Article type
Year
Abstract
Background:
Alongside reporting guidance for quantitative systematic reviews and meta-analyses, researchers have more recently developed reporting guidance for generic and specific qualitative evidence synthesis methods in an attempt to enhance the transparency, consistency, and quality of reporting. Gaps however remain in reporting guidance for syntheses that integrate quantitative and qualitative evidence.
Objectives:
In this paper, we present an overview of contemporary and novel developments and approaches for the presentation and reporting of qualitative and mixed-method syntheses.
Methods and results:
We include an analysis of the completeness of current reporting guidance mapped against internationally agreed methods for reporting guideline development. In addition, we will discuss some of the challenges related to the dissemination and uptake of reporting guidance in diverse qualitative research communities.
Conclusions:
We conclude our paper with some recommendations on how to best choose between the different alternatives presented for different review and synthesis types.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement:
None on the level of this synthesis. Some reports on the guidelines included in our overview report on stakeholder involvement in their procedure of developing reporting guidance, most of them were scholars.
Alongside reporting guidance for quantitative systematic reviews and meta-analyses, researchers have more recently developed reporting guidance for generic and specific qualitative evidence synthesis methods in an attempt to enhance the transparency, consistency, and quality of reporting. Gaps however remain in reporting guidance for syntheses that integrate quantitative and qualitative evidence.
Objectives:
In this paper, we present an overview of contemporary and novel developments and approaches for the presentation and reporting of qualitative and mixed-method syntheses.
Methods and results:
We include an analysis of the completeness of current reporting guidance mapped against internationally agreed methods for reporting guideline development. In addition, we will discuss some of the challenges related to the dissemination and uptake of reporting guidance in diverse qualitative research communities.
Conclusions:
We conclude our paper with some recommendations on how to best choose between the different alternatives presented for different review and synthesis types.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement:
None on the level of this synthesis. Some reports on the guidelines included in our overview report on stakeholder involvement in their procedure of developing reporting guidance, most of them were scholars.