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
. 2019 Jan 25;4(Suppl 1):e001107.
doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-001107. eCollection 2019.

Formulating questions to explore complex interventions within qualitative evidence synthesis

Affiliations

Formulating questions to explore complex interventions within qualitative evidence synthesis

Andrew Booth et al. BMJ Glob Health. .

Abstract

When making decisions about complex interventions, guideline development groups need to factor in the sociocultural acceptability of an intervention, as well as contextual factors that impact on the feasibility of that intervention. Qualitative evidence synthesis offers one method of exploring these issues. This paper considers the extent to which current methods of question formulation are meeting this challenge. It builds on a rapid review of 38 different frameworks for formulating questions. To be useful, a question framework should recognise context (as setting, environment or context); acknowledge the criticality of different stakeholder perspectives (differentiated from the target population); accommodate elements of time/timing and place; be sensitive to qualitative data (eg, eliciting themes or findings). None of the identified frameworks satisfied all four of these criteria. An innovative question framework, PerSPEcTiF, is proposed and retrospectively applied to a published WHO guideline for a complex intervention. Further testing and evaluation of the PerSPEcTiF framework is required.

Keywords: qualitative study; systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None declared.

References

    1. Wong G. Is complexity just too complex? J Clin Epidemiol 2013;66:1199–201. 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.06.019 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rogers PJ. Using programme theory to evaluate complicated and complex aspects of interventions. Evaluation 2008;14:29–48. 10.1177/1356389007084674 - DOI
    1. World Health Organization . WHO surgical safety checklist and implementation manual, 2012.
    1. Petticrew M, Knai C, Thomas J, et al. Implications of a complexity perspective for systematic reviews and guideline development in health decision making. BMJ Glob Health 2019;4(Suppl 1):i6–i17. 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000899 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Booth A, Moore G, Flemming K, et al. Taking account of context in systematic reviews and guidelines considering a complexity perspective. BMJ Glob Health 2019;4(Suppl 1):i6–i7. 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-000840 - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources