NOW FOR AN ORIGINAL PAPER ASSIGNMENT:Case Study: Qualitative Research Methods

For this, and other reasons, the Cochrane Collaboration’s Qualitative Research Methods Group promotes ‘qualitative evidence synthesis’ as the terminology of choice. Other terms encountered in the literature include the tautological ‘qualitative meta-synthesis’ and the misleading ‘meta-ethnography’ (describing a method that can be adapted to interpreting many types of qualitative research, not simply ethnographies).

Perceived strengths. Qualitative systematic reviews can be used: to explore barriers and facilitators to the delivery and uptake of services; for an exploration of user views; to investigate perceptions of new roles, from the point of view of either those filling the roles or those with whom the post holder interacts; and to inform the prioritization of services where evidence on effectiveness is equivocal and preferences and attitudes thus become the determining factors.40 This type of review therefore possesses a considerable strength in complementing the research evidence with the other two essential components of evidence practice, i.e. user-reported and practitioner-observed considerations.41 Provided such insights are generalizable, findings from qualitative research may be more powerful than isolated comments from local questionnaires or surveys.

Perceived weaknesses. Methods for qualitative systematic review are still in their infancy and there is considerable debate about when specific methods or approaches are appropriate. For example, opinions differ as to whether comprehensive search strategies are required, identifying as many relevant qualitative research studies as possible, or whether what is being sought is a holistic interpretation of a phenomenon. If the latter is the case, then a more selective search approach may be

acceptable as long as the method of sampling papers for inclusion is appropriate. Such debates centre on whether the dominant model for qualitative evidence synthesis is the classic systematic review method or whether it is more appropriate to adapt and adopt concepts from primary qualitative research (e.g. grounded theory, theoretical saturation, purposive sampling etc.). Nevertheless, emerging guidance, now included in the Cochrane Collaboration’s handbook42

and Centre for Reviews and Dissemination methodologies is gradually moving towards greater consensus.43

Example. Duggan, F. & Banwell, L. Constructing a model of effective information dissemination in a crisis. Information Research 2004, 9(3). Available from: http://InformationR.net/ir/9-3/paper178.html.