Considering axiological integrity: a methodological analysis of qualitative evidence syntheses, and its implications for health professions education

Martina Kelly, Rachel H Ellaway, Helen Reid, Heather Ganshorn, Sarah Yardley, Deirdre Bennett, Tim Dornan

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

1 Citation (Scopus)
81 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) is a suite of methodologies that combine qualitative techniques with the synthesis of qualitative knowledge. They are particularly suited to medical education as these approaches pool findings from original qualitative studies, whilst paying attention to context and theoretical development. Although increasingly sophisticated use is being made of qualitative primary research methodologies in health professions education (HPE) the use of secondary qualitative reviews in HPE remains underdeveloped. This study examined QES methods applied to clinical humanism in healthcare as a way of advancing thinking around the use of QES in HPE in general. A systematic search strategy identified 49 reviews that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Meta-study was used to develop an analytic summary of methodological characteristics, the role of theory, and the synthetic processes used in QES reviews. Fifteen reviews used a defined methodology, and 17 clearly explained the processes that led from data extraction to synthesis. Eight reviews adopted a specific theoretical perspective. Authors rarely described their reflexive relationship with their data. Epistemological positions tended to be implied rather than explicit. Twenty-five reviews included some form of quality appraisal, although it was often unclear how authors acted on its results. Reviewers under-reported qualitative approaches in their review methodologies, and tended to focus on elements such as systematicity and checklist quality appraisal that were more germane to quantitative evidence synthesis. A core concern was that the axiological (value) dimensions of the source materials were rarely considered let alone accommodated in the synthesis techniques used. QES can be used in HPE research but only with careful attention to maintaining axiological integrity.

Original languageEnglish
JournalAdvances in Health Sciences Education : Theory and Practice
Early online date14 May 2018
DOIs
Publication statusEarly online date - 14 May 2018

Fingerprint

integrity
profession
health
evidence
education
methodology
humanism
inclusion
Values

Cite this

@article{ead44cd77932474198b1e0d0c9259b0b,
title = "Considering axiological integrity: a methodological analysis of qualitative evidence syntheses, and its implications for health professions education",
abstract = "Qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) is a suite of methodologies that combine qualitative techniques with the synthesis of qualitative knowledge. They are particularly suited to medical education as these approaches pool findings from original qualitative studies, whilst paying attention to context and theoretical development. Although increasingly sophisticated use is being made of qualitative primary research methodologies in health professions education (HPE) the use of secondary qualitative reviews in HPE remains underdeveloped. This study examined QES methods applied to clinical humanism in healthcare as a way of advancing thinking around the use of QES in HPE in general. A systematic search strategy identified 49 reviews that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Meta-study was used to develop an analytic summary of methodological characteristics, the role of theory, and the synthetic processes used in QES reviews. Fifteen reviews used a defined methodology, and 17 clearly explained the processes that led from data extraction to synthesis. Eight reviews adopted a specific theoretical perspective. Authors rarely described their reflexive relationship with their data. Epistemological positions tended to be implied rather than explicit. Twenty-five reviews included some form of quality appraisal, although it was often unclear how authors acted on its results. Reviewers under-reported qualitative approaches in their review methodologies, and tended to focus on elements such as systematicity and checklist quality appraisal that were more germane to quantitative evidence synthesis. A core concern was that the axiological (value) dimensions of the source materials were rarely considered let alone accommodated in the synthesis techniques used. QES can be used in HPE research but only with careful attention to maintaining axiological integrity.",
author = "Martina Kelly and Ellaway, {Rachel H} and Helen Reid and Heather Ganshorn and Sarah Yardley and Deirdre Bennett and Tim Dornan",
year = "2018",
month = "5",
day = "14",
doi = "10.1007/s10459-018-9829-y",
language = "English",
journal = "Advances in Health Sciences Education : Theory and Practice",
issn = "1382-4996",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",

}

Considering axiological integrity: a methodological analysis of qualitative evidence syntheses, and its implications for health professions education. / Kelly, Martina; Ellaway, Rachel H; Reid, Helen; Ganshorn, Heather; Yardley, Sarah; Bennett, Deirdre; Dornan, Tim.

In: Advances in Health Sciences Education : Theory and Practice, 14.05.2018.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - Considering axiological integrity: a methodological analysis of qualitative evidence syntheses, and its implications for health professions education

AU - Kelly, Martina

AU - Ellaway, Rachel H

AU - Reid, Helen

AU - Ganshorn, Heather

AU - Yardley, Sarah

AU - Bennett, Deirdre

AU - Dornan, Tim

PY - 2018/5/14

Y1 - 2018/5/14

N2 - Qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) is a suite of methodologies that combine qualitative techniques with the synthesis of qualitative knowledge. They are particularly suited to medical education as these approaches pool findings from original qualitative studies, whilst paying attention to context and theoretical development. Although increasingly sophisticated use is being made of qualitative primary research methodologies in health professions education (HPE) the use of secondary qualitative reviews in HPE remains underdeveloped. This study examined QES methods applied to clinical humanism in healthcare as a way of advancing thinking around the use of QES in HPE in general. A systematic search strategy identified 49 reviews that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Meta-study was used to develop an analytic summary of methodological characteristics, the role of theory, and the synthetic processes used in QES reviews. Fifteen reviews used a defined methodology, and 17 clearly explained the processes that led from data extraction to synthesis. Eight reviews adopted a specific theoretical perspective. Authors rarely described their reflexive relationship with their data. Epistemological positions tended to be implied rather than explicit. Twenty-five reviews included some form of quality appraisal, although it was often unclear how authors acted on its results. Reviewers under-reported qualitative approaches in their review methodologies, and tended to focus on elements such as systematicity and checklist quality appraisal that were more germane to quantitative evidence synthesis. A core concern was that the axiological (value) dimensions of the source materials were rarely considered let alone accommodated in the synthesis techniques used. QES can be used in HPE research but only with careful attention to maintaining axiological integrity.

AB - Qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) is a suite of methodologies that combine qualitative techniques with the synthesis of qualitative knowledge. They are particularly suited to medical education as these approaches pool findings from original qualitative studies, whilst paying attention to context and theoretical development. Although increasingly sophisticated use is being made of qualitative primary research methodologies in health professions education (HPE) the use of secondary qualitative reviews in HPE remains underdeveloped. This study examined QES methods applied to clinical humanism in healthcare as a way of advancing thinking around the use of QES in HPE in general. A systematic search strategy identified 49 reviews that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Meta-study was used to develop an analytic summary of methodological characteristics, the role of theory, and the synthetic processes used in QES reviews. Fifteen reviews used a defined methodology, and 17 clearly explained the processes that led from data extraction to synthesis. Eight reviews adopted a specific theoretical perspective. Authors rarely described their reflexive relationship with their data. Epistemological positions tended to be implied rather than explicit. Twenty-five reviews included some form of quality appraisal, although it was often unclear how authors acted on its results. Reviewers under-reported qualitative approaches in their review methodologies, and tended to focus on elements such as systematicity and checklist quality appraisal that were more germane to quantitative evidence synthesis. A core concern was that the axiological (value) dimensions of the source materials were rarely considered let alone accommodated in the synthesis techniques used. QES can be used in HPE research but only with careful attention to maintaining axiological integrity.

U2 - 10.1007/s10459-018-9829-y

DO - 10.1007/s10459-018-9829-y

M3 - Review article

C2 - 29761255

JO - Advances in Health Sciences Education : Theory and Practice

JF - Advances in Health Sciences Education : Theory and Practice

SN - 1382-4996

ER -