| Autor: |
Heid Nøkleby, Heather Melanie R. Ames, Lars Jørun Langøien, Christine Hillestad Hestevik |
| Jazyk: |
angličtina |
| Rok vydání: |
2024 |
| Předmět: |
|
| Zdroj: |
Systematic Reviews, Vol 13, Iss 1, Pp 1-4 (2024) |
| Druh dokumentu: |
article |
| ISSN: |
2046-4053 |
| DOI: |
10.1186/s13643-024-02511-6 |
| Popis: |
Abstract The increasing prevalence and application of qualitative evidence syntheses (QES) in decision-making processes underscore the need for robust tools to assess the methodological limitations of a completed QES. This commentary discusses the limitations of three existing tools and presents the authors’ efforts to address this gap. Through a simple comparative analysis, the three tools are examined in terms of their coverage of essential topic areas. The examination finds that existing assessment tools lack comprehensive coverage, clarity, and grounding in qualitative research principles. The authors advocate for the development of a new collaboratively developed evidence-based tool rooted in qualitative methodology and best practice methods. The conclusion emphasizes the necessity of a tool that can provide a comprehensive judgement on the methodological limitations of a QES, addressing the needs of end-users, and ultimately enhancing the trustworthiness of QES findings in decision-making processes. |
| Databáze: |
Directory of Open Access Journals |
| Externí odkaz: |
|
|
Nepřihlášeným uživatelům se plný text nezobrazuje |
K zobrazení výsledku je třeba se přihlásit.
|
