Pragmatism as the philosophical foundation for the Joanna Briggs meta-aggregative approach to qualitative evidence synthesis
Pragmatism as the philosophical foundation for the Joanna Briggs meta-aggregative approach to qualitative evidence synthesis
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1365-2648.2011.05636.x
复制
发表时间：
2011-07-01
影响因子：
3.8
通讯作者：
Lockwood, Craig
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Hannes, Karin;Lockwood, Craig
目的。本文讨论了实用主义哲学在乔安娜·布里格斯定性证据合成的元聚合方法中的作用。背景。越来越多的定性证据综合发表在期刊上，其中许多受到解释性或批判现实主义观点的影响。定性证据合成的一种方法是元聚合。元聚合最初旨在对已建立的有效性审查流程的透明度、可审计性和可靠性进行建模，它为生成综合报表提供了理由，这些报表涉及“行动方针”，为临床或政策层面的决策提供信息。数据源。本文借鉴了有关实用主义哲学（1877-2008）的文献以及乔安娜·布里格斯研究所（Joanna Briggs Institute）在 2004 年至 2007 年间开发的元聚合用户指南进行了讨论。元聚合作为一种方法论是建立在实用主义哲学传统的原则和假设之上的。只有当建议的“行动方针”以某种方式得到有效性衡量标准的支持时，元聚合才能充分发挥其潜力，正如混合方法研究所证明的那样。对护理的启示。作为元聚合综合的结果呈现的“行动方针”本质上是指导性的，并在实际决策时为医疗保健从业者提供信息。结论。元聚合中建议的“行动路线”的真正验证包括令人满意的最终结果（精神或身体），总结研究中出现的基本想法的综合陈述能够在最终用户中生成。
Aim. This paper presents a discussion of the role of the philosophy of pragmatism in the Joanna Briggs meta-aggregative approach to qualitative evidence synthesis.Background. An increasing number of qualitative evidence syntheses are being published in journals, many of them influenced by an interpretive or a critical-realist perspective. One approach to qualitative evidence synthesis is meta-aggregation. Originally designed to model the transparency, auditability and reliability of the established process for effectiveness reviews, meta-aggregation makes a case for the production of synthesized statements that refer to 'lines of action' informing decision-making at the clinical or policy level.Data sources. This paper draws from the literature written on the philosophy of pragmatism (1877-2008) and from the user guidance on meta-aggregation developed by the Joanna Briggs Institute between 2004 and 2007.Discussion. Meta-aggregation as a methodology is founded on the principles and assumptions of the philosophical traditions of pragmatism. Meta-aggregation can only reach its full potential if the 'lines of action' suggested will somehow be supported by measures of effectiveness, as demonstrated in mixed method research.Implications for nursing. The 'lines of action' presented as the result of a meta-aggregative synthesis are directive in nature and inform healthcare practitioners at the point of practical decision-making.Conclusion. The real verification of the 'lines of action' suggested in a meta-aggregation consists of the satisfactorily ending consequences, mental or physical, which the synthesized statements that summarize the basic ideas emerging from the studies are able to generate in end users.