首页> 外文期刊>International journal of nursing studies >A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in Mixed Studies Reviews.
【24h】

A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in Mixed Studies Reviews.

机译:一个评分系统,用于评估混合方法研究,并同时评估“混合研究”评论中的定性,定量和混合方法主要研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

A new form of literature review has emerged, Mixed Studies Review (MSR). These reviews include qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies. In the present paper, we examine MSRs in health sciences, and provide guidance on processes that should be included and reported. However, there are no valid and usable criteria for concomitantly appraising the methodological quality of the qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies. OBJECTIVE: To propose criteria for concomitantly appraising the methodological quality of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies or study components. DESIGN: A three-step critical review was conducted. DATA SOURCES: 2322 references were identified in MEDLINE, and their titles and abstracts were screened; 149 potentially relevant references were selected and the full-text papers were examined; 59 MSRs were retained and scrutinized using a deductive-inductive qualitative thematic data analysis. This revealed three types of MSR: convenience, reproducible, andsystematic. REVIEW METHODS: Guided by a proposal, we conducted a qualitative thematic data analysis of the quality appraisal procedures used in the 17 systematic MSRs (SMSRs). RESULTS: Of 17 SMSRs, 12 showed clear quality appraisal procedures with explicit criteria but no SMSR used valid checklists to concomitantly appraise qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies. In two SMSRs, criteria were developed following a specific procedure. Checklists usually contained more criteria than needed. In four SMSRs, a reliability assessment was described or mentioned. While criteria for quality appraisal were usually based on descriptors that require specific methodological expertise (e.g., appropriateness), no SMSR described the fit between reviewers' expertise and appraised studies. Quality appraisal usually resulted in studies being ranked by methodological quality. CONCLUSION: A scoring system is proposed for concomitantly appraising the methodological quality of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies for SMSRs. This scoring system may also be used to appraise the methodological quality of qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods components of mixed methods research.
机译:一种新的文学评论形式已经出现,即混合研究评论(MSR)。这些评论包括定性,定量和混合方法研究。在本文中,我们研究了健康科学中的MSR,并提供了有关应包括和报告的过程的指导。但是,目前尚无有效和可用的标准来同时评估定性,定量和混合方法研究的方法学质量。目的:提出标准,以同时评价定性,定量和混合方法研究或研究组成部分的方法学质量。设计:进行了三步严格审查。资料来源:在MEDLINE中鉴定了2322篇参考文献,并筛选了其标题和摘要。选择了149篇可能相关的参考文献,并对全文进行了审查;保留了59个MSR,并使用演绎-归纳定性主题数据分析进行了审查。这揭示了MSR的三种类型:便捷,可重现和系统化。审查方法:在一项提案的指导下,我们对17个系统MSR(SMSR)中使用的质量评估程序进行了定性的主题数据分析。结果:在17个SMSR中,有12个显示了明确的质量评估程序,并有明确的标准,但没有SMSR使用有效的检查表来同时评估定性,定量和混合方法研究。在两个SMSR中,遵循特定程序制定了标准。清单通常包含比所需更多的条件。在四个SMSR中,描述或提到了可靠性评估。虽然质量评估的标准通常基于需要特定方法学专门知识(例如适当性)的描述子,但SMSR并未描述审查者的专业知识与评估研究之间的契合度。质量评估通常导致研究按方法学质量排名。结论:提出了一个评分系统,以同时评估SMSR的定性,定量和混合方法研究的方法学质量。该评分系统还可用于评估混合方法研究的定性,定量和混合方法组成部分的方法学质量。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号