holgersen H, Ekeland TJ, Davidson L. Metasynthesis and bricolage: an artistic exercise of creating a collage of meaning. Qual Health Res 2013;23:1285–92. 10.1177/1049732313502127 [PubMed: 23964060] [CrossRef]
48.
CASP UK. Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP). CASP UK; 1998. URL: www​.casp-uk.net (accessed 10 October 2017).
49.
Malpass A, Shaw A, Sharp D, Walter F, Feder G, Ridd M, Kessler D. ‘Medication career’ or ‘moral career’? The two sides of managing antidepressants: a meta-ethnography of patients’ experience of antidepressants. Soc Sci Med 2009;68:154–68. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2008.09.068 [PubMed: 19013702] [CrossRef]
50.
Erasmus E. The use of street-level bureaucracy theory in health policy analysis in low- and middle-income countries: a meta-ethnographic synthesis. Health Policy Plan 2014;29(Suppl. 3):iii70–8. 10.1093/heapol/czu112 [PubMed: 25435538] [CrossRef]
51.
Britten N, Pope C. Medicine Taking for Asthma: a Worked Example of Meta-Ethnography. In Hannes K, Lockwood C, editors. Synthesizing Qualitative Research: Choosing the Right Approach. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd; 2012. pp. 41–58. 10.1002/9781119959847.ch3 [CrossRef]
52.
Campbell R, Britten N, Pound P, Donovan J, Morgan M, Pill R, et al. Section 4.8 – Using Meta-Ethnography to Synthesise Qualitative Research. In Popay J, editor. Moving Beyond Effectiveness in Evidence Synthesis: Methodological Issues in the Synthesis of Diverse Sources of Evidence. London: NICE; 2006.
53.
Atkins S, Lewin S, Smith H, Engel M, Fretheim A, Volmink J. Conducting a meta-ethnography of qualitative literature: lessons learnt. BMC Med Res Methodol 2008;8:21. 10.1186/1471-2288-8-21 [PMC free article: PMC2374791] [PubMed: 18416812] [CrossRef]
54.
Garside R. A Comparison of Methods for the Systematic Review of Qualitative Research: Two Examples Using Meta-Ethnography and Meta-Study. Exeter: University of Exeter; 2008.
55.
Doyle LH. Synthesis through meta-ethnography: Paradoxes, enhancements, and possibilities. Qual Res 2003;3:321–44. 10.1177/1468794103033003 [CrossRef]
56.
Booth A, Carroll C, Ilott I, Low LL, Cooper K. Desperately seeking dissonance: identifying the disconfirming case in qualitative evidence synthesis. Qual Health Res 2013;23:126–41. 10.1177/1049732312466295 [PubMed: 23166156] [CrossRef]
57.
Booth A. Acknowledging a Dual Heritage for Qualitative Evidence Synthesis: Harnessing the Qualitative Research and Systematic Review Research Traditions. Sheffield: University of Sheffield; 2013. [PubMed: 30799763]
58.
Bondas T, Hall EO. Challenges in approaching metasynthesis research. Qual Health Res 2007;17:113–21. 10.1177/1049732306295879 [PubMed: 17170249] [CrossRef]
59.
Garside R, Britten N, Stein K. The experience of heavy menstrual bleeding: a systematic review and meta-ethnography of qualitative studies. J Adv Nurs 2008;63:550–62. 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2008.04750.x [PubMed: 18808575] [CrossRef]
60.
Colvin CJ, Smith HJ, Swartz A, Ahs JW, de Heer J, Opiyo N, et al. Understanding careseeking for child illness in sub-Saharan Africa: a systematic review and conceptual framework based on qualitative research of household recognition and response to child diarrhoea, pneumonia and malaria. Soc Sci Med 2013;86:66–78. 10.1016/j.socscimed.2013.02.031 [PubMed: 23608095] [CrossRef]
61.
Williamson LM, Parkes A, Wight D, Petticrew M, Hart GJ. Limits to modern contraceptive use among young women in developing countries: a systematic review of qualitative research. Reprod Health 2009;6:3. 10.1186/1742-4755-6-3 [PMC free article: PMC2652437] [PubMed: 19228420] [CrossRef]
62.
Monforte-Royo C, Villavicencio-Chávez C, Tomás-Sábado J, Mahtani-Chugani V, Balaguer A. What lies behind the wish to hasten death? A systematic review and meta-ethnography from the perspective of patients. PLOS ONE 2012;7:e37117. 10.1371/journal.pone.0037117 [PMC free article: PMC3351420] [PubMed: 22606338] [CrossRef]
63.
Galdas P, Darwin Z, Fell J, Kidd L, Bower P, Blickem C, et al. A systematic review and metaethnography to identify how effective, cost-effective, accessible and acceptable self-management support interventions are for men with long-term conditions (SELF-MAN). Health Serv Deliv Res 2015;3(34). [PubMed: 26312361]
64.
Wells M, Williams B, Firnigl D, Lang H, Coyle J, Kroll T, et al. Returning to Work After Cancer: a Qualitative Meta-Synthesis of Problems, Experiences and Strategies of Working After Cancer. Edinburgh: Chief Scientist’s Office; 2011.
65.
Wells M, Williams B, Firnigl D, Lang H, Coyle J, Kroll T, MacGillivray S. Supporting ‘work-related goals’ rather than ‘return to work’ after cancer? A systematic review and meta-synthesis of 25 qualitative studies. Psycho-Oncology 2013;22:1208–19. 10.1002/pon.3148 [PubMed: 22888070] [CrossRef]
66.
Garrett CR, Gask LL, Hays R, Cherrington A, Bundy C, Dickens C, et al. Accessing primary health care: a meta-ethnography of the experiences of British South Asian patients with diabetes, coronary heart disease or a mental health problem. Chronic Illn 2012;8:135–55. 10.1177/1742395312441631 [PubMed: 22414446] [CrossRef]
67.
Hoy S. Beyond men behaving badly: a meta-ethnography of men’s perspectives on psychological distress and help seeking. Int J Men’s Health 2012;11:202–26. 10.3149/jmh.1103.202 [CrossRef]
68.
Purc-Stephenson RJ, Thrasher C. Nurses’ experiences with telephone triage and advice: a meta-ethnography. J Adv Nurs 2010;66:482–94. 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2010.05275.x [PubMed: 20423383] [CrossRef]
69.
Hole E, Stubbs B, Roskell C, Soundy A. The patient’s experience of the psychosocial process that influences identity following stroke rehabilitation: a metaethnography. Sci World J 2014;2014:349151. 10.1155/2014/349151 [PMC free article: PMC3927748] [PubMed: 24616623] [CrossRef]
70.
Lucas PJ, Cabral C, Hay AD, Horwood J. A systematic review of parent and clinician views and perceptions that influence prescribing decisions in relation to acute childhood infections in primary care. Scand J Prim Health Care 2015;33:11–20. 10.3109/02813432.2015.1001942 [PMC free article: PMC4377734] [PubMed: 25716427] [CrossRef]
71.
Priddis H, Dahlen H, Schmied V. Women’s experiences following severe perineal trauma: a meta-ethnographic synthesis. J Adv Nurs 2013;69:748–59. 10.1111/jan.12005 [PubMed: 23057716] [CrossRef]
72.
Sinnott C, Mc Hugh S, Browne J, Bradley C. GPs’ perspectives on the management of patients with multimorbidity: systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research. BMJ Open 2013;3:e003610. 10.1136/bmjopen-2013-003610 [PMC free article: PMC3773648] [PubMed: 24038011] [CrossRef]
73.
Cullinan S, O’Mahony D, Fleming A, Byrne S. A meta-synthesis of potentially inappropriate prescribing in older patients. Drugs Aging 2014;31:631–8. 10.1007/s40266-014-0190-4 [PubMed: 24923385] [CrossRef]
74.
Molony SL. The meaning of home: a qualitative meta-synthesis. Res Gerontol Nurs 2010;3:291–307. 10.3928/19404921-20100302-02 [PubMed: 20429493] [CrossRef]
75.
Errasti-Ibarrondo B, Pérez M, Carrasco JM, Lama M, Zaragoza A, Arantzamendi M. Essential elements of the relationship between the nurse and the person with advanced and terminal cancer: a meta-ethnography. Nurs Outlook 2015;63:255–68. 10.1016/j.outlook.2014.12.001 [PubMed: 25982766] [CrossRef]
76.
Kane GA, Wood VA, Barlow J. Parenting programmes: a systematic review and synthesis of qualitative research. Child Care Health Dev 2007;33:784–93. 10.1111/j.1365-2214.2007.00750.x [PubMed: 17944788] [CrossRef]
77.
Soundy A, Smith B, Dawes H, Pall H, Gimbrere K, Ramsay J. Patient’s expression of hope and illness narratives in three neurological conditions: a meta-ethnography. Health Psychol Rev 2013;7:177–201. 10.1080/17437199.2011.568856 [CrossRef]
78.
Ypinazar VA, Margolis SA, Haswell-Elkins M, Tsey K. Indigenous Australians’ understandings regarding mental health and disorders. Aust N Z J Psychiatry 2007;41:467–78. 10.1080/00048670701332953 [PubMed: 17508316] [CrossRef]
79.
Wikberg A, Bondas T. A patient perspective in research on intercultural caring in maternity care: A meta-ethnography. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being 2010;5:4648. 10.3402/qhw.v5i1.4648 [PMC free article: PMC2879866] [PubMed: 20640028] [CrossRef]
80.
Malterud K, Ulriksen K. Obesity, stigma, and responsibility in health care: a synthesis of qualitative studies. Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being 2011;6:4. 10.3402/qhw.v6i4.8404 [PMC free article: PMC3223414] [PubMed: 22121389] [CrossRef]
81.
Duncan E, Swingler K. A Web Site for Conducting Delphi Studies. 2013. URL: http://delphi​.stir.ac.uk/about/ (accessed 27 March 2018).
82.
Duncan EA, Colver K, Dougall N, Swingler K, Stephenson J, Abhyankar P. Consensus on items and quantities of clinical equipment required to deal with a mass casualties big bang incident: a national Delphi study. BMC Emerg Med 2014;14:5. 10.1186/1471-227X-14-5 [PMC free article: PMC3936839] [PubMed: 24559111] [CrossRef]
83.
Linstone HA, Turoff M. The Delphi method: techniques and applications. Technometrics 2002;18.
84.
Hasson F, Keeney S, McKenna H. Research guidelines for the Delphi survey technique. J Adv Nurs 2000;32:1008–15. [PubMed: 11095242]
85.
Black N, Murphy M, Lamping D, McKee M, Sanderson C, Askham J, Marteau T. Consensus development methods: a review of best practice in creating clinical guidelines. J Health Serv Res Policy 1999;4:236–48. 10.1177/135581969900400410 [PubMed: 10623041] [CrossRef]
86.
Duncan E, Nicol MM, Ager A. Factors that constitute a good cognitive behavioural treatment manual: A Delphi study. Behav Cogn Psychother 2004;32:199–213. 10.1017/S135246580400116X [CrossRef]
87.
Mead D, Moseley L. The use of the Delphi as a research approach. Nurse Res 2001;8:4–23. 10.7748/nr2001.07.8.4.4.c6162 [CrossRef]
88.
Okoli C, Pawlowski SD. The Delphi method as a research tool: an example, design considerations and applications. Inform Manage 2004;42:15–29. 10.1016/j.im.2003.11.002 [CrossRef]
89.
Booth A. ‘Brimful of STARLITE’: toward standards for reporting literature searches. J Med Libr Assoc 2006;94:421–9, e205. [PMC free article: PMC1629442] [PubMed: 17082834]
90.
Booth A, Noyes J, Flemming K, Gerhardus A, Wahlster P, Van Der Wilt G, et al. Guidance on Choosing Qualitative Evidence Synthesis Methods for Use in Health Technology Assessments of Complex Interventions. INTEGRATE-HTA; 2016.
91.
McCormick J, Rodney P, Varcoe C. Reinterpretations across studies: an approach to meta-analysis. Qual Health Res 2003;13:933–44. 10.1177/1049732303253480 [PubMed: 14502959] [CrossRef]
92.
Walsh D, Downe S. Meta-synthesis method for qualitative research: a literature review. J Adv Nurs 2005;50:204–11. 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03380.x [PubMed: 15788085] [CrossRef]
93.
Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Jones D, Young B, Sutton A. Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods. J Health Serv Res Policy 2005;10:45–53. 10.1177/135581960501000110 [PubMed: 15667704] [CrossRef]
94.
Pope C, Mays N. Chapter 13. Synthesising Qualitative Research. In Pope CM, Mays N, editors. Qualitative Research in Health Care. 3rd edn. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing; 2006. pp. 142–52. 10.1002/9780470750841.ch13 [CrossRef]
95.
Weed M. Interpretive qualitative synthesis in the sport & exercise sciences: the meta-interpretation approach. Eur J Sport Sci 2006;6:127–39. 10.1080/17461390500528576 [CrossRef]
96.
Bondas T, Hall EOC. A decade of metasynthesis research in health sciences: a meta-method study. Int J Qual Stud Health 2007;2:101–13. 10.1080/17482620701251684 [CrossRef]
97.
Pope C, Mays N, Popay J. Synthesizing Qualitative and Quantitative Health Evidence: A Guide to Methods. Maidenhead: Open University Press; 2007.
98.
Finlayson KW, Dixon A. Qualitative meta-synthesis: a guide for the novice. Nurse Res 2008;15:59–71. 10.7748/nr2008.01.15.2.59.c6330 [PubMed: 18283763] [CrossRef]
99.
Weed M. A potential method for the interpretive synthesis of qualitative research: issues in the development of ‘meta-interpretation’. Int J Soc Res Method 2008;11:13–28. 10.1080/13645570701401222 [CrossRef]
100.
Barnett-Page E, Thomas J. Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review. BMC Med Res Methodol 2009;9:59. 10.1186/1471-2288-9-59 [PMC free article: PMC3224695] [PubMed: 19671152] [CrossRef]
101.
Beck CT. Metasynthesis: a goldmine for evidence-based practice. AORN J 2009;90:–, 705–10. 10.1016/j.aorn.2009.06.025 [PubMed: 19895928] [CrossRef]
102.
Suri H, Clarke D. Advancements in research synthesis methods: from a methodologically inclusive perspective. Rev Educ Res 2009;79:395–430. 10.3102/0034654308326349 [CrossRef]
103.
Ring N, Ritchie K, Mandava L, Jepson R. A Guide to Synthesising Qualitative Research for Researchers Undertaking Health Technology Assessments and Systematic Reviews. Edinburgh: NHS Quality Improvement Scotland; 2010.
104.
Hansen HP, Draborg E, Kristensen FB. Exploring qualitative research synthesis: the role of patients’ perspectives in health policy design and decision making. Patient 2011;4:143–52. 10.2165/11539880-000000000-00000 [PubMed: 21766910] [CrossRef]
105.
Kangasniemi M, Länsimies-Antikainen H, Halkoaho A, Pietilä AM. Examination of the phases of metasynthesis: a study on patients’ duties as an example. Prof Inferm 2012;65:55–60. [PubMed: 22463754]
106.
Saini M, Shlonsky A. Systematic Synthesis of Qualitative Research. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2012. 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195387216.001.0001 [CrossRef]
107.
Bearman M, Dawson P. Qualitative synthesis and systematic review in health professions education. Med Educ 2013;47:252–60. 10.1111/medu.12092 [PubMed: 23398011] [CrossRef]
108.
McCann S, Campbell M, Entwistle V. Recruitment to clinical trials: a meta-ethnographic synthesis of studies of reasons for participation. J Health Serv Res Policy 2013;18:233–41. 10.1177/1355819613483126 [PubMed: 23986530] [CrossRef]
109.
Franzel B, Schwiegershausen M, Heusser P, Berger B. How to locate and appraise qualitative research in complementary and alternative medicine. BMC Complement Altern Med 2013;13:125. 10.1186/1472-6882-13-125 [PMC free article: PMC3778880] [PubMed: 23731997] [CrossRef]
110.
Hammersley M. Chapter 11. What is qualitative synthesis and why we do It? In Hammersley M, editor. The Myth of Research Based Policy: London: Sage; 2013. 10.4135/9781473957626.n12 [CrossRef]
111.
Finfgeld-Connett D. Metasynthesis findings: potential versus reality. Qual Health Res 2014;24:1581–91. 10.1177/1049732314548878 [PubMed: 25192758] [CrossRef]
112.
Melendez-Torres GJ, Grant S, Bonell C. A systematic review and critical appraisal of qualitative metasynthetic practice in public health to develop a taxonomy of operations of reciprocal translation. Res Synth Methods 2015;6:357–71. 10.1002/jrsm.1161 [PubMed: 26220201] [CrossRef]
113.
Sigurdson C, Woodgate R. Designing a Metasynthesis Study in Pediatric Oncology Nursing Research. J Pediatr Oncol Nurs 2015;32:360–8. 10.1177/1043454214563544 [PubMed: 25643970] [CrossRef]
114.
Lee RP, Hart RI, Watson RM, Rapley T. Qualitative synthesis in practice: Some pragmatics of meta-ethnography. Qual Res 2015;15:334–50. 10.1177/1468794114524221 [CrossRef]
115.
Meadows-Oliver M. Meta-Ethnography. In de Chesnay M, editor. Nursing Research Using Ethnography: Qualitative Designs and Methods in Nursing. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Company; 2015. pp. 171–9.
116.
Carroll C, Booth A. Quality assessment of qualitative evidence for systematic review and synthesis: is it meaningful, and if so, how should it be performed? Res Synth Methods 2015;6:149–54. 10.1002/jrsm.1128 [PubMed: 26099483] [CrossRef]
117.
Seers K. Qualitative systematic reviews: their importance for our understanding of research relevant to pain. Br J Pain 2015;9:36–40. 10.1177/2049463714549777 [PMC free article: PMC4616987] [PubMed: 26516555] [CrossRef]
118.
Nye E, Melendez-Torres GJ, Bonnell C. Origins, methods, and advances in qualitative meta-synthesis. Rev Educ 2016;4:57–79. 10.1002/rev3.3065 [CrossRef]
119.
France EF, Wells M, Lang H, Williams B. Why, when and how to update a meta-ethnography qualitative synthesis. Syst Rev 2016;5:44. 10.1186/s13643-016-0218-4 [PMC free article: PMC4791806] [PubMed: 26979748] [CrossRef]
120.
Ayar MC, Bauchspies WK, Yalvac B. Examining interpretive studies of science: a meta-ethnography. Educ Sci-Theor Pract 2015;15:253–65. 10.12738/estp.2015.1.2153 [CrossRef]
121.
Beach D, Bagley C, Eriksson A, Player-Koro C. Changing teacher education in Sweden: using meta-ethnographic analysis to understand and describe policy making and educational changes. Teach Teach Educ 2014;44:160–7. 10.1016/j.tate.2014.08.011 [CrossRef]
122.
Gomersall T, Madill A, Summers LK. A metasynthesis of the self-management of type 2 diabetes. Qual Health Res 2011;21:853–71. 10.1177/1049732311402096 [PubMed: 21429946] [CrossRef]
123.
Toye F, Seers K, Allcock N, Briggs M, Carr E, Andrews J, Barker K. Patients’ experiences of chronic non-malignant musculoskeletal pain: a qualitative systematic review. Br J Gen Pract 2013;63:e829–41. 10.3399/bjgp13X675412 [PMC free article: PMC3839392] [PubMed: 24351499] [CrossRef]
124.
Vittner D, Casavant S, McGrath JM. A meta-ethnography: skin-to-skin holding from the caregiver’s perspective. Adv Neonatal Care 2015;15:191–200. 10.1097/ANC.0000000000000169 [PubMed: 25938950] [CrossRef]
125.
Brohan E, Henderson C, Wheat K, Malcolm E, Clement S, Barley EA, et al. Systematic review of beliefs, behaviours and influencing factors associated with disclosure of a mental health problem in the workplace. BMC Psychiatry 2012;12:11. 10.1186/1471-244X-12-11 [PMC free article: PMC3298486] [PubMed: 22339944] [CrossRef]
126.
Cairns V, Murray C. How do the features of mindfulness-based cognitive therapy contribute to positive therapeutic change? A meta-synthesis of qualitative studies. Behav Cogn Psychother 2015;43:342–59. 10.1017/S1352465813000945 [PubMed: 24229765] [CrossRef]
127.
Child S, Goodwin V, Garside R, Jones-Hughes T, Boddy K, Stein K. Factors influencing the implementation of fall-prevention programmes: a systematic review and synthesis of qualitative studies. Implement Sci 2012;7:91. 10.1186/1748-5908-7-91 [PMC free article: PMC3576261] [PubMed: 22978693] [CrossRef]
128.
Furuta M, Sandall J, Bick D. Women’s perceptions and experiences of severe maternal morbidity – a synthesis of qualitative studies using a meta-ethnographic approach. Midwifery 2014;30:158–69. 10.1016/j.midw.2013.09.001 [PubMed: 24144992] [CrossRef]
129.
Jensen LA, Allen MN. A synthesis of qualitative research on wellness-illness. Qual Health Res 1994;4:349–69. 10.1177/104973239400400402 [CrossRef]
130.
Lundgren I, Begley C, Gross MM, Bondas T. ‘Groping through the fog’: a metasynthesis of women’s experiences on VBAC (Vaginal birth after Caesarean section). BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2012;12:85. 10.1186/1471-2393-12-85 [PMC free article: PMC3506503] [PubMed: 22909230] [CrossRef]
131.
Nelson AM. A meta-synthesis related to infant feeding decision making. MCN Am J Matern Child Nurs 2012;37:247–52. 10.1097/NMC.0b013e31824fde7d [PubMed: 22739481] [CrossRef]
132.
O’Neill T, Jinks C, Ong BN. Decision-making regarding total knee replacement surgery: a qualitative meta-synthesis. BMC Health Serv Res 2007;7:52. 10.1186/1472-6963-7-52 [PMC free article: PMC1854891] [PubMed: 17425793] [CrossRef]
133.
Rudolfsson G, Berggren I. Nursing students’ perspectives on the patient and the impact of the nursing culture: a meta-synthesis. J Nurs Manag 2012;20:771–81. 10.1111/j.1365-2834.2012.01470.x [PubMed: 22967295] [CrossRef]
134.
Schmied V, Olley H, Burns E, Duff M, Dennis CL, Dahlen HG. Contradictions and conflict: a meta-ethnographic study of migrant women’s experiences of breastfeeding in a new country. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 2012;12:163. 10.1186/1471-2393-12-163 [PMC free article: PMC3546887] [PubMed: 23270315] [CrossRef]
135.
Smith LK, Pope C, Botha JL. Patients’ help-seeking experiences and delay in cancer presentation: a qualitative synthesis. Lancet 2005;366:825–31. 10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67030-4 [PubMed: 16139657] [CrossRef]
136.
Smith TO, Purdy R, Lister S, Salter C, Fleetcroft R, Conaghan PG. Attitudes of people with osteoarthritis towards their conservative management: a systematic review and meta-ethnography. Rheumatol Int 2014;34:299–313. 10.1007/s00296-013-2905-y [PubMed: 24306266] [CrossRef]
137.
Steen M, Downe S, Bamford N, Edozien L. Not-patient and not-visitor: a metasynthesis fathers’ encounters with pregnancy, birth and maternity care. Midwifery 2012;28:362–71. 10.1016/j.midw.2011.06.009 [PubMed: 21820778] [CrossRef]
138.
Thorne S, Paterson B. Shifting images of chronic illness. Image J Nurs Sch 1998;30:173–8. 10.1111/j.1547-5069.1998.tb01275.x [PubMed: 9775561] [CrossRef]
139.
Tuthill E, McGrath J, Young S. Commonalities and differences in infant feeding attitudes and practices in the context of HIV in sub-Saharan Africa: a metasynthesis. AIDS Care 2014;26:214–25. 10.1080/09540121.2013.813625 [PMC free article: PMC3855184] [PubMed: 23879637] [CrossRef]
140.
Tuquero JM. A meta-ethnographic synthesis of support services in distance learning programs. J Inf Technol Educ 2011;10:157–79.
Copyright © Queen’s Printer and Controller of HMSO 2019. This work was produced by Cunningham et al. under the terms of a commissioning contract issued by the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care. This issue may be freely reproduced for the purposes of private research and study and extracts (or indeed, the full report) may be included in professional journals provided that suitable acknowledgement is made and the reproduction is not associated with any form of advertising. Applications for commercial reproduction should be addressed to: NIHR Journals Library, National Institute for Health Research, Evaluation, Trials and Studies Coordinating Centre, Alpha House, University of Southampton Science Park, Southampton SO16 7NS, UK.
Bookshelf ID: NBK537425

Views

  • PubReader
  • Print View
  • Cite this Page
  • PDF version of this title (2.4M)

Other titles in this collection

Related information

  • PMC
    PubMed Central citations
  • PubMed
    Links to PubMed

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...