Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorFrance, EF
dc.contributor.authorCunningham, M
dc.contributor.authorRing, N
dc.contributor.authorUny, I
dc.contributor.authorDuncan, EAS
dc.contributor.authorJepson, RG
dc.contributor.authorMaxwell, M
dc.contributor.authorRoberts, RJ
dc.contributor.authorTurley, RL
dc.contributor.authorBooth, A
dc.contributor.authorBritten, N
dc.contributor.authorFlemming, K
dc.contributor.authorGallagher, I
dc.contributor.authorGarside, R
dc.contributor.authorHannes, K
dc.contributor.authorLewin, S
dc.contributor.authorNoblit, GW
dc.contributor.authorPope, C
dc.contributor.authorThomas, J
dc.contributor.authorVanstone, M
dc.contributor.authorHigginbottom, GMA
dc.contributor.authorNoyes, J
dc.date.accessioned2020-06-22T14:53:14Z
dc.date.issued2019-01-15
dc.description.abstractAims: The aim of this study was to provide guidance to improve the completeness and clarity of meta-ethnography reporting. Background: Evidence-based policy and practice require robust evidence syntheses which can further understanding of people's experiences and associated social processes. Meta-ethnography is a rigorous seven-phase qualitative evidence synthesis methodology, developed by Noblit and Hare. Meta-ethnography is used widely in health research, but reporting is often poor quality and this discourages trust in and use of its findings. Meta-ethnography reporting guidance is needed to improve reporting quality. Design: The eMERGe study used a rigorous mixed-methods design and evidence-based methods to develop the novel reporting guidance and explanatory notes. Methods: The study, conducted from 2015 to 2017, comprised of: (1) a methodological systematic review of guidance for meta-ethnography conduct and reporting; (2) a review and audit of published meta-ethnographies to identify good practice principles; (3) international, multidisciplinary consensus-building processes to agree guidance content; (4) innovative development of the guidance and explanatory notes. Findings: Recommendations and good practice for all seven phases of meta-ethnography conduct and reporting were newly identified leading to 19 reporting criteria and accompanying detailed guidance. Conclusion: The bespoke eMERGe Reporting Guidance, which incorporates new methodological developments and advances the methodology, can help researchers to report the important aspects of meta-ethnography. Use of the guidance should raise reporting quality. Better reporting could make assessments of confidence in the findings more robust and increase use of meta-ethnography outputs to improve practice, policy, and service user outcomes in health and other fields. This is the first tailored reporting guideline for meta-ethnography. This article is being simultaneously published in the following journals: Journal of Advanced Nursing, Psycho-oncology, Review of Education, and BMC Medical Research Methodology.en_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipNIHRen_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipDECIPHer, a UKCRC Public Health Research Centre of Excellence: British Heart Foundationen_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipCancer Research UKen_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipEconomic and Social Research Councilen_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipMedical Research Councilen_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipWelsh Governmenten_GB
dc.description.sponsorshipWellcome Trusten_GB
dc.identifier.citationVol. 28 (3), pp. 447 - 458en_GB
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/pon.4915
dc.identifier.grantnumber13/114/60en_GB
dc.identifier.grantnumberRES‐590‐28‐0005en_GB
dc.identifier.grantnumberWT087640MAen_GB
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10871/121590
dc.language.isoenen_GB
dc.publisherWileyen_GB
dc.rights© 2019 The Authors. Psycho‐Oncology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.en_GB
dc.subjectguidelineen_GB
dc.subjectmeta-ethnographyen_GB
dc.subjectnursingen_GB
dc.subjectpublication standardsen_GB
dc.subjectreportingen_GB
dc.subjectqualitative evidence synthesisen_GB
dc.subjectqualitative researchen_GB
dc.subjectresearch designen_GB
dc.subjectsystematic reviewen_GB
dc.titleImproving reporting of meta-ethnography: The eMERGe reporting guidanceen_GB
dc.typeArticleen_GB
dc.date.available2020-06-22T14:53:14Z
dc.identifier.issn1057-9249
dc.descriptionThis is the final version. Available from Wiley via the DOI in this record. en_GB
dc.identifier.journalPsycho-Oncologyen_GB
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/en_GB
dcterms.dateAccepted2018-07-03
rioxxterms.versionVoRen_GB
rioxxterms.licenseref.startdate2018-07-03
rioxxterms.typeJournal Article/Reviewen_GB
refterms.dateFCD2020-06-22T14:49:04Z
refterms.versionFCDVoR
refterms.dateFOA2020-06-22T14:53:17Z
refterms.panelAen_GB


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

© 2019 The Authors. Psycho‐Oncology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
Except where otherwise noted, this item's licence is described as © 2019 The Authors. Psycho‐Oncology Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.