Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Testing methodological guidance on the conduct ...
View graph of relations

Testing methodological guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews: effectiveness of interventions to promote smoke alarm ownership and function

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Published

Standard

Testing methodological guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews : effectiveness of interventions to promote smoke alarm ownership and function. / Rodgers, Mark; Sowden, Angela; Petticrew, Mark; Arai, Lisa; Roberts, Helen; Britten, Nicky; Popay, Jennie.

In: Evaluation, Vol. 15, No. 1, 01.2009, p. 49-73.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Author

Rodgers, Mark ; Sowden, Angela ; Petticrew, Mark ; Arai, Lisa ; Roberts, Helen ; Britten, Nicky ; Popay, Jennie. / Testing methodological guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews : effectiveness of interventions to promote smoke alarm ownership and function. In: Evaluation. 2009 ; Vol. 15, No. 1. pp. 49-73.

Bibtex

@article{3b8574c8ba584ee8994f6ac591373afe,
title = "Testing methodological guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews: effectiveness of interventions to promote smoke alarm ownership and function",
abstract = "The objective was to assess the impact of new guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews of effectiveness, by means of a blinded comparison of guidance-led narrative synthesis against a meta-analysis of the same study data.The conclusions of the two syntheses were broadly similar. However, differences between the approaches meant that conclusions about the impact of moderators of effect appeared stronger when derived from the meta-analysis, whereas implications for future research appeared more extensive when derived from the narrative synthesis. These findings emphasize that a rigorously conducted narrative synthesis can add meaning and value to the findings of meta-analysis.The guidance framework provided a useful vehicle for structuring a narrative synthesis and increasing transparency and rigour of the process.While there may be risks with overinterpretation of study data, the framework, tools and techniques described in the guidance appear to increase the transparency and reproducibility of narrative synthesis.",
keywords = "guidance , narrative synthesis, research methodology , systematic reviews",
author = "Mark Rodgers and Angela Sowden and Mark Petticrew and Lisa Arai and Helen Roberts and Nicky Britten and Jennie Popay",
year = "2009",
month = jan
doi = "10.1177/1356389008097871",
language = "English",
volume = "15",
pages = "49--73",
journal = "Evaluation: the International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice,",
issn = "1356-3890",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Testing methodological guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews

T2 - effectiveness of interventions to promote smoke alarm ownership and function

AU - Rodgers, Mark

AU - Sowden, Angela

AU - Petticrew, Mark

AU - Arai, Lisa

AU - Roberts, Helen

AU - Britten, Nicky

AU - Popay, Jennie

PY - 2009/1

Y1 - 2009/1

N2 - The objective was to assess the impact of new guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews of effectiveness, by means of a blinded comparison of guidance-led narrative synthesis against a meta-analysis of the same study data.The conclusions of the two syntheses were broadly similar. However, differences between the approaches meant that conclusions about the impact of moderators of effect appeared stronger when derived from the meta-analysis, whereas implications for future research appeared more extensive when derived from the narrative synthesis. These findings emphasize that a rigorously conducted narrative synthesis can add meaning and value to the findings of meta-analysis.The guidance framework provided a useful vehicle for structuring a narrative synthesis and increasing transparency and rigour of the process.While there may be risks with overinterpretation of study data, the framework, tools and techniques described in the guidance appear to increase the transparency and reproducibility of narrative synthesis.

AB - The objective was to assess the impact of new guidance on the conduct of narrative synthesis in systematic reviews of effectiveness, by means of a blinded comparison of guidance-led narrative synthesis against a meta-analysis of the same study data.The conclusions of the two syntheses were broadly similar. However, differences between the approaches meant that conclusions about the impact of moderators of effect appeared stronger when derived from the meta-analysis, whereas implications for future research appeared more extensive when derived from the narrative synthesis. These findings emphasize that a rigorously conducted narrative synthesis can add meaning and value to the findings of meta-analysis.The guidance framework provided a useful vehicle for structuring a narrative synthesis and increasing transparency and rigour of the process.While there may be risks with overinterpretation of study data, the framework, tools and techniques described in the guidance appear to increase the transparency and reproducibility of narrative synthesis.

KW - guidance

KW - narrative synthesis

KW - research methodology

KW - systematic reviews

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=58149505623&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1356389008097871

DO - 10.1177/1356389008097871

M3 - Journal article

AN - SCOPUS:58149505623

VL - 15

SP - 49

EP - 73

JO - Evaluation: the International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice,

JF - Evaluation: the International Journal of Theory, Research and Practice,

SN - 1356-3890

IS - 1

ER -