Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review

• Published in: BMC medical research methodology Vol. 9; no. 1; p. 59
• Main Authors: Barnett-Page, Elaine, Thomas, James
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London BioMed Central 11.08.2009; BioMed Central Ltd; BMC
• Subjects: Debate; Ethnography; Evidence-Based Medicine; Health Sciences; Health Services Needs and Demand; Health Services Research - methods; Humans; Medical research; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Medicine, Experimental; Meta-Analysis as Topic; Methods; Patient Selection; Professional-Patient Relations; Program Evaluation; Qualitative Research; Quality Control; Research Design; Researcher-Subject Relations; Statistical Theory and Methods; Statistics for Life Sciences; Theory of Medicine/Bioethics; United Kingdom; Thematic Synthesis; Qualitative Synthesis; Narrative Synthesis; Theoretical Sampling; Order Construct
• ISSN: 1471-2288; 1471-2288
• DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-9-59

Background In recent years, a growing number of methods for synthesising qualitative research have emerged, particularly in relation to health-related research. There is a need for both researchers and commissioners to be able to distinguish between these methods and to select which method is the most appropriate to their situation. Discussion A number of methodological and conceptual links between these methods were identified and explored, while contrasting epistemological positions explained differences in approaches to issues such as quality assessment and extent of iteration. Methods broadly fall into 'realist' or 'idealist' epistemologies, which partly accounts for these differences. Summary Methods for qualitative synthesis vary across a range of dimensions. Commissioners of qualitative syntheses might wish to consider the kind of product they want and select their method – or type of method – accordingly.