Tehran University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Qualitative Trial-Sibling Studies and Unrelated Qualitative Studies Contributed to Complex Intervention Reviews Publisher Pubmed



Noyes J1 ; Hendry M2 ; Lewin S3, 4 ; Glenton C3 ; Chandler J5 ; Rashidian A6
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. School of Social Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, LL57 2EF, United Kingdom
  2. 2. North Wales Centre for Primary Care Research, Bangor University, Gwenfro Units, 4-8, Wrexham Technology Park, Wrexham, LL13 7YP, United Kingdom
  3. 3. Global Health Unit, Norwegian Knowledge Centre, Norwegian Institute of Public Health, PO Box 4404, Nydalen, Oslo, N-0403, Norway
  4. 4. Health Systems Research Unit, South African Medical Research Council, Francie van Zijl Drive, Parowvallei, Cape, Tygerberg, South Africa
  5. 5. Cochrane Editorial Unit, Cochrane Central Executive, St Albans House, 57-59 Haymarket, London, SW1Y 4QX, United Kingdom
  6. 6. Department of Health Management and Economics, Tehran University of Medical Science, Tehran, Iran

Source: Journal of Clinical Epidemiology Published:2016


Abstract

Objective To compare the contribution of trial-sibling and unrelated qualitative studies in complex intervention reviews. Study Design and Setting Researchers are using qualitative trial-sibling studies undertaken alongside trials to provide explanations to understand complex interventions. In the absence of qualitative trial-sibling studies, it is not known if qualitative studies unrelated to trials are helpful. Trials, trial-sibling, and unrelated qualitative studies looking at three health system interventions were identified. We looked for similarities and differences between the two types of qualitative studies, such as participants, intervention delivery, context, study quality and reporting, and contribution to understanding trial results. Results Reporting was generally poor in both qualitative study types. We detected no substantial differences in participant characteristics. Interventions in qualitative trial-sibling studies were delivered using standardized protocols, whereas interventions in unrelated qualitative studies were delivered in routine care. Qualitative trial-sibling studies alone provided insufficient data to develop meaningful transferrable explanations beyond the trial context, and their limited focus on immediate implementation did not address all phenomena of interest. Together, trial-sibling and unrelated qualitative studies provided larger, richer data sets across contexts to better understand the phenomena of interest. Conclusions Findings support inclusion of trial-sibling and unrelated qualitative studies to explore complexity in complex intervention reviews. © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Related Docs
View other Related Docs
1. Barriers and Facilitators to the Implementation of Doctor-Nurse Substitution Strategies in Primary Care: A Qualitative Evidence Synthesis, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2019)
2. Applying Grade-Cerqual to Qualitative Evidence Synthesis Findings-Paper 6: How to Assess Relevance of the Data, Implementation Science (2018)
3. Synthesising Quantitative and Qualitative Evidence to Inform Guidelines on Complex Interventions: Clarifying the Purposes, Designs and Outlining Some Methods, BMJ Global Health (2019)
4. Using Qualitative Evidence in Decision Making for Health and Social Interventions: An Approach to Assess Confidence in Findings From Qualitative Evidence Syntheses (Grade-Cerqual), PLoS Medicine (2015)
5. Applying Grade-Cerqual to Qualitative Evidence Synthesis Findings: Introduction to the Series, Implementation Science (2018)
6. Primary-Level Worker Interventions for the Care of People Living With Mental Disorders and Distress in Low- and Middle-Income Countries, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (2021)
7. Applying Grade-Cerqual to Qualitative Evidence Synthesis Findings-Paper 2: How to Make an Overall Cerqual Assessment of Confidence and Create a Summary of Qualitative Findings Table, Implementation Science (2018)
8. Applying Grade-Cerqual to Qualitative Evidence Synthesis Findings-Paper 4: How to Assess Coherence, Implementation Science (2018)
Experts (# of related papers)
Arash Rashidian (8)
Elham Shakibazadeh (2)
Other Related Docs
9. Applying Grade-Cerqual to Qualitative Evidence Synthesis Findings-Paper 5: How to Assess Adequacy of Data, Implementation Science (2018)
10. Applying Grade-Cerqual to Qualitative Evidence Synthesis Findings-Paper 3: How to Assess Methodological Limitations, Implementation Science (2018)