Systematic reviews of qualitative evidence: What are the experiences of women with endometriosis?

Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology

Volumn 26, Issue 6, 2006, Pages 501-506

  Denny, E ^a   Khan, K S ^b  

^a BIRMINGHAM CITY UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b BIRMINGHAM WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ENDOMETRIOSIS; GOVERNMENT; HEALTH CARE NEED; HEALTH CARE POLICY; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REVIEW; STANDARD; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TECHNIQUE;

ADAPTATION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; ENDOMETRIOSIS; FEMALE; HUMANS; QUALITY CONTROL; QUALITY OF LIFE;

EID: 33749032799     PISSN: 01443615     EISSN: 13646893     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/01443610600797301     Document Type: Review

References (31)

1. Ballweg ML. 1992. Endometriosis: the patient's perspective. Infertility and Reproductive Medicine Clinics of North America 3:747-761.
2. Barbour RS. 2001. Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? British Medical Journal 322:1115-1117.
3. Barroso J, Gallup CJ, Sandelowski M et al. 2003. The challenge of searching for and retrieving qualitative studies. Western Journal of Nursing Research 25:153-178.
4. Bryman A. 2001. Social research methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
5. Buchanan DR. 1992. An uneasy alliance: combining qualitative and quantitative research methods. Health Education Quarterly Spring:117-135.
6. Canadian Consensus Conference. 1999. The patient's perspective. The endometriosis association. Journal of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada Special Supplement.
7. Cox H, Henderson L, Andersen N et al. 2003a. Focus group study of endometriosis: struggle, loss and the medical merry-goround. International Journal of Nursing Practice 9:2-9.
8. Cox H, Henderson L, Wood R et al. 2003b. Learning to take charge: women's experiences of living with endometriosis. Complement Therapy Nursing Midwifery 9:62-68.
9. Denny E. (2004a). 'You are one of the unlucky ones': delay in the diagnosis of endometriosis. Diversity in Health and Social Care 1:39-44.
10. Denny E. (2004b). Women's experience of endometriosis. Journal of Advanced Nursing 46:641-648.
11. Dixon-Woods M, Fitzpatrick R. 2001. Qualitative research in systematic reviews. Has established a place for itself. British Medical Journal 323:765-766.
12. Dixon-Woods M, Fitzpatrick R, Roberts K. 2001. Including qualitative research in systematic reviews: opportunities and problems. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 7:125-133.
13. Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Young B et al. 2004. Integrative approaches to qualitative and quantitative evidence. London: Health Development Agency.
14. Evans D. 2002. Database searches for qualitative research. Journal of the Medical Library Association 90:290-293.
15. Grant MJ. 2000. Searching for qualitative research studies on the MEDLINE database: the development of an optimal search strategy. Department of Information and Library Studies.
16. Greenhalgh T, Taylor R. 1997. Papers that go beyond numbers (qualitative research). British Medical Journal 315:740-743.
17. Harden A. 2004. A review of tools for assessing the quality of qualitative studies: implications for systematic reviews (abstract). Ottawa: Cochrane Collaboration Colloquium.
18. Harden A, Garcia J, Oliver S et al. 2004. Applying systematic review methods to studies of people's views: an example from public health research. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health 58:794-800.
19. Howe K, Eisenhart M. 1990. Standards for qualitative (and quantitative) research: a prolegomenon. Educational Researcher 19:2-9.
20. Jones G, Jenkinson C, Kennedy S. 2004. The impact of endometriosis upon quality of life: a qualitative analysis. Journal of Psychosomatic Obstetrics and Gynaecology 25:123-133.
21. Khan KS, Coomarasamy A. 2004. Searching for evidence to inform clinical practice. Current Obstetrics and Gynaecology 14:142-146.
22. Khan KS, Ter Riet G, Glanville J et al. editors. 2001. Undertaking systematic reviews of research on effectiveness. CRD's Guidance for Carrying Out or Commissioning Reviews. 2nd ed. CRD Report No. 4. NHS Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (CRD). York: University of York. Available at: http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/crd/report4.htm
23. Khan KS, Kunz R, Kleijnen J et al. 2003a. Five steps to conducting a systematic review. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 96:118-121.
24. Khan KS, Kunz R, Kleijnen J et al. 2003b. Systematic reviews to support evidence-based medicine: How to review and apply findings of systematic reviews. London: Royal Society of Medicine Press.
25. McDermott E, Graham H, Hamilton V. 2004. Experience of being a teenage mother in the UK: a report of a systematic review of qualitative studies. The Centre for Evidence-based Public Health Policy, the Social and Public Health Services Unit. Glasgow: University of Glasgow.
26. Neelakantan D, Omojole F, Clark TJ et al. 2004. Quality of life instruments in studies of pelvic pain: a systematic review. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 8:851-858.
27. Noblit G, Hare D. 1988. Meta ethnography: synthesising qualitative data. California: SAGE monograph.
28. Popay J, Rogers A, Williams G. 1998. Rationale and standards in the systematic review of qualitative literature in health services research. Qualitative Health Research 8:341-351.
29. Prentice A. 2001. Regular review: Endometriosis. British Medical Journal 323:93-95.
30. Shaw R, Booth A, Sutton A et al. 2004. Finding qualitative research: an evaluation of search strategies. BMC Medical Research Methodology 4:5.
31. Whitney ML. 1998. Importance of lay organizations for coping with endometriosis. Journal of Reproductive Medicine 43:331-334.