Improving reporting of meta-ethnography: The eMERGe reporting guidance.
guideline
meta-ethnography
nursing
publication standards
qualitative evidence synthesis
qualitative research
reporting
research design
systematic review
Journal
Journal of advanced nursing
ISSN: 1365-2648
Titre abrégé: J Adv Nurs
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7609811
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2019
May 2019
Historique:
received:
13
06
2017
revised:
22
06
2018
accepted:
03
07
2018
pubmed:
16
1
2019
medline:
4
12
2019
entrez:
16
1
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to provide guidance to improve the completeness and clarity of meta-ethnography reporting. Evidence-based policy and practice require robust evidence syntheses which can further understanding of people's experiences and associated social processes. Meta-ethnography is a rigorous seven-phase qualitative evidence synthesis methodology, developed by Noblit and Hare. Meta-ethnography is used widely in health research, but reporting is often poor quality and this discourages trust in and use of its findings. Meta-ethnography reporting guidance is needed to improve reporting quality. The eMERGe study used a rigorous mixed-methods design and evidence-based methods to develop the novel reporting guidance and explanatory notes. The study, conducted from 2015 - 2017, comprised of: (1) a methodological systematic review of guidance for meta-ethnography conduct and reporting; (2) a review and audit of published meta-ethnographies to identify good practice principles; (3) international, multidisciplinary consensus-building processes to agree guidance content; (4) innovative development of the guidance and explanatory notes. Recommendations and good practice for all seven phases of meta-ethnography conduct and reporting were newly identified leading to 19 reporting criteria and accompanying detailed guidance. The bespoke eMERGe Reporting Guidance, which incorporates new methodological developments and advances the methodology, can help researchers to report the important aspects of meta-ethnography. Use of the guidance should raise reporting quality. Better reporting could make assessments of confidence in the findings more robust and increase use of meta-ethnography outputs to improve practice, policy, and service user outcomes in health and other fields. This is the first tailored reporting guideline for meta-ethnography. This article is being simultaneously published in the following journals: Journal of Advanced Nursing, Psycho-oncology, Review of Education, and BMC Medical Research Methodology. 目的: 本研究的目的是为提高元人种志报告的完整性和清晰度提供指导。 背景: 基于证据的政策和实践需要强有力的证据合成,以进一步了解人们的经验和相关的社会过程。 种志是由诺伯特和黑尔开发的一种严谨的七-相定性证据综合方法。元人种志在健康研究中被广泛使用,但报告质量往往很差,这阻碍了对研究结果的信任和使用。元人种志报告指南是提高报告质量所必需的。 设计: 本研究采用了严格的混合方法设计和基于证据的方法来开发新的报告指南和注释。 方法: 这项研究从2015年到2017年进行,包括:(1)对元人种志行为和报告指南的方法系统审查;(2)审查和审计已出版的元人种志,以确定良好的实践原则;(3)国际、多学科的共识--建立过程以达成指导内容;(4)创新发展的指导和说明。 研究发现: 新确定的所有七个元人种志实施和报告阶段的建议和良好做法提供了19项报告准则,并附有详细的指南。 结论: 定制的新兴报告指南,包含了新的方法论的发展和进步,可以帮助研究人员报告元人种志的重要方面。使用指南应提高报告质量。更好的报告可以使对调查结果的信心评估更加可靠,并增加对元人种学输出的使用,以改进卫生和其他领域的实践、政策和服务用户结果。这是第一个为元人种学量身定制的报告指南。本文同时发表于《高级护理杂志》、《精神肿瘤学》、《教育评论》和《英国医学委员会医学研究方法论》等期刊。.
Sections du résumé
AIMS
OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to provide guidance to improve the completeness and clarity of meta-ethnography reporting.
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Evidence-based policy and practice require robust evidence syntheses which can further understanding of people's experiences and associated social processes. Meta-ethnography is a rigorous seven-phase qualitative evidence synthesis methodology, developed by Noblit and Hare. Meta-ethnography is used widely in health research, but reporting is often poor quality and this discourages trust in and use of its findings. Meta-ethnography reporting guidance is needed to improve reporting quality.
DESIGN
METHODS
The eMERGe study used a rigorous mixed-methods design and evidence-based methods to develop the novel reporting guidance and explanatory notes.
METHODS
METHODS
The study, conducted from 2015 - 2017, comprised of: (1) a methodological systematic review of guidance for meta-ethnography conduct and reporting; (2) a review and audit of published meta-ethnographies to identify good practice principles; (3) international, multidisciplinary consensus-building processes to agree guidance content; (4) innovative development of the guidance and explanatory notes.
FINDINGS
RESULTS
Recommendations and good practice for all seven phases of meta-ethnography conduct and reporting were newly identified leading to 19 reporting criteria and accompanying detailed guidance.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The bespoke eMERGe Reporting Guidance, which incorporates new methodological developments and advances the methodology, can help researchers to report the important aspects of meta-ethnography. Use of the guidance should raise reporting quality. Better reporting could make assessments of confidence in the findings more robust and increase use of meta-ethnography outputs to improve practice, policy, and service user outcomes in health and other fields. This is the first tailored reporting guideline for meta-ethnography. This article is being simultaneously published in the following journals: Journal of Advanced Nursing, Psycho-oncology, Review of Education, and BMC Medical Research Methodology.
目的: 本研究的目的是为提高元人种志报告的完整性和清晰度提供指导。 背景: 基于证据的政策和实践需要强有力的证据合成,以进一步了解人们的经验和相关的社会过程。 种志是由诺伯特和黑尔开发的一种严谨的七-相定性证据综合方法。元人种志在健康研究中被广泛使用,但报告质量往往很差,这阻碍了对研究结果的信任和使用。元人种志报告指南是提高报告质量所必需的。 设计: 本研究采用了严格的混合方法设计和基于证据的方法来开发新的报告指南和注释。 方法: 这项研究从2015年到2017年进行,包括:(1)对元人种志行为和报告指南的方法系统审查;(2)审查和审计已出版的元人种志,以确定良好的实践原则;(3)国际、多学科的共识--建立过程以达成指导内容;(4)创新发展的指导和说明。 研究发现: 新确定的所有七个元人种志实施和报告阶段的建议和良好做法提供了19项报告准则,并附有详细的指南。 结论: 定制的新兴报告指南,包含了新的方法论的发展和进步,可以帮助研究人员报告元人种志的重要方面。使用指南应提高报告质量。更好的报告可以使对调查结果的信心评估更加可靠,并增加对元人种学输出的使用,以改进卫生和其他领域的实践、政策和服务用户结果。这是第一个为元人种学量身定制的报告指南。本文同时发表于《高级护理杂志》、《精神肿瘤学》、《教育评论》和《英国医学委员会医学研究方法论》等期刊。.
Autres résumés
Type: Publisher
(chi)
目的: 本研究的目的是为提高元人种志报告的完整性和清晰度提供指导。 背景: 基于证据的政策和实践需要强有力的证据合成,以进一步了解人们的经验和相关的社会过程。 种志是由诺伯特和黑尔开发的一种严谨的七-相定性证据综合方法。元人种志在健康研究中被广泛使用,但报告质量往往很差,这阻碍了对研究结果的信任和使用。元人种志报告指南是提高报告质量所必需的。 设计: 本研究采用了严格的混合方法设计和基于证据的方法来开发新的报告指南和注释。 方法: 这项研究从2015年到2017年进行,包括:(1)对元人种志行为和报告指南的方法系统审查;(2)审查和审计已出版的元人种志,以确定良好的实践原则;(3)国际、多学科的共识--建立过程以达成指导内容;(4)创新发展的指导和说明。 研究发现: 新确定的所有七个元人种志实施和报告阶段的建议和良好做法提供了19项报告准则,并附有详细的指南。 结论: 定制的新兴报告指南,包含了新的方法论的发展和进步,可以帮助研究人员报告元人种志的重要方面。使用指南应提高报告质量。更好的报告可以使对调查结果的信心评估更加可靠,并增加对元人种学输出的使用,以改进卫生和其他领域的实践、政策和服务用户结果。这是第一个为元人种学量身定制的报告指南。本文同时发表于《高级护理杂志》、《精神肿瘤学》、《教育评论》和《英国医学委员会医学研究方法论》等期刊。.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30644123
doi: 10.1111/jan.13809
pmc: PMC7594209
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Systematic Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1126-1139Subventions
Organisme : Economic and Social Research Council
ID : RES-590-28-0005
Organisme : Medical Research Council
ID : MR/K023209/1
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
ID : WT087640MA
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : UK Clinical Research Collaboration
Organisme : National Institute of Health Research (NIHR)
ID : 13/114/60
Organisme : Department of Health
ID : HS&DR/13/114/60
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : Welsh Government
Organisme : Cancer Research UK
Pays : United Kingdom
Organisme : British Heart Foundation
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Advanced Nursing Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Syst Rev. 2016 Mar 15;5:44
pubmed: 26979748
Med J Aust. 2006 Sep 4;185(5):263-7
pubmed: 16948622
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013 Mar 21;13:46
pubmed: 23517438
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Nov 08;(11):ED000073
pubmed: 24524152
Soc Sci Med. 2005 Jul;61(1):133-55
pubmed: 15847968
Med Educ. 2013 Mar;47(3):252-60
pubmed: 23398011
Qual Health Res. 2013 Jan;23(1):126-41
pubmed: 23166156
Implement Sci. 2016 Jul 18;11:98
pubmed: 27430879
Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2010 Feb 08;5:
pubmed: 20640028
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009 Aug 11;9:59
pubmed: 19671152
J Med Libr Assoc. 2006 Oct;94(4):421-9, e205
pubmed: 17082834
Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 2011 Oct;27(4):384-90
pubmed: 22004781
Qual Health Res. 2014 Nov;24(11):1581-91
pubmed: 25192758
J Adv Nurs. 2019 May;75(5):1126-1139
pubmed: 30644123
Qual Health Res. 2007 Jan;17(1):113-21
pubmed: 17170249
J Adv Nurs. 2013 Jan;69(1):194-204
pubmed: 22591030
J Health Serv Res Policy. 2002 Oct;7(4):209-15
pubmed: 12425780
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 May;97:49-58
pubmed: 29247700
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2012 Nov 27;12:181
pubmed: 23185978
PLoS Med. 2009 Jul 21;6(7):e1000097
pubmed: 19621072
Health Policy Plan. 2014 Dec;29 Suppl 3:iii70-8
pubmed: 25435538
Health Technol Assess. 2011 Dec;15(43):1-164
pubmed: 22176717
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006 Jul 26;6:35
pubmed: 16872487
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008 Apr 16;8:21
pubmed: 18416812
BMJ. 2017 Jan 16;356:j80
pubmed: 28093384
J Clin Epidemiol. 2018 May;97:79-85
pubmed: 29222060
Psychooncology. 2015 Nov;24(11):1347-8
pubmed: 26291310
Prof Inferm. 2012 Jan-Mar;65(1):55-60
pubmed: 22463754
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014 Nov 19;14:119
pubmed: 25407140
Nurse Res. 2008;15(2):59-71
pubmed: 18283763
Qual Health Res. 2004 Dec;14(10):1342-65
pubmed: 15538004
PLoS Med. 2010 Feb 16;7(2):e1000217
pubmed: 20169112
PLoS Med. 2015 Oct 27;12(10):e1001895
pubmed: 26506244
Soc Sci Med. 2003 Feb;56(4):671-84
pubmed: 12560003
Qual Health Res. 2017 Jan;27(1):3-12
pubmed: 27956657
AORN J. 2009 Nov;90(5):701-2, 705-10
pubmed: 19895928
BMC Med. 2013 Jan 29;11:20
pubmed: 23360661
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2015 Nov 25;15:103
pubmed: 26606922
Qual Health Res. 2013 Sep;23(9):1285-92
pubmed: 23964060
Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2005 Sep;3(8):207-15
pubmed: 21631749
Patient Educ Couns. 2011 Nov;85(2):e131-43
pubmed: 21396793
Soc Sci Med. 2009 Jan;68(1):154-68
pubmed: 19013702
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2014 Jun 21;14:80
pubmed: 24951054
J Adv Nurs. 2005 Apr;50(2):204-11
pubmed: 15788085