Search

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.

Additional file 2. Structured press releases and a news service

List of reviews excluded where no full-text was available. (PDF 23 kb)

Summary of the results of each review, in relation to the scoping overview objectives. (PDF 59 kb)

Full search strategy. (PDF 13 kb)

Table of funding and conflicts of interest as reported in the reviews. (PDF 38 kb)

Supplementary_file_-_Lay_health_worker_role_description for The lay health worker–patient relationship in promoting pulmonary rehabilitation (PR) in COPD: What makes it work? by Gill Gilworth, Simon Lewin, Alison J Wright, Stephanie JC Taylor, Rachel Tuffnell, Lauren Hogg, Nicholas S Hopkinson, Sally J Singh and Patrick White in Chronic Respiratory Disease

Table S4. Supplementary information: explanatory notes for Phases 3-6 to accompany Part 2 of the guidance. (DOCX 88 kb)

Plain language summary of the overview. (PDF 37 kb)

Search strategy. (DOCX 14 kb)

Criteria for assessing the reliability of included reviews. (PDF 66 kb)

File S1. Supplementary information: the eMERGe project research design & methods. (DOCX 184 kb)

Applicability of the evidence to LMICs, with explanations of assessments. (PDF 56 kb)

Overview of sampling stage and contribution to findings for primary studies included in the Qualitative Evidence Synthesis . This table presents an overview of each of the primary studies included in the qualitative evidence synthesis, the stage at which they were sampled and how many findings each study contributes to. (DOCX 13 kb)

Study characteristics addressed in the CERQual concept of relevance. This table presents the different study charachteristics that can be addresses when applying the CERQual concept of relevance. (DOCX 16 kb)

File S2. Supplementary information: A. 57 publications included in the systematic review for â Stage1 Identification of Standardsâ and B. Publications contributing to development of reporting criteria. (DOCX 299 kb)

List of excluded reviews assessed in full-text with reasons for exclusion. (PDF 47 kb)

File S3. Supplementary information: the sample of 29 published meta-ethnographies analysed in â Stage 2 Development and Application of Standardsâ . (DOCX 27 kb)

The objective of this research was to design mass media resources to enable the public to assess the trustworthiness of claims about the effects (benefits and harms) of treatments, and make appropriate health choices.

Open peer review reports. (PDF 98 kb)

The purpose of CERQual and what CERQual is not intended to address. (PDF 621Â kb)

Recommended standard phrases for describing the assessment for each CERQual component and the overall assessment. (PDF 598 kb)

Open Peer Review reports. (PDF 111 kb)

Key definitions relevant to CERQual. (PDF 617 kb)

Deciding whether to apply CERQual to a review finding—interpretive or explanatory level findings. (PDF 637 kb)