scispace - formally typeset
Open AccessJournal ArticleDOI

Judgment, resources, and complexity: a qualitative study of the experiences of systematic reviewers of health promotion.

Jonathan Shepherd
- 01 Jun 2013 - 
- Vol. 36, Iss: 2, pp 247-267
TLDR
It was suggested that an understanding of research methods is beneficial for novice reviewers, and long-term investment is needed to support an infrastructure for the production of high-quality systematic reviews of important health promotion priorities.
Abstract
Systematic reviews play an increasingly important role in decision making in health promotion and public health. However, little has been published on how systematic reviewers acquire necessary knowledge and skills, and on the challenges they face in producing reviews. Semistructured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of 17 systematic reviewers of health promotion. They described practice, training, and mentoring as being key ways that they learned reviewing skills, often in combination. Practice-based learning was considered to be particularly beneficial. Training was generally easy to access, though questions were raised about the feasibility of training stakeholders such as health professionals to become reviewers. It was suggested that an understanding of research methods is beneficial for novice reviewers. While funding opportunities for doing reviews are available, long-term investment is needed to support an infrastructure for the production of high-quality systematic reviews of important health promotion priorities.

read more

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI

Meta-analysis, complexity, and heterogeneity : a qualitative interview study of researchers’ methodological values and practices

TL;DR: This qualitative interview study aimed to understand researchers’ understanding of complexity and heterogeneity and the factors which may influence the choices researchers make in synthesising complex data.
Journal ArticleDOI

Techniques for Identifying Cross-Disciplinary and "Hard-to-Detect" Evidence for Systematic Review.

TL;DR: This paper sought to identify evidence on community engagement in public health interventions that aim to reduce health inequalities and identified 319 primary studies cited in reviews after full-text screening that would have been missed by typical searching and screening methods.
Journal ArticleDOI

Interpretive analysis of 85 systematic reviews suggests that narrative syntheses and meta-analyses are incommensurate in argumentation.

TL;DR: Using Toulmin's argumentation theory, the texts of systematic reviews in the area of workplace health promotion are analysed to explore differences in the modes of reasoning embedded in reports of narrative synthesis as compared with reports of meta‐analysis.
Journal ArticleDOI

Just how plain are plain tobacco packs: re-analysis of a systematic review using multilevel meta-analysis suggests lessons about the comparative benefits of synthesis methods

TL;DR: The meta-analysis found that respondents typically rated plain packaging as less attractive than alternative (e.g. branded) tobacco packs, and there were several trade-offs between analysis methods in the types and bodies of evidence each one contained and in the difference between partial precision and breadth of conclusions.
References
More filters
Book

Qualitative methods for health research

TL;DR: Qualitative Methodology and Health Research Developing Qualitative Research Designs Responsibilities, Ethics and Values Managing and Analysing data developing Qualitative Analysis.
Journal ArticleDOI

Realist review - a new method of systematic review designed for complex policy interventions

TL;DR: A model of research synthesis designed to work with complex social interventions or programmes, and which is based on the emerging ‘realist’ approach to evaluation is offered, to enable decision-makers to reach a deeper understanding of the intervention and how it can be made to work most effectively.
Related Papers (5)