Booth Andrew, Noyes Jane, Flemming Kate, Moore Graham, Tunçalp Özge, Shakibazadeh Elham
School of Health and Related Research, University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
School of Social Sciences, Bangor University, Wales, UK.
BMJ Glob Health. 2019 Jan 25;4(Suppl 1):e001107. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-001107. eCollection 2019.
When making decisions about complex interventions, guideline development groups need to factor in the sociocultural acceptability of an intervention, as well as contextual factors that impact on the feasibility of that intervention. Qualitative evidence synthesis offers one method of exploring these issues. This paper considers the extent to which current methods of question formulation are meeting this challenge. It builds on a rapid review of 38 different frameworks for formulating questions. To be useful, a question framework should recognise context (as setting, environment or context); acknowledge the criticality of different stakeholder perspectives (differentiated from the target population); accommodate elements of time/timing and place; be sensitive to qualitative data (eg, eliciting themes or findings). None of the identified frameworks satisfied all four of these criteria. An innovative question framework, PerSPEcTiF, is proposed and retrospectively applied to a published WHO guideline for a complex intervention. Further testing and evaluation of the PerSPEcTiF framework is required.
在对复杂干预措施做出决策时,指南制定小组需要考虑干预措施的社会文化可接受性,以及影响该干预措施可行性的背景因素。定性证据综合提供了一种探讨这些问题的方法。本文探讨了当前问题制定方法在多大程度上应对了这一挑战。它基于对38种不同问题制定框架的快速回顾。一个有用的问题框架应该认识到背景(如背景、环境或情境);承认不同利益相关者观点的关键性(与目标人群区分开来);考虑时间/时机和地点因素;对定性数据敏感(例如,引出主题或研究结果)。所确定的框架均未满足所有这四项标准。本文提出了一个创新的问题框架PerSPEcTiF,并将其追溯应用于世界卫生组织发布的一项复杂干预措施指南。需要对PerSPEcTiF框架进行进一步的测试和评估。