Formulating questions to explore complex interventions within qualitative evidence synthesis
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
Standard Standard
In: BMJ Global Health, Vol. 4, No. Suppl 1, 25.01.2019, p. e001107.
Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review
HarvardHarvard
APA
CBE
MLA
VancouverVancouver
Author
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 -