共 6 条
Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series-paper 6: reporting guidelines for qualitative, implementation, and process evaluation evidence syntheses
被引:70
|作者:
Flemming, Kate
[1
]
Booth, Andrew
[2
]
Hannes, Karin
[3
]
Cargo, Margaret
[4
]
Noyes, Jane
[5
]
机构:
[1] Univ York, Fac Sci, Dept Hlth Sci, Seebohm Rowntree Bldg, York YO10 5DD, N Yorkshire, England
[2] Sch Hlth & Related Res ScHARR, 30 Regent St, Sheffield S1 4DA, S Yorkshire, England
[3] Katholieke Univ Leuven, Fac Social Sci, Ctr Sociol Res, Social Res Methodol Grp, Leuven, Belgium
[4] Univ South Australia, Ctr Populat Hlth Res, Spatial Epidemiol & Evaluat Res Grp, South Australia Hlth & Med Res Inst, 8th Floor Off 310,North Terrace, Adelaide, SA 510, Australia
[5] 2 Bangor Univ, Sch Social Sci, Bangor LL57 2DG, Gwynedd, Wales
关键词:
Qualitative evidence synthesis;
Reporting guidelines;
Implementation;
Systematic reviews;
Methods;
KNOWLEDGE SYNTHESIS METHODS;
STANDARDS;
PROTOCOL;
REALIST;
STATEMENT;
D O I:
10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.10.022
中图分类号:
R19 [保健组织与事业(卫生事业管理)];
学科分类号:
摘要:
Objectives: To outline contemporary and novel developments for the presentation and reporting of syntheses of qualitative, implementation, and process evaluation evidence and provide recommendations for the use of reporting guidelines. Study Design and Setting: An overview of reporting guidelines for qualitative, implementation, and process evaluation evidence syntheses drawing on current international literature and the collective expert knowledge of the Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group. Results: Several reporting guidelines exist that can be used or adapted to report syntheses of qualitative, implementation, and process evaluation evidence. Methods to develop individual guidance varied. The use of a relevant reporting guideline can enhance the transparency, consistency, and quality of reporting. Guidelines that exist are generic, method specific, and for particular aspects of the reviewing process, searching. Conclusion: Caution is expressed over the potential for reporting guidelines to produce a mechanistic approach moving the focus away from the content and toward the procedural aspects of the review. The use of a reporting guideline is recommended and a five-step decision flowchart to guide the choice of reporting guideline is provided. Gaps remain in method-specific reporting guidelines such as mixed-study, implementation, and process evaluation evidence syntheses. (C) 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:79 / 85
页数:7
相关论文