JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for RAMESES Archives


RAMESES Archives

RAMESES Archives


RAMESES@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

RAMESES Home

RAMESES Home

RAMESES  October 2011

RAMESES October 2011

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Using analysis techniques from different synthesis methods

From:

Monika Kastner <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards" <[log in to unmask]>, Monika Kastner <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 3 Oct 2011 18:40:20 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (18 lines)

Hi everyone,

I'm a postdoc fellow at the Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute of St. Michael's hospital (University of Toronto), working with a group of researchers who are part of a collective called Knowledge Translation (KT) Canada. I have recently joined the RAMESES listserv and have read with great interest the many posts related to realist review/meta-narrative review methods. I wanted to express a big thank you for providing such a great learning forum for our group! We have also embarked on a realist review, and would now like to jump in and describe what we are doing to hopefully advance knowledge around conducting realist reviews, and also to ask a few question related to our work. 

Briefly, we are investigating the concept of guideline implementability by identifying the perceived characteristics of guidelines that affect uptake of recommendations, and then figuring out what works for whom in what circumstances and why. We have completed an iterative, multi-level search strategy (which was an incredibly arduous and lengthy process) and are now gleefully looking at our data. My questions to the group are related to our synthesis methods, which are slightly unconventional as we decided to extend the realist review analysis to include techniques borrowed from other analysis techniques such as those from qualitative methods. We did this because we felt that the realist review could sort out our underlying theory (ie, what works for whom and in what circumstances) but may not work so well for interpreting specific attributes of guideline recommendations that may facilitate uptake, and to build a framework of guideline implementability. We searched for other potential methods that may help us do this and felt that techniques from meta-ethnography (eg., reciprocal translation analysis) could help us generate a compete list of unique attributes and their definitions, and then use both an integrative and interpretive approach (to come up with first, second and third order interpretations) to reveal the relationships between guideline attributes and their uptake. At this point we used these techniques to classify ~700 unique guideline attributes (from 215 articles) into 28 categories and 6 major categories (this was done in duplicate among 2 groups of researchers within KT Canada). Our next steps are to develop a codebook of definitions for the attributes/subcategories/categories, which we believe will help us reveal relationships within/between categories to provide a better understanding of guideline implementability and the tradeoffs between their attributes. 

Our specific questions are:

1.	What does everyone think about the idea of borrowing other techniques to supplement analysis of a realist review (or other synthesis methods)? 

2.	At one point, we decided to stop data extraction because we felt that we were not finding anything new to add to our understanding. However, we still have about 200 articles that were identified as potentially relevant (by experts and other search strategies) but feel that the potential for these articles to add anything new did not outweigh the effort to review them. Thus, we came up with the idea of developing a codebook of definitions (which we were going to do at the conclusion of data extraction anyway) and use this as a way of testing saturation for the remainder of these potentially relevant articles. We thought that this technique would be less effort with greater potential to identify anything new... plus this process fits nicely with the idea that realist reviews are not supposed to be “exhaustive” – is this a legitimate technique for deciding saturation, etc? Would operationalization of this saturation process help others doing such reviews?  

3.	We are thinking that developing a framework of categories/subcategories of guideline attributes (and the codebook of definitions) may become “live” documents that other researchers interested in this area could use as a repository of information to help answer other research questions, and to allow them to add to it as the field expands – what do you think of this? 

Your thoughts on these issues are much appreciated (and apologies for the long message), and thanks again for creating this forum so that we can collectively advance this knowledge as these new synthesis methods evolve. 

Monika

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager