Evaluating and synthesizing qualitative research: the need to develop a distinctive approach.

Full Abstract

The growing popularity of qualitative research has led to calls for it to be incorporated into the evidence base. It is argued that, in seeking to respond to this challenge, it is important that we recognize the important differences between qualitative and quantitative research and that we take this into account in developing a distinctive approach. This paper outlines the distinctive contribution made by qualitative research with regard to the nature of the curiosity involved, the iterative research process and its treatment of data, analysis and findings. We caution against simply importing templates developed for systematic review of quantitative work, and make suggestions with regard to developing a new model for evaluating and synthesizing qualitative work. The proposed new model takes a critical look at some of the assumptions underpinning systematic review, such as the process of literature searching and selection of relevant material. Although there is potential for checklist items--such as purposive sampling, respondent validation, multiple coding, triangulation and grounded theory--to be used over-prescriptively in evaluating qualitative papers, it is argued that a more creative engagement with these concepts could yield a distinctive approach more appropriate for this type of work. Moreover, we speculate that some of the questions thereby raised might be usefully applied to consideration of established procedures for reviewing quantitative work.

Learn Faster Today Improve your study skills

Author information

Author/s: Barbour, Rosaline S (RS); Barbour, Michael (M);

Affiliation: Department of General Practice, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK.

Journal and publication information

Publication Type: Journal Article

Journal: Journal of evaluation in clinical practice (J Eval Clin Pract), published in England. (Language: eng)

Reference: 2003-May; vol 9 (issue 2) : pp 179-86

Dates: Created 2003/06/05; Completed 2003/10/29; Revised 2007/11/15;

PMID: 12787181, status: MEDLINE (last retrieval date: 11/6/2008)

Sourced from the National Library of Medicine. Abstract text and other information may be subject to copyright.

External Links for this article (including full text providers, if available):

Click Electronic Full-text Provider Links to see options for finding the electronic full text links to this article. Note there may be a subscription or fee required for access to the full text. See our FAQ for information on finding FREE full text articles.

This article may also be located in paper journal collections available in many libraries. Use the Journal and Publication Information above to find the full article.

MeSH headings (categories)

This article was linked to the MESH Headings shown below.

This article has not been indexed for related articles as yet, however you can still use the live related article search links below.

See 100+ related articles.