Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2007 Jan 15:7:4.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-7-4.

Worked examples of alternative methods for the synthesis of qualitative and quantitative research in systematic reviews

Affiliations

Worked examples of alternative methods for the synthesis of qualitative and quantitative research in systematic reviews

Patricia J Lucas et al. BMC Med Res Methodol. .

Abstract

Background: The inclusion of qualitative studies in systematic reviews poses methodological challenges. This paper presents worked examples of two methods of data synthesis (textual narrative and thematic), used in relation to one review, with the aim of enabling researchers to consider the strength of different approaches.

Methods: A systematic review of lay perspectives of infant size and growth was conducted, locating 19 studies (including both qualitative and quantitative). The data extracted from these were synthesised using both a textual narrative and a thematic synthesis.

Results: The processes of both methods are presented, showing a stepwise progression to the final synthesis. Both methods led us to similar conclusions about lay views toward infant size and growth. Differences between methods lie in the way they dealt with study quality and heterogeneity.

Conclusion: On the basis of the work reported here, we consider textual narrative and thematic synthesis have strengths and weaknesses in relation to different research questions. Thematic synthesis holds most potential for hypothesis generation, but may obscure heterogeneity and quality appraisal. Textual narrative synthesis is better able to describe the scope of existing research and account for the strength of evidence, but is less good at identifying commonality.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Petticrew M, Roberts H. Systematic Reviews in the Social Sciences. A Practical Guide. Oxford, UK, Blackwell Publishing; 2006.
    1. CQMG Cochrane Qualitative Methods Group. 2007. http://www.joannabriggs.edu.au/cqrmg/index.html
    1. Popay J, Roberts H, Sowden A, Pettticrew M, Arai L, Rodgers M, Britten N. Guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews. http://www lancs ac uk/fass/projects/nssr/ 2007.
    1. Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Young B, Jones DR, Sutton AJ. Integrative approaches to qualitative and quantitative evidence. London, Health Development Agency; 2004.
    1. Harden A. Extending the boundaries of systematic reviews to integrate different types of study: examples of methods developed within reviews of young people's health. In: Popay J, editor. Moving beyond effectiveness in evidence synthesis. London, National Institute for Health & Clinical Excellence; 2006. pp. 15–30.

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources