Authors' recommendations: Incorporating qualitative research specifically within HTAs and systematic reviews is a relatively recent development but researchers in a range of disciplines have beensynthesising qualitative studies for some time. There is a considerable body of knowledge in this area, both theoretical guidance and practical worked examples. The literature relating to the synthesis of qualitative literature is however complex, especially as several different approaches exist and terminology is often used interchangeably and inconsistently. This is perhaps not surprising as the field is still evolving and those synthesising qualitative research may approach the studies from differing epistemological stances. For example, a researcher synthesising qualitative studies to inductively understand a social phenomenon may adopt a different method from one synthesising qualitative studies with the purpose of better understanding the effects of an empirically-tested clinical intervention. Alternatively, a researcher planning to synthesise qualitative research primarily as a means of generating theory may use a different approach from one who intends to apply the results to answering a specific clinical question. In addition, it is not uncommon for researchers to use the principles of more than one method for synthesising qualitative studies within a single study. Nonetheless, at the time of writing, whilst there are certain methodologies which already appear to be leading the field in healthcare. In particular, these are: meta-ethnography for the synthesis of qualitative studies; thematic synthesis for the integration of qualitative findings with those from quantitative systematic reviews; and realist synthesis to combine a range of evidence.This document only provides an outline of possible methods. Those wishing to undertake a synthesis of qualitative studies within the context of an HTA or systematic review – as well as commissioners and funders of such research – might wish to consider the aim(s) and objective(s) of their review and the outcome required, and select the method(s) accordingly. Finally, researchers are also advised to familiarise themselves with the theoretical and practical guidance associated with the approach(es).

Project Status: Completed

URL for project: http://www.nhshealthquality.org/nhsqis/files/HTA_MethodsofSynthesisingQualitativeLiterature_DEC10.pdf

Year Published: 2010

URL for published report: http://www.nhshealthquality.org/nhsqis/controller?p_service=Content.show&p_applic=CCC&pContentID=8837

English language abstract: An English language summary is available

Publication Type: Not Assigned

Country: Scotland

Organisation Name: Quality Improvement Scotland

Contact Address: Delta House, 50 West Nile Street Glasgow G1 2NP Scotland United Kingdom Tel: +44 141 225 6988; Fax: +44 141 221 3262

Contact Name: shtg.hcis@nhs.net

Contact Email: shtg.hcis@nhs.net

Copyright: NHS Quality Improvement Scotland (NHS QIS)