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
Comparative Study
. 2013 Jun 18:14:179.
doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-14-179.

Using qualitative evidence on patients' views to help understand variation in effectiveness of complex interventions: a qualitative comparative analysis

Bridget Candy  1 , Michael King, Louise Jones, Sandy Oliver
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Using qualitative evidence on patients' views to help understand variation in effectiveness of complex interventions: a qualitative comparative analysis

Bridget Candy et al. Trials. .

Abstract

Background: Complex healthcare interventions consist of multiple components which may vary in trials conducted in different populations and contexts. Pooling evidence from trials in a systematic review is challenging because it is unclear which components are needed for effectiveness. The potential is recognised for using recipients' views to explore why some complex interventions are effective and others are not. Methods to maximise this potential are poorly developed.

Methods: We used a novel approach to explore how patients' views may explain the disparity in effectiveness of complex interventions. We used qualitative comparative analysis to explore agreement between qualitative syntheses of data on patients' views and evidence from trialed interventions to increase adherence to treatments. We first populated data matrices to reflect whether the content of each trialed intervention could be matched with suggestions arising from patients' views. We then used qualitative comparative analysis software to identify, by a process of elimination, the smallest number of configurations (patterns) of components that corresponded with patients' suggestions and accounted for whether each intervention was effective or ineffective.

Results: We found suggestions by patients were poorly represented in interventions. Qualitative comparative analysis identified particular combinations of components corresponding with patients' suggestions and with whether an intervention was effective or ineffective. Six patterns were identified for an effective and four for an ineffective intervention. Two types of patterns arose for the effective interventions, one being didactic (providing clear information or instruction) and the other interactive (focusing on personal risk factors).

Conclusions: Our analysis highlights how data on patients' views has the potential to identify key components across trials of complex interventions or inform the content of new interventions to be trialed.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart for QCA analysis.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Langhorne P, Pollock A. in conjunction with the Stroke Unit Trialists’ Collaboration. What are the components of effective stroke unit care? Age Ageing. 2002;31:365–371. doi: 10.1093/ageing/31.5.365. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lamb SE, Becker C, Gillespie LD, Smith JL, Finnegan S, Potter R, Pfeiffer K. for The Taxonomy Investigators. Reporting of complex interventions in clinical trials: development of a taxonomy to classify and describe fall-prevention interventions. Trials. 2011;12:125. doi: 10.1186/1745-6215-12-125. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gardner B, Whittington C, McAteer J, Eccles MP, Michie S. Using theory to synthesise evidence from behaviour change interventions: the example of audit and feedback. Soc Sci Med. 2010;70:1618–1625. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2010.01.039. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Thomas J, Harden A, Oakley A, Oliver S, Sutcliffe K, Rees R, Brunton G, Kavanagh J. Integrating qualitative research with trials in systematic reviews. BMJ. 2004;328:1010–1012. doi: 10.1136/bmj.328.7446.1010. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. on behalf of the Cochrane Qualitative Research Methods Group. Qualitative research and Cochrane reviews. In: The Cochrane Collaboration, Higgins JPT, Green S, editor. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011] 2011. Chapter 20. Available at [ http://www.cochrane-handbook.org]

Publication types