Improving reporting of meta-ethnography: the eMERGe reporting guidance

Public Deposited
Analytics

Downloadable Content

Download PDF
Request Version for Screen Reader
Creator
  • France, Emma F
    • Other Affiliation: University of Stirling
  • Cunningham, Maggie
    • Other Affiliation: University of Stirling
  • Ring, Nicola
    • Other Affiliation: Edinburgh Napier University
  • Uny, Isabelle
    • Other Affiliation: University of Stirling
  • Duncan, Edward A S
    • Other Affiliation: University of Stirling
  • Jepson, Ruth G
    • Other Affiliation: University of Edinburgh
  • Maxwell, Margaret
    • Other Affiliation: University of Stirling
  • Roberts, Rachel J
    • Other Affiliation: University of Stirling
  • Turley, Ruth L
    • Other Affiliation: Cardiff University
  • Booth, Andrew
    • Other Affiliation: University of Sheffield
  • Britten, Nicky
    • Other Affiliation: University of Exeter Medical School
  • Flemming, Kate
    • Other Affiliation: University of York
  • Gallagher, Ian
    • Other Affiliation: eMERGe project
  • Garside, Ruth
    • Other Affiliation: University of Exeter Medical School
  • Hannes, Karin
    • Other Affiliation: University of Leuven
  • Lewin, Simon
    • Other Affiliation: Norwegian Institute of Public Health
  • Noblit, George W
    • Affiliation: University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
  • Pope, Catherine
    • Other Affiliation: University of Southampton
  • Thomas, James
    • Other Affiliation: EPPI-Centre Institute of Education
  • Vanstone, Meredith
    • Other Affiliation: McMaster University
  • Higginbottom, Gina M
    • Other Affiliation: University of Nottingham
  • Noyes, Jane
    • Other Affiliation: Bangor University
Abstract
  • Aims 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.
Date of publication
DOI
Identifier
Resource type
  • Article
Rights statement
  • In Copyright
Rights holder
  • The Author(s).
Journal title
  • BMC Medical Research Methodology
Journal volume
  • 19
Journal issue
  • 1
Language
  • English
Bibliographic citation
  • BMC Medical Research Methodology. 2019 Jan 31;19(1):25
Publisher
  • BioMed Central

Relations

Parents:

This work has no parents.

Items

Thumbnail Title Date Uploaded Visibility Actions
file details 12874_2018_article_600.pdf 2019-05-07 Public Download
file details 12874_2018_600_moesm5_esm.docx 2019-05-07 Public Download
file details 12874_2018_600_moesm3_esm.docx 2019-05-07 Public Download
file details 12874_2018_600_moesm4_esm.docx 2019-05-07 Public Download
file details 12874_2018_600_moesm2_esm.docx 2019-05-07 Public Download
file details 12874_2018_600_moesm1_esm.docx 2019-05-07 Public Download