A guide to reading and using systematic reviews of qualitative research
(2016) In Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 31(6). p.897-903- Abstract
There is an increasingly widespread policy momentum to increase patient-centred care and to improve quality of life outcomes within health services. Qualitative research methods are used to elicit in-depth and detailed insights into people's attitudes, beliefs, emotions and experiences - much of which may remain unspoken during clinical encounters. Questions about patients' beliefs and preferences for treatment can be addressed by qualitative research and inform evidence-based strategies for delivering patient-centred care. Systematic reviews of multiple primary qualitative studies bring together findings from different studies to offer new and more comprehensive understandings of social phenomena across various healthcare contexts and... (More)
There is an increasingly widespread policy momentum to increase patient-centred care and to improve quality of life outcomes within health services. Qualitative research methods are used to elicit in-depth and detailed insights into people's attitudes, beliefs, emotions and experiences - much of which may remain unspoken during clinical encounters. Questions about patients' beliefs and preferences for treatment can be addressed by qualitative research and inform evidence-based strategies for delivering patient-centred care. Systematic reviews of multiple primary qualitative studies bring together findings from different studies to offer new and more comprehensive understandings of social phenomena across various healthcare contexts and populations and are an emerging methodology in the literature including for care in chronic kidney disease. This article will provide a framework for the systematic review of qualitative research so readers can make sense of these study types and use them in clinical care and policy.
(Less)
- author
- Tong, Allison ; Palmer, Suetonia ; Craig, Jonathan C. and Strippoli, Giovanni F M
- publishing date
- 2016-06-24
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- thematic synthesis
- in
- Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation
- volume
- 31
- issue
- 6
- pages
- 7 pages
- publisher
- Oxford University Press
- external identifiers
-
- pmid:25414375
- scopus:84975117320
- ISSN
- 0931-0509
- DOI
- 10.1093/ndt/gfu354
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- no
- id
- bdc23c60-671b-4946-aa26-e7909d31e690
- date added to LUP
- 2016-07-11 11:29:37
- date last changed
- 2024-03-22 05:07:06
@article{bdc23c60-671b-4946-aa26-e7909d31e690,
abstract = {{<p>There is an increasingly widespread policy momentum to increase patient-centred care and to improve quality of life outcomes within health services. Qualitative research methods are used to elicit in-depth and detailed insights into people's attitudes, beliefs, emotions and experiences - much of which may remain unspoken during clinical encounters. Questions about patients' beliefs and preferences for treatment can be addressed by qualitative research and inform evidence-based strategies for delivering patient-centred care. Systematic reviews of multiple primary qualitative studies bring together findings from different studies to offer new and more comprehensive understandings of social phenomena across various healthcare contexts and populations and are an emerging methodology in the literature including for care in chronic kidney disease. This article will provide a framework for the systematic review of qualitative research so readers can make sense of these study types and use them in clinical care and policy.</p>}},
author = {{Tong, Allison and Palmer, Suetonia and Craig, Jonathan C. and Strippoli, Giovanni F M}},
issn = {{0931-0509}},
keywords = {{thematic synthesis}},
language = {{eng}},
month = {{06}},
number = {{6}},
pages = {{897--903}},
publisher = {{Oxford University Press}},
series = {{Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation}},
title = {{A guide to reading and using systematic reviews of qualitative research}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ndt/gfu354}},
doi = {{10.1093/ndt/gfu354}},
volume = {{31}},
year = {{2016}},
}