Department of Social and Environmental Health, London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, UK.
Peninsula Technology Assessment Group (PenTAG), Peninsula College of Medicine & Dentistry, University of Exeter, UK.
Res Synth Methods. 2012 Mar;3(1):1-10. doi: 10.1002/jrsm.1036. Epub 2012 Apr 13.
Systematic reviews of qualitative evidence have been widely used to provide information on the context and implementation of interventions, and their potential barriers and facilitators. However, such reviews face a number of methodological challenges, and there are ongoing debates as to how qualitative evidence can best be used to inform our understanding of interventions. In this paper, we use a case study of two systematic reviews of qualitative evidence on the prevention of skin cancer to explore these issues. We find that qualitative evidence not directly related to interventions is likely to be of value for such reviews, that it is often not possible to construct fully comprehensive search strategies, and that there are diminishing returns to the synthesis, in terms of added value or insight, from the inclusion of large numbers of primary studies. We conclude that there are a number of ways in which systematic reviews of qualitative evidence can be utilised in conjunction with evidence on intervention effectiveness, without compromising the rigour of the review process. In particular, the use of theory to inform frameworks for synthesis is a promising way to integrate a broader range of qualitative evidence. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
系统评价的定性证据已被广泛用于提供干预措施的背景和实施情况的信息，以及它们的潜在障碍和促进因素。然而，这类综述面临着许多方法学上的挑战，并且对于如何最好地利用定性证据来帮助我们了解干预措施，仍存在持续的争论。在本文中，我们使用对预防皮肤癌的两项定性证据系统评价的案例研究来探讨这些问题。我们发现，与干预措施直接相关的定性证据可能对这类综述有价值，构建完全全面的检索策略通常是不可能的，而且从纳入大量原始研究中获得的综合价值或深入见解来看，回报递减。我们得出结论，有许多方法可以将定性证据的系统评价与干预效果的证据结合使用，而不会影响审查过程的严谨性。特别是，使用理论来为综合框架提供信息是整合更广泛的定性证据的一种有前途的方法。版权所有©2012 约翰威立父子有限公司
