Assessing qualitative data richness and thickness: Development of an evidence‐based tool for use in qualitative evidence synthesis

Author:

Ames Heather M. R.1ORCID,France Emma F.2ORCID,Cooper Sara345ORCID,Bianchim Mayara S.26ORCID,Lewin Simon789ORCID,Schmidt Bey‐Marrié910ORCID,Uny Isabelle11ORCID,Noyes Jane6ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department for Systematic Reviews and Health Technology Assessments The Norwegian Institute of Public Health Oslo Norway

2. Centre for Healthcare and Community Research, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport University of Stirling Stirling UK

3. Cochrane South Africa, South African Medical Research Council Cape Town South Africa

4. School of Public Health and Family Medicine, Faculty of Health Sciences University of Cape Town Cape Town South Africa

5. Department of Global Health, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences Stellenbosch University Cape Town South Africa

6. School of Medical and Health Sciences Bangor University Bangor UK

7. Department of Health Sciences Ålesund Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) Ålesund Norway

8. Centre for Epidemic Interventions Research (CEIR) Norwegian Institute of Public Health Oslo Norway

9. Health Systems Research Unit South African Medical Research Council Cape Town South Africa

10. School of Public Health University of the Western Cape Cape Town South Africa

11. Institute for Social Marketing and Health, Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport University of Stirling Stirling UK

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundWell‐conducted qualitative evidence syntheses (QESs) can provide invaluable insights into complex phenomena. However, the development of an in‐depth understanding depends on the analysis of rich, thick data from the included primary qualitative studies. Sampling may be needed if there are too many eligible studies. Data richness and thickness are among several criteria that can be taken into consideration when sampling studies for inclusion. However, existing tools do not address explicitly the assessment of both data richness and thickness in the context of QES.MethodsTo address this gap, we have developed, piloted, and conducted initial user testing of a richness and thickness assessment tool. The tool has been in development since 2014. Three pilot versions from three review teams have been used in six Cochrane reviews. Key members from the original three review teams subsequently came together to create a consensus‐based definitive version 1 of the tool. Four review authors piloted the version 1 tool, which has been subject to initial user testing. The version 1 assessment tool consists of two components: assessing the thickness of contextual data and assessing the richness of conceptual data. The accompanying guidance emphasizes the importance of assessing data that addresses the review question.ResultsThe paper provides guidance on how to apply the tool, emphasizing the importance of reaching a consensus among review authors and fostering a shared understanding of what constitutes rich and thick data in the context of the review. The potential challenges related to the time and resource constraints of this additional review process are acknowledged.ConclusionVersion 1 of the tool represents a significant development in QES methodology, filling a critical gap and enhancing the transparency and rigor of the sampling process. The authors invite feedback from the research community to further test, refine and improve this tool based on wider user experiences.

Publisher

Wiley

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3