Synthesis of guidance available for assessing methodological quality and grading of evidence from qualitative research to inform clinical recommendations: a systematic literature review
Authors' conclusion
There is a lack of consensus on the use of tools, checklists and approaches suitable for appraising the methodological quality of qualitative research and the grading of qualitative evidence to inform clinical practice.
Study context
- Population
- Primary articles and guideline documents in English on assessing methodological quality of qualitative research and grading levels of qualitative evidence, to inform EULAR recommendations9,073 records retrieved
- Participants
- 15 participants
- Outcome
- Guidance for appraising and grading qualitative research
Methodological detailsnarrative synthesis, Searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, COCHRANE and PsycINFO from inception to 23 October 2020
- Narrative synthesis
- Searched PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, Web of Science, COCHRANE and PsycINFO from inception to 23 October 2020
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
Articles describing methodological tools to assess quality of qualitative research (design, recruitment, ethical rigour, data collection and analysis)
6
Articles describing one approach with four key components for confidence in findings from systematic reviews of qualitative research
7
Articles on grading levels of clinical recommendations based on qualitative evidence (a qualitative evidence hierarchy; a research pyramid)
2
Original publication
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →