Article type
Year
Abstract
Background: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) is a promising new review method for examining the complex causal recipes of multi-component interventions. Reviewers employing this method have used it in a variety of ways, including development of hypotheses to test in meta-analysis – and to explain heterogeneity of outcomes in existing meta-analyses. To make reviewers aware of the diversity of ways in which QCA may be used to explore intervention complexity, the aim of this review of reviews is to identify and develop a typology of QCA review designs.
Objectives: to describe the diversity of approaches for employing QCA in systematic reviews to explore intervention complexity.
Methods: we will conduct a review of systematic reviews employing QCA as a method of analysis. We will search multiple databases from inception to 2019. Reviews will be included if they are systematic reviews involving QCA. We will analyze the included reviews according the nature of synthesis processes including:
1) the combination of methods employed in the review: QCA alone, QCA in combination with meta-analysis (MA) or QCA in combination with narrative synthesis (NS); and
2) the sequence of synthesis: QCA is the first stage of synthesis and is used to inform MA or NS, or QCA is used second in order to explain the findings of existing MA or NS.
Results: we will present the findings of the review of reviews to provide a comprehensive overview of existing systematic reviews that employ QCA. Our analyses will explore the extent and nature of use of this emerging methodology. In addition we will present a typology of QCA reviews which will enable reviewers to understand the diversity of ways in which QCA has been employed to understand intervention complexity in systematic reviews.
Conclusions: there is diversity in the ways that QCA can be used to unpack intervention complexity in systematic reviews. The typology will help reviewers to understand the diversity of approaches, as well as how it might be used in their own work.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement: patients or healthcare consumers were not involved, since the focus is methodological rather than substantive.
Objectives: to describe the diversity of approaches for employing QCA in systematic reviews to explore intervention complexity.
Methods: we will conduct a review of systematic reviews employing QCA as a method of analysis. We will search multiple databases from inception to 2019. Reviews will be included if they are systematic reviews involving QCA. We will analyze the included reviews according the nature of synthesis processes including:
1) the combination of methods employed in the review: QCA alone, QCA in combination with meta-analysis (MA) or QCA in combination with narrative synthesis (NS); and
2) the sequence of synthesis: QCA is the first stage of synthesis and is used to inform MA or NS, or QCA is used second in order to explain the findings of existing MA or NS.
Results: we will present the findings of the review of reviews to provide a comprehensive overview of existing systematic reviews that employ QCA. Our analyses will explore the extent and nature of use of this emerging methodology. In addition we will present a typology of QCA reviews which will enable reviewers to understand the diversity of ways in which QCA has been employed to understand intervention complexity in systematic reviews.
Conclusions: there is diversity in the ways that QCA can be used to unpack intervention complexity in systematic reviews. The typology will help reviewers to understand the diversity of approaches, as well as how it might be used in their own work.
Patient or healthcare consumer involvement: patients or healthcare consumers were not involved, since the focus is methodological rather than substantive.
PDF