A Comparative Analysis of Three Online Appraisal Instruments' Ability to Assess Validity in Qualitative Research

被引:242
作者
Hannes, Karin [1 ]
Lockwood, Craig [2 ]
Pearson, Alan
机构
[1] Catholic Univ Louvain, Ctr Methodol Educ Res, B-3000 Louvain, Belgium
[2] Univ Adelaide, Joanna Briggs Inst, Res & Innovat Unit, Adelaide, SA, Australia
关键词
evidence-based practice; metasynthesis; research evaluation; review; validity; HEALTH-CARE;
D O I
10.1177/1049732310378656
中图分类号
R1 [预防医学、卫生学];
学科分类号
1004 ; 120402 ;
摘要
The concept of validity has been a central component in critical appraisal exercises evaluating the methodological quality of quantitative studies. Reactions by qualitative researchers have been mixed in relation to whether or not validity should be applied to qualitative research and if so, what criteria should be used to distinguish high-quality articles from others. We compared three online critical appraisal instruments' ability to facilitate an assessment of validity. Many reviewers have used the critical appraisal skills program (CASP) tool to complete their critical appraisal exercise; however, CASP appears to be less sensitive to aspects of validity than the evaluation tool for qualitative studies (ETQS) and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) tool. The ETQS provides detailed instructions on how to interpret criteria; however, it is the JBI tool, with its focus on congruity, that appears to be the most coherent.
引用
收藏
页码:1736 / 1743
页数:8
相关论文
共 31 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], INT J QUALITATIVE ME
[2]  
[Anonymous], RES METH FEST NAT CT
[3]  
[Anonymous], SUMARI J BRIGGS I SY
[4]  
[Anonymous], 1994, Qualitative data analysis, DOI DOI 10.1080/0140528790010406
[5]  
[Anonymous], UPDATE REV PUB UNPUB
[6]  
[Anonymous], CRIT APPR TOOL QUAL
[7]  
[Anonymous], 2000, QUALITATIVE REPORT
[8]  
[Anonymous], 1978, The Research Act: A Theoretical Introduction to Research Methods
[9]  
[Anonymous], EV TOOL QUAL RES
[10]  
[Anonymous], 4 INT C CONC LIB INF