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  September 2014

RAMESES September 2014

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: the "so what?" question in meta-narrative reviews

From:

Marjorie MacDonald <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Fri, 19 Sep 2014 13:56:02 +0000

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (1 lines)

Hi Paula. As the PI on the one funded meta-narrative review by CIHR (if there really was only one - I am surprised), and as a former member on the knowledge synthesis review panel at CIHR, what I can tell you is that the reason there has only been almost no funded meta-narrative reviews is that (up to the time I came off the review committee) there had been almost no applications for this type of review. I believe the committee and CIHR is sympathetic to and supportive of all types of review, including meta-narrative, if the proposal is a good one. Given the currency of your topic, I would say you have a good shot at getting funding if you write a kick-ass proposal. The challenge is that in the new revised application, the page length of the application is very short, so you have almost no space to make your case, describe your methods etc.  But you are right that having a good rationale and clear questions is very important. The methods section is also critical, as is the active engagement of knowledge users. Don't know if this helps. I will leave the rest of this group to respond to your questions related to output because your KT plan is also important to the panel. We are just waiting to hear in October whether another meta-narrative review proposal we submitted will be successful. 



Marjorie MacDonald

University of Victoria



-----Original Message-----

From: Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis: Evolving Standards [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Paula Rowland

Sent: September-19-14 6:29 AM

To: [log in to unmask]

Subject: the "so what?" question in meta-narrative reviews



Hello all,



Thank you for the opportunity to join this interesting list serve! I have really enjoyed reading through the various threads. Rather than continue to lurk from my small corner of the world in Toronto, I've decided to enter the conversation by asking a question.



I've been working in health care for a while, but am a very recent PhD. My research is in the intersections of policy and practice within health care organizations. I pull from theory and methods from organizational studies and sociology. My current research is on "patient engagement" at the level of health care organizations.



I am drafting a proposal for a knowledge synthesis. I would like to get my mind around the various paradigms and research traditions that are constituting historical and current literature on "patient engagement" for the purpose of informing organizational policies and programs. As a social scientist, the tensions and paradoxes involved in the different ways the "patient" is constructed (as a citizen and a consumer), how implementation of these programs are considered (sometimes as a transactional exchange of knowledge, sometimes as a process of relationships, sometimes both), and how these programs are evaluated (I have seen attempts at quasi-experiemental designs that would 'black-box' the entire process of engagement and treat the advisor as a variable that is either present or not) --- it is abundantly clear to me that exploring these tensions and how they manifest in organizational programs is a useful exercise. 



I would like to try my hand a meta-narrative review to help me unpack some of these tensions. In looking at the funding body I am apply to (CIHR), I see that they have only funded 1 meta-narrative review. I imagine that I need to do a particularly good job of explaining why my questions are important, why the methodology makes sense, and how important the research will be. 



To that end, I am finding myself in a translation problem. The value of the research is very clear to me. But --- I wonder if I am doing enough to explain the potential impact to the reviewers. They are likely to be a mix of policy makers and traditional systematic reviewers. 



Does anyone have any experience and/or readings they could share that would help me describe the potential impact/importance of a meta-narrative review? I am looking for some help thinking through the "so what" question so that my rationale is more clear. I think it might be a bit lost in my jargon and enthusiasm right now. Other CIHR funded reviews tended to produce decision making frameworks. I am not sure I can sign up for that kind of output???? If not, how do I explain the potential significance of the research in the absence of such tangible, concrete tools?



Thanks in advance for any direction. And I am very much looking forward to ongoing conversation with this group!



Cheers

Paula

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

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