Giltenane, Martina, O'Mahony, Aoife, Bianchim, Mayara et al. (9 more authors) (Accepted: 2025) Assessing the reporting quality of published qualitative evidence syntheses in the Cochrane Library. Cochrane Evidence Synthesis and Methods. ISSN 2832-9023 (In Press)
Abstract
Background Over ten years since the first qualitative evidence synthesis (QES) was published in the Cochrane Library, QES and mixed-methods reviews (MMR) with a qualitative component have become increasingly common and influential in healthcare research and policy development. The quality of such reviews and the completeness with which they are reported is therefore of paramount importance. Aim This review aimed to assess the reporting quality of published QESs and MMRs with a qualitative component in the Cochrane Library. Methods All published QESs and MMRs were identified from the Cochrane Library. A bespoke framework developed by key international experts based on the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC), Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research (ENTREQ) and meta-ethnography reporting guidance (eMERGe) was used to code the quality of reporting of QESs and MMRs. Results Thirty-one reviews were identified, including 11 MMRs. The reporting quality of the QESs and MMRs published by Cochrane varied considerably. Based on the criteria within our framework, just over a quarter (8, 26%) were considered to meet satisfactory reporting standards, 10 (32%) could have provided clearer or more detailed descriptions in their reporting, just over a quarter (8, 26%) provided poor quality or insufficient descriptions and five (16%) omitted descriptions relevant to our framework. Conclusion This assessment offers important insights into the reporting practices prevalent in these review types. Methodology and reporting have changed considerably over time. Earlier QES have not necessarily omitted important reporting components, but rather our understanding of what should be completed and reported has grown considerably. The variability in reporting quality within QESs and MMRs underscores the need to develop Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) specifically for QES. Keywords: qualitative evidence synthesis, reporting quality, mixed-methods reviews, quality assessment
Metadata
Item Type: | Article |
---|---|
Authors/Creators: |
|
Copyright, Publisher and Additional Information: | This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the University’s Research Publications and Open Access policy. |
Dates: |
|
Institution: | The University of York |
Academic Units: | The University of York > Faculty of Sciences (York) > Health Sciences (York) |
Depositing User: | Pure (York) |
Date Deposited: | 26 Feb 2025 10:20 |
Last Modified: | 26 Feb 2025 10:20 |
Status: | In Press |
Refereed: | Yes |
Open Archives Initiative ID (OAI ID): | oai:eprints.whiterose.ac.uk:223766 |
Download
Filename: Final_Synthesis_Assessing_the_reporting_quality_of_published_qualitative_evidence_synthesis_in_the_Cochrane_Library.docx
Description: Final Synthesis_Assessing the reporting quality of published qualitative evidence synthesis in the Cochrane Library
Licence: CC-BY 2.5
