eBangor

A methodological systematic review of what’s wrong with meta-ethnography reporting

France, E.F. and Ring, N. and Thomas, R. and Noyes, J. and Maxwell, M. and Jepson, R. (2014) A methodological systematic review of what’s wrong with meta-ethnography reporting. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 14 (119). -. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-14-119 (In Press)

Full-text not available from this repository..

Abstract

Syntheses of qualitative studies can inform health policy, services and our understanding of patient experience. Meta-ethnography is a systematic seven-phase interpretive qualitative synthesis approach well-suited to producing new theories and conceptual models. However, there are concerns about the quality of meta-ethnography reporting, particularly the analysis and synthesis processes. Our aim was to investigate the application and reporting of methods in recent meta-ethnography journal papers, focusing on the analysis and synthesis process and output.

Item Type: Article
Subjects: Research Publications
Departments: College of Business, Law, Education and Social Sciences > School of Social Sciences
Date Deposited: 20 Jan 2015 03:37
Last Modified: 23 Sep 2015 02:52
ISSN: 14712288
URI: http://e.bangor.ac.uk/id/eprint/3388
Identification Number: DOI: 10.1186/1471-2288-14-119
Publisher: Springer
Administer Item Administer Item

eBangor is powered by EPrints 3 which is developed by the School of Electronics and Computer Science at the University of Southampton. More information and software credits.