Skip to content

Research at St Andrews

Qualitative evidence syntheses: Assessing the relative contributions of multi-context and single-context reviews

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

DOI

Author(s)

Andrew Booth, Suleiman Mshelia, Chukwudi V. Analo, Sarange Brenda Nyakang'o

School/Research organisations

Abstract

Aims: To examine the strengths and weaknesses of multi-context (international) qualitative evidence syntheses in comparison with single-context (typically single-country) reviews. We compare a multi-country synthesis with single-context syntheses on facility-based delivery in Nigeria and Kenya. Design: Discussion paper. Background: Qualitative evidence increasingly contributes to decision-making. International organizations commission multi-context reviews of qualitative evidence to gain a comprehensive picture of similarities and differences across comparable (e.g., low- and middle-income) countries. Such syntheses privilege breadth over contextual detail, risking inappropriate interpretation and application of review findings. Decision-makers value single-context syntheses that account for the contexts of their populations and health services. We explore how findings from multi- and single-context syntheses contribute against a conceptual framework (adequacy, coherence, methodological limitations and relevance) that underpins the GRADE Confidence in Evidence of Reviews of Qualitative Evidence approach. Data sources: Included studies and findings from a multi-context qualitative evidence synthesis (2001–2013) and two single-context syntheses (Nigeria, 2006–2017; and Kenya, 2002–2016; subsequently updated and revised). Findings: Single-context reviews contribute cultural, ethnic and religious nuances and specific health system factors (e.g., use of a voucher system). Multi-context reviews contribute to universal health concerns and to generic health system concerns (e.g., access and availability). Implications for nursing: Nurse decision-makers require relevant, timely and context-sensitive evidence to inform clinical and managerial decision-making. This discussion paper informs future commissioning and use of multi- and single-context qualitative evidence syntheses. Conclusion: Multi- and single-context syntheses fulfil complementary functions. Single-context syntheses add nuances not identifiable in the remit and timescales of a multi-context review. Impact This study offers a unique comparison between multi-context and single country (Nigeria and Kenya) qualitative syntheses exploring facility-based birth. Clear strengths and weaknesses were identified to inform commissioning and application of future syntheses. Characteristics can inform the commissioning of single- and multi-context nursing-oriented reviews across the world.

Close

Details

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)3812-3822
Number of pages11
JournalJournal of Advanced Nursing
Volume75
Issue number12
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2019

    Research areas

  • facility-based delivery, midwives, nursing research, qualitative evidence synthesIs, research findings, systematic reviews

Discover related content
Find related publications, people, projects and more using interactive charts.

View graph of relations

Related by author

  1. Women's perceived barriers to giving birth in health facilities in rural Kenya: A qualitative evidence synthesis

    Nyakang'o, S. B. & Booth, A., 1 Dec 2018, In: Midwifery. 67, p. 1-11 11 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

  2. Effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving physical and psychological outcomes of fall-related injuries in people with dementia: A narrative systematic review

    Robalino, S., Nyakang'o, S. B., Beyer, F. R., Fox, C. & Allan, L. M., 20 Feb 2018, In: Systematic Reviews. 7, 1, 31.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

  3. Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings-paper 7: understanding the potential impacts of dissemination bias

    Booth, A., Lewin, S., Glenton, C., Munthe-Kaas, H., Toews, I., Noyes, J., Rashidian, A., Berg, R. C., Nyakang'o, B., Meerpohl, J. J. & GRADE-CERQual Coordinating Team, 25 Jan 2018, In: Implementation Science. 13, Supp 1, 12.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Related by journal

  1. Reducing distress in first level and student nurses: a review of the applied stress management literature

    Jones, M. C. & Johnston, D. W., Jul 2000, In: Journal of Advanced Nursing. 32, p. 66-74 9 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

  2. Distress, stress and coping in first year student nurses.

    Jones, MC. & Johnston, D. W., Sep 1997, In: Journal of Advanced Nursing. 26, p. 475-482 8 p.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

ID: 272683959

Top