arrow
Return

Protocol-developing meta-ethnography reporting guidelines (eMERGe)

delete2015-11-25
delete78
delete
OA
AI
E
Emma F. France *
N
Nicola Ring
J
Jane Noyes
M
Margaret Maxwell
R
Ruth Jepson
E
Edward Duncan
R
Ruth Turley
D
Derek Jones
I
Isabelle Uny
DOI:10.1186/s12874-015-0068-0delete
deleteOriginal
deleteShare
deleteSave
View PDF
Abstract

Abstract

En 中文
Background: Designing and implementing high-quality health care services and interventions requires robustly synthesised evidence. Syntheses of qualitative research studies can provide evidence of patients' experiences of health conditions; intervention feasibility, appropriateness and acceptability to patients; and advance understanding of health care issues. The unique, interpretive, theory-based meta-ethnography synthesis approach is suited to conveying patients' views and developing theory to inform service design and delivery. However, meta-ethnography reporting is often poor quality, which discourages trust in, and use of, meta-ethnography findings. Users of evidence syntheses require reports that clearly articulate analytical processes and findings. Tailored research reporting guidelines can raise reporting standards but none exists for meta-ethnography. This study aims to create an evidence-based meta-ethnography reporting guideline articulating the methodological standards and depth of reporting required to improve reporting quality. Methods/design: The mixed-methods design of this National Institute of Health Research-funded study (http://www.stir.ac.uk/emerge/) follows good practice in research reporting guideline development comprising: (1) a methodological systematic review (PROSPERO registration: CRD42015024709) to identify recommendations and guidance in conducting/reporting meta-ethnography; (2) a review and audit of published meta-ethnographies to identify good practice principles and develop standards in conduct/reporting; (3) an online workshop and Delphi studies to agree guideline content with 45 international qualitative synthesis experts and 45 other stakeholders including patients; (4) development and wide dissemination of the guideline and its accompanying detailed explanatory document, a report template for National Institute of Health Research commissioned meta-ethnographies, and training materials on guideline use. Discussion: Meta-ethnography, devised in the field of education, is now used widely in other disciplines. Methodological advances relevant to meta-ethnography conduct exist. The extent of discipline-specific adaptations of meta-ethnography and the fit of any adaptions with the underpinning philosophy of meta-ethnography require investigation. Well-reported meta-ethnography findings could inform clinical decision-making. A bespoke meta-ethnography reporting guideline is needed to improve reporting quality, but to be effective potential users must know it exists, trust it and use it. Therefore, a rigorous study has been designed to develop and promote a guideline. By raising reporting quality, the guideline will maximise the likelihood that high-quality meta-ethnographies will contribute robust evidence to improve health care and patient outcomes.
Keywords:
Reporting guideline
Meta-ethnography
Qualitative review or synthesis
Qualitative research
Evidence-based practice
Systematic review
AI Summary

AI Summary

Key information extracted from the uploaded paper, including a brief overview, abstract, background, key highlights, visual analysis, and future outlook.

Journal

BMC Medical Research Methodology cover
BMC Medical Research Methodology
IF:
3.4
Papers:
3.9K
Citations:
2.8W

Organization

U
University of Stirling
Scholars:
3.7K
Papers: 4.2K
Citations: 5.8K
B
Bangor University
Scholars:
4.5K
Papers: 4.6K
Citations: 7.6K
C
Cardiff University
Scholars:
2.7W
Papers: 2.5W
Citations: 3.5W
U
University of Edinburgh
Scholars:
5.2W
Papers: 4.6W
Citations: 71
researcher View more organizations
Cited Papers

Cited Papers

Resisting medicines: a synthesis of qualitative studies of medicine taking
err2005-07-01
err714
PREAI
errPound, P; Britten, N; Morgan, M; Yardley, L; Pope, C; Daker-White, G; Campbell, R
errShare
errSave
Conducting a meta-ethnography of qualitative literature: Lessons learnt
err2008-04-16
err761
errOAAI
errAtkins, Salla; Lewin, Simon; Smith, Helen; Engel, Mark; Fretheim, Atle; Volmink, Jimmy
errShare
errSave
Hair growth‐modulation by adrenergic drugs
err2007-05-04
err0
PREAI
errE. M. J. Peters; M. Maurer; V. A. Botchkarev; D. S. Gordon; R. Paus
errShare
errSave
What is the most appropriate knowledge synthesis method to conduct a review? Protocol for a scoping review
err2012-08-03
err258
errOAAI
errKastner, Monika; Tricco, Andrea C.; Soobiah, Charlene; Lillie, Erin; Perrier, Laure; Horsley, Tanya; Welch, Vivian; Cogo, Elise; Antony, Jesmin; Straus, Sharon E.
errShare
errSave
Does the CONSORT checklist improve the quality of reports of randomised controlled trials? A systematic review
err2006-09-04
err666
PREAI
errPlint, Amy C.; Moher, David; Morrison, Andra; Schulz, Kenneth; Altman, Douglas G.; Hill, Catherine; Gaboury, Isabelle
errShare
errSave
'Trying to pin down jelly' - exploring intuitive processes in quality assessment for meta-ethnography
err2013-03-21
err127
errOAAI
errToye, Francine; Seers, Kate; Allcock, Nick; Briggs, Michelle; Carr, Eloise; Andrews, JoyAnn; Barker, Karen
errShare
errSave
researcher View more