Abstract
Aim. The aim of this paper is to distinguish the integrative review method from other review methods and to propose methodological strategies specific to the integrative review method to enhance the rigour of the process. Background. Recent evidence‐based practice initiatives have increased the need for and the production of all types of reviews of the literature (integrative reviews, systematic reviews, meta‐analyses, and qualitative reviews). The integrative review method is the only approach that allows for the combination of diverse methodologies (for example, experimental and non‐experimental research), and has the potential to play a greater role in evidence‐based practice for nursing. With respect to the integrative review method, strategies to enhance data collection and extraction have been developed; however, methods of analysis, synthesis, and conclusion drawing remain poorly formulated. Discussion. A modified framework for research reviews is presented to address issues specific to the integrative review method. Issues related to specifying the review purpose, searching the literature, evaluating data from primary sources, analysing data, and presenting the results are discussed. Data analysis methods of qualitative research are proposed as strategies that enhance the rigour of combining diverse methodologies as well as empirical and theoretical sources in an integrative review. Conclusion. An updated integrative review method has the potential to allow for diverse primary research methods to become a greater part of evidence‐based practice initiatives.
Keywords
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...
Systems for grading the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations II: Pilot study of a new system
Abstract Background Systems that are used by different organisations to grade the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations vary. They have different strengths and...
Qualitative synthesis and systematic review in health professions education
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 r...
Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach
BackgroundScoping reviews are a relatively new approach to evidence synthesis and currently there exists little guidance regarding the decision to choose between a systematic re...
Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions
On a shelf in the sunny, open‐plan office of Cochrane Australia in Melbourne, there's a large, white ring‐binder that, it's fair to say, hasn't been opened in a while. It's a pr...
Publication Info
- Year
- 2005
- Type
- article
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 546-553
- Citations
- 9069
- Access
- Closed
External Links
Social Impact
Social media, news, blog, policy document mentions
Citation Metrics
Cite This
Identifiers
- DOI
- 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x