Series: Practical guidance to qualitative research. Part 7: Qualitative evidence synthesis for emerging themes in primary care research: Scoping review, meta-ethnography and rapid realist review.

Albine Moser, Irene Korstjens
Author Information
  1. Albine Moser: Faculty of Health Care, Research Centre Autonomy and Participation of Chronically Ill People, Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, Heerlen, The Netherlands. ORCID
  2. Irene Korstjens: Faculty of Health Care, Research Centre for Midwifery Science, Zuyd University of Applied Sciences, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Abstract

This article, the seventh in a series aiming to provide practical guidance for qualitative research in primary care, introduces qualitative synthesis research for addressing health themes in primary care research. Qualitative synthesis combines rigorous processes and authorial judgement to present the collective meaning of research outputs; the findings of qualitative studies - and sometimes mixed-methods and quantitative research - are pooled. We describe three exemplary designs: the scoping review, the meta-ethnography and the rapid realist review. Scoping reviews aim to provide an overview of the evidence/knowledge or to answer questions regarding the nature and diversity of the evidence/knowledge available. Meta-ethnographies intend to systematically compare data from primary qualitative studies to identify and develop new overarching concepts, theories, and models. Rapid realist reviews aim to provide a knowledge synthesis by looking at complex questions while responding to time-sensitive and emerging issues. It addresses the question, 'what works, for whom, in what circumstances, and how?'We discuss these three designs' context, what, why, when and how. We provide examples of published studies and sources for further reading, including manuals and guidelines for conducting and reporting these studies. Finally, we discuss attention points for the research team concerning the involvement of necessary experts and stakeholders and choices to be made during the research process.

Keywords

References

  1. Syst Rev. 2012 Feb 10;1:10 [PMID: 22587960]
  2. Syst Rev. 2016 Mar 15;5:44 [PMID: 26979748]
  3. Health Res Policy Syst. 2019 Aug 8;17(1):76 [PMID: 31391057]
  4. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Nov 19;18(1):143 [PMID: 30453902]
  5. Eur J Gen Pract. 2017 Dec;23(1):274-279 [PMID: 29185826]
  6. Health Res Policy Syst. 2008 Jul 09;6:7 [PMID: 18613961]
  7. J Clin Epidemiol. 2021 Feb;130:13-22 [PMID: 33068715]
  8. Eur J Gen Pract. 2021 Dec;27(1):166-175 [PMID: 34282695]
  9. Implement Sci. 2013 Sep 05;8:103 [PMID: 24007206]
  10. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011 Oct;27(4):384-90 [PMID: 22004781]
  11. Eur J Gen Pract. 2022 Dec;28(1):1-12 [PMID: 35037811]
  12. Nurs Ethics. 2022 Aug;29(5):1107-1133 [PMID: 35395917]
  13. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry. 2022 Feb;37(2): [PMID: 34825742]
  14. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Nov 27;12:181 [PMID: 23185978]
  15. Implement Sci. 2010 Jul 19;5:56 [PMID: 20642853]
  16. Syst Rev. 2015 Apr 17;4:50 [PMID: 25925676]
  17. BMC Med. 2015 Sep 16;13:224 [PMID: 26377409]
  18. Health Technol Assess. 2011 Dec;15(43):1-164 [PMID: 22176717]
  19. BMJ Glob Health. 2019 Jan 25;4(Suppl 1):e000882 [PMID: 30775015]
  20. J Clin Epidemiol. 2017 Feb;82:47-60 [PMID: 27591906]
  21. Med Educ. 2013 Mar;47(3):252-60 [PMID: 23398011]
  22. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2019 Jan 31;19(1):25 [PMID: 30709371]
  23. Qual Health Res. 2018 Dec;28(14):2250-2266 [PMID: 29676217]
  24. Prim Care Diabetes. 2007 Feb;1(1):25-33 [PMID: 18632016]
  25. J Adv Nurs. 2021 Apr;77(4):2102-2113 [PMID: 33543511]
  26. BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Jan 8;21(1):50 [PMID: 33419430]
  27. Res Involv Engagem. 2021 Oct 10;7(1):72 [PMID: 34629118]
  28. Ann Intern Med. 2018 Oct 2;169(7):467-473 [PMID: 30178033]
  29. BMC Health Serv Res. 2023 Jan 17;23(1):43 [PMID: 36650497]
  30. Implement Sci. 2018 Jan 25;13(Suppl 1):10 [PMID: 29384082]
  31. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 May;97:35-38 [PMID: 29242094]
  32. Worldviews Evid Based Nurs. 2016 Apr;13(2):118-23 [PMID: 26821833]
  33. Implement Sci. 2010 Sep 20;5:69 [PMID: 20854677]
  34. Eur J Gen Pract. 2022 Dec;28(1):118-124 [PMID: 35593106]
  35. BMJ Open. 2022 Jun 1;12(6):e054780 [PMID: 35649605]
  36. BMJ Open. 2021 Dec 20;11(12):e051383 [PMID: 34930731]
  37. BMC Med. 2016 Jun 24;14(1):96 [PMID: 27342217]
  38. Soc Sci Med. 2022 Oct;311:115313 [PMID: 36087388]
  39. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 Jul;99:41-52 [PMID: 29548841]

MeSH Term

Humans
Qualitative Research
Anthropology, Cultural
Research Design
Primary Health Care
Scoping Reviews As Topic

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0researchqualitativereviewsynthesisprovideprimarycarestudiesrealistmeta-ethnographyrapidguidancethemesQualitative-threescopingScopingreviewsaimevidence/knowledgequestionsemergingdiscussarticleseventhseriesaimingpracticalintroducesaddressinghealthcombinesrigorousprocessesauthorialjudgementpresentcollectivemeaningoutputsfindingssometimesmixed-methodsquantitativepooleddescribeexemplarydesigns:overviewanswerregardingnaturediversityavailableMeta-ethnographiesintendsystematicallycomparedataidentifydevelopnewoverarchingconceptstheoriesmodelsRapidknowledgelookingcomplexrespondingtime-sensitiveissuesaddressesquestion'whatworkscircumstanceshow?'Wedesigns'contextexamplespublishedsourcesreadingincludingmanualsguidelinesconductingreportingFinallyattentionpointsteamconcerninginvolvementnecessaryexpertsstakeholderschoicesmadeprocessSeries:PracticalPart7:evidenceresearch:Primary

Similar Articles

Cited By (2)