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
. 2014 Sep 20:14:108.
doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-14-108.

Establishing confidence in the output of qualitative research synthesis: the ConQual approach

Zachary Munn  1 , Kylie Porritt  2 , Craig Lockwood  3 , Edoardo Aromataris  4 , Alan Pearson  5
Affiliations

Establishing confidence in the output of qualitative research synthesis: the ConQual approach

Zachary Munn et al. BMC Med Res Methodol. .

Abstract

Background: The importance of findings derived from syntheses of qualitative research has been increasingly acknowledged. Findings that arise from qualitative syntheses inform questions of practice and policy in their own right and are commonly used to complement findings from quantitative research syntheses. The GRADE approach has been widely adopted by international organisations to rate the quality and confidence of the findings of quantitative systematic reviews. To date, there has been no widely accepted corresponding approach to assist health care professionals and policy makers in establishing confidence in the synthesised findings of qualitative systematic reviews.

Methods: A methodological group was formed develop a process to assess the confidence in synthesised qualitative research findings and develop a Summary of Findings tables for meta-aggregative qualitative systematic reviews.

Results: Dependability and credibility are two elements considered by the methodological group to influence the confidence of qualitative synthesised findings. A set of critical appraisal questions are proposed to establish dependability, whilst credibility can be ranked according to the goodness of fit between the author's interpretation and the original data. By following the processes outlined in this article, an overall ranking can be assigned to rate the confidence of synthesised qualitative findings, a system we have labelled ConQual.

Conclusions: The development and use of the ConQual approach will assist users of qualitative systematic reviews to establish confidence in the evidence produced in these types of reviews and can serve as a practical tool to assist in decision making.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Ranking for dependability. This figure represents how a score for dependability is developed during the ConQual process, and is based on the response to 5 critical appraisal questions.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Ranking for credibility. This figure represents how a score for credibility is developed during the ConQual process, and is based on the congruency of the authors interpretation and the supporting data.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Guyatt G, Cairns J, Churchill D, Cook D, Haynes B, Hirsh J, Irvine J, Levine M, Levine M, Nishikawa J, Sackett D, Brill-Edwards P, Gerstein H, Gibson J, Jaeschke R, Kerigan A, Neville A, Panju A, Detsky A, Enkin M, Frid P, Gerrity M, Laupacis A, Lawrence V, Menard J, Moyer V, Mulrow C, Links P, Oxman A, Sinclair J, Tugwell P. Evidence-based medicine. A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. JAMA. 1992;268:2420–2425. doi: 10.1001/jama.1992.03490170092032. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sackett D, Rosenberg W, Gray J, Haynes R, Richardson W. Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't. BMJ. 1996;13:71–72. doi: 10.1136/bmj.312.7023.71. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Pearson A, Wiechula R, Court A, Lockwood C. The JBI model of evidence-based healthcare. Int J Evid Base Healthc. 2005;3:207–215. - PubMed
    1. Marshall G, Sykes AE. Radiography. 2010. Systematic reviews: a guide for radiographers and other health care professionals.
    1. Noyes J, Popay J, Pearson A, Hannes K, Booth A. Qualitative research and Cochrane reviews. In: Higgins J, Green S, editors. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Version 510 [updated March 2011] 2011.
Pre-publication history
    1. The pre-publication history for this paper can be accessed here:http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2288/14/108/prepub

LinkOut - more resources