- Framework of problems / Rigourous
- Low reporting or methodological quality (OTHER GUIDANCE)
- The "quality" of JBI qualitative research synthesis: a methodological investigation into the adherence of meta-aggregative systematic reviews to reporting standards and methodological guidance
| Ref ID | 824 |
| First Author | Z. Munn |
| Journal | JBI EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS |
| Year Of Publishing | 2021 |
| URL | https://journals.lww.com/jbisrir/Abstract/2021/05000/The__quality__of_JBI_qualitative_research.6.aspx?context=FeaturedArticles&collectionId=2 |
| Keywords |
Transparency Qualitative JBI |
| Problem(s) |
Low reporting or methodological quality (OTHER GUIDANCE) |
| Number of systematic reviews included | 33 |
| Summary of Findings | Of the 33 qualitative systematic reviews in the JBI Database of Systematic Reviews and Implementation Reports (JBISRIR) between 2015 to 2017, several areas were identified where reviewers consistently made errors or did not clearly report their findings, including study screening and selection issues (particularly how this was done and by whom), transparent rationale for study exclusion, who performed data extraction and how, processes for developing synthesized findings, and the development and presentation of recommendations. |
| Did the article find that the problem(s) led to qualitative changes in interpretation of the results? | Not Applicable |
| Are the methods of the article described in enough detail to replicate the study? | No |