META-ANALYSIS AND SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH: MISSION IMPOSSIBLE? Qualitative Inquiry Group Seminar University of Toronto, March 27, 2009 1 len MacEachen (Institute for Work & Health, University of Toronto) ott Reeves (Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, University of Toronto)
32
Embed
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews in qualitative research: Mission impossible?
Meta-analysis and systematic reviews in qualitative research: Mission impossible?. Ellen MacEachen (Institute for Work & Health, University of Toronto) Scott Reeves (Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, University of Toronto). Qualitative Inquiry Group Seminar - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
META-ANALYSIS AND SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS IN QUALITATIVE RESEARCH: MISSION IMPOSSIBLE?
Qualitative Inquiry Group Seminar University of Toronto, March 27, 2009
1
Ellen MacEachen (Institute for Work & Health, University of Toronto)Scott Reeves (Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, University of Toronto)
Overview – 4 parts
1. Where did systematic reviews come from & why do we do them?
2. Brief overview of the systematic review process
3. Cases that draw out systematic review issues Case I (Scott) Case II (Ellen)
4. Reflections on the conduct and usefulness of systematic reviews of qualitative studies
2
1. What are systematic reviews? Positivistic roots / standardization Synthesis of primary studies Multiple check points / dual reviewers /
transparency Assess quality of evidence (only include
‘rigorous’ studies) Inference through statistical analysis
Newer Qual types (meta-ethnography… )
3
Why do SRs?
Useful: Knowledge translation (policymakers/
practitioners) Initial entry into field (academics) Help define field (academics) Outline areas of future research
(acad/policy) Grant applications (academics)
4
2. Brief overview of the systematic review process
A walk through the ‘recipe’ followed for systematic reviews
5
6
FLOWCHART OF STUDIES
Merge databases (n = 7294)AND
REMOVE DUPLICATES = 5067
Inclusion Criteria Applied to
Title and Abstracts/ArticlesExcluded at this level
n = 4256
Studies considered for QA (qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods
(n =609 )
Supplemental articles from reference list
n = 63
Step 6: Finding Synthesis
Excluded at this level n = 13
Excluded at this level n = 20
n = 19
Studies passing quality appraisal n = 14
Studies passing quality appraisal n = 5
Quantitative Studies
Total considered for QA = 44
Qualitative Studies
Total considered for QA = 33
Qualitative Studies
Total considered for DE = 20
Quantitative Studies
Total considered for DE = 23
Medline
Total = 1620
EMBASE
Total = 1683
CINAHL
Total = 443
PsycINFO
Total = 1174
Sociological Abstracts Total = 279
ASSIA
Total = 74
ABI Inform
Total = 381
EconLit
Total = 58
Business Source Premier
Total = 585
Other
Total = 240
Content Experts’ Refs Total = 840
What databases will be searched?
What keywords are used in the search?
What is the scope of the search?
Languages? Dates?
What stakeholders are involved and at what stages?
How will we find papers not listed on
databases?What articles are included/excluded
?
Quality control process for what is
being included/excluded
How will we assess quality?
Two reviewers per paper, consensus
approach
What data will we extract?
Two reviewers per paper at this stage, consensus
approach
Step 1: Library Search
Step 2: Study Relevance
Step 3: Division of QNT/QL Studies
Step 4: Quality Appraisal
Step 5: Data Extraction
3. SR ‘cases’
Case I – Making decisions about how to construct systematic reviews: the early daysInterprofessional education (Scott)
Case II – Struggles with the paradigm of systematic reviews: later daysWork & health in small businesses (Ellen)
8
Interprofessional education (IPE)
Case I: Making decisions about how
to construct systematic reviews:
the early days
9
REVIEW QUESTIONwhat kind of IPE, under what circumstances, produces what kind of outcomes?