Journal of Health Services Research & Policy > Volume 10, Number 1 > Pp. 45-53B

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Dixon-Woods, M. Articles by Sutton, A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Social Bookmarking                      What's this?

Review Article

Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods

Mary Dixon-Woods, Shona Agarwal, David Jones, Bridget Young, Alex Sutton

Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK; Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester; Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester; Division of Clinical Psychology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK; Department of Health Sciences, University of Leicester, Leicester

Background: The limitations of traditional forms of systematic review in making optimal use of all forms of evidence are increasingly evident, especially for policy-makers and practitioners. There is an urgent need for robust ways of incorporating qualitative evidence into systematic reviews.

Objectives: In this paper we provide a brief overview and critique of a selection of strategies for synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence, ranging from techniques that are largely qualitative and interpretive through to techniques that are largely quantitative and integrative.

Results: A range of methods is available for synthesising diverse forms of evidence. These include narrative summary, thematic analysis, grounded theory, meta-ethnography, meta-study, realist synthesis, Miles and Huberman's data analysis techniques, content analysis, case survey, qualitative comparative analysis and Bayesian meta-analysis. Methods vary in their strengths and weaknesses, ability to deal with qualitative and quantitative forms of evidence, and type of question for which they are most suitable.

Conclusions: We identify a number of procedural, conceptual and theoretical issues that need to be addressed in moving forward with this area, and emphasise the need for existing techniques to be evaluated and modified, rather than inventing new approaches.

CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. Dixon-Woods Why is patient safety so hard? A selective review of ethnographic studies J Health Serv Res Policy, January 1, 2010; 15(suppl_1): 11 - 16. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. Voils, V. Hassselblad, J. Crandell, Y. Chang, E. Lee, and M. Sandelowski A Bayesian method for the synthesis of evidence from qualitative and quantitative reports: the example of antiretroviral medication adherence J Health Serv Res Policy, October 1, 2009; 14(4): 226 - 233. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				L. Rchaidia, B. Dierckx de Casterle, L. De Blaeser, and C. Gastmans Cancer Patients' Perceptions of the Good Nurse: a Literature Review Nursing Ethics, September 1, 2009; 16(5): 528 - 542. [Abstract] [PDF]

				Mothers' experiences of bottle-feeding: a systematic review of qualitative and quantitative studies Arch. Dis. Child., August 1, 2009; 94(8): 596 - 601.

				M. Chaffee Willingness of health care personnel to work in a disaster: an integrative review of the literature. Disaster Med Public Health Preparedness, March 1, 2009; 3(1): 42 - 56. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				C J H Kelnar Evidence-based child health: SIGN and NICE Arch. Dis. Child. Ed. Pract., December 1, 2008; 93(6): 190 - 198. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D Strech, M Synofzik, and G Marckmann Systematic reviews of empirical bioethics J. Med. Ethics, June 1, 2008; 34(6): 472 - 477. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Thor, J. Lundberg, J. Ask, J. Olsson, C. Carli, K. P. Harenstam, and M. Brommels Application of statistical process control in healthcare improvement: systematic review Qual. Saf. Health Care, October 1, 2007; 16(5): 387 - 399. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Flemming The synthesis of qualitative research and evidence-based nursing Evid. Based Nurs., July 1, 2007; 10(3): 68 - 71. [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. R Goldsmith, C. R Bankhead, and J. Austoker Synthesising quantitative and qualitative research in evidence-based patient information J Epidemiol Community Health, March 1, 2007; 61(3): 262 - 270. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J G Williams, S E Roberts, M F Ali, W Y Cheung, D R Cohen, G Demery, A Edwards, M Greer, M D Hellier, H A Hutchings, et al. Gastroenterology services in the UK. The burden of disease, and the organisation and delivery of services for gastrointestinal and liver disorders: a review of the evidence Gut, February 1, 2007; 56(suppl_1): 1 - 113. [Full Text] [PDF]

				P Lucas, L Arai, J Baird, J Kleijnen, C Law, and H Roberts A systematic review of lay views about infant size and growth Arch. Dis. Child., February 1, 2007; 92(2): 120 - 127. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				T. Greenhalgh and R. Peacock Effectiveness and efficiency of search methods in systematic reviews of complex evidence: audit of primary sources BMJ, November 5, 2005; 331(7524): 1064 - 1065. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. M. Bravata, K. M. McDonald, K. G. Shojania, V. Sundaram, and D. K. Owens Challenges in Systematic Reviews: Synthesis of Topics Related to the Delivery, Organization, and Financing of Health Care Ann Intern Med, June 21, 2005; 142(12_Part_2): 1056 - 1065. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]