Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Reviewing qualitative and quantitative evidence has been advocated to provide in-depth answers to review questions involving complex phenomena. This type of review is emerging, and several synthesis designs have been proposed.
Objective: Using a mixed methods research framework, we aim to identify and describe the different types of synthesis designs applied in systematic mixed studies reviews (SMSR).
Methods: SMSR were searched for in six databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, and Web of Science) from inception through December 2014. Academic journal papers were selected for inclusion if they were systematic reviews combining qualitative, quantitative and/or mixed methods studies.
Results: A total of 7006 records were found, 470 of which met our eligibility criteria. The number of published systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence has increased considerably over the past decade; passing from less than 15 in 2006 to more than 100 in 2014 (Figure 1). Three main types of synthesis designs were identified. A first type is convergent synthesis designs, in which results of included studies are transformed into either qualitative (e.g. themes) or quantitative (e.g. statistics) results. A second type is sequential synthesis designs, in which two synthesis methods are used and the results of both syntheses are compared and integrated: a quantitative synthesis informs the qualitative synthesis (sequential exploratory synthesis design) or a qualitative synthesis informs the quantitative synthesis (sequential explanatory synthesis design). A third design, named parallel, consists in two independent syntheses of qualitative and quantitative data without integration of the results of both syntheses.
Conclusion: Using the mixed methods research framework as a starting point, this review describes the main types of synthesis designs usually applied in SMSR for combining qualitative and quantitative evidence. Results show that these reviews are becoming popular and warrant the need for additional methodological development.
Objective: Using a mixed methods research framework, we aim to identify and describe the different types of synthesis designs applied in systematic mixed studies reviews (SMSR).
Methods: SMSR were searched for in six databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL, AMED, and Web of Science) from inception through December 2014. Academic journal papers were selected for inclusion if they were systematic reviews combining qualitative, quantitative and/or mixed methods studies.
Results: A total of 7006 records were found, 470 of which met our eligibility criteria. The number of published systematic reviews combining qualitative and quantitative evidence has increased considerably over the past decade; passing from less than 15 in 2006 to more than 100 in 2014 (Figure 1). Three main types of synthesis designs were identified. A first type is convergent synthesis designs, in which results of included studies are transformed into either qualitative (e.g. themes) or quantitative (e.g. statistics) results. A second type is sequential synthesis designs, in which two synthesis methods are used and the results of both syntheses are compared and integrated: a quantitative synthesis informs the qualitative synthesis (sequential exploratory synthesis design) or a qualitative synthesis informs the quantitative synthesis (sequential explanatory synthesis design). A third design, named parallel, consists in two independent syntheses of qualitative and quantitative data without integration of the results of both syntheses.
Conclusion: Using the mixed methods research framework as a starting point, this review describes the main types of synthesis designs usually applied in SMSR for combining qualitative and quantitative evidence. Results show that these reviews are becoming popular and warrant the need for additional methodological development.