“Best fit” framework synthesis: refining the method

Abstract

BackgroundFollowing publication of the first worked example of the “best fit” method of evidence synthesis for the systematic review of qualitative evidence in this journal, the originators of the method identified a need to specify more fully some aspects of this particular derivative of framework synthesis.Methods and ResultsWe therefore present a second such worked example in which all techniques are defined and explained, and their appropriateness is assessed. Specified features of the method include the development of new techniques to identify theories in a systematic manner; the creation of an a priori framework for the synthesis; and the “testing” of the synthesis. An innovative combination of existing methods of quality assessment, analysis and synthesis is used to complete the process. This second worked example was a qualitative evidence synthesis of employees’ views of workplace smoking cessation interventions, in which the “best fit” method was found to be practical and fit for purpose.ConclusionsThe method is suited to producing context-specific conceptual models for describing or explaining the decision-making and health behaviours of patients and other groups. It offers a pragmatic means of conducting rapid qualitative evidence synthesis and generating programme theories relating to intervention effectiveness, which might be of relevance both to researchers and policy-makers.

Barriers and facilitators to health screening in men: A systematic review

“…Data extraction and synthesis were conducted based on the 'best fit' framework synthesis method which provides 'a means to test, reinforce and build on an existing published model, conceived for a potentially different but relevant population' (Carroll et al, 2013). Researchers can combine several frameworks if necessary and refine the framework by adding new themes that emerged from the data, which are not found in the initial framework.…”

Can we Build on Social Movement Theories to Develop and Improve Community‐Based Participatory Research? A Framework Synthesis Review

“…This recent type of review, adapted from framework analysis—a technique for data analysis in primary qualitative studies (Dixon‐Woods, 2011) —, is a highly structured approach to organize qualitative data, based on a priori themes drawn from a conceptual framework (Carroll et al., 2011, 2013; Dixon‐Woods, 2011; Oliver et al., 2008). While framework synthesis is largely a deductive approach, it also includes an inductive component building on thematic analysis to identify potential new themes from the data, binding the strengths of both deductive and inductive approaches (Carroll et al., 2013; Dixon‐Woods, 2011; Oliver et al., 2008). …”

“…We also used thematic analysis to generate new themes (categories) for material that the initial framework did not accommodate (Carroll et al., 2013). …”

“…However, we have made the rationale for this choice of framework transparent. In addition, the secondary thematic analysis, inherent to framework synthesis, mitigates this limitation by providing opportunities for new themes, concepts, and categories to emerge from the data, thus encompassing specificity of the setting, population, or intervention that can fall outside of the foundation framework (Carroll et al., 2013). …”

“…Drawing on a framework synthesis (Carroll, Booth & Cooper, 2011; Carroll, Booth, Leaviss & Rick, 2013; Dixon‐Woods, 2011; Oliver et al., 2008) of key CBPR projects, this study aims to describe the development of a multidimensional conceptual framework building on social movement theories capable of drawing out identifiable elements of CBPR processes . In this work, we favored a specific rather than exhaustive search strategy, focused around the need to find information‐rich examples of illustrative CBPR.…”