Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Qualitative Evidence Syntheses, Differences From Reviews of Intervention Effectiveness and Implications for Guidance. (11th February 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Glenton, Claire; Lewin, Simon; Downe, Soo; Paulsen, Elizabeth; Munabi-Babigumira, Susan; Agarwal, Smisha; Ames, Heather; Cooper, Sara; Daniels, Karen; Houghton, Catherine; Karimi‐Shahanjarini, Akram; Moloi, Hlengiwe; Odendaal, Willem; Shakibazadeh, Elham; Vasudevan, Lavanya; Xyrichis, Andreas; Bohren, Meghan A.
• Is Part Of: International journal of qualitative methods. Volume 21(2022)
• Publication Date: 2022-02-11
• Subjects: qualitative evidence synthesis -- systematic reviews of qualitative research -- Cochrane -- study language -- purposive sampling -- reflexivity -- conflict of interest; Qualitative research -- Periodicals; Social sciences -- Philosophy -- Periodicals; Social sciences -- Research -- Periodicals; Social sciences -- Statistical methods -- Periodicals; Qualitative Research -- Periodicals; Qualitative research; Social sciences -- Philosophy; Social sciences -- Research; Periodicals; 300.72
• DOI: 10.1177/16094069211061950
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1609-4069

Abstract

Systematic reviews of qualitative research ('qualitative evidence syntheses') are increasingly popular and represent a potentially important source of information about people's views, needs and experiences. Since 2013, Cochrane has published qualitative evidence syntheses, and the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care group has been involved in the majority of these reviews. But more guidance is needed on how to prepare these reviews in an environment that is more familiar with reviews of quantitative research. In this paper, we describe and reflect on how Cochrane qualitative evidence syntheses differ from reviews of intervention effectiveness and how these differences have influenced the guidance developed by the EPOC group. In particular, we discuss how it has been important to display to end users, firstly, that qualitative evidence syntheses are carried out with rigour and transparency, and secondly, that these quality standards need to reflect qualitative research traditions. We also discuss lessons that reviews of effectiveness might learn from qualitative research.