| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Stop wasting time looking for files and revisions. Connect your Gmail, DriveDropbox, and Slack accounts and in less than 2 minutes, Dokkio will automatically organize all your file attachments. Learn more and claim your free account.

View
 

Toolkit for Mixed Studies Reviews

Page history last edited by Quan Nha HONG 1 year, 4 months ago

Welcome to the wiki 'Toolkit for Mixed Studies Reviews'

 

HOW TO USE THIS WIKI?

In line with the PRISMA statement (www.prisma-statement.org), this WIKI is structured by eights stages (QESISAES acronym).

Question  Eligibility  Source  Identification  Selection  Appraisal  Extraction Synthesis

 

In the following table, each stage is listed. Click on the hyperlink to know more about the stage. In addition, guidance for reporting mixed studies reviews is presented at the end.

 

Stage 1: 

Formulate a review question

Stage 2:

Define eligibility criteria

Stage 3:

Sources of information 

Stage 4:

Identify potential relevant studies

Stage 5:

Select relevant studies

Stage 6: 

Appraise the quality of studies

Stage 7:

Extract data

Stage 8:

 Synthesize included studies

Guidance for reporting:

Report mixed studies reviews

 

WHY THIS WIKI?

The purpose of this WIKI is to suggest guidance (tips) for designing, conducting, and reporting Mixed Studies Reviews (MSRs), and to collect comments and suggestions about it. MSR is a literature review approach in which qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies are systematically identified, selected, appraised, and synthesized (synthesis of qualitative and quantitative evidence).

 

This wiki complements the following articles:

 

FOR WHOM?

Librarians, managers, patient partners, practitioners, researchers and trainees  who want to conduct, better understand MSR or who want to review papers on MSR.

 

WHAT IS THIS WIKI?

- A practical tool - a toolkit - that provides a step-by-step guidance.

- A collaborative tool aimed at developing a network of people interested in MSR.

- An ongoing up-date on the science of MSR.

 

WHO COLLABORATED TO THIS WIKI?  

This WIKI has been initially developed by three researchers and a librarian:  

 

- Quan-Nha Hong, OT, MSc, Wiki moderator, is a PhD candidate at the department of Family Medicine at McGill University, Montreal, Canada. Email: quan.nha.hong@mail.mcgill.ca. She is interested in mixed studies reviews and methods of knowledge synthesis. Her doctoral research project is on the validation of the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT) (http://mixedmethodsappraisaltoolpublic.pbworks.com)

 

- Pierre Pluye, MD, PhD, is FRQS Research Scholar and Associate Professor, Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. Email: pierre.pluye@mcgill.ca. He has expertise in mixed methods research and mixed studies reviews, and developed the MMAT. His studies are on participatory research with organizations and on the patient outcomes associated with the use of information derived from electronic knowledge resources. He has co-developed the Information Assessment Method that is used by more than 10,000 Canadian pharmacists and physicians (http://www.mgcill.ca/iam). He is the Canadian Cochrane Network co-representative for McGill University.

 

- Isabelle Vedel, MD, PhD, is CIHR New Investigator, Dawson Scholar, and Assistant professor, Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. Email: isabelle.vedel@mcgill.ca. She has expertise in evaluation, mixed methods research, and complex systematic reviews of the literature. Her main research interests concern health care organizations and primary health care services for people with multiple chronic diseases and elders. 

 

- Vera  Granikov, is a Research Embedded Information Specialist at the department of Family Medicine at McGill University, Montreal, Canada. Email: veragranikov@gmail.com. She holds a Masters degree in Library and Information Studies (specializing in Knowledge Management) from McGill University.  She is interested in health information literacy, knowledge management, collaboration, and organizational learning. 

 

HOW TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS WIKI?

Do not hesitate to post any comments on this WIKI in the box at the end of each page. Thanks in advance!

 

If you are interested to actively collaborate to this wiki, please contact Quan-Nha Hong by email (quan.nha.hong@mail.mcgill.ca).

 

Authors gratefully acknowledge the constructive feedback from colleagues, postdoctoral fellows, and graduate students who contributed to and attended (a) the DENT-FMED-672 ‘Applied mixed methods for health research’ and FMED-600 ‘Mixed studies reviews’ courses at McGill University, and (b) the one-week intensive summer course ‘Mixed methods research and mixed studies reviews in health sciences’ in Lausanne (Switzerland), São Paulo (Brazil), and Warwick (UK).

 

HOW TO CITE THIS WIKI ?

Pluye, P., Hong, Q.N., & Vedel, I. (2016). Toolkit for mixed studies reviews (V3). Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, and Quebec-SPOR SUPPORT Unit, Montreal, Canada. Retrieved on [date] from http://toolkit4mixedstudiesreviews.pbworks.com.

 

WHAT ARE THE MAIN REFERENCES?

Articles of interest on mixed studies reviews:

  • Bryman A (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: how is it done? Qualitative Research, 6(1), 97–113. 
  • Heyvaert M, Maes B, Onghena P (2013). Mixed methods research synthesis: definition, framework, and potential. Quality and Quantity, 47, 659-676. 
  • Mays N, Pope C, Popay J (2005). Systematically reviewing qualitative and quantitative evidence to inform management and policy-making in the health field. Journal of Health Service Research & Policy 10, 6-20. 
  • Pluye P, Gagnon MP, Griffiths F, Johnson-Lafleur J (2009). A scoring system for appraising mixed methods research, and concomitantly appraising qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods primary studies in mixed studies reviews. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(4), 529-546.  
  • Pluye P, Hong QN (2014). Combining the power of stories and numbers: Mixed Methods Research and Mixed Studies ReviewsAnnual Review in Public Health, 35, 29-45. 
  • Pope C, Mays N, Popay J (2007). Synthesizing qualitative and quantitative health evidence: A guide to methods. Adelaide: Ramsay Books. 

 

If you have a writer access, click on Wiki tips to learn more about editing a wiki: Wiki tips. 

 

Visitors (since November 10, 2013):   

Comments (2)

Quan Nha HONG said

at 12:16 pm on Mar 10, 2016

We added a stage in the QESISAS's framework. Initially, we included in stage 6 the data extraction and appraisal. After discussion with colleagues, we split these in two stages. The framework is now named QESISAES.

Lydia Neubert said

at 9:11 am on Dec 1, 2016

Dear participants of the wiki 'Toolkit for Mixed Studies Reviews',

I´m starting appraising the quality of studies by using the MMAT and I have two questions:
First, when the tutorial describes different (exemplary) considerations (a, b, and/or c), my "judgement" is based on all or only one of these considerations?
Second, when information is not available, even not by contacting the authors, can I choose "cant't tell"?

Thank you for helping me and king regards, Lydia Neubert (research associate from Germany)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.