Abstract

Context Formal qualitative synthesis is the process of pooling qualitative and mixed‐method research data, and then drawing conclusions regarding the collective meaning of the research. Qualitative synthesis is regularly used within systematic reviews in the health professions literature, although such use has been heavily debated in the general literature. This controversy arises in part from the inherent tensions found when generalisations are derived from in‐depth studies that are heavily context‐dependent. Methods We explore three representative qualitative synthesis methodologies: thematic analysis; meta‐ethnography, and realist synthesis. These can be understood across two dimensions: integrative to interpretative, and idealist to realist. Three examples are used to illustrate the relative strengths and limitations of these approaches. Discussion Against a backdrop of controversy and diverse methodologies, readers must take a critical stand when reading literature reviews that use qualitative synthesis to derive their findings. We argue that notions of qualitative rigour such as transparency and acknowledgment of the researchers’ stance should be applied to qualitative synthesis.

Keywords

RigourQualitative researchEpistemologyContext (archaeology)Meaning (existential)Systematic reviewEngineering ethicsSociologyThematic analysisPsychologyMEDLINESocial sciencePolitical science

Affiliated Institutions

Related Publications

The Systematic Review

In Brief This article is the first in a new series on systematic reviews from the Joanna Briggs Institute, an international collaborative supporting evidence-based practice in n...

2014 AJN American Journal of Nursing 505 citations

Publication Info

Year
2013
Type
article
Volume
47
Issue
3
Pages
252-260
Citations
341
Access
Closed

External Links

Social Impact

Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions

Citation Metrics

341
OpenAlex

Cite This

Margaret Bearman, Phillip Dawson (2013). Qualitative synthesis and systematic review in health professions education. Medical Education , 47 (3) , 252-260. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12092

Identifiers

DOI
10.1111/medu.12092