Using Qualitative Evidence in Decision Making for Health and Social Interventions: An Approach to Assess Confidence in Findings from Qualitative Evidence Syntheses (GRADE-CERQual)

By S. Lewin, C. Glenton, H. Munthe-Kaas, Benedicte Carlsen, C. Colvin, M. Gülmezoglu, J. Noyes, Andrew Booth, R. Garside, A. Rashidian. PLoS Medicine, 2015

775 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Simon Lewin and colleagues present a methodology for increasing transparency and confidence in qualitative research synthesis.

Subfields: Education, General Health Professions, Management Science and Operations Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/48430aa9e4d9f5606b6c88edeb194a948f186b06

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

In General Health Professions

In Management Science and Operations Research

Citations in the corpus

Quantifying Thematic Saturation in Qualitative Data Analysis (2018, methodology): “Various systems for rating qualitative evidence based on the methodology of GRADE have been proposed, for example, by Goldsmith et al. (2007) and the GRADE Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research system (Lewin et al. 2015).”
Applying GRADE-CERQual to qualitative evidence synthesis findings: introduction to the series (2018, methodology): “We define a review finding as an analytic output from a qualitative evidence synthesis that, based on data from primary studies, describes a phenomenon or an aspect of a phenomenon [16].”
Improving the content validity of the mixed methods appraisal tool: a modified e-Delphi study. (2019, methodology): “Several approaches for rating the overall quality of evidence have been developed, such as Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) [38] and GRADE-Confidence in the Evidence from Reviews of Qualitative research (CERQual) [39].”