Centre for Health Equity Training, Research and Evaluation (CHETRE), Part of the UNSW Australia Research Centre for Primary Health Care & Equity, A Unit of Population Health, South Western Sydney Local Health District, NSW Health, A member of the Ingham Institute, Sydney, Australia.
School of Population Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Syst Rev. 2021 Dec 11;10(1):311. doi: 10.1186/s13643-021-01848-6.
Urban health is a field of research and practice that has attracted the interest of various disciplines. While it is encouraged for diverse disciplines to contribute to a multidisciplinary field of study such as urban health, this often results in tensions, conflicts or competition between the different traditions that stem from different epistemological backgrounds. This meta-narrative review aims to identify and describe the multiple paradigms and articulate the underlying epistemological, ontological, methodological, and aetiological differences in their approaches. Articulating the paradigms not only contributes to the advancement of research, but also provides a framework for understanding the different policy beliefs and ideas policy actors hold and apply in the policy process.
We apply the meta-narrative method to systematic literature review which includes the following six iterative phases. The planning phase includes the finalisation of the review protocol and assembly of review team. The search phase includes a comprehensive literature search in key databases and a double-sided systematic snowballing method. We will search multidisciplinary databases including Web of Science, Scopus and ProQuest, and topic-specific databases including Urban Studies Abstracts (EBSCO), MEDLINE, and EMBASE from their inception onwards. Bibliometric analyses of this literature will be used to triangulate the mapping of the paradigms. The mapping phase includes identifying the dominant paradigms and landmark publications through agreement with the review team. In the appraisal phase, the literature will be assessed by their respective quality standards, followed by data extraction to identify the individual narratives in the conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and instrumental dimensions of each paradigm. The synthesis phase will review the data to compare and contrast and identify the overarching meta-narratives. The recommendation phase will include dissemination of the findings from the review.
The meta-narrative review will reveal the how the different paradigms conceptualise, frame and prioritise urban health issues, their preferred methodologies to study the phenomenon, and the nature of the solutions to improve human health. This review will assist researchers and practitioners in understanding and interpreting evidence produced by other traditions that study urban health. Through this, urban health researchers and practitioners will be able to seek coherence in understanding, explaining, and exploring the urban health phenomenon.
Open Science Framework ( https://osf/io/tn8vk ).
城市健康是一个吸引了多个学科关注的研究和实践领域。虽然鼓励不同学科为城市健康等多学科领域的研究做出贡献，但这通常会导致不同传统之间产生紧张、冲突或竞争，而这些传统则源于不同的认识论背景。本元叙事综述旨在确定和描述多个范式，并阐明其方法在认识论、本体论、方法论和病因学方面的潜在差异。阐明范式不仅有助于研究的推进，还为理解政策制定者在政策过程中持有的不同政策信念和想法提供了一个框架。
我们应用元叙事方法对系统文献综述进行研究，该综述包括以下六个迭代阶段。规划阶段包括审查方案的最终确定和审查团队的组建。搜索阶段包括在主要数据库中进行全面的文献搜索，以及双边系统的滚雪球方法。我们将搜索多学科数据库，包括 Web of Science、Scopus 和 ProQuest，以及特定于主题的数据库，包括 Urban Studies Abstracts (EBSCO)、MEDLINE 和 EMBASE，从它们的创立开始。对该文献的文献计量分析将用于三角测量范式的映射。在映射阶段，通过与审查团队达成一致，确定主导范式和标志性出版物。在评价阶段，将根据各自的质量标准对文献进行评估，然后提取数据以确定每个范式在概念、理论、方法和工具维度上的个体叙事。综合阶段将对数据进行回顾，以比较和对比，并确定主导的元叙事。建议阶段将包括从审查中发现的结果的传播。
元叙事综述将揭示不同范式如何概念化、构建和优先考虑城市健康问题，以及他们研究城市健康现象的首选方法和改善人类健康的解决方案的性质。本综述将帮助研究人员和实践者理解和解释其他研究城市健康的传统产生的证据。通过这种方式，城市健康研究人员和实践者将能够在理解、解释和探索城市健康现象方面寻求一致性。
开放科学框架（https://osf.io/tn8vk）。
