Thorne Sally, Jensen Louise, Kearney Margaret H, Noblit George, Sandelowski Margarete
School of Nursing, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada.
Qual Health Res. 2004 Dec;14(10):1342-65. doi: 10.1177/1049732304269888.
In an era of pressure toward evidence-based health care, we are witnessing a new enthusiasm for qualitative metasynthesis as an enterprise distinct from conventional literature reviews, secondary analyses, and the many other scholarly endeavors with which it is sometimes confused. This article represents the reflections of five scholars, each ofwhom has authored a distinct qualitative metasynthesis strategy. By providing the reader a glimpse into the tradition of their various qualitative metasynthesis projects, these authors offer a finely nuanced examination of the tensions between comparison and integration, deconstruction and synthesis, and reporting and integration within the metasynthesis endeavor. In so doing, they account for many of the current confusions about representation and generalization within the products of these inquiries. Through understanding the bases of their unique angles of vision, the reader is invited to engage in their commitment to scholarly integrity and intellectual credibility in this emerging methodological challenge.
在一个朝着循证医疗保健发展的压力时代,我们目睹了对质性元综合法的新热情,它作为一种与传统文献综述、二次分析以及其他有时与之混淆的诸多学术活动不同的事业。本文呈现了五位学者的思考,他们每人都撰写了独特的质性元综合法策略。通过让读者初步了解他们各种质性元综合法项目的传统,这些作者对元综合法过程中比较与整合、解构与综合以及报告与整合之间的紧张关系进行了细致入微的审视。这样做时,他们解释了当前对这些研究成果中代表性和普遍性的许多困惑。通过理解他们独特视角的基础,邀请读者在这一新兴的方法挑战中秉持他们对学术诚信和知识可信度的承诺。