Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Improving reporting of Meta-Ethnography: The eMERGe Reporting Guidance

  • Emma F. France
  • , Maggie Cunningham
  • , Nicola Ring
  • , Isabelle Uny
  • , Edward AS Duncan
  • , Ruth G Jepson
  • , Margaret Maxwell
  • , Rachel J. Roberts
  • , Ruth L. Turley
  • , Andrew Booth
  • , Nicky Britten
  • , Kate Flemming
  • , Ian Gallagher
  • , Ruth Garside
  • , Karin Hannes
  • , Simon Lewin
  • , George W. Noblit
  • , Catherine Pope
  • , James Thomas
  • , Meredith Vanstone
  • Gina M. A. Higginbottom, Jane Noyes
    • University of Stirling
    • University of Edinburgh
    • University of Exeter Medical School
    • University of York
    • eMERGe project
    • University of Leuven
    • University of North Carolina
    • University of Southampton
    • EPPI-Centre, Institute of Education, University of London
    • McMaster University, Hamilton
    • University of Nottingham
    • Edinburgh Napier University
    • Cardiff University
    • University of Sheffield
    • University of Exeter
    • Knowledge Centre for the Health Services at the Norwegian Institute of Public Health, Oslo

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    216 Downloads (Pure)

    Abstract

    Abstract
    Aims
    To provide guidance to improve the completeness and clarity of meta-ethnography reporting.
    Background
    Evidence-based policy and practice require robust evidence syntheses which can further understanding of people’s experiences and associated social processes. Meta-ethnography is a rigorous seven-phase qualitative evidence synthesis methodology, developed by Noblit and Hare. Meta-ethnography is used widely in health research, but reporting is often poor quality and this discourages trust in and use of its findings. Meta-ethnography reporting guidance is needed to improve reporting quality.
    Design The eMERGe study used a rigorous mixed-methods design and evidence-based methods to develop the novel reporting guidance and explanatory notes.
    Methods
    The study, conducted from 2015-2017, comprised of: (1) a methodological systematic review of guidance for meta-ethnography conduct and reporting; (2) a review and audit of published meta-ethnographies to identify good practice principles; (3) international, multi-disciplinary consensus-building processes to agree guidance content; (4) innovative development of the guidance and explanatory notes.
    Findings
    Recommendations and good practice for all seven phases of meta-ethnography conduct and reporting were newly identified leading to nineteen reporting criteria and accompanying detailed guidance.
    Conclusion
    The bespoke eMERGe Reporting Guidance, which incorporates new methodological developments and advances the methodology, can help researchers to report the important aspects of meta-ethnography. Use of the guidance should raise reporting quality. Better reporting could make assessments of confidence in the findings more robust and increase use of meta-ethnography outputs to improve practice, policy and service user outcomes in health and other fields. This is the first tailoredreporting guideline for meta-ethnography. The article is being simultaneously published in the following journals: BMC Medical Research Methodology, Journal of Advanced Nursing, PLOS ONE, Psycho-Oncology; and Review of Education.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)1126-1139
    Number of pages14
    JournalJournal of Advanced Nursing
    Volume75
    Issue number5
    Early online date15 Jan 2019
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - May 2019

    Keywords

    • guideline
    • meta-ethnography
    • nursing
    • publication standards
    • qualitative evidence synthesis
    • qualitative research
    • reporting
    • research design
    • systematic review

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Improving reporting of Meta-Ethnography: The eMERGe Reporting Guidance'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this