Abstract
Do domestic smoke alarms save lives? Can youn
g offenders be 'scared straight' through tough penal
measures? What factors should
be considered when designing and implementing a multi-sectoral
injury prevention programme in a local area? Maki
ng sense of large bodies of evidence drawn from
research using a range of methods is a challenge.
Ensuring that the product of
this synthesis process
can be trusted is important for policy makers, for prac
titioners and for the people research is intended
to benefit. There are a number of ways in which research evidence can be brought together to give
an overall picture of current knowl
edge that can be used to inform policy and practice decisions.
However, the trustworthiness of some of these methods remains problematic.
The guidance we set out here focuses on a particular approach -
narrative synthesis.
Variants of
this approach are widely used in work on evidence
synthesis, including Cochr
ane reviews, but there is
currently no consensus on the constituent element
s of narrative synthesis and the conditions for
establishing trustworthiness – notably a systematic
and transparent approach to the synthesis
process with safeguards in place to avoid bias resulting from the undue emphasis on one study
relative to another – are frequently absent. This
guidance therefore aims to contribute to improving
the quality of narrative approac
hes to evidence synthesis
g offenders be 'scared straight' through tough penal
measures? What factors should
be considered when designing and implementing a multi-sectoral
injury prevention programme in a local area? Maki
ng sense of large bodies of evidence drawn from
research using a range of methods is a challenge.
Ensuring that the product of
this synthesis process
can be trusted is important for policy makers, for prac
titioners and for the people research is intended
to benefit. There are a number of ways in which research evidence can be brought together to give
an overall picture of current knowl
edge that can be used to inform policy and practice decisions.
However, the trustworthiness of some of these methods remains problematic.
The guidance we set out here focuses on a particular approach -
narrative synthesis.
Variants of
this approach are widely used in work on evidence
synthesis, including Cochr
ane reviews, but there is
currently no consensus on the constituent element
s of narrative synthesis and the conditions for
establishing trustworthiness – notably a systematic
and transparent approach to the synthesis
process with safeguards in place to avoid bias resulting from the undue emphasis on one study
relative to another – are frequently absent. This
guidance therefore aims to contribute to improving
the quality of narrative approac
hes to evidence synthesis
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Place of Publication | London |
| Publisher | Institute for Health Research |
| Number of pages | 92 |
| Publication status | Published - Apr 2006 |