Formulating questions to explore complex interventions within qualitative evidence synthesis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Standard Standard

Formulating questions to explore complex interventions within qualitative evidence synthesis. / Booth, Andrew; Noyes, Jane; Flemming, Kate et al.
In: BMJ Global Health, Vol. 4, No. Suppl 1, 25.01.2019, p. e001107.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

HarvardHarvard

Booth, A, Noyes, J, Flemming, K, Moore, G, Tunçalp, Ö & Shakibazadeh, E 2019, 'Formulating questions to explore complex interventions within qualitative evidence synthesis', BMJ Global Health, vol. 4, no. Suppl 1, pp. e001107. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-001107

APA

Booth, A., Noyes, J., Flemming, K., Moore, G., Tunçalp, Ö., & Shakibazadeh, E. (2019). Formulating questions to explore complex interventions within qualitative evidence synthesis. BMJ Global Health, 4(Suppl 1), e001107. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-001107

CBE

Booth A, Noyes J, Flemming K, Moore G, Tunçalp Ö, Shakibazadeh E. 2019. Formulating questions to explore complex interventions within qualitative evidence synthesis. BMJ Global Health. 4(Suppl 1):e001107. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2018-001107

MLA

VancouverVancouver

Booth A, Noyes J, Flemming K, Moore G, Tunçalp Ö, Shakibazadeh E. Formulating questions to explore complex interventions within qualitative evidence synthesis. BMJ Global Health. 2019 Jan 25;4(Suppl 1):e001107. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-001107

Author

Booth, Andrew ; Noyes, Jane ; Flemming, Kate et al. / Formulating questions to explore complex interventions within qualitative evidence synthesis. In: BMJ Global Health. 2019 ; Vol. 4, No. Suppl 1. pp. e001107.

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Formulating questions to explore complex interventions within qualitative evidence synthesis

AU - Booth, Andrew

AU - Noyes, Jane

AU - Flemming, Kate

AU - Moore, Graham

AU - Tunçalp, Özge

AU - Shakibazadeh, Elham

N1 - This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non commercial IGO License (CC BY-NC 3.0 IGO), which permits use, distribution,and reproduction for non-commercial purposes in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In any reproduction of this article there should not be any suggestion that WHO or this article endorse any specific organization or products. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article's original URL.

PY - 2019/1/25

Y1 - 2019/1/25

N2 - When making decisions about complex interventions, guideline development groups need to factor in the sociocultural acceptability of an intervention, as well as contextual factors that impact on the feasibility of that intervention. Qualitative evidence synthesis offers one method of exploring these issues. This paper considers the extent to which current methods of question formulation are meeting this challenge. It builds on a rapid review of 38 different frameworks for formulating questions. To be useful, a question framework should recognise context (as setting, environment or context); acknowledge the criticality of different stakeholder perspectives (differentiated from the target population); accommodate elements of time/timing and place; be sensitive to qualitative data (eg, eliciting themes or findings). None of the identified frameworks satisfied all four of these criteria. An innovative question framework, PerSPEcTiF, is proposed and retrospectively applied to a published WHO guideline for a complex intervention. Further testing and evaluation of the PerSPEcTiF framework is required.

AB - When making decisions about complex interventions, guideline development groups need to factor in the sociocultural acceptability of an intervention, as well as contextual factors that impact on the feasibility of that intervention. Qualitative evidence synthesis offers one method of exploring these issues. This paper considers the extent to which current methods of question formulation are meeting this challenge. It builds on a rapid review of 38 different frameworks for formulating questions. To be useful, a question framework should recognise context (as setting, environment or context); acknowledge the criticality of different stakeholder perspectives (differentiated from the target population); accommodate elements of time/timing and place; be sensitive to qualitative data (eg, eliciting themes or findings). None of the identified frameworks satisfied all four of these criteria. An innovative question framework, PerSPEcTiF, is proposed and retrospectively applied to a published WHO guideline for a complex intervention. Further testing and evaluation of the PerSPEcTiF framework is required.

U2 - 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-001107

DO - 10.1136/bmjgh-2018-001107

M3 - Article

C2 - 30775019

VL - 4

SP - e001107

JO - BMJ Global Health

JF - BMJ Global Health

SN - 2059-7908

IS - Suppl 1

ER -