A key task in conducting research integration studies is determining what features to account for in the research reports eligible for inclusion. In the course of a methodological project, the authors found a remarkable uniformity in the way findings were produced and presented, no matter what the stated or implied frame of reference or method. They describe a typology of findings, which they developed to bypass the discrepancy between method claims and the actual use of methods, and efforts to ascertain its utility and reliability. The authors propose that the findings in journal reports of qualitative studies in the health domain can be classified on a continuum of data transformation as no finding, topical survey, thematic survey, conceptual/thematic description, or interpretive explanation.

Abstract:The new imperative in the health disciplines to be more methodologically inclusive has generated a growing interest in mixed research synthesis, or the integration of qualitative and quantitative research findings. Qualitative metasummary is a quantitatively oriented aggregation of qualitative findings originally developed to accommodate the distinctive features of qualitative surveys. Yet these findings are similar in form and mode of production to the descriptive findings researchers often present in addition to the results of bivariate and multivariable analyses. Qualitative metasummary, which includes the extraction, grouping, and formatting of findings, and the calculation of frequency and intensity effect sizes, can be used to produce mixed research syntheses and to conduct a posteriori analyses of the relationship between reports and findings.

These results suggest that stressful life events, dysphoric mood and limited social support are associated with more rapid clinical progression in HIV infection, with serum cortisol also exerting an independent effect on disease progression.

Given the varied beliefs about findings among qualitative researchers, the challenge is to find ways to present findings that will make them discernible to the diverse audiences for whom they are intended, including researchers and practitioners.

The authors' purpose in this article is to report the results of their search and retrieval efforts to date in an ongoing study to develop the procedural, analytic, and interpretive techniques to conduct qualitative meta-synthesis projects, using studies on women with HIV infection as the method case. For researchers conducting qualitative meta-synthesis projects, the ideal goal is to retrieve all of the relevant studies in a field--not simply a sample of them. Bates's model of berrypicking is used as the framework to describe the techniques used to conduct these searches. The authors discuss, in particular, the challenges of working with bibliographic databases, including choosing which databases to search, learning about the idiosyncrasies of working with each database, developing a list of search terms, and refining inclusion criteria regarding which studies to include in the meta-synthesis. Recommendations are given for searchers and writers of qualitative research.

HIV-positive women experience stigmatization in relationships with others. HIV-related stigma is as much a reflection of these others as it is central to the experience of HIV-positive people themselves. Even those not infected with HIV are still affected by it and are thus appropriate targets for interventions to reduce its negative effects.

In this article, the authors hope to shift the debate in the practice disciplines concerning quality in qualitative research from a preoccupation with epistemic criteria toward consideration of aesthetic and rhetorical concerns. They see epistemic criteria as inevitably including aesthetic and rhetorical concerns. The authors argue here for a reconceptualization of the research report as a literary technology that mediates between researcher/writer and reviewer/reader. The evaluation of these reports should thus be treated as occasions in which readers seek to make texts meaningful, rather than for the rigid application of standards and criteria. The authors draw from reader-response theories, literature on rhetoric and representation in science, and findings from an on-going methodological research project involving the appraisal of a set of qualitative studies.

Qualitative metasummaries are useful end products of research integration studies involving reports of findings in the form of qualitative surveys, and may serve as a foundation for qualitative metasyntheses.