Qualitative studies conducted alongside randomized controlled trials in oncology: A scoping review of use and rigour of reporting.
Clinical trials
Neoplasms
Psych-oncology
Qualitative research
Randomized controlled trial
Research design
Trial-sibling
Journal
International journal of nursing studies
ISSN: 1873-491X
Titre abrégé: Int J Nurs Stud
Pays: England
ID NLM: 0400675
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Apr 2022
Apr 2022
Historique:
received:
13
03
2021
revised:
22
12
2021
accepted:
05
01
2022
pubmed:
21
2
2022
medline:
17
3
2022
entrez:
20
2
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for generating evidence to inform clinical oncology practice. Knowledge gained through qualitative research methodologies can be complementary to that gained through RCTs. How qualitative research has been combined with RCTs in oncology has not been previously characterized. This scoping review was conducted to summarize how qualitative research associated with RCTs in the oncology setting has been conducted and examine the quality of reporting. Manuscripts reporting on qualitative research linked with RCTs in the cancer context that involved patients (both adult and pediatric) and/or informal caregiver (friends/family) were included. Peer-reviewed manuscripts indexed in MEDLINE (OVID) and CINAHL, published in English between 2008 and January 2019. Formal scoping review methods were followed. A data extraction tool informed by the research questions as well as the COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research (COREQ) was utilized. Extraction was conducted independently by two authors, with disagreements resolved by a third. Fifty-four articles were included. Assessing information sharing, diet/exercise, and psychotherapeutic interventions were the most common focuses of the RCTs. The most common focus of the qualitative component was on gaining insight into the experience of receiving the intervention or participating in RCT procedures. How the intervention impacted the cancer experience was not a common focus of the qualitative components. Some reports provided insufficient information to understand how the qualitative components aligned with the RCT components. The results of the qualitative and RCT components were not integrated to draw meaningful conclusions about the efficacy of the intervention under study in most cases. Reports focusing on only qualitative methods had higher median (Mdn) reporting of COREQ items compared to reports that included both the qualitative and RCT components (Mdn = 18 vs. Mdn = 14, respectively; p <0.001). This review identified that qualitative research has been combined with RCTs in the cancer context in a number of ways, most commonly to understand the experience of receiving study interventions or participating in trial procedures. Exploring how interventions impact other aspects of the cancer experience is an approach that should be considered in future work. Formalized guidelines for the design and reporting of investigations that combine qualitative and RCT approaches in the cancer context are expected to be of value. Combining qualitative research with randomized controlled trials in oncology: an impornt opportunity for discovery.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for generating evidence to inform clinical oncology practice. Knowledge gained through qualitative research methodologies can be complementary to that gained through RCTs. How qualitative research has been combined with RCTs in oncology has not been previously characterized.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
This scoping review was conducted to summarize how qualitative research associated with RCTs in the oncology setting has been conducted and examine the quality of reporting.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
METHODS
Manuscripts reporting on qualitative research linked with RCTs in the cancer context that involved patients (both adult and pediatric) and/or informal caregiver (friends/family) were included.
SOURCES OF EVIDENCE
METHODS
Peer-reviewed manuscripts indexed in MEDLINE (OVID) and CINAHL, published in English between 2008 and January 2019.
CHARTING METHODS
METHODS
Formal scoping review methods were followed. A data extraction tool informed by the research questions as well as the COnsolidated criteria for REporting Qualitative research (COREQ) was utilized. Extraction was conducted independently by two authors, with disagreements resolved by a third.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Fifty-four articles were included. Assessing information sharing, diet/exercise, and psychotherapeutic interventions were the most common focuses of the RCTs. The most common focus of the qualitative component was on gaining insight into the experience of receiving the intervention or participating in RCT procedures. How the intervention impacted the cancer experience was not a common focus of the qualitative components. Some reports provided insufficient information to understand how the qualitative components aligned with the RCT components. The results of the qualitative and RCT components were not integrated to draw meaningful conclusions about the efficacy of the intervention under study in most cases. Reports focusing on only qualitative methods had higher median (Mdn) reporting of COREQ items compared to reports that included both the qualitative and RCT components (Mdn = 18 vs. Mdn = 14, respectively; p <0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
This review identified that qualitative research has been combined with RCTs in the cancer context in a number of ways, most commonly to understand the experience of receiving study interventions or participating in trial procedures. Exploring how interventions impact other aspects of the cancer experience is an approach that should be considered in future work. Formalized guidelines for the design and reporting of investigations that combine qualitative and RCT approaches in the cancer context are expected to be of value.
TWEETABLE ABSTRACT
CONCLUSIONS
Combining qualitative research with randomized controlled trials in oncology: an impornt opportunity for discovery.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35183865
pii: S0020-7489(22)00003-7
doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2022.104174
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Review
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
104174Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest None.