This methods article reports on key problems and difficulties encountered in a systematic literature review that in the absence of randomized controlled trials drew on theoretical studies of decision making and practice-based research. The review process is discussed in relation to other approaches to reviewing and synthesizing qualitative research. A pilot systematic review protocol is the focus of this article. Clinical complexity in this study illustrates a need to integrate qualitative methods into systematic review and synthesis, regardless of the research designs under review.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Appleton, J. (1995, June). Health visitor assessment of vulnerability. Health Visitor, 68, 228-231.
2.
Canadian Taskforce on the Periodic Health Examination . (1979). The periodic health examination. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 121, 1139-1254.
3.
Chalmers, I. , & Haynes, B. (1995). Reporting, updating, and correcting systematic reviews of the effects of health care. In I. Chalmers & D. G. Altman (Eds.), Systematic reviews (pp. 86-95). London: BMJ Publishing.
4.
Chalmers, K. I. (1992). Searching for health needs: The work of health visiting. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 18, 900-911.
5.
Cochrane Collaboration on Effective Professional Practice Unit. (CCEPP) . (1996). The data collection checklist. York, UK: Author.
6.
de la Cuesta, C. (1994). Marketing: A process in health visiting. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 19(2), 347-353.
7.
Dowie, J. , & Elstein, A. (1988). Professional judgment: A reader in clinical decision-making. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Evidence-Based Care Resource Group: Evidence-Based Care . (1994a). 1. Setting priorities: How important is this problem?Canadian Medical Association Journal, 150, 1249-1254.
9.
Evidence-Based Care Resource Group: Evidence-Based Care . (1994b). 2. Setting guidelines: How should we manage this problem?Canadian Medical Association Journal, 150, 1417-1426.
10.
Evidence-Based Medicine Working Group . (1992). Evidence-based medicine: A new approach to teaching the practice of medicine. Journal of the American Medical Association, 268, 2418-2425.
11.
Eysenck, H. J. (1994). Meta-analysis or best-evidence synthesis?Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 1(1), 29-36.
12.
Hamm, R. M. (1988). Clinical intuition and clinical analysis: Expertise and the cognitive continuum. In J. Dowie & A. Elstein (Eds.), Professional judgment: A reader in clinical decision-making (pp. 78-105). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
13.
Health Services Research Unit (HSRU) . (1997). NHS decision-making in nursing, therapy and non-medical professions: The report of a pilot study with health visitors to the NHS R&D Directorate South Thames. Canterbury, UK: Christ Church College.
14.
Hunter, D. (1996, March). How can we place evidence-based health care into a context of rational thought in late 20th century? Paper presented at the British Sociological Association conference, The Role of “Consumers”/Users in Evidence-Based Health Care, Westminster City Hall, London.
15.
Jensen, L. A. , & Allen, M. N. (1996). Meta-synthesis of qualitative findings. Qualitative Health Research, 6(4), 553-560.
16.
Long, A. , & Harrison, S. (1996). The balance of evidence. Health Service Journal: Health Management Guide, 6(Suppl.), 1-2.
17.
Long, A. F. , Brettle, A., & Mercer, G. (1995). Searching the literature on the efficacy and effectiveness of complementary therapies: A report by the Yorkshire Collaborating Center for Health Services Research. Leeds, UK: Nuffield Institute for Health.
18.
Luker, K. A. , & Chalmers, K. I. (1990). Gaining access to clients: The case of health visiting. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 15, 74-82.
19.
Mulrow, C. D. (1994). Rationale for systematic reviews. British Medical Journal, 309, 597-599.
Rogers, A. , Popay, J., & Williams, G. (1996, October/November). Rationale and standards for the systematic review of qualitative literature in health services research. Paper presented at the Third International Interdisciplinary Qualitative Health Research Conference, Bournemouth, England.
25.
Rowe, J. (1995). Working with vulnerable families: The impact on health visitor workloads. Health Visitor, 68(6), 232-235.
26.
Sackett, D. I. , & Haynes, R. B. (1996). Evidence-based medicine: What it is and what it isn’t. British Medical Journal, 312, 71.
27.
Stewart, L. , & Parmar, M.K.B. (1993). Meta-analysis of the literature or of individual patient data: Is there a difference?Lancet, 341, 418-422.
28.
Thompson, S. G. (1994). Why sources of heterogeneity in meta-analysis should be investigated. British Medical Journal, 309, 1351-1355.
