Zusammenfassung
Systematische Reviews haben eine hohe Bedeutung für eine evidenz-basierte Gesundheits- und Pflegeversorgung. Bislang sind systematische Verfahren für das Erstellen von Übersichtsarbeiten überwiegend für quantitative Studien entwickelt worden. Im internationalen Raum finden sich einige Veröffentlichungen zum Thema systematischer Übersichtsarbeiten in qualitativer Forschung. In deutschsprachigen Publikationen spielt dieses Thema bisher kaum eine Rolle. Allerdings sind insbesondere in den Gesundheitswissenschaften und Pflegewissenschaften zahlreiche qualitative Studien durchgeführt worden. Vor diesem Hintergrund ist die Bedeutung systematischer Übersichtsarbeiten als hoch einzustufen, damit die Erkenntnisse methodisch angemessen Eingang in eine evidenz-basierte Gesundheitsversorgung finden können. Dieser Beitrag versucht eine erste Annäherung an das Thema. Er zeigt die Notwendigkeit, sich in Gesundheitsforschung grundsätzlich damit auseinander zu setzen und in weitere Diskussionen sowie Entwicklungen zu treten.
Abstract
Systematic reviews are gaining more and more importance in evidence-based practice. So far the most developed review methods are those on quantitative research. There are some publications on reviews in qualitative research in the English-speaking countries. Until now, however, this topic has not been discussed much in Germany. Even so, particularly in health care research, a lot of qualitative research has been carried out. Against the background of this situation, systematic reviews in qualitative research are of prime importance so that the results can find their way into evidence-based practice. This article tries to approach this topic. It shows the need for their intense consideration in health care research, for discussion, and for the pursuit of further developments.
Schlüsselwörter
systematische Reviews - qualitative Forschung - Gesundheitsforschung - Evidenz-basierte Praxis
Key words
Systematic reviews - qualitative research - health care research - evidence-based practice
Literatur
-
1
Antes G, Bassler D, Galandi D.
Systematische Übersichtsarbeiten: Ihre Rolle in einer Evidenz-basierten Gesundheitsversorgung.
Deutsches Ärzteblatt.
1999;
96
10
, A-16, B-476, C-437
-
2
Barroso J.
Powell-Cope GM. Metasynthesis of qualitative research on living with HIV infection.
Qualitative Health Research.
2000;
10
3:340-3:353
-
3
Beck CT.
Caring within education: A metasynthesis.
Journal of Nursing Education.
2001;
40
3:101-3:109
-
4
Booth A.
Cochrane or cock-eyed? How should we conduct systematic reviews of qualitative research.
2000;
, Paper presented at the Qualitative Evidence-based Practice Conference, Taking a Critical Stance. Coventry University http://www.leeds.ac.uk/educol/documents/00001724.htm (Zugriff: 12.8.05)
-
5
Borroso J, Gollop CJ, Sandelowski M, Meynell J, Pearce PF, Collins LJ.
The Challenges of Searching for and Retrieving Qualitative Studies.
Western Journal of Nursing Research.
2003;
25
2:152-2:178
-
6
Burke SO, Kauffmann E, Costello E, Wiskin N, Harrison MB.
Stressors in families with a child with a chronic condition: an analaysis of qualitative studies and a framework.
Canadian Journal of Nursing Research.
30;
1
71-95
-
7
Chalmers I, Hedgges L, Cooper H.
A Brief History of Research Synthesis.
Evaluation & The Health Professions.
2002;
25
1:12-1:37
-
8
Chalmers I.
The Cochrane Collaboration: Preparing, Maintaining, and Dissemenating Systematic Reviews of the Effects of Health Care.
Annals New York Academy of Sciences.
1993;
703
156-165
-
9
Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Jones D, Young B, Sutton A.
Synthesizing qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods.
Journal of Health Services Research & Policy.
2005;
10
1:45-1:53
-
10
Eastabrooks A, Field PA, Morse JM.
Aggregating Qualitative Findings: An Approach to Theory Development.
Qualitative Health Research.
1994;
4
4:503-4:511
-
11 Flick U. Triangulation in qualitativer Forschung. In: Flick U, v. Kardorff E, Steinke I (Hrsg). Qualitative Forschung. Ein Handbuch. Reinbek bei Hamburg: Rowohlts enzyklopädie. 2004: 309-318
-
12
Harden. et al .
Applying systematic review methods to studies of people's views: an example from public health research.
JECH.
2004;
58
9:794-9:800
-
13 Kuzel AJ, Engel JD. Some pragmatic Thoughts About Evaluating Qualitative Health Research. In: Morse JM, Swanson JM, Kuzel AJ (Eds). The Nature of Qualitative Evidence. Thousands Oaks. London, New Delhi: Sage Publications 2001: 114-138
-
14
Lloyd Jones M.
Application of systematic review methods to qualitative research: practical issues.
Journal of Advanced Nursing.
2004;
48
271-278
-
15
Popay J, Rogers A, Williams G.
Rationale Standards for the Systematic Review of Qualitative Literature in Health Services Research.
Qualitative Health Research.
1998;
8
3:341-3:351
-
16
Sandelowski M, Docherty S, Emden C.
Focus on Qualitative Methods. Qualitative Metasynthesis: Issues and Techniques.
Research in Nursing & Health.
1997;
20
365-371
-
17
Sandelowski M.
Focus on Research Methods. Whatever Happened to Qualitative Description.
Research in Nursing & Health.
2000;
23
334-340
-
18 Swanson JM. The Nature of Outcomes. In: Morse JM, Swanson JM, Kuzel AJ (Eds). The Nature of Qualitative Evidence. Thousands Oaks. London, New Delhi: Sage Publiccations 2001: 223-273
-
19
Weed M.
Meta-Interpretation. A method for the Interpretive Synthesis of Qualitative Research.
Forum Qualitative Social Research.
2005;
6
, 1:Art. 37
-
20
Whittermore R.
Combining Evidence in Nursing Research.
Methods and Implications. Nursing Research.
2005;
4
1:56-1:62
Korrespondenzadresse
Prof. Dr. M. Hasseler
Hochschule für Angewandte Wissenschaften Hamburg
Fakultät Soziale Arbeit & pflege
Saarlandstr. 30
22303 Hamburg
Email: martina.hasseler@sp.haw-hamburg.de
