ArticleTrials2013
Using qualitative evidence on patients' views to help understand variation in effectiveness of complex interventions: a qualitative comparative analysis.
Article in Trials, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers, 5 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
15 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Intervention components in the self-management of Parkinson's: a mixed-methods synthesis of qualitative and quantitative evidence.BMC health services research · 2024Pooled it
- Complementary therapy in palliative care: A synthesis of qualitative and quantitative systematic reviews.Palliative medicine · 2020Pooled it
- The importance of service-users' perspectives: A systematic review of qualitative evidence reveals overlooked critical features of weight management programmes.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2018Pooled it
- Identifying configurations of behavior change techniques in effective medication adherence interventions: a qualitative comparative analysis.Systematic reviews · 2016Pooled it
- Interventions to improve safe and effective medicines use by consumers: an overview of systematic reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2014Pooled it
- Trial
- Article
- Article
- Article
- Why it Worked: Participants' Insights into an mHealth Antiretroviral Therapy Adherence Intervention in China.The open AIDS journal · 2018Article
- Using qualitative comparative analysis in a systematic review of a complex intervention.Systematic reviews · 2016Article
- Development of a model for integrated care at the end of life in advanced dementia: A whole systems UK-wide approach.Palliative medicine · 2016Article
- Intervention Component Analysis (ICA): a pragmatic approach for identifying the critical features of complex interventions.Systematic reviews · 2015Review
- Article
- Using qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) in systematic reviews of complex interventions: a worked example.Systematic reviews · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundComplex healthcare interventions consist of multiple components which may vary in trials conducted in different populations and contexts. Pooling evidence from trials in a systematic review is challenging because it is unclear which components are needed for effectiveness. The potential is recognised for using recipients' views to explore why some complex interventions are effective and others are not. Methods to maximise this potential are poorly developed.
methodsWe used a novel approach to explore how patients' views may explain the disparity in effectiveness of complex interventions. We used qualitative comparative analysis to explore agreement between qualitative syntheses of data on patients' views and evidence from trialed interventions to increase adherence to treatments. We first populated data matrices to reflect whether the content of each trialed intervention could be matched with suggestions arising from patients' views. We then used qualitative comparative analysis software to identify, by a process of elimination, the smallest number of configurations (patterns) of components that corresponded with patients' suggestions and accounted for whether each intervention was effective or ineffective.
resultsWe found suggestions by patients were poorly represented in interventions. Qualitative comparative analysis identified particular combinations of components corresponding with patients' suggestions and with whether an intervention was effective or ineffective. Six patterns were identified for an effective and four for an ineffective intervention. Two types of patterns arose for the effective interventions, one being didactic (providing clear information or instruction) and the other interactive (focusing on personal risk factors).
conclusionsOur analysis highlights how data on patients' views has the potential to identify key components across trials of complex interventions or inform the content of new interventions to be trialed.
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.