Celebrating methodological challenges and changes: reflecting on the emergence and importance of the role of qualitative evidence in Cochrane reviews

Work-life integration among nurse educators: a meta-synthesis

Background

Work-life integration has been extensively researched in various contexts. Women dominate the nursing profession, but work-life integration is essential for men and women since both are expected to focus equally on their families and careers. The nursing faculty perceives nurse educators' work environment as undervalued, lacking support, and limited time to grow and carry the heavy workload.

Method

A qualitative meta-synthesis of studies between 2013 and 2023 was conducted using ScienceDirect, EBSCO Host, Sage and Sabinet databases. Seven articles related to the research phenomenon were retrieved.

Conclusion

The resulting themes revolved around two central aspects: nurse educators' work and life integration. Nurse educators face various challenges with work-life integration and often view their failure as a personal rather than a societal issue. However, as much as achieving work-life integration is personal, there is a call for employers in academic environments to improve workplace policies, like better-paid maternity leave, affordable quality childcare, and social support. Furthermore, nurse educators' line managers should display warmth and encouragement about personal challenges affecting nurse educators.

Perspectives of HPV vaccination among young adults: a qualitative systematic review and evidence synthesis protocol

INTRODUCTION

Human papillomavirus (HPV) is the causative agent of nearly all cervical cancers. Despite the proven safety and efficacy of HPV vaccines in preventing HPV-related cancers, the global vaccine coverage rate is estimated to only be 15%. HPV vaccine coverage rates are more actively tracked and reported for adolescents 17 years and younger but there is still a critical window of opportunity to intervene and promote HPV vaccination among young adults aged 18-26 years who are still eligible to be vaccinated. This protocol for a qualitative evidence synthesis aims to review perspectives of HPV vaccination among young adults (18-26 years) and identify facilitators and barriers that influence HPV vaccination uptake and decision-making.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Seven databases will be searched from 1 January 2006 to the date of final search. For inclusion, studies must report HPV vaccination perspectives of young adults aged 18-26 years and use qualitative study methods or analysis techniques. Studies will be screened in a two-stage process guided by the eligibility criteria. Final included studies will be evaluated for methodological strengths and limitations using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme quality assessment tool for qualitative studies. After data extraction, framework analysis will be used to analyse the data applying the socioecological model. Finally, the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation - Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research will be applied to evaluate the confidence in synthesised qualitative findings. The methodology of this review follows the Cochrane Handbook guidelines on qualitative evidence syntheses.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Formal ethical approval is not required for this study. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and professional networks.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023417052.

Synthesis of Qualitative Evidence on Malaria in Pregnancy, 2005-2022: A Systematic Review

Qualitative research on malaria in pregnancy (MiP) is incipient, therefore its contextual, experiential and symbolic associated factors are unknown. This study systematizes the qualitative research on MiP, describes knowledge, perceptions and behaviors about MiP, and compiles individual, socioeconomic, cultural and health system determinants of MiP through a meta-synthesis in 10 databases. A total of 48 studies were included with 2600 pregnant women, 1300 healthcare workers, and 2200 relatives or community members. Extensive knowledge was demonstrated on ITN and case management, but it was lacking on SP-IPTp, risks and consequences of MiP. Attitudes were negative towards ANC and MiP prevention. There were high trustfulness scores and preference for traditional medicine and distrust in the safety of drugs. The main determinants of the Health System were rationing, copayments, delay in payment to clinics, high out-of-pocket expenses, shortage, low workforce and work overload, shortcomings in care quality, low knowledges of healthcare workers on MiP and negative attitude in care. The socioeconomic and cultural determinants were poverty and low educational level of pregnant women, distance to the hospital, patriarchal-sexist gender roles, and predominance of local conceptions on maternal-fetal-neonatal health. The meta-synthesis demonstrates the difficulty to detect MiP determinants and the importance of performed qualitative research before implementing MiP strategies to understand the multidimensionality of the disease.

Definition and conceptualization of the patient-centered care pathway, a proposed integrative framework for consensus: a Concept analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Confusion exists over the definition of the care pathway concept and existing conceptual frameworks contain various inadequacies which have led to implementation difficulties. In the current global context of rapidly changing health care systems, there is great need for a standardized definition and integrative framework that can guide implementation. This study aims to propose an accurate and up-to-date definition of care pathway and an integrative conceptual framework.

METHODS

An innovative hybrid method combining systematic review, concept analysis and bibliometric analysis was undertaken to summarize qualitative, quantitative, and mixed-method studies. Databases searched were PubMed, Embase and ABI/Inform. Methodological quality of included studies was then assessed.

RESULTS

Forty-four studies met the inclusion criteria. Using concept analysis, we developed a fine-grained understanding, an integrative conceptual framework, and an up-to-date definition of patient-centered care pathway by proposing 28 subcategories grouped into seven attributes. This conceptual framework considers both operational and social realities and supports the improvement and sustainable transformation of clinical, administrative, and organizational practices for the benefit of patients and caregivers, while considering professional experience, organizational constraints, and social dynamics. The proposed attributes of a fluid and effective pathway are (i) the centricity of patients and caregivers, (ii) the positioning of professional actors involved in the care pathway, (iii) the operation management through the care delivery process, (iv) the particularities of coordination structures, (v) the structural context of the system and organizations, (vi) the role of the information system and data management and (vii) the advent of the learning system. Antecedents are presented as key success factors of pathway implementation. By using the consequences and empirical referents, such as outcomes and evidence of care pathway interventions, we went beyond the single theoretical aim, proposing the application of the conceptual framework to healthcare management.

CONCLUSIONS

This study has developed an up-to-date definition of patient-centered care pathway and an integrative conceptual framework. Our framework encompasses 28 subcategories grouped into seven attributes that should be considered in complex care pathway intervention. The formulation of these attributes, antecedents as success factors and consequences as potential outcomes, allows the operationalization of this model for any pathway in any context.

Factors that influence parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination: a qualitative evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Childhood vaccination is one of the most effective ways to prevent serious illnesses and deaths in children. However, worldwide, many children do not receive all recommended vaccinations, for several potential reasons. Vaccines might be unavailable, or parents may experience difficulties in accessing vaccination services; for instance, because of poor quality health services, distance from a health facility, or lack of money. Some parents may not accept available vaccines and vaccination services. Our understanding of what influences parents' views and practices around childhood vaccination, and why some parents may not accept vaccines for their children, is still limited. This synthesis links to Cochrane Reviews of the effectiveness of interventions to improve coverage or uptake of childhood vaccination.

OBJECTIVES

- Explore parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination, and the factors influencing acceptance, hesitancy, or nonacceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Develop a conceptual understanding of what and how different factors reduce parental acceptance of routine childhood vaccination. - Explore how the findings of this review can enhance our understanding of the related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and three other databases for eligible studies from 1974 to June 2020.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that: utilised qualitative methods for data collection and analysis; focused on parents' or caregivers' views, practices, acceptance, hesitancy, or refusal of routine vaccination for children aged up to six years; and were from any setting globally where childhood vaccination is provided.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used a pre-specified sampling frame to sample from eligible studies, aiming to capture studies that were conceptually rich, relevant to the review's phenomenon of interest, from diverse geographical settings, and from a range of income-level settings. We extracted contextual and methodological data from each sampled study. We used a meta-ethnographic approach to analyse and synthesise the evidence. We assessed methodological limitations using a list of criteria used in previous Cochrane Reviews and originally based on the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme quality assessment tool for qualitative studies. We used the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) approach to assess our confidence in each finding. We integrated the findings of this review with those from relevant Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness. We did this by mapping whether the underlying theories or components of trial interventions included in those reviews related to or targeted the overarching factors influencing parental views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination identified by this review.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 145 studies in the review and sampled 27 of these for our analysis. Six studies were conducted in Africa, seven in the Americas, four in South-East Asia, nine in Europe, and one in the Western Pacific. Studies included urban and rural settings, and high-, middle-, and low-income settings. Many complex factors were found to influence parents' vaccination views and practices, which we divided into four themes. Firstly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their broader ideas and practices surrounding health and illness generally, and specifically with regards to their children, and their perceptions of the role of vaccination within this context. Secondly, many parents' vaccination ideas and practices were influenced by the vaccination ideas and practices of the people they mix with socially. At the same time, shared vaccination ideas and practices helped some parents establish social relationships, which in turn strengthened their views and practices around vaccination. Thirdly, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by wider political issues and concerns, and particularly their trust (or distrust) in those associated with vaccination programmes. Finally, parents' vaccination ideas and practices may be influenced by their access to and experiences of vaccination services and their frontline healthcare workers. We developed two concepts for understanding possible pathways to reduced acceptance of childhood vaccination. The first concept, 'neoliberal logic', suggests that many parents, particularly from high-income countries, understood health and healthcare decisions as matters of individual risk, choice, and responsibility. Some parents experienced this understanding as in conflict with vaccination programmes, which emphasise generalised risk and population health. This perceived conflict led some parents to be less accepting of vaccination for their children. The second concept, 'social exclusion', suggests that some parents, particularly from low- and middle-income countries, were less accepting of childhood vaccination due to their experiences of social exclusion. Social exclusion may damage trustful relationships between government and the public, generate feelings of isolation and resentment, and give rise to demotivation in the face of public services that are poor quality and difficult to access. These factors in turn led some parents who were socially excluded to distrust vaccination, to refuse vaccination as a form of resistance or a way to bring about change, or to avoid vaccination due to the time, costs, and distress it creates. Many of the overarching factors our review identified as influencing parents' vaccination views and practices were underrepresented in the interventions tested in the four related Cochrane Reviews of intervention effectiveness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Our review has revealed that parents' views and practices regarding childhood vaccination are complex and dynamic social processes that reflect multiple webs of influence, meaning, and logic. We have provided a theorised understanding of the social processes contributing to vaccination acceptance (or not), thereby complementing but also extending more individualistic models of vaccination acceptance. Successful development of interventions to promote acceptance and uptake of childhood vaccination will require an understanding of, and then tailoring to, the specific factors influencing vaccination views and practices of the group(s) in the target setting. The themes and concepts developed through our review could serve as a basis for gaining this understanding, and subsequent development of interventions that are potentially more aligned with the norms, expectations, and concerns of target users.

In search of 'community': a critical review of community mental health services for women in African settings

Community is deemed a central resource for the improvement of health, across disciplines, contexts and conditions. However, what is meant by this term is rarely critically explored. In Global Mental Health, considerable efforts in recent years have been directed towards scaling up 'community' approaches, with variable success, creating the need to better understand approaches to its use. Our study contributes to this need, through a critical review of studies engaging with the term 'community' in relation to women's mental health services in African settings. Our review explored 30 peer-reviewed articles from the past 15 years, which were systematically evaluated for quality of evidence. Studies were then analysed using a blend of conventional and directed content analysis to unpack perspectives on the term's use in intervention and phenomenological studies. We identified four broad categories of community: (1) place (shared geographical location or institutional affiliation), (2) practice (belongingness to a shared activity or profession), (3) symbols (meanings and experiences associated with shared community life) and (4) identity (diagnostic identity around a mental health condition). Analysis identified community of place as the most common primary focus of interest across the sample, with 80% of papers referencing this dimension. We noted that in studies where communities of practice were the focus, this was in relation to leveraging local knowledge to inform or support service delivery of intervention programmes, often designed by outsiders. Implications for future policy and mental health services research are discussed.

Optimising the value of the critical appraisal skills programme (CASP) tool for quality appraisal in qualitative evidence synthesis

The value of qualitative evidence synthesis for informing healthcare policy and practice within evidence-based medicine is increasingly recognised. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding how to judge the methodological quality of qualitative studies being synthesised and debates around the extent to which such assessment is possible and appropriate. The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) tool is the most commonly used tool for quality appraisal in health-related qualitative evidence syntheses, with endorsement from the Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group. The tool is recommended for novice qualitative researchers, but there is little existing guidance on its application. This article considers issues related to the suitability and usability of the CASP tool for quality appraisal in qualitative evidence synthesis in order to support and improve future appraisal exercises framed by the tool. We reflect on our practical experience of using the tool in a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis. We discuss why it is worth considering a study’s underlying theoretical, ontological and epistemological framework and how this could be incorporated into the tool by way of a novel question. We consider how particular features of the tool may impact its interpretation, the appraisal results and the subsequent synthesis. We discuss how to use quality appraisal results to inform the next stages of evidence synthesis and present a novel approach to organising the synthesis, whereby studies deemed to be of higher quality contribute relatively more to the synthesis. We propose tool modifications, user guidance, and areas for future methodological research.

Access to and interventions to improve maternity care services for immigrant women: a narrative synthesis systematic review

Background

In 2016, over one-quarter of births in the UK (28.2%) were to foreign-born women. Maternal and perinatal mortality are disproportionately higher among some immigrants depending on country of origin, indicating the presence of deficits in their care pathways and birth outcomes.

Objectives

Our objective was to undertake a systematic review and narrative synthesis of empirical research that focused on access and interventions to improve maternity care for immigrant women, including qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies.

Review methods

An information scientist designed the literature database search strategies (limited to retrieve literature published from 1990 to 2018). All retrieved citations (45,954) were independently screened by two or more team members using a screening tool. We searched grey literature reported in related databases and websites. We contacted stakeholders with subject expertise. In this review we define an immigrant as a person who relocates to the destination country for a minimum of 1 year, with the goal of permanent residence.

Results

We identified 40 studies for inclusion. Immigrant women tended to book and access antenatal care later than the recommended first 10 weeks of pregnancy. Primary factors included limited English-language skills, lack of awareness of availability of the services, lack of understanding of the purpose of antenatal appointments, immigration status and income barriers. Immigrant women had mixed perceptions regarding how health-care professionals (HCPs) had delivered maternity care services. Those with positive perceptions felt that HCPs were caring, confidential and openly communicative. Those with negative views perceived HCPs as rude, discriminatory or insensitive to their cultural and social needs; these women therefore avoided accessing maternity care. We found very few interventions that had focused on improving maternity care for these women and the effectiveness of these interventions has not been rigorously evaluated.

Limitations

Our review findings are limited by the available research evidence related to our review questions. There may be many aspects of immigrant women’s experiences that we have not addressed. For example, few studies exist for perinatal mental health in immigrant women from Eastern European countries (in the review period). Many studies included both immigrant and non-immigrant women.

Conclusions

Available evidence suggests that the experiences of immigrant women in accessing and using maternity care services in the UK are mixed; however, women largely had poor experiences. Contributing factors included a lack of language support, cultural insensitivity, discrimination and poor relationships between immigrant women and HCPs. Furthermore, a lack of knowledge of legal entitlements and guidelines on the provision of welfare support and maternity care to immigrants compounds this.

Future work

Studies are required on the development of interventions and rigorous scientific evaluation of these interventions. Development and evaluation of online antenatal education resources in multiple languages. Development and appraisal of education packages for HCPs focused on the provision of culturally safe practice for the UK’s diverse population. The NHS in the UK has a hugely diverse workforce with a vast untapped linguistic resource; strategies could be developed to harness this resource.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015023605.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 14. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A systematic review and meta-synthesis of qualitative studies on pelvic organ prolapse for the development of core outcome sets

AIMS

In the current climate of evidence-based health care, the aim of this meta-synthesis was to collect and systematically analyse data from primary qualitative studies on pelvic organ prolapse (POP), to identify patient-centered perspectives on the natural course of POP. Information acquired in this study may be useful for ongoing research towards the development of core outcome sets (COS) in pelvic floor disorders.

METHODS

A CHORUS Working Group performed a standardized search of three different databases (Medline, Embase, Scopus), from inception to October 2019. We selected qualitative studies on women's perspectives on POP that were published in the English language. Three reviewers independently evaluated the quality of eligible papers and highlighted recurrent themes based on patient perspectives.

RESULTS

Eighteen qualitative studies including a total of 497 patients were assessed in this analysis. Our study revealed five superordinate themes, recurrently encountered in qualitative studies on POP: awareness of POP (6 studies), communication (9 studies), treatments (10 studies), effects on quality of life (6 studies), and self-image (3 studies). Five out of 10 quality criteria were met by all the studies included, based on an assessment performed using the critical appraisal skills program.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first synthesis of qualitative studies that address POP-related experiences of women, highlighting five superordinate themes, of which treatment was the most commonly reported one. This synthesis' findings may guide quantitative research priorities and will hopefully contribute to the development of a COS for POP.

Factors that influence acceptance of human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination for adolescents: a qualitative evidence synthesis

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Qualitative). The objectives are as follows:

The objectives of the review are to:

Identify, appraise, and synthesise qualitative studies exploring: parents’, caregivers’, or adolescents’ views, experiences, or decision‐making regarding HPV vaccination; or the factors influencing the acceptance of HPV vaccination arising from parents’, caregivers’, and adolescents’ accounts. Identify the factors influencing parents’, caregivers’ and adolescents’ acceptance of HPV vaccination. Explore how the findings of this review can enhance our understanding of the related intervention review (Abdullahi 2015 ).

Improving care for women and girls who have undergone female genital mutilation/cutting: qualitative systematic reviews

Background

In a context of high migration, there are growing numbers of women living in the UK who have experienced female genital mutilation/cutting. Evidence is needed to understand how best to meet their health-care needs and to shape culturally appropriate service delivery.

Objectives

To undertake two systematic reviews of qualitative evidence to illuminate the experiences, needs, barriers and facilitators around seeking and providing female genital mutilation-/cutting-related health care from the perspectives of (1) women and girls who have experienced female genital mutilation/cutting (review 1) and (2) health professionals (review 2).

Review methods

The reviews were undertaken separately using a thematic synthesis approach and then combined into an overarching synthesis. Sixteen electronic databases (including grey literature sources) were searched from inception to 31 December 2017 and supplemented by reference list searching. Papers from any Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development country with any date and in any language were included (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development membership was considered a proxy for comparable high-income migrant destination countries). Standardised tools were used for quality appraisal and data extraction. Findings were coded and thematically analysed using NVivo 11 (QSR International, Warrington, UK) software. Confidence in the review findings was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation – Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative Research (GRADE-CERQual) approach. All review steps involved two or more reviewers and a team that included community-based and clinical experts.

Results

Seventy-eight papers (74 distinct studies) met the inclusion criteria for both reviews: 57 papers in review 1 (n = 18 from the UK), 30 papers in review 2 (n = 5 from the UK) and nine papers common to both. Review 1 comprised 17 descriptive themes synthesised into five analytical themes. Women’s health-care experiences related to female genital mutilation/cutting were shaped by silence and stigma, which hindered care-seeking and access to care, especially for non-pregnant women. Across all countries, women reported emotionally distressing and disempowering care experiences. There was limited awareness of specialist service provision. Good care depended on having a trusting relationship with a culturally sensitive and knowledgeable provider. Review 2 comprised 20 descriptive themes synthesised into six analytical themes. Providers from many settings reported feeling uncomfortable talking about female genital mutilation/cutting, lacking sufficient knowledge and struggling with language barriers. This led to missed opportunities for, and suboptimal management of, female genital mutilation-/cutting-related care. More positive experiences/practices were reported in contexts where there was input from specialists and where there were clear processes to address language barriers and to support timely identification, referral and follow-up.

Limitations

Most studies had an implicit focus on type III female genital mutilation/cutting and on maternity settings, but many studies combined groups or female genital mutilation/cutting types, making it hard to draw conclusions specific to different communities, conditions or contexts. There were no evaluations of service models, there was no research specifically on girls and there was limited evidence on psychological needs.

Conclusions

The evidence suggests that care and communication around female genital mutilation/cutting can pose significant challenges for women and health-care providers. Appropriate models of service delivery include language support, continuity models, clear care pathways (including for mental health and non-pregnant women), specialist provision and community engagement. Routinisation of female genital mutilation/cutting discussions within different health-care settings may be an important strategy to ensure timely entry into, and appropriate receipt of, female genital mutilation-/cutting-related care. Staff training is an ongoing need.

Future work

Future research should evaluate the most-effective models of training and of service delivery.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD420150300012015 (review 1) and PROSPERO CRD420150300042015 (review 2).

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

Healthcare professional perceived barriers and facilitators to discussing sexual wellbeing with patients after diagnosis of chronic illness: A mixed-methods evidence synthesis

OBJECTIVES

To explore healthcare professional perceived barriers and facilitators to discussing sexual health and wellbeing with patients after diagnosis of chronic illness.

METHODS

Five databases were searched and included data were synthesised using a meta-ethnographic approach. Confidence in findings was assessed using the GRADE-CERQual framework. Searches, extraction and quality assessment procedures were conducted independently by at least two authors.

RESULTS

Concepts extracted from 30 included studies were used to develop a conceptual framework based on five overarching themes. These were [1] individual and societal attitudes to sex and sexual wellbeing [2], patient specific factors [3], organizational and professional factors [4], strategies to overcome barriers in practice and [5] perceived training needs. Healthcare professionals acknowledged the importance of discussing and providing support for sexual wellbeing needs, but recognized it is not routinely provided.

CONCLUSIONS

While patient specific factors and organizational issues such as lack of time were frequently identified as barriers, intra-personal and social perceptions appear to have the strongest influence on healthcare professional perspectives.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Brief education and tools to support healthcare professionals to have effective conversations with patients are required. These should address social barriers, normalise sexual issues, and support healthcare professionals to initiate discussions around sexual concerns.

Factors that influence parents' and informal caregivers' acceptance of routine childhood vaccination: a qualitative evidence synthesis

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Qualitative). The objectives are as follows:

Identify, appraise and synthesise qualitative studies exploring: parents’ and informal caregivers’ views, experiences, or decision‐making regarding routine childhood vaccination; or the factors influencing acceptance of routine childhood vaccination arising from parents’ and informal caregivers’ accounts. Develop a conceptual understanding of what and how different factors influence parental acceptance of routine childhood vaccination. Explore how the findings of this review can enhance our understanding of the related intervention reviews (Saeterdal 2014 ; Oyo‐Ita 2016 ; Jacobson 2018 ; Kaufman 2018 ).

The Impact of Evidence-Based Medicine on Qualitative Metasynthesis: Benefits to be Harvested and Warnings to be Given

Qualitative metasynthesis, developed as an interpretative and inductive methodology, is increasingly influenced by standards from evidence-based medicine, established as a strategy to support policy decisions and guidelines. Currently, principles and procedures from the format developed for systematic reviews are often applied for review and synthesis of all kinds of evidence, including results from qualitative studies. In this article, I substantiate these claims, discussing benefits to be harvested and warnings to be given when qualitative metasynthesis approaches the evidence-based medicine methodology. Situating my exploration in the context of clinical practice, I contrast missions and values of these methodologies regarding review and synthesis of research literature, highlighting potential mismatches between ontology and epistemology, emphasizing challenges regarding sample, analysis, and transferability. Approving systematic and transparent strategies as generic for such purposes, I warn against the idea that methodology developed for evidence-based medicine is a universal gold standard for synthesis of research evidence.

Considering axiological integrity: a methodological analysis of qualitative evidence syntheses, and its implications for health professions education

Qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) is a suite of methodologies that combine qualitative techniques with the synthesis of qualitative knowledge. They are particularly suited to medical education as these approaches pool findings from original qualitative studies, whilst paying attention to context and theoretical development. Although increasingly sophisticated use is being made of qualitative primary research methodologies in health professions education (HPE) the use of secondary qualitative reviews in HPE remains underdeveloped. This study examined QES methods applied to clinical humanism in healthcare as a way of advancing thinking around the use of QES in HPE in general. A systematic search strategy identified 49 reviews that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Meta-study was used to develop an analytic summary of methodological characteristics, the role of theory, and the synthetic processes used in QES reviews. Fifteen reviews used a defined methodology, and 17 clearly explained the processes that led from data extraction to synthesis. Eight reviews adopted a specific theoretical perspective. Authors rarely described their reflexive relationship with their data. Epistemological positions tended to be implied rather than explicit. Twenty-five reviews included some form of quality appraisal, although it was often unclear how authors acted on its results. Reviewers under-reported qualitative approaches in their review methodologies, and tended to focus on elements such as systematicity and checklist quality appraisal that were more germane to quantitative evidence synthesis. A core concern was that the axiological (value) dimensions of the source materials were rarely considered let alone accommodated in the synthesis techniques used. QES can be used in HPE research but only with careful attention to maintaining axiological integrity.

Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series-paper 5: methods for integrating qualitative and implementation evidence within intervention effectiveness reviews

The Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group 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 article, 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 synthesized 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.

The Sexual Adjustment Process of Cancer Patients and Their Partners: A Qualitative Evidence Synthesis

When confronted with cancer, a prominent challenge for patients and their partners is their changed sexual relationship. An empirically based theoretical model of the sexual adaptation process during cancer might be helpful in guiding the development of adequate interventions for couples who struggle with their sexual relationship. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to synthesize evidence from primary qualitative research studies and to arrive at a detailed description of the process of sexual adjustment during cancer. We conducted a qualitative evidence synthesis of a purposeful sample of 16 qualitative papers, using the meta-ethnography approach to synthesis. We found that the subsequent studies used different theoretical approaches to describe the sexual adaptation process. This led to three divergent sexual adaptation processes: (1) the pathway of grief and mourning, depicting sexual changes as a loss; (2) the pathway of restructuring, depicting the adjustment process toward sexual changes as a cognitive process with a strong focus on the social and cultural forces that shape the values and experiences of sexuality; and (3) the pathway of sexual rehabilitation, depicting sexual changes as a bodily dysfunction that needs treatment and specific behavioral strategies. All three pathways have their own opportunities and challenges. A greater awareness of these different pathways could help healthcare providers to better understand the ways a particular couple might cope with changed sexuality, offering them opportunities to discover alternative pathways for sexual adjustment.

Potential value of systematic reviews of qualitative evidence in informing user-centered health and social care: findings from a descriptive overview

OBJECTIVES

Systematic reviews of quantitative evidence are well established in health and social care. Systematic reviews of qualitative evidence are increasingly available, but volume, topics covered, methods used, and reporting quality are largely unknown. We provide a descriptive overview of systematic reviews of qualitative evidence assessing health and social care interventions included on the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE).

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

We searched DARE for reviews published between January 1, 2009, and December 31, 2014. We extracted data on review content and methods, summarized narratively, and explored patterns over time.

RESULTS

We identified 145 systematic reviews conducted worldwide (64 in the UK). Interventions varied but largely covered treatment or service delivery in community and hospital settings. There were no discernible patterns over time. Critical appraisal of primary studies was conducted routinely. Most reviews were poorly reported.

CONCLUSION

Potential exists to use systematic reviews of qualitative evidence when driving forward user-centered health and social care. We identify where more research is needed and propose ways to improve review methodology and reporting.

Prevention of alcohol and drug misuse in adolescents: An overview of systematic reviews

Background

– Systematic reviews have evaluated a wide variety of programmes aiming to prevent, reduce or delay substance use in adolescents. This paper presents an overview of recent systematic reviews, summarising the evidence on the effectiveness of prevention strategies which target adolescents misusing alcohol and/or drugs.

Methods

– We performed a comprehensive search in major electronic databases, consulted websites and checked reference lists of relevant articles. Studies that met our inclusion criteria were critically appraised using the AMSTAR instrument. The findings from the included systematic reviews were synthesised using a vote counting procedure.

Results

– Twenty-one systematic reviews were identified. Ten of these were rated as of high quality. There was little overlap between reviews in terms of the target group, intervention, setting and outcome measures. The components or mechanisms of the prevention programmes were poorly described. Ten reviews evaluated school-based prevention. The effects of these prevention programmes are promising, while effects of community-based, family-based and multi-faceted programmes were less convincing.

Conclusion

– Based on the current evidence, there is a small but consistent positive effect of school-based prevention programmes, but it is less clear what the “active ingredient” is. For example, which group should one target, in which setting and in which circumstances? A set of standardised process and outcome measures would allow us to better compare and statistically pool the results of original studies and reviews. This overview of reviews, like similar other overviews, should encourage researchers to increase uniformity and consistency between studies. This would improve the comparability of evidence, which is needed to formulate valid recommendations for practice.

Metasynthesis: An Original Method to Synthesize Qualitative Literature in Psychiatry

BACKGROUND

Metasynthesis-the systematic review and integration of findings from qualitative studies-is an emerging technique in medical research that can use many different methods. Nevertheless, the method must be appropriate to the specific scientific field in which it is used. The objective is to describe the steps of a metasynthesis method adapted from Thematic Synthesis and phenomenology to fit the particularities of psychiatric research.

METHOD

We detail each step of the method used in a metasynthesis published in 2015 on adolescent and young adults suicidal behaviors. We provide clarifications in several methodological points using the latest literature on metasyntheses. The method is described in six steps: define the research question and the inclusion criteria, select the studies, assess their quality, extract and present the formal data, analyze the data, and express the synthesis.

CONCLUSION

Metasyntheses offer an appropriate balance between an objective framework, a rigorously scientific approach to data analysis and the necessary contribution of the researcher's subjectivity in the construction of the final work. They propose a third level of comprehension and interpretation that brings original insights, improve the global understanding in psychiatry, and propose immediate therapeutic implications. They should be included in the psychiatric common research toolkit to become better recognized by clinicians and mental health professionals.

Barriers and enablers to guideline implementation strategies to improve obstetric care practice in low- and middle-income countries: a systematic review of qualitative evidence

BACKGROUND

Maternal mortality remains a major international health problem in low- and middle-income countries (LMIC), and most could have been prevented by quality improvement interventions already demonstrated to be effective, such as clinical guideline implementation strategies. The aim of this systematic review was to synthesise qualitative evidence on guideline implementation strategies to improve obstetric care practice in LMIC in order to identify barriers and enablers to their successful implementation.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and CINAHL databases for articles reporting research findings on barriers and enablers to guideline implementation strategies in obstetric care practice in LMIC. We conducted a "best fit" framework synthesis of the included studies. We used an organisational "stages of change" model as our a priori framework for the synthesis.

RESULTS

Nine studies were included: all were based in Sub-Saharan Africa and in hospital health care facilities. The majority of studies (seven) evaluated one particular guideline implementation strategy: clinical audit and feedback (both criterion-based audit and maternal death reviews), and a minority (two) evaluated educational interventions. A range of barriers and enablers to successful guideline implementation was identified. A key finding of the framework synthesis was that "high" and "low" intrinsic health care professional motivation are overall enablers and barriers, respectively, of successful guideline implementation. We developed a modified "stages of change" model to take account of these findings.

CONCLUSION

We have identified a number of quality improvement processes that are amenable to change at limited or no additional cost, although some identified barriers may be difficult to address without increased resources. We note the pathways to implementation may be complex and require further research to develop our understanding of individual and organisational behaviours and motivation in LMIC settings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42015016062.

Understanding factors affecting patient and public engagement and recruitment to digital health interventions: a systematic review of qualitative studies

BACKGROUND

Numerous types of digital health interventions (DHIs) are available to patients and the public but many factors affect their ability to engage and enrol in them. This systematic review aims to identify and synthesise the qualitative literature on barriers and facilitators to engagement and recruitment to DHIs to inform future implementation efforts.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus and the ACM Digital Library were searched for English language qualitative studies from 2000 - 2015 that discussed factors affecting engagement and enrolment in a range of DHIs (e.g. 'telemedicine', 'mobile applications', 'personal health record', 'social networking'). Text mining and additional search strategies were used to identify 1,448 records. Two reviewers independently carried out paper screening, quality assessment, data extraction and analysis. Data was analysed using framework synthesis, informed by Normalization Process Theory, and Burden of Treatment Theory helped conceptualise the interpretation of results.

RESULTS

Nineteen publications were included in the review. Four overarching themes that affect patient and public engagement and enrolment in DHIs emerged; 1) personal agency and motivation; 2) personal life and values; 3) the engagement and recruitment approach; and 4) the quality of the DHI. The review also summarises engagement and recruitment strategies used. A preliminary DIgital Health EnGagement MOdel (DIEGO) was developed to highlight the key processes involved. Existing knowledge gaps are identified and a number of recommendations made for future research. Study limitations include English language publications and exclusion of grey literature.

CONCLUSION

This review summarises and highlights the complexity of digital health engagement and recruitment processes and outlines issues that need to be addressed before patients and the public commit to digital health and it can be implemented effectively. More work is needed to create successful engagement strategies and better quality digital solutions that are personalised where possible and to gain clinical accreditation and endorsement when appropriate. More investment is also needed to improve computer literacy and ensure technologies are accessible and affordable for those who wish to sign up to them.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42015029846.

Barriers and facilitators to patient and public engagement and recruitment to digital health interventions: protocol of a systematic review of qualitative studies

INTRODUCTION

Patients and the public are beginning to use digital health tools to assist in managing chronic illness, support independent living and self-care, and remain connected to health and care providers. However, engaging with and enrolling in digital health interventions, such as telehealth systems, mobile health applications, patient portals and personal health records, in order to use them varies considerably. Many factors affect people's ability to engage with and sign up to digital health platforms.

OBJECTIVES

The primary aim is to identify the barriers and facilitators patients and the public experience to engagement and recruitment to digital health interventions. The secondary aim is to identify engagement and enrolment strategies, leading if possible to a taxonomy of such approaches, and a conceptual framework of digital health engagement and recruitment processes.

METHODS

A systematic review of qualitative studies will be conducted by searching six databases: MEDLINE, CINAHL, PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus and the ACM Digital Library for papers published between 2000 and 2015. Titles and abstracts along with full-text papers will be screened by two independent reviewers against predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria. A data extraction form will be used to provide details of the included studies. Quality assessment will be conducted using the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research checklist. Any disagreements will be resolved through discussion with an independent third reviewer. Analysis will be guided by framework synthesis and informed by normalization process theory and burden of treatment theory, to aid conceptualisation of digital health engagement and recruitment processes.

DISCUSSION

This systematic review of qualitative studies will explore factors affecting engagement and enrolment in digital health interventions. It will advance our understanding of readiness for digital health by examining the complex factors that affect patients' and the public's ability to take part.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42015029846.

Searching for qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: a structured methodological review

BACKGROUND

Qualitative systematic reviews or qualitative evidence syntheses (QES) are increasingly recognised as a way to enhance the value of systematic reviews (SRs) of clinical trials. They can explain the mechanisms by which interventions, evaluated within trials, might achieve their effect. They can investigate differences in effects between different population groups. They can identify which outcomes are most important to patients, carers, health professionals and other stakeholders. QES can explore the impact of acceptance, feasibility, meaningfulness and implementation-related factors within a real world setting and thus contribute to the design and further refinement of future interventions. To produce valid, reliable and meaningful QES requires systematic identification of relevant qualitative evidence. Although the methodologies of QES, including methods for information retrieval, are well-documented, little empirical evidence exists to inform their conduct and reporting.

METHODS

This structured methodological overview examines papers on searching for qualitative research identified from the Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group Methodology Register and from citation searches of 15 key papers.

RESULTS

A single reviewer reviewed 1299 references. Papers reporting methodological guidance, use of innovative methodologies or empirical studies of retrieval methods were categorised under eight topical headings: overviews and methodological guidance, sampling, sources, structured questions, search procedures, search strategies and filters, supplementary strategies and standards.

CONCLUSIONS

This structured overview presents a contemporaneous view of information retrieval for qualitative research and identifies a future research agenda. This review concludes that poor empirical evidence underpins current information practice in information retrieval of qualitative research. A trend towards improved transparency of search methods and further evaluation of key search procedures offers the prospect of rapid development of search methods.

The effectiveness of peer mentoring in promoting a positive transition to higher education for first-year undergraduate students: a mixed methods systematic review protocol

BACKGROUND

The global transfer of nursing and midwifery education to higher education institutes has led to student nurses and midwives experiencing challenges previously faced by traditional third-level students, including isolation, loneliness, financial difficulties and academic pressure. These challenges can contribute to increased stress and anxiety levels which may be detrimental to the successful transition to higher education, thus leading to an increase in attrition rates. Peer mentoring as an intervention has been suggested to be effective in supporting students in the transition to third-level education through enhancing a sense of belongingness and improving student satisfaction, engagement and retention rates. This proposed systematic review aims to determine the effectiveness of peer mentoring in enhancing levels of student engagement, sense of belonging and overall satisfaction of first-year undergraduate students following transition into higher education.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Web of Knowledge, ProQuest, Embase, CINAHL, ERIC, PsycINFO and CENTRAL databases will be searched for qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies on the implementation of peer assessment strategies in higher education institutes (HEIs) or universities for full-time, first-year adult students (>17 years). Included studies will be limited to the English language. The quality of included studies will be assessed using a validated Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). The findings will be presented as a narrative synthesis or meta-analysis as appropriate following sequential explanatory synthesis.

DISCUSSION

The review will provide clear, non-biased evidence-based guidance to all third-level educators on the effectiveness of peer-mentoring programmes for first-year undergraduates. The review is necessary to help establish which type of peer mentoring is most effective. The evidence from qualitative and quantitative studies drawn from the international literature will be utilised to illustrate the best way to implement and evaluate peer mentoring as an effective intervention and will be useful in guiding future research and practice in this area. These findings may be applied internationally across all disciplines.

The use of purposeful sampling in a qualitative evidence synthesis: A worked example on sexual adjustment to a cancer trajectory

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of qualitative evidence syntheses papers are found in health care literature. Many of these syntheses use a strictly exhaustive search strategy to collect articles, mirroring the standard template developed by major review organizations such as the Cochrane and Campbell Collaboration. The hegemonic idea behind it is that non-comprehensive samples in systematic reviews may introduce selection bias. However, exhaustive sampling in a qualitative evidence synthesis has been questioned, and a more purposeful way of sampling papers has been proposed as an alternative, although there is a lack of transparency on how these purposeful sampling strategies might be applied to a qualitative evidence synthesis. We discuss in our paper why and how we used purposeful sampling in a qualitative evidence synthesis about 'sexual adjustment to a cancer trajectory', by giving a worked example.

METHODS

We have chosen a mixed purposeful sampling, combining three different strategies that we considered the most consistent with our research purpose: intensity sampling, maximum variation sampling and confirming/disconfirming case sampling.

RESULTS

The concept of purposeful sampling on the meta-level could not readily been borrowed from the logic applied in basic research projects. It also demands a considerable amount of flexibility, and is labour-intensive, which goes against the argument of many authors that using purposeful sampling provides a pragmatic solution or a short cut for researchers, compared with exhaustive sampling. Opportunities of purposeful sampling were the possible inclusion of new perspectives to the line-of-argument and the enhancement of the theoretical diversity of the papers being included, which could make the results more conceptually aligned with the synthesis purpose.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper helps researchers to make decisions related to purposeful sampling in a more systematic and transparent way. Future research could confirm or disconfirm the hypothesis of conceptual enhancement by comparing the findings of a purposefully sampled qualitative evidence synthesis with those drawing on an exhaustive sample of the literature.

Time to rethink the systematic review catechism? Moving from 'what works' to 'what happens'

Systematic review methods are developing rapidly, and most researchers would recognise their key methodological aspects, such as a closely focussed question, a comprehensive search, and a focus on synthesising 'stronger' rather than 'weaker' evidence. However, it may be helpful to question some of these underlying principles, because while they work well for simpler review questions, they may result in overly narrow approaches to more complex questions and interventions. This commentary discusses some core principles of systematic reviews, and how they may require further rethinking, particularly as reviewers turn their attention to increasingly complex issues, where a Bayesian perspective on evidence synthesis, which would aim to assemble evidence - of different types, if necessary - in order to inform decisions', may be more productive than the 'traditional' systematic review model. Among areas identified for future research are the examination of publication bias in qualitative research; research on the efficiency and potential biases of comprehensive searches in different disciplines; and the use of Bayesian methods in evidence synthesis. The incorporation of a systems perspective into systematic reviews is also an area which needs rapid development.

Evidence-based mapping of design heterogeneity prior to meta-analysis: a systematic review and evidence synthesis

BACKGROUND

Assessment of design heterogeneity conducted prior to meta-analysis is infrequently reported; it is often presented post hoc to explain statistical heterogeneity. However, design heterogeneity determines the mix of included studies and how they are analyzed in a meta-analysis, which in turn can importantly influence the results. The goal of this work is to introduce ways to improve the assessment and reporting of design heterogeneity prior to statistical summarization of epidemiologic studies.

METHODS

In this paper, we use an assessment of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) as an example to show how a technique called 'evidence mapping' can be used to organize studies and evaluate design heterogeneity prior to meta-analysis.. Employing a systematic and reproducible approach, we evaluated the following elements across 11 selected cohort studies: variation in definitions of SSB, T2D, and co-variables, design features and population characteristics associated with specific definitions of SSB, and diversity in modeling strategies.

RESULTS

Evidence mapping strategies effectively organized complex data and clearly depicted design heterogeneity. For example, across 11 studies of SSB and T2D, 7 measured diet only once (with 7 to 16 years of disease follow-up), 5 included primarily low SSB consumers, and 3 defined the study variable (SSB) as consumption of either sugar or artificially-sweetened beverages. This exercise also identified diversity in analysis strategies, such as adjustment for 11 to 17 co-variables and a large degree of fluctuation in SSB-T2D risk estimates depending on variables selected for multivariable models (2 to 95% change in the risk estimate from the age-adjusted model).

CONCLUSIONS

Meta-analysis seeks to understand heterogeneity in addition to computing a summary risk estimate. This strategy effectively documents design heterogeneity, thus improving the practice of meta-analysis by aiding in: 1) protocol and analysis planning, 2) transparent reporting of differences in study designs, and 3) interpretation of pooled estimates. We recommend expanding the practice of meta-analysis reporting to include a table that summarizes design heterogeneity. This would provide readers with more evidence to interpret the summary risk estimates.