Should we exclude inadequately reported studies from qualitative systematic reviews? An evaluation of sensitivity analyses in two case study reviews

Qualitative Health Research

Volumn 22, Issue 10, 2012, Pages 1425-1434

  Carroll, Christopher ^a   Booth, Andrew ^a   Lloyd Jones, Myfanwy ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

critical methods; qualitative analysis; research, mixed methods; systematic reviews; validity

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; LITERATURE; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; REPRODUCIBILITY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; REVIEW LITERATURE AS TOPIC; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 84865615357     PISSN: 10497323     EISSN: 15527557     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1049732312452937     Document Type: Review

References (58)

1. Anthony D., Duffy K.. An evaluation of a tissue viability online course. Information Technology in Nursing. 2003 ; 15: 20-28
2. Barbour R.. Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: A case of the tail wagging the dog?. British Medical Journal. 2001 ; 322: 1115-1117 (Pubitemid 32411191)
3. Barnett-Page E., Thomas J.. Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: A critical review. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2009 ; 9: 59
4. BruntonG.OliverS.OliverK.LorencT. (2006). A synthesis of research addressing children's, young people's and parents' views of walking and cycling for transport for London. Retrieved from http://eppi.ioe.ac.uk/cms/Portals/0/ PDF%20reviews%20and%20summaries/WalkingAndCyclingWEB.pdf
5. Campbell R., Pound P., Pope C., Britten N., Pill R., Morgan N., Donovan J.. Evaluating meta-ethnography: A synthesis of qualitative research on lay experiences of diabetes and diabetes care. Social Science & Medicine. 2003 ; 65: 671-684 (Pubitemid 36135801)
6. Carroll C., Booth A., Cooper K.. A worked example of best-fit framework synthesis: A systematic review of views concerning the taking of potential chemopreventive agents. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2011 ; 11: 29
7. CarrollC.BoothA.PapaioannouD.SuttonA.WongR. (2009). UK healthcare professionals' experience of e-learning techniques: A systematic review of qualitative data. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 29, 235-241. Retrieved from http://www.jcehp.com/
8. Carroll C., Lloyd-Jones M., Cooke J., Owen J.. Reasons for the use and non-use of school sexual health services: A systematic review of young people's views. Journal of Public Health. 2012 ;:
9. Conole G., Hall M., Smith S.. An evaluation of an online course for medical practitioners. Educational Technology & Society. 2002 ; 5: 66-75 (Pubitemid 38817193)
10. Dixon-Woods M., Agarwal S., Jones D., Young B., Sutton A.. Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: A review of possible methods. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2005 ; 10: 45-53B
11. Dixon-Woods M., Bonas S., Booth A., Jones D., Miller T., Shaw R.,... Young B.. How can systematic reviews incorporate qualitative research? A critical perspective. Qualitative Research. 2006 ; 6: 27-44 (Pubitemid 43650772)
12. Dixon-Woods M., Fitzpatrick R.. Qualitative research in systematic reviews has established a place for itself. British Medical Journal. 2001 ; 323: 765-766 (Pubitemid 32946759)
13. Dixon-Woods M., Shaw R., Agarwal S., Smith J.. The problem of appraising qualitative research. Quality and Safety in Health Care. 2004 ; 13: 223-225 (Pubitemid 38797510)
14. Dixon-Woods M., Sutton A., Shaw R., Miller T., Smith J., Young B.,... Jones D.. Appraising qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: A quantitative and qualitative comparison of three methods. Journal of Health Services Research and Policy. 2007 ; 12: 42-47 (Pubitemid 46174205)
15. DowneS. (2008). Metasynthesis: A guide to knitting smoke. Evidence Based Midwifery, 6, 4-8. Retrieved from http://www.rcm.org.uk/ebm/
16. Eakin J., Mykhalovskiy E.. Reframing the evaluation of qualitative health research: Reflections on a review of appraisal guidelines in the health sciences. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice. 2003 ; 9: 187-194 (Pubitemid 36749548)
17. Emihovich C., Herrington C. Sex, kids, and politics: Health services in schools. New York: Teachers College Press ; 1997:
18. Gomersall T., Madill A., Summers L.. Metasynthesis of the self-management of Type 2 diabetes. Qualitative Health Research. 2011 ; 21: 853-871
19. Gresty K., Skirton H., Evenden A.. Addressing the issue of e-learning and online genetics for health professionals. Nursing & Health Sciences. 2007 ; 9: 14-22 (Pubitemid 46218461)
20. Grol R., Dalhuijsen J., Thomas S., Veld C., Rutten G., Mokkink H.. Attributes of clinical guidelines that influence use of guidelines in general practice: An observational study. British Medical Journal. 1998 ; 317: 858-861 (Pubitemid 28434555)
21. Guttmacher S., Lieberman L., Hoi-Chang W., Radosh A., Rafferty Y., Ward D., Freudenberg N.. Gender differences in attitudes and use of condom availability programs among sexually active students in New York City public high schools. Journal of the American Medical Women's Association. 1995 ; 50: 99-102
22. HallN.HarveyP.MeerabeauL.MugglestonD. (2004). An evaluation of online training in the NHS workplace. Retrieved from http://www.recordingachievement. org/images/pdfs/case-studies/HE5Psection/ an%20evaluation%20of%20online%20training%20in%20the%20nhs%20workplace.pdf
23. Hannes K., Lockwood C., Pearson A.. A comparative analysis of three online appraisal instruments' ability to assess validity in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research. 2010 ; 20: 1736-1743
24. Harden A., Garcia J., Oliver S., Rees R., Shepherd J., Brunton G., Oakley A.. Applying systematic review methods to studies of people's views: An example from public health research. Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health. 2004 ; 58: 794-800 (Pubitemid 39127891)
25. HareC.DavisC.ShepherdM. (2006). Safer medicine administration through the use of e-learning. Nursing Times, 102, 25-27. Retrieved from http://www.nursingtimes.net/
26. Health Care Practice Research & Development Unit. (2009). Evaluation tool for qualitative studies. Retrieved from http://usir.salford.ac.uk/12970/1/ Evaluation-Tool-for-Qualitative-Studies.pdf
27. HurstJ. (2005). Evaluating staff and student experiences of multidisciplinary continuous professional development via distance-learning. EDTNA/ERCA Journal, 31, 160-163. Retrieved from http://www.edtnaerca.org/pages/ education/jrc.php (Pubitemid 41789097)
28. KinghornS. (2005). Delivering multiprofessional Web-based psychosocial education-The lessons learnt. International Journal of Palliative Nursing, 11, 432-437. Retrieved from http://www.ijpn.co.uk/
29. Kirby D., Brener N., Brown N., Peterfreund N., Hillard P., Harrist R.. The impact of condom availability [correction of distribution] in Seattle schools on sexual behavior and condom use. American Journal of Public Health. 1999 ; 89: 182-187 (Pubitemid 29282794)
30. LarsenT.JenkinsL. (2005). Evaluation of online learning module about sickness certification for general practitioners. Retrieved from http://193.129.121.133/asd/asd5/rports2005-2006/rrep304.pdf
31. Lincoln Y.. Emerging criteria for quality in qualitative and interpretive research. Qualitative Inquiry. 1995 ; 1: 275-289
32. Mays N., Pope C.. Qualitative research: Rigour and qualitative research. British Medical Journal. 1995 ; 311: 109-112
33. Miles M., Huberman A. Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage ; 1994:
34. Nelson M., Quinney D.. Evaluating a school-based health clinic. Health Visitor. 1997 ; 70: 419-421
35. Noyes J., Popay J.. Directly observed therapy and tuberculosis: How can a systematic review of qualitative research contribute to improving services? A qualitative meta-synthesis. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2007 ; 57: 227-243
36. Oliver S., Rees R., Clarke-Jones L., Milne R., Oakley A., Gabbay J.,...Gyte G.. A multidimensional conceptual framework for analysing public involvement in health services research. Health Expectations. 2008 ; 11: 72-84 (Pubitemid 351239422)
37. Paterson B., Thorne S., Canam C., Jillings C. Meta-study of qualitative health research: A practical guide to meta-analysis and meta-synthesis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage ; 2001:
38. Patton M. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage ; 1990:
39. Pawson R. Evidence based policy: A realist perspective. London: Sage ; 2006:
40. Petticrew M., Roberts H. Systematic reviews in the social sciences: A practical guide. Petticrew M. Roberts H., ed. Oxford, UK: Blackwell ; 2006: 125-163.
41. Popay J., Rogers A., Williams G.. Rationale and standards for the systematic review of qualitative literature. Qualitative Health Research. 1998 ; 8: 341-351 (Pubitemid 128624442)
42. Power R.. Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: Never mind the tail (checklist), check out the dog (research). British Medical Journal. 2001 ; 323: 514-515
43. Public Health Resource Unit, Critical Appraisal Skills Program. (2006). 10 questions to help you make sense of qualitative research. Retrieved from http://www.sph.nhs.uk/sph-files/casp-appraisal-tools/ Qualitative%20Appraisal%20Tool.pdf
44. Salmon D., Ingram J. An evaluation of Brook sexual health outreach in schools. Bristol, UK: University of the West of England, Centre for Public Health Research ; 2008:
45. Sandelowski M., Barroso J. Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. New York: Springer ; 2007:
46. Sandelowski M., Barroso J., Voils C.. Using qualitative metasummary to synthesize qualitative and quantitative descriptive findings. Research in Nursing and Health. 2007 ; 30: 99-111
47. Schulz K., Altman D., Moher D.. CONSORT 2010 statement: Updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomised trials. British Medical Journal. 2010 ; 340: c332
48. Schuster M., Bell R., Berry S., Kanouse D.. Students' acquisition and use of school condoms in a high school condom availability program. Pediatrics. 1997 ; 104: 689-694 (Pubitemid 27425995)
49. Tanner K., Kirton A., Stone N., Ingham R. Evaluating the effectiveness of Time 4U services and associated educational interventions in Worcestershire: Summary of main findings. Worcester, UK: Worcester County Council: ; 2003:
50. Thomas J., Harden A.. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2008 ; 8: 45
51. Thorley K., Turner S., Hussey L., Hall N., Agius R.. CPD for GPs using the THOR-GP website. Occupational Medicine. 2007 ; 57: 575-580 (Pubitemid 350238119)
52. Thorne S.. Toward methodological emancipation in applied health research. Qualitative Health Research. 2011 ; 21: 443-453
53. Washkansky G. Sexual health drop in service. London: London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham ; 2008:
54. Whittemore R., Chase S. K., Mandle C.. Validity in qualitative research. Qualitative Health Research. 2001 ; 11: 522-537 (Pubitemid 33706874)
55. Whittington K., Cook J., Barratt C., Jenkins J.. Can the Internet widen participation in reproductive medicine education for professionals?. Human Reproduction. 2004 ; 19: 1800-1805 (Pubitemid 39144626)
56. Wilkinson A., Forbes A., Bloomfield J., Fincham G.. An exploration of four Web-based open and flexible learning modules in post-registration nurse education. International Journal of Nursing Studies. 2004 ; 41: 411-424 (Pubitemid 38410825)
57. Zabin L., Stark H., Emerson R.. Reasons for delay in contraceptive clinic utilization. Adolescent clinic and nonclinic populations compared. Journal of Adolescent Health. 1991 ; 12: 225-232
58. Zeanah P., Morse E., Simon P., Stock M., Pratt J., Sterne S.. Community reactions to reproductive health care at three school-based clinics in Louisiana. Journal of School Health. 1996 ; 66: 237-241 (Pubitemid 126432940)