scholarly journals University students’ representations of Europe and self-identification as Europeans: a synthesis of qualitative evidence for future policy formulation

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Esther Cores-Bilbao ◽  
María del Carmen Méndez-García ◽  
M. Carmen Fonseca-Mora
Keyword(s):  
University Students ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Foreign Language Learning ◽  
Educational Interventions ◽  
Policy Formulation ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
The European Union ◽  
Systematic Analysis ◽  
Qualitative Evidence ◽  
The Impact

AbstractThe current European context is characterised by the emergence of socio-political tensions that threaten to derail the cohesion objectives traditionally promoted by the authorities of the European Union. With EU citizenship in the shadow of Brexit, the fear of dismemberment of the current Europe of the 28 looms over a renewed debate on concepts like European identity, European citizenship or EU legitimacy and the involvement of its constituents in European affairs, as well as the role of education for promoting democratic awareness among young Europeans. This work aims to collect, appraise and synthesise qualitative evidence obtained in primary research exploring the perceptions of European university students about their civic and cultural identity. This systematic analysis sets out to identify predictors of positive self-identification with the EU and its institutions, focusing on the impact that different educational interventions have had on the attitudes and perceptions expressed by university students, and the importance of foreign language learning in the results obtained. The authors report their assessment of quality of the findings in a Cochrane-style qualitative evidence synthesis (QES), based on the GRADE-CERQual (Confidence in Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research) method. The 12 informed findings described in this study support decision-making in future education policy formulation.

scholarly journals Patient and carer involvement in palliative care research: An integrative qualitative evidence synthesis review

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (8) ◽  
pp. 969-984 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleni Chambers ◽  
Clare Gardiner ◽  
Jill Thompson ◽  
Jane Seymour
Keyword(s):  
Palliative Care ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Evidence Base ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Training Support ◽  
Care Research ◽  
Qualitative Evidence ◽  
Health And Social Care ◽  
Facilitators And Barriers ◽  
The Impact

Background: Patient/carer involvement in palliative care research has been reported as complex, difficult and less advanced compared to other areas of health and social care research. There is seemingly limited evidence on impact and effectiveness. Aim: To examine the evidence regarding patient/carer involvement in palliative care research and identify the facilitators, barriers, impacts and gaps in the evidence base. Design: Qualitative evidence synthesis using an integrative review approach and thematic analysis. Data sources: Electronic databases were searched up to March 2018. Additional methods included searching websites and ongoing/unpublished studies, author searching and contacting experts. Eligibility criteria were based on the SPICE (Setting, Perspective, Intervention, Comparison, Evaluation) framework. Two quality assessments on methodology and involvement were undertaken. Results: A total of 93 records were included. Eight main themes were identified, mainly concerning facilitators and barriers to effective patient and carer involvement in palliative care research: definitions/roles, values/principles, organisations/culture, training/support, networking/groups, perspectives/diversity, relationships/communication and emotions/impact. Evidence on the impact of involvement was limited, but when carried out effectively, involvement brought positive benefits for all concerned, improving the relevance and quality of research. Evidence gaps were found in non-cancer populations and collaborative/user-led involvement. Conclusion: Evidence identified suggests that involvement in palliative care research is challenging, but not dissimilar to that elsewhere. The facilitators and barriers identified relate mainly to the conduct of researchers at an individual level; in particular, there exists a reluctance among professionals to undertake involvement, and myths still perpetuate that patients/carers do not want to be involved. A developed infrastructure, more involvement-friendly organisational cultures and a strengthening of the evidence base would also be beneficial.

scholarly journals Understanding Shoulder Pain: A Qualitative Evidence Synthesis Exploring the Patient Experience

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christina Maxwell ◽  
Katie Robinson ◽  
Karen McCreesh
Keyword(s):  
Qualitative Research ◽  
Shoulder Pain ◽  
Methodological Quality ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Included Study ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Qualitative Evidence ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Research Studies

Abstract Objective The objective of this study was to review and synthesize qualitative research studies exploring the experiences of individuals living with shoulder pain to enhance understanding of the experiences of these individuals as well as facilitate health care developments. Methods A meta-ethnographic approach was adopted to review and synthesize eligible published qualitative research studies. The findings from each included study were translated into one another using the Noblit and Hares 7-stage process. A systematic search of 11 electronic databases was conducted in March 2020. Methodological quality was assessed using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) appraisal tool. Results Nineteen studies were included in the meta-synthesis. Included articles explored the lived experiences as well as treatment-related experiences of participants. All of the included articles were deemed to be of high methodological quality. Three themes were identified: (1) negative emotional, social, and activity impact (“It has been a big upheaval”), (2) developing an understanding (“Why is it hurting so much?”), and (3) exercise (“Am I going to go through a lot of pain in moving it…?”). Across the included studies, the severe emotional and physical impact of shoulder pain was a core finding. Many people sought a “permanent” solution involving surgery. Openness to other treatment options was influenced by factors including understanding of pain, prior experiences, and treatment expectations. Conclusion These findings deepen understanding of the impact of shoulder pain on peoples’ lives and provide novel insight into the experience of treatment. Enhanced awareness of people’s experiences of shoulder pain and treatment is crucial for clinicians when planning and implementing evidence-based recommendation. Impact To the knowledge of the authors, this is the first qualitative evidence synthesis to explore the treatment-related experiences of individuals with shoulder pain. Shoulder surgery was considered by many as the only means to achieve a more permeant resolution of symptoms. Lay Summary Shoulder pain causes emotional and physical turmoil that can permeate every facet of life. People’s understanding of their shoulder pain appears to be deeply rooted in a biomechanical view of pain, which influences their expectations relating to diagnosis and treatment.

scholarly journals Developing a reporting guideline to improve meta-ethnography in health research: the eMERGe mixed-methods study

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (4) ◽  
pp. 1-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maggie Cunningham ◽  
Emma F France ◽  
Nicola Ring ◽  
Isabelle Uny ◽  
Edward AS Duncan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Mixed Methods ◽  
Health Research ◽  
Guideline Development ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Good Practice ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Qualitative Evidence ◽  
The Impact

BackgroundMeta-ethnography is a commonly used methodology for qualitative evidence synthesis. Research has identified that the quality of reporting of published meta-ethnographies is often poor and this has limited the utility of meta-ethnography findings to influence policy and practice.ObjectiveTo develop guidance to improve the completeness and clarity of meta-ethnography reporting.Methods/designThe meta-ethnography reporting guidance (eMERGe) study followed the recommended approach for developing health research reporting guidelines and used a systematic mixed-methods approach. It comprised (1) a methodological systematic review of guidance in the conduct and reporting of meta-ethnography; (2) a review and audit of published meta-ethnographies, along with interviews with meta-ethnography end-users, to identify good practice principles; (3) a consensus workshop and two eDelphi (Version 1, Duncan E, Swinger K, University of Stirling, Stirling, UK) studies to agree guidance content; and (4) the development of the guidance table and explanatory notes.ResultsResults from the methodological systematic review and the audit of published meta-ethnographies revealed that more guidance was required around the reporting of all phases of meta-ethnography conduct and, in particular, the synthesis phases 4–6 (relating studies, translating studies into one another and synthesising translations). Following the guidance development process, the eMERGe reporting guidance was produced, comprising 19 items grouped into the seven phases of meta-ethnography.LimitationsThe finalised guidance has not yet been evaluated in practice; therefore, it is not possible at this stage to comment on its utility. However, we look forward to evaluating its uptake and usability in the future.ConclusionsThe eMERGe reporting guidance has been developed following a rigorous process in line with guideline development recommendations. The guidance is intended to improve the clarity and completeness of reporting of meta-ethnographies, and to facilitate use of the findings within the guidance to inform the design and delivery of services and interventions in health, social care and other fields. The eMERGe project developed a range of training materials to support use of the guidance, which is freely available atwww.emergeproject.org(accessed 26 March 2018). Meta-ethnography is an evolving qualitative evidence synthesis methodology and future research should refine the guidance to accommodate future methodological developments. We will also investigate the impact of the eMERGe reporting guidance with a view to updating the guidance.Study registrationThis study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015024709 for the stage 1 systematic review.FundingThe National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme.

scholarly journals Study protocol of a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis using two different approaches: Healthcare related needs and desires of older people with post-stroke aphasia

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. e039348
Author(s):  
Nadine Janis Pohontsch ◽  
Thorsten Meyer ◽  
Yvonne Eisenmann ◽  
Maria-Inti Metzendorf ◽  
Verena Leve ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Older People ◽  
Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Treatment Success ◽  
Qualitative Studies ◽  
Qualitative Evidence Synthesis ◽  
Healthcare Needs ◽  
Qualitative Evidence

IntroductionStroke is a frequent disease in the older population of Western Europe with aphasia as a common consequence. Aphasia is known to impede targeting treatment to individual patients’ needs and therefore may reduce treatment success. In Germany, the postacute care of patients who had stroke is provided by different healthcare institutions of different sectors (rehabilitation, nursing and primary care) with substantial difficulties to coordinate services. We will conduct two qualitative evidence syntheses (QESs) aiming at exploring distinct healthcare needs and desires of older people living with poststroke aphasia. We thereby hope to support the development of integrated care models based on needs of patients who are very restricted to communicate them. Since various methods of QESs exist, the aim of the study embedding the two QESs was to determine if findings differ according to the approach used.Methods and analysisWe will conduct two QESs by using metaethnography (ME) and thematic synthesis (ThS) independently to synthesise the findings of primary qualitative studies. The main differences between these two methods are the underlying epistemologies (idealism (ME) vs realism (ThS)) and the type of research question (emerging (ME) vs fixed (ThS)).We will search seven bibliographical databases. Inclusion criteria comprise: patients with poststroke aphasia, aged 65 years and older, studies in German/English, all types of qualitative studies concerning needs and desires related to healthcare or the healthcare system. The protocol was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, follows Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols guidelines and includes three items from the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the synthesis of Qualitative Research checklist.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required. Findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented on national conferences.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document