Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods.
Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1258/1355819052801804
复制
发表时间：
2005-01-01
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
Sutton, Alex
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Dixon-Woods, Mary;Agarwal, Shona;Sutton, Alex
背景技术背景：传统形式的系统评价在最佳利用各种形式的证据方面的局限性越来越明显，特别是对政策制定者和从业人员而言。有一个迫切需要强大的方法，将定性证据纳入systematic reviews.结论：在本文中，我们提供了一个简要的概述和选择的定性和定量证据的综合策略的批评，从技术，主要是定性和解释，通过技术，主要是定量和综合。结果：有一系列方法可用于综合各种形式的证据。这些方法包括叙述性摘要、主题分析、扎根理论、元民族志、元研究、现实主义综合、迈尔斯和休伯曼的数据分析技术、内容分析、个案调查、定性比较分析和贝叶斯元分析。方法不同，在他们的长处和短处，能够处理定性和定量形式的证据，和类型的问题，他们是最合适的.CONCLUSIONS：我们确定了一些程序，概念和理论问题，需要解决在这一领域的前进，并强调需要对现有的技术进行评估和修改，而不是发明新的方法。
BACKGROUND: The limitations of traditional forms of systematic review in making optimal use of all forms of evidence are increasingly evident, especially for policy-makers and practitioners. There is an urgent need for robust ways of incorporating qualitative evidence into systematic reviews.OBJECTIVES: In this paper we provide a brief overview and critique of a selection of strategies for synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence, ranging from techniques that are largely qualitative and interpretive through to techniques that are largely quantitative and integrative.RESULTS: A range of methods is available for synthesising diverse forms of evidence. These include narrative summary, thematic analysis, grounded theory, meta-ethnography, meta-study, realist synthesis, Miles and Huberman's data analysis techniques, content analysis, case survey, qualitative comparative analysis and Bayesian meta-analysis. Methods vary in their strengths and weaknesses, ability to deal with qualitative and quantitative forms of evidence, and type of question for which they are most suitable.CONCLUSIONS: We identify a number of procedural, conceptual and theoretical issues that need to be addressed in moving forward with this area, and emphasise the need for existing techniques to be evaluated and modified, rather than inventing new approaches.