Title |
Meta-ethnography 25 years on: challenges and insights for synthesising a large number of qualitative studies
|
---|---|
Published in |
BMC Medical Research Methodology, June 2014
|
DOI | 10.1186/1471-2288-14-80 |
Pubmed ID | |
Authors |
Francine Toye, Kate Seers, Nick Allcock, Michelle Briggs, Eloise Carr, Karen Barker |
Abstract |
Studies that systematically search for and synthesise qualitative research are becoming more evident in health care, and they can make an important contribution to patient care. Our team was funded to complete a meta-ethnography of patients' experience of chronic musculoskeletal pain. It has been 25 years since Noblit and Hare published their core text on meta-ethnography, and the current health research environment brings additional challenges to researchers aiming to synthesise qualitative research. Noblit and Hare propose seven stages of meta-ethnography which take the researcher from formulating a research idea to expressing the findings. These stages are not discrete but form part of an iterative research process. We aimed to build on the methods of Noblit and Hare and explore the challenges of including a large number of qualitative studies into a qualitative systematic review. These challenges hinge upon epistemological and practical issues to be considered alongside expectations about what determines high quality research. This paper describes our method and explores these challenges. Central to our method was the process of collaborative interpretation of concepts and the decision to exclude original material where we could not decipher a concept. We use excerpts from our research team's reflexive statements to illustrate the development of our methods. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 4 | 27% |
Canada | 3 | 20% |
South Africa | 1 | 7% |
Italy | 1 | 7% |
Spain | 1 | 7% |
Unknown | 5 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
Type | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Members of the public | 8 | 53% |
Scientists | 3 | 20% |
Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 2 | 13% |
Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
Geographical breakdown
Country | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
United Kingdom | 4 | 1% |
Germany | 1 | <1% |
France | 1 | <1% |
Sweden | 1 | <1% |
New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
Spain | 1 | <1% |
United States | 1 | <1% |
Unknown | 270 | 96% |
Demographic breakdown
Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Student > Master | 56 | 20% |
Student > Ph. D. Student | 48 | 17% |
Researcher | 36 | 13% |
Student > Doctoral Student | 23 | 8% |
Student > Bachelor | 17 | 6% |
Other | 41 | 15% |
Unknown | 59 | 21% |
Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
---|---|---|
Social Sciences | 45 | 16% |
Medicine and Dentistry | 41 | 15% |
Nursing and Health Professions | 36 | 13% |
Psychology | 33 | 12% |
Business, Management and Accounting | 11 | 4% |
Other | 42 | 15% |
Unknown | 72 | 26% |