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

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

Volumn 97, Issue , 2018, Pages 70-78

  Harden, Angela ^a   Thomas, James ^b   Cargo, Margaret ^c   Harris, Janet ^d   Pantoja, Tomas ^e   Flemming, Kate ^f   Booth, Andrew ^d   Garside, Ruth ^g   Hannes, Karin ^h   Noyes, Jane ⁱ  

^a UNIVERSITY OF EAST LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

^d UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

^e PONTIFICIA UNIVERSIDAD CATÓLICA DE CHILE   (Chile)

^f UNIVERSITY OF YORK   (United Kingdom)

^g UNIVERSITY OF EXETER MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United Kingdom)

^h UNIVERSITY OF LEUVEN   (Belgium)

ⁱ BANGOR UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cochrane collaboration; Implementation research; Mixed methods research; Process evaluations; Qualitative evidence synthesis; Qualitative research; Systematic reviews

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; COCHRANE LIBRARY; CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK; EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE; HUMAN; INTEGRATION; INTERVENTION STUDY; METHODOLOGY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRAM EFFECTIVENESS; PROGRAM EVALUATION; PROGRAM THEORY; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; QUANTITATIVE STUDY; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW (TOPIC); THEORY; EVIDENCE BASED MEDICINE; HEALTH CARE DELIVERY; MEDICAL RESEARCH; PRACTICE GUIDELINE; PROCEDURES;

BIOMEDICAL RESEARCH; DELIVERY OF HEALTH CARE; EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE; GUIDELINES AS TOPIC; HUMANS; QUALITATIVE RESEARCH; SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS AS TOPIC;

EID: 85044786247     PISSN: 08954356     EISSN: 18785921     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2017.11.029     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. Barnett-Page, E., Thomas, J., Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review. BMC Med Res Methodol, 9, 2009, 59.
2. Hannes, K., Lockwood, C., Synthesizing qualitative research: choosing the right approach. 2011, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, Chichester, UK.
3. Sandelowski, M., Barroso, J., Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research. 2007, Springer, New York.
4. Glenton, C., Colvin, C.J., Carlsen, B., Swartz, A., Lewin, S., Noyes, J., et al. Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of lay health worker programmes to improve access to maternal and child health: qualitative evidence synthesis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev(10), 2013, CD010414.
5. Hannes, K., Booth, A., Harris, J., Noyes, J., Celebrating methodological challenges and changes: reflecting on the emergence and importance of the role of qualitative evidence in Cochrane reviews. Systematic Reviews, 2, 2013, 84.
6. Petticrew, M., Rehfuess, E., Noyes, J., Higgins, J., Mayhew, A., Panjota, T., et al. Synthesizing evidence on complex interventions: how meta-analytical, qualitative, and mixed-method approaches can contribute. J Clin Epidemiol 66 (2013), 1230–1243.
7. Sutcliffe, K., Thomas, J., Stokes, G., Hinds, K., Bangpan, M., Intervention Component Analysis (ICA): a pragmatic approach for identifying the critical features of complex interventions. Syst Rev, 4, 2015, 140.
8. Saini, M., Shlonsky, A., Systematic synthesis of qualitative research: a pocket guide for social work research methods. 2012, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
9. Yaffe, J., Montgomery, P., Hopewell, S., Shepard, L.D., Empty reviews: a description and consideration of Cochrane systematic reviews with no included studies. PLoS One, 7, 2012, e36626.
10. Johnson, R., Onwuegbuzie, A., Mixed methods research: a research paradigm whose time has come?. Educ Res 33 (2004), 14–26.
11. Moore, G., Audrey, S., Barker, M., Bond, L., Bonell, C., Hardeman, W., et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ, 350, 2015, h1258.
12. Kneale, D., Thomas, J., Harris, K., Developing and optimising the use of logic models in systematic reviews: exploring practice and good practice in the use of programme theory in reviews. PLoS One, 10, 2015, 11.
13. Funnell, S.C., Rogers, P.J., Purposeful program theory: effective use of theories of change and logic models. 2011, John Wiley/Jossey-Bass, New Jersey.
14. Rossi, P.H., Lipsey, M.W., Freeman, H.E., Evaluation. A systematic approach. 7th ed., 2004, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks.
15. Suchman, E., Evaluative research. 1967, Russell Sage Foundation, New York.
16. Weiss, C.H., Evaluation research. Methods of assessing program effectiveness. 1972, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
17. Chen, H.-T., Practical program evaluation. Assessing and improving planning, implementation and effectiveness. 2005, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA 2005.
18. Booth, A., Noyes, J., Flemming, K., Gerhardus, A., Wahlster, P., Van Der Wilt, G.J., et al. Guidance on choosing qualitative evidence synthesis methods for use in health technology assessments of complex interventions. 2016 [Online]. Available at http://www.integrate-hta.eu/downloads/ Accessed January 28, 2018.
19. Dixon-Woods, M., Agarwal, S., Jones, D., Young, B., Sutton, A., Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods. J Health Serv Res Policy 10 (2005), 45–53.
20. Harden, A., Thomas, J., Mixed methods and systematic reviews: examples and emerging issues. Tashakkori, A., Teddlie, C., (eds.) Mixed Methods Handbook, 2nd ed., 2010, Sage Publications, New York.
21. Heyvaert, M., Hannes, K., Onghena, P., Using mixed methods research synthesis for literature reviews. 2016, Sage Publications, New York.
22. Pluye, P., Hong, Q.N., Combining the power of stories and numbers: mixed methods research and mixed methods reviews. Annu Rev Public Health 35 (2014), 29–45.
23. Sandelowski, M., Voils, C., Barroso, J., Defining and designing mixed research synthesis studies. Res Schools 13 (2006), 29–40.
24. Thomas, J., Harden, A., Oakley, A., Oliver, S., Sutcliffe, K., Rees, R., et al. Integrating qualitative research with trials in systematic reviews: an example review from public health shows how integration is possible and some potential benefits. BMJ 328 (2004), 1010–1012.
25. Pawson, R., Evidence-based policy: a realist perspective. 2006, Sage, London.
26. Wong, G., Greenhalgh, T., Westhorp, G., Buckingham, J., Pawson, R., RAMESES publication standards: realist syntheses. J Adv Nurs 69 (2013), 1005–1022.
27. Ragin, C., Redesigning social inquiry: fuzzy sets and beyond. 2008, University of Chicago Press, London.
28. Thomas, J., O'Mara-Eves, A., Brunton, G., Using Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) in systematic reviews of complex interventions: a worked example. Syst Rev, 3, 2014, 67.
29. Tricco, A.C., Antony, J., Soobiah, C., Kastner, M., MacDonald, H., Cogo, E., et al. Knowledge synthesis methods for integrating qualitative and quantitative data: a scoping review reveals poor operationalisation of the methodological steps,. J ClinicalEpidemiology 73 (2016), 29–35.
30. Noyes, J., Lewin, S., Chapter 6: Supplemental guidance on selecting a method of qualitative evidence synthesis, and integrating qualitative evidence with Cochrane intervention reviews. (updated August 2011) Noyes, J., Booth, A., Hannes, K., Harden, A., Harris, J., Lewin, S., et al. (eds.) Supplementary Guidance for Inclusion of Qualitative Research in Cochrane Systematic Reviews of Interventions, 2011, Cochrane Collaboration Qualitative Methods Group Available at http://cqrmg.cochrane.org/supplemental-handbook-guidance Version 1 Accessed January 28, 2018.
31. Heyvaert, M., Maes, B., Onghena, P., Mixed methods research synthesis: definition, framework, and potential. Qual Quant 47 (2013), 659–676.
32. Candy, B., King, M., Jones, L., Oliver, S., Using qualitative synthesis to explore heterogeneity of complex interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol, 11, 2011, 124.
33. Harden, A., Brunton, G., Fletcher, A., Oakley, A., Teenage pregnancy and social disadvantage: a systematic review integrating trials and qualitative studies. BMJ, 339, 2009, b4254v.
34. Shepherd, J., Harden, A., Barnett-Page, E., Kavanagh, J., Picot, J., Frampton, G., et al. Using process data to understand outcomes in sexual health promotion: an example from a review of school-based programmes to prevent sexually transmitted infections. Health Educ Res 29 (2014), 566–582.
35. Sutcliffe, K., Richardson, M., Rees, R., Melendez-Torres, G.J., Stansfield, C., Thomas, J., What are the critical features of successful Tier 2 weight management programmes?: A systematic review to identify the programme characteristics, and combinations of characteristics, that are associated with successful weight loss. 2016, EPPI-Centre, Social Science Research Unit, UCL Institute of Education, University College London, London.
36. Candy, B., King, M., Jones, L., Oliver, S., Using qualitative evidence on patients’ views to help understand variation in effectiveness of complex interventions: a qualitative comparative analysis. Trials, 14, 2013, 179.
37. Flemming, K., Synthesis of quantitative and qualitative research: an example using Critical Interpretive Synthesis. J Adv Nurs 66 (2010), 201–217.
38. Greenhalgh, T., Kristjannson, E., Robinson, V., Realist review to understand the efficacy of school feeding programmes. BMJ 335 (2007), 858–861.
39. Roberts, K., Dixon-Woods, M., Fitzpatrick, R., Abrams, K., Jones, D., Factors affecting uptake of childhood immunisation: a Bayesian synthesis of qualitative and quantitative evidence. Lancet 360 (2002), 1596–1599.
40. Voils, C., Hassselblad, V., Crandell, J., Chang, Y., Lee, E., Sandelowski, M., A Bayesian method for the synthesis of evidence from qualitative and quantitative reports: the example of antiretroviral medication adherence. J Health Serv Res Policy 14 (2009), 226–233.
41. Wong, G., Greenhalgh, T., Westhorp, G., Buckingham, J., Pawson, R., RAMESES publication standards: meta-narrative reviews. J Adv Nurs 69 (2013), 987–1004.
42. Aslam, R.W., Hendry, M., Carter, B., Noyes, J., Rycroft Malone, J., Booth, A., et al. Interventions for preventing unintended repeat pregnancies among adolescents (Protocol). Cochrane Database Syst Rev, 1, 2015, CD011477.
43. Harris, K.M., Kneale, D., Lasserson, T.J., McDonald, V.M., Grigg, J., Thomas, J., School-based self management interventions for asthma in children and adolescents: a mixed methods systematic review (Protocol). Cochrane Database Syst Rev(4), 2015, CD011651.
44. Anderson, L.M., Petticrew, M., Rehfuess, E., Armstrong, R., Ueffing, E., Baker, P., et al. Using logic models to capture complexity in systematic reviews. Res Synth Methods 2:1 (2011), 33–42.
45. Rohwer, A., Booth, A., Pfadenhauer, L., Brereton, L., Gerhardus, A., Mozygemba, K., et al. Guidance on the use of logic models in health technology assessments of complex interventions. 2016 Available at http://www.integrate-hta.eu/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Guidance-on-the-use-of-logic-models-in-health-technology-assessments-of-complex-interventions.pdf Accessed January 28, 2018.
46. Allmark, P., Baxter, S., Goyder, E., Guillaume, L., Crofton-Martin, G., Assessing the health benefits of advice services: using research evidence and logic model methods to explore complex pathways. Health Soc Care Community 21:1 (2013), 59–68.
47. Baxter, S.K., Blank, L., Woods, H.B., Payne, N., Rimmer, M., Goyder, E., Using logic model methods in systematic review synthesis: describing complex pathways in referral management interventions. BMC Med Res Methodol, 14, 2014, 1.
48. Leeuw, F.L., Reconstructing programme theories: methods available and problems to be solved. Am J Eval 24 (2003), 5–20.
49. Pearson, M., Hunt, H., Cooper, C., Shepperd, S., Pawson, R., Anderson, R., Providing effective and preferred care closer to home: a realist review of intermediate care. Health Soc Care Community 23:6 (2015), 577–593.
50. Weiss, C., Evaluation: Methods for studying programs and policies. 1998, Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.
51. Anderson, L.M., Oliver, S.R., Michie, S., Rehfuess, E., Noyes, J., Shemilt, I., Investigating complexity in systematic reviews of interventions by using a spectrum of methods. J Clin Epidemiol 66 (2013), 1223–1229.
52. Oliver, K., Rees, R., Brady, L.M., Kavanagh, J., Oliver, S., Thomas, J., Broadening public participation in systematic reviews: a case example involving young people in two configurative reviews. Res Synth Methods 6:2 (2015), 206–217.
53. Harris, J., Springett, J., Croot, L., Booth, A., Campbell, F., Thompson, J., et al. Can community-based peer support promote health literacy and reduce inequalities? A realist review. Public Health Research, 3, 2015 https://doi.org/10.3310/phr03030 Accessed January 28, 2018.
54. Booth, A., Carroll, C., How to build up the actionable knowledge base: the role of ‘best fit’ framework synthesis for studies of improvement in healthcare. BMJ Qual Saf 24 (2015), 700–708.
55. Hartmann-Boyce J, Johns D, Aveyard P, Onakpoya I, Jebb S, Phillips D, et al. The clinical effectiveness of long-term weight management schemes for adults (Review 1a), Update review for National Institute for Health & Care Excellence guidance on the managing overweight and obese adults. Oxford: University of Oxford; 2013.
56. van Grootel, L., van Wesel, F., O'Mara-Eves, A., Thomas, J., Hox, J., Boeije, H., Using the realist perspective to link theory from qualitative evidence synthesis to quantitative studies: Broadening the matrix approach. Res Synth Methods 8 (2017), 303–311.