ArticleBMC medical research methodology2006
Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups.
Article in BMC medical research methodology, 2006. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 704 papers, 27 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
704 citing papers in PubMed, 27 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Is context considered in health inequity research and why? An examination of current trends in Ethiopia.Philosophy, ethics, and humanities in medicine : PEHM · 2026Pooled it
- Next of kin involvement in mental health care services - a systematic participatory overview of evidence syntheses.BMC psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Key Factors for Quality End-of-Life Care for People With Intellectual Disabilities. A Critical Interpretive Synthesis Review Using a 'Best-Fit' Framework Approach.Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 2026Pooled it
- Alexithymia in neurodevelopmental populations: a scoping review of Down syndrome, autism spectrum disorder, and dual diagnosis.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Mapping ecological paradigms in educational psychology: a decade of scholarship inFrontiers in psychology · 2026Pooled it
- Facilitators and barriers primary care physicians face in providing palliative care in low- and middle-income countries: a mixed methods systematic review.BMC primary care · 2025Pooled it
- Aesthetic Experience in the Acceptance of Wearable Technology for People With Dementia: Critical Interpretive Synthesis.JMIR aging · 2025Pooled it
- Mechanisms of inequitable access to parkinson's disease care: a critical interpretive synthesis.International journal for equity in health · 2025Pooled it
- Understanding access to sexual and reproductive health in general practice using an adapted Candidacy Framework: a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis.The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners · 2025Pooled it
- Prioritizing policy issues for knowledge translation: a critical interpretive synthesis.Global health research and policy · 2025Pooled it
- Access Barriers to Healthcare for Undocumented Migrants in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Qualitative Systematic Review.Journal of immigrant and minority health · 2025Pooled it
- Approaches to Incorporation of Preferences into Health Economic Models of Genomic Medicine: A Critical Interpretive Synthesis and Conceptual Framework.Applied health economics and health policy · 2025Pooled it
- Quality indicators of supportive care for patients with cancer undergoing treatment: a systematic review.BMC cancer · 2025Pooled it
- Understanding care-seeking of pregnant women from underserved groups: a systematic review and meta-ethnography.Frontiers in public health · 2025Pooled it
- Experience of menopause across ethnic groups: mapping the evidence through a scoping review.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Pooled it
- Ethical issues in the use of genetic predictions of aggressive behavior in the criminal justice system: a systematic review.Frontiers in genetics · 2025Pooled it
- BRAZILIAN GASTROENTEROLOGY FEDERATION (FBG) CLINICAL GUIDELINE: DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT OF EOSINOPHILIC ESOPHAGITIS IN ADULTS AND ADOLESCENTS.Arquivos de gastroenterologia · 2025Guideline
- Women's experiences with the healthcare system during and after a late miscarriage: a qualitative meta-synthesis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2025Pooled it
- Non-empirical methods for ethics research on digital technologies in medicine, health care and public health: a systematic journal review.Medicine, health care, and philosophy · 2024Pooled it
- Participation in the digital transformation of healthcare: a review of qualitative studies.International journal of health care quality assurance · 2024Pooled it
644 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundConventional systematic review techniques have limitations when the aim of a review is to construct a critical analysis of a complex body of literature. This article offers a reflexive account of an attempt to conduct an interpretive review of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups in the UK
methodsThis project involved the development and use of the method of Critical Interpretive Synthesis (CIS). This approach is sensitised to the processes of conventional systematic review methodology and draws on recent advances in methods for interpretive synthesis.
resultsMany analyses of equity of access have rested on measures of utilisation of health services, but these are problematic both methodologically and conceptually. A more useful means of understanding access is offered by the synthetic construct of candidacy. Candidacy describes how people's eligibility for healthcare is determined between themselves and health services. It is a continually negotiated property of individuals, subject to multiple influences arising both from people and their social contexts and from macro-level influences on allocation of resources and configuration of services. Health services are continually constituting and seeking to define the appropriate objects of medical attention and intervention, while at the same time people are engaged in constituting and defining what they understand to be the appropriate objects of medical attention and intervention. Access represents a dynamic interplay between these simultaneous, iterative and mutually reinforcing processes. By attending to how vulnerabilities arise in relation to candidacy, the phenomenon of access can be better understood, and more appropriate recommendations made for policy, practice and future research. DISCUSSION: By innovating with existing methods for interpretive synthesis, it was possible to produce not only new methods for conducting what we have termed critical interpretive synthesis, but also a new theoretical conceptualisation of access to healthcare. This theoretical account of access is distinct from models already extant in the literature, and is the result of combining diverse constructs and evidence into a coherent whole. Both the method and the model should be evaluated in other contexts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.