Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research: ENTREQ

By A. Tong, K. Flemming, E. McInnes, Sandy Oliver, J. Craig. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 2012

3,049 citations recorded by the source corpus.

BackgroundThe syntheses of multiple qualitative studies can pull together data across different contexts, generate new theoretical or conceptual models, identify research gaps, and provide evidence for the development, implementation and evaluation of health interventions. This study aims to develop a framework for reporting the synthesis of qualitative health research.MethodsWe conducted a comprehensive search for guidance and reviews relevant to the synthesis of qualitative research, methodology papers, and published syntheses of qualitative health research in MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and relevant organisational websites to May 2011. Initial items were generated inductively from guides to synthesizing qualitative health research. The preliminary checklist was piloted against forty published syntheses of qualitative research, purposively selected to capture a range of year of publication, methods and methodologies, and health topics. We removed items that were duplicated, impractical to assess, and rephrased items for clarity.ResultsThe Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research (ENTREQ) statement consists of 21 items grouped into five main domains: introduction, methods and methodology, literature search and selection, appraisal, and synthesis of findings.ConclusionsThe ENTREQ statement can help researchers to report the stages most commonly associated with the synthesis of qualitative health research: searching and selecting qualitative research, quality appraisal, and methods for synthesising qualitative findings. The synthesis of qualitative research is an expanding and evolving methodological area and we would value feedback from all stakeholders for the continued development and extension of the ENTREQ statement.

Subfields: Education, General Health Professions, Statistics and Probability

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c974243514e9b1a29950ccd776ba647ec3984a0f

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 Statistics and Probability

Citations in the corpus

Factors that influence the implementation of e-health: a systematic review of systematic reviews (an update) (2016, methodology): “This systematic review is reported following the ENTREQ statement guidelines to enhance transparency in reporting qualitative evidence synthesis [11].”
What kind of systematic review should I conduct? A proposed typology and guidance for systematic reviewers in the medical and health sciences (2018, methodology): “There are reporting guidelines available for qualitative reviews, including the ‘Enhancing transparency in reporting the synthesis of qualitative research’ (ENTREQ) statement [26] and the newly proposed meta-ethnography reporting guidelines (eMERGe) [27].”
Understanding factors affecting patient and public engagement and recruitment to digital health interventions: a systematic review of qualitative studies (2016, positive): “The reporting of this review follows the Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research (ENTREQ) statement [40].”
The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. (2021, methodology): “The PRISMA 2020 items are relevant for mixed-methods systematic reviews (which include quantitative and qualitative studies), but reporting guidelines addressing the presentation and synthesis of qualitative data should also be consulted [39 , 40] .”
Establishing confidence in the output of qualitative research synthesis: the ConQual approach (2014, background): “Amongst the many different methodologies that exist for the synthesis of qualitative findings, some demand critical appraisal whilst others do not [6,25,26].”
The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews (2021, methodology): “The PRISMA 2020 items are relevant for mixed-methods systematic reviews (which include quantitative and qualitative studies), but reporting guidelines addressing the presentation and synthesis of qualitative data should also be consulted.[39, 40] PRISMA 2020 can be used for original systematic revie”
Barriers and facilitators to utilizing digital health technologies by healthcare professionals (2023, background): “The 21 domains prioritized in the Enhancing Transpar-ency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research (ENTREQ) statement were followed 158 .”
How to Do a Systematic Review: A Best Practice Guide for Conducting and Reporting Narrative Reviews, Meta-Analyses, and Meta-Syntheses. (2019, methodology): “As we discussed earlier, the method section may also need to discuss and explain borderline cases that readers might have expected to have been included, or which were included despite partially breaching the inclusion and exclusion criteria (e.g., see Trickey et al. 2012).”
The Mistreatment of Women during Childbirth in Health Facilities Globally: A Mixed-Methods Systematic Review (2015, methodology): “Search Strategy The published literature was systematically searched in PubMed (S2 Table), CINAHL (S3 Table), and Embase (S4 Table) using controlled vocabulary and free-text terms combining two main components: (a) maternal health, perinatal health, or childbirth and (b) mistreatment of women.”
Patient engagement in research: a systematic review (2014, background): “Differences in studies settings and characteristics can be used to explain differences in results (heterogeneity) [16].”
Optimising the value of the critical appraisal skills programme (CASP) tool for quality appraisal in qualitative evidence synthesis (2020, methodology): “In response, qualitative study reporting standards have been developed, such as APA JARS (for qualitative psychology research),(45) Consolidated criteria for Reporting Qualitative research (COREQ; for qualitative interview and focus group studies)(49) and Enhancing transparency in reporting the synt”
An Overview of Qualitative Research and Focus Group Discussion (2021, background): “Recently qualitative research has developed and gained interest in the social fields because it attempts to create a detailed explanation of human attitudes, feelings, and perceptions (Tong et al., 2012).”