Appraising Qualitative Research for Evidence Syntheses: A Compendium of Quality Appraisal Tools
Tóm tắt
As the movement toward evidence-based health policy continues to emphasize the importance of including patient and public perspectives, syntheses of qualitative health research are becoming more common. In response to the focus on independent assessments of rigor in these knowledge products, over 100 appraisal tools for assessing the quality of qualitative research have been developed. The variety of appraisal tools exhibit diverse methods and purposes, reflecting the lack of consensus as to what constitutes appropriate quality criteria for qualitative research. It is a daunting task for those without deep familiarity of the field to choose the best appraisal tool for their purpose. This article provides a description of the structure, content, and objectives of existing appraisal tools for those wanting to evaluate primary qualitative research for a qualitative evidence synthesis. We then discuss common features of appraisal tools and examine their implications for evidence synthesis.
Từ khóa
Tài liệu tham khảo
Barnett-Page E., Thomas J. (2009). Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review. BMC medical research methodology, 9(1), 59. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-9-59
Critical Appraisal Skills Programme. (2016). CASP qualitative research checklist [online]. Retrieved from http://www.casp-uk.net/casp-tools-checklists
Downe S., 2008, Evidence Based Midwifery, 6, 4
Finfgeld D. L. (2003). Metasynthesis: The state of the art—so far. Qualitative health research, 13(7), 893-904. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732303253462
First Nations Governance Centre. (2014). Ownership, Control, Access and Possession (OCAP TM): The path to first nations information governance. Ottawa: First Nations Information Governance Centre. Retrieved from http://fnigc.ca/sites/default/files/docs/ocap_path_to_fn_information_governance_en_final.pdf
Gentles S. J., Jack S. M., Nicholas D. B., McKibbon K. (2014). Critical approach to reflexivity in grounded theory. The Qualitative Report, 19(44), 1–14. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol19/iss44/3
Joanna Briggs Institute. (2016). Checklist for qualitative research [online]. Retrieved from http://joannabriggs.org/research/critical-appraisal-tools.html
Kandasamy S., 2017, Ontario Health Technology Assessment Series, 17, 1
Majid U., HPV testing for primary cervical cancer screening: A health technology assessment
Noblit G. W., Hare R. D., Hare R. D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing qualitative studies Particularities: Collected Essay on Ethnography and Education 44, 93-123. USA: Sage Publications.
Sandelowski M., Barroso J. (2002). Finding the findings in qualitative studies. Journal of nursing scholarship, 34(3), 213-219. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1547-5069.2002.00213.x
Sandelowski M., Barroso J., Voils C. I. (2007). Using qualitative metasummary to synthesize qualitative and quantitative descriptive findings. Research in nursing & health, 30(1), 99-111. https://doi.org/10.1002/nur.20176
Sandelowski M., 2006, Handbook for synthesizing qualitative research
Spencer L., 2003, Quality in qualitative evaluation: A framework for assessing research evidence
Yardley L., 2008, Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods, 2, 235