AimsThe aim of this study was to provide guidance to improve the completeness and clarity of meta-ethnography reporting.BackgroundEvidence-based policy and practice require robust evidence syntheses which can further understanding of people’s experiences and associated social processes. Meta-ethnography is a rigorous seven-phase qualitative evidence synthesis methodology, developed by Noblit and Hare. Meta-ethnography is used widely in health research, but reporting is often poor quality and this discourages trust in and use of its findings. Meta-ethnography reporting guidance is needed to improve reporting quality.DesignThe eMERGe study used a rigorous mixed-methods design and evidence-based methods to develop the novel reporting guidance and explanatory notes.MethodsThe study, conducted from 2015 to 2017, comprised of: (1) a methodological systematic review of guidance for meta-ethnography conduct and reporting; (2) a review and audit of published meta-ethnographies to identify good practice principles; (3) international, multidisciplinary consensus-building processes to agree guidance content; (4) innovative development of the guidance and explanatory notes.FindingsRecommendations and good practice for all seven phases of meta-ethnography conduct and reporting were newly identified leading to 19 reporting criteria and accompanying detailed guidance.ConclusionThe bespoke eMERGe Reporting Guidance, which incorporates new methodological developments and advances the methodology, can help researchers to report the important aspects of meta-ethnography. Use of the guidance should raise reporting quality. Better reporting could make assessments of confidence in the findings more robust and increase use of meta-ethnography outputs to improve practice, policy, and service user outcomes in health and other fields. This is the first tailored reporting guideline for meta-ethnography. This article is being simultaneously published in the following journals: Journal of Advanced Nursing, Psycho-oncology, Review of Education, and BMC Medical Research Methodology.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12874-018-0600-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

BackgroundPoor adherence to medication regimens increases adverse outcomes for patients with Type 2 diabetes. Improving medication adherence is a growing priority for clinicians and health care systems. We examine the differences between patient and provider understandings of barriers to medication adherence for Type 2 diabetes patients.MethodsWe searched systematically for empirical qualitative studies on the topic of barriers to medication adherence among Type 2 diabetes patients published between 2002–2013; 86 empirical qualitative studies qualified for inclusion. Following qualitative meta-synthesis methods, we coded and analyzed thematically the findings from studies, integrating and comparing findings across studies to yield a synthetic interpretation and new insights from this body of research.ResultsWe identify 7 categories of barriers: (1) emotional experiences as positive and negative motivators to adherence, (2) intentional non-compliance, (3) patient-provider relationship and communication, (4) information and knowledge, (5) medication administration, (6) social and cultural beliefs, and (7) financial issues. Patients and providers express different understandings of what patients require to improve adherence. Health beliefs, life context and lay understandings all inform patients’ accounts. They describe barriers in terms of difficulties adapting medication regimens to their lifestyles and daily routines. In contrast, providers' understandings of patients poor medication adherence behaviors focus on patients’ presumed needs for more information about the physiological and biomedical aspect of diabetes.ConclusionsThis study highlights key discrepancies between patients’ and providers’ understandings of barriers to medication adherence. These misunderstandings span the many cultural and care contexts represented by 86 qualitative studies. Counseling and interventions aimed at improving medication adherence among Type 2 diabetes might become more effective through better integration of the patient’s perspective and values concerning adherence difficulties and solutions.

Aims The aim of this study was to provide guidance to improve the completeness and clarity of meta‐ethnography reporting. Background Evidence‐based policy and practice require robust evidence syntheses which can further understanding of people's experiences and associated social processes. Meta‐ethnography is a rigorous seven‐phase qualitative evidence synthesis methodology, developed by Noblit and Hare. Meta‐ethnography is used widely in health research, but reporting is often poor quality and this discourages trust in and use of its findings. Meta‐ethnography reporting guidance is needed to improve reporting quality. Design The eMERGe study used a rigorous mixed‐methods design and evidence‐based methods to develop the novel reporting guidance and explanatory notes. Methods The study, conducted from 2015 to 2017, comprised of: (1) a methodological systematic review of guidance for meta‐ethnography conduct and reporting; (2) a review and audit of published meta‐ethnographies to identify good practice principles; (3) international, multidisciplinary consensus‐building processes to agree guidance content; (4) innovative development of the guidance and explanatory notes. Findings Recommendations and good practice for all seven phases of meta‐ethnography conduct and reporting were newly identified leading to 19 reporting criteria and accompanying detailed guidance. Conclusion The bespoke eMERGe Reporting Guidance, which incorporates new methodological developments and advances the methodology, can help researchers to report the important aspects of meta‐ethnography. Use of the guidance should raise reporting quality. Better reporting could make assessments of confidence in the findings more robust and increase use of meta‐ethnography outputs to improve practice, policy, and service user outcomes in health and other fields. This is the first tailored reporting guideline for meta‐ethnography. This article is being simultaneously published in the following journals: Journal of Advanced Nursing, Psycho‐oncology, Review of Education, and BMC Medical Research Methodology.

Professions define credibility and constructiveness in culturally specific ways and create contexts for learning that may either facilitate or constrain the provision of meaningful feedback. Comparison with other professional cultures may offer strategies for creating a productive feedback culture within medical education.

As the movement toward evidence-based health policy continues to emphasize the importance of including patient and public perspectives, syntheses of qualitative health research are becoming more common. In response to the focus on independent assessments of rigor in these knowledge products, over 100 appraisal tools for assessing the quality of qualitative research have been developed. The variety of appraisal tools exhibit diverse methods and purposes, reflecting the lack of consensus as to what constitutes appropriate quality criteria for qualitative research. It is a daunting task for those without deep familiarity of the field to choose the best appraisal tool for their purpose. This article provides a description of the structure, content, and objectives of existing appraisal tools for those wanting to evaluate primary qualitative research for a qualitative evidence synthesis. We then discuss common features of appraisal tools and examine their implications for evidence synthesis.

Excess gestational weight gain has numerous negative health outcomes for women and children, including high blood pressure, diabetes, and cesarean section (maternal) and high birth weight, trauma at birth, and asphyxia (infants). Excess weight gain in pregnancy is associated with a higher risk of long-term obesity in both mothers and children. Despite a concerted public health effort, the proportion of pregnant women gaining weight in excess of national guidelines continues to increase. To understand this phenomenon and offer suggestions for improving interventions, we conducted a systematic review of qualitative research on pregnant women's perceptions and experiences of weight gain in pregnancy. We used the methodology of qualitative meta-synthesis to analyze 42 empirical qualitative research studies conducted in high-income countries and published between 2005 and 2015. With this synthesis, we provide an account of the underlying factors and circumstances (barriers, facilitators, and motivators) that pregnant women identify as important for appropriate weight gain. We also offer a description of the strategies identified by pregnant women as acceptable and appropriate ways to promote healthy weight gain. Through our integrative analysis, we identify women's common perception on the struggle to enact health behaviors and physical, social, and environmental factors outside of their control. Effective and sensitive interventions to encourage healthy weight gain in pregnancy must consider the social environment in which decisions about weight take place.

BackgroundNon-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) can be used to accurately detect fetal chromosomal anomalies early in pregnancy by assessing cell-free fetal DNA present in maternal blood. The rapid diffusion of NIPT, as well as the ease and simplicity of the test raises concerns around informed decision-making and the potential for routinization. Introducing NIPT in a way that facilitates informed and autonomous decisions is imperative to the ethical application of this technology. We approach this imperative by systematically reviewing and synthesizing primary qualitative research on women’s experiences with and preferences for informed decision-making around NIPT.MethodsWe searched multiple bibliographic databases including Ovid MEDLINE, EBSCO Cumulative Index to Nursing & Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and ISI Web of Science Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI). Our review was guided by integrative qualitative meta-synthesis, and we used a staged coding process similar to that of grounded theory to conduct our analysis.ResultsThirty empirical primary qualitative research studies were eligible for inclusion. Women preferred to learn about NIPT from their clinicians, but they expressed dissatisfaction with the quality and quantity of information provided during counselling and often sought information from a variety of other sources. Women generally had a good understanding of test characteristics, and the factors of accuracy, physical risk, and test timing were the critical information elements that they used to make informed decisions around NIPT. Women often described NIPT as easy or just another blood test, highlighting threats to informed decision-making such as routinization or a pressure to test.ConclusionsWomen’s unique circumstances modulate the information that they value and require most in the context of making an informed decision. Widened availability of trustworthy information about NIPT as well as careful attention to the facilitation of counselling may help facilitate informed decision-making.Trial registrationPROSPERO 2018 CRD42018086261.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12884-018-2168-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Objectives Diet modification is an important part of the prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes, but sustained dietary change remains elusive for many individuals. This paper describes and interprets the barriers to diet modification from the perspective of people with type 2 diabetes, paying particular attention to the experiences of people who experience social marginalization. Methods A systematic review of primary, empirical qualitative research was performed, capturing 120 relevant studies published between 2002 and 2015. Qualitative meta-synthesis was used to provide an integrative analysis of this knowledge. Results Due to the central role of food in social life, dietary change affects all aspects of a person's life, and barriers related to self-discipline, emotions, family and social support, social significance of food, and knowledge were identified. These barriers are inter-linked and overlapping. Social marginalization magnifies barriers; people who face social marginalization are trying to make the same changes as other people with diabetes with fewer socio-material resources in the face of greater challenges. Discussion A social-ecological model of behavior supports our findings of challenges at all levels, and highlights the need for interventions and counseling strategies that address the social and environmental factors that shape and sustain dietary change.