ReviewSystematic reviews2016
Searching for qualitative research for inclusion in systematic reviews: a structured methodological review.
Review in Systematic reviews, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 153 papers, 55 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
153 citing papers in PubMed, 55 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Experiences of Stigma Among Parents With Intellectual Disability: A Systematic Review and Thematic Synthesis.Journal of applied research in intellectual disabilities : JARID · 2026Pooled it
- Clinical Practice Guidelines on Normal Labour and Childbirth: A Systematic Review.BJOG : an international journal of obstetrics and gynaecology · 2026Pooled it
- The help-seeking experiences of adolescents and youth with endometriosis: a systematic review and thematic synthesis.BMC women's health · 2026Pooled it
- On the (limited) use of touchscreen-based behavioural and cognitive research with dogs: potential causes and future directions.Animal cognition · 2026Pooled it
- Perceptions and Experiences of Animal-Assisted Interventions for People Living With Dementia: A Qualitative Evidence Synthesis.Journal of clinical nursing · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review of factors contributing to partners' negative birth experiences.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Pooled it
- A systematic review and thematic synthesis exploring how gay, bisexual and other men who have sex with men (GBMSM) experience HPV and HPV vaccination.Human vaccines & immunotherapeutics · 2025Pooled it
- Emotions in Engineering Ethics Education: Systematic Review and Ways Forward.Science and engineering ethics · 2025Pooled it
- Competence and confidence of health care professionals in using clozapine: a qualitative systematic review and thematic synthesis.Acta neuropsychiatrica · 2025Pooled it
- The Experiences and Perceptions of Telehealth in Patients Living With Advanced Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: A Qualitative Evidence Synthesis.Journal of advanced nursing · 2025Pooled it
- The health consequences of stigma and discrimination: a systematic review and meta-analysis of their impact on Black non-binary individuals in Sub-Saharan Africa.Frontiers in sociology · 2025Pooled it
- Factors that influence recruitment to COVID-19 vaccine trials: a qualitative evidence synthesis.Trials · 2024Pooled it
- Gender differences in the context of interventions for improving health literacy in migrants: a qualitative evidence synthesis.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Experiences of music therapy in paediatric palliative care from multiple stakeholder perspectives: A systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis.Palliative medicine · 2024Pooled it
- A Systematic Review of Publications on Perceptions and Management of Chronic Medical Conditions Using Telemedicine Remote Consultations by Primary Healthcare Professionals April 2020 to December 2021 During the COVID-19 Pandemic.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024Pooled it
- Exploring the experiences of women living with metastatic breast cancer [MBC]: A systematic review of qualitative evidence.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- The sexual and reproductive health needs and preferences of youths in sub-Saharan Africa: A meta-synthesis.PloS one · 2024Pooled it
- Patients' experiences of day surgery and recovery: A meta-ethnography.Nursing open · 2024Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Older adults' experiences during the COVID-19 pandemic: a qualitative systematic literature review.BMC geriatrics · 2023Pooled it
93 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundQualitative systematic reviews or qualitative evidence syntheses (QES) are increasingly recognised as a way to enhance the value of systematic reviews (SRs) of clinical trials. They can explain the mechanisms by which interventions, evaluated within trials, might achieve their effect. They can investigate differences in effects between different population groups. They can identify which outcomes are most important to patients, carers, health professionals and other stakeholders. QES can explore the impact of acceptance, feasibility, meaningfulness and implementation-related factors within a real world setting and thus contribute to the design and further refinement of future interventions. To produce valid, reliable and meaningful QES requires systematic identification of relevant qualitative evidence. Although the methodologies of QES, including methods for information retrieval, are well-documented, little empirical evidence exists to inform their conduct and reporting.
methodsThis structured methodological overview examines papers on searching for qualitative research identified from the Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group Methodology Register and from citation searches of 15 key papers.
resultsA single reviewer reviewed 1299 references. Papers reporting methodological guidance, use of innovative methodologies or empirical studies of retrieval methods were categorised under eight topical headings: overviews and methodological guidance, sampling, sources, structured questions, search procedures, search strategies and filters, supplementary strategies and standards.
conclusionsThis structured overview presents a contemporaneous view of information retrieval for qualitative research and identifies a future research agenda. This review concludes that poor empirical evidence underpins current information practice in information retrieval of qualitative research. A trend towards improved transparency of search methods and further evaluation of key search procedures offers the prospect of rapid development of search methods.
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.