Exercise interventions and patient beliefs for people with chronic hip and knee pain: a mixed methods review

Hurley, Michael; Dickson, Kelly; Walsh, Nicola; Hauari, Hanan; Grant, Robert; Cumming, Jo; Oliver, Sandy

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd010842

Cited by 13 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For recent Cochrane complex intervention reviews, since Anderson et al's 2011 seminal article on the use logic models in systematic reviews [34], increasing examples of this particular use of mid-range theory have been reported. In their mixed-method systematic review protocol, Hurley et al developed two conceptual logic diagrams from an initial synthesis of literature to show the effects of erroneous health beliefs and the complex reciprocal interrelationship between pain, physical, and psychosocial function and exercise interventions [35]. Turley et al developed an a priori logic model that was developed over the course of the review exploring the effectiveness of slum upgrading initiatives [21].…”

Section: Mid-range Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current use was established and Cochrane guidance on selection of social theories for systematic reviews of complex interventions was developed

Noyes

Hendry

Booth

et al. 2016

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Mid-range Theoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Current use was established and Cochrane guidance on selection of social theories for systematic reviews of complex interventions was developed

Noyes

Hendry

Booth

et al. 2016

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Four protocols aiming to add a qualitative component to an existing Cochrane Review or suggesting a mixed method approach to synthesis were published in 2011 to 2012 [ 24 - 27 ]. We identified another four for the year up until June 2013 [ 28 - 31 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Celebrating methodological challenges and changes: reflecting on the emergence and importance of the role of qualitative evidence in Cochrane reviews

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cochrane systematic reviews have proven to be beneficial for decision making processes, both on a practitioner and a policy level, and there are current initiatives to extend the types of evidence used by them, including qualitative research. In this article we outline the major achievements of the Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group. Although the Group has encountered numerous challenges in dealing with the evolution of qualitative evidence synthesis, both outside and within the Cochrane Collaboration, it has successfully responded to the challenges posed in terms of incorporating qualitative evidence in systematic reviews. The Methods Group will continue to advocate for more flexible and inclusive approaches to evidence synthesis in order to meet the exciting challenges and opportunities presented by mixed methods systematic reviews and reviews of complex interventions.

show abstract

“…Proximity to the intervention is considered in both of the above examples -where Hurley et al [73] limit selection to qualitative studies on the same intervention, Bohren et al [74] state that in sampling they will privilege qualitative studies that were linked to a specific quantitative intervention but not be directly linked with the quantitative studies in the intervention review Sampling and screening procedures are described in section 5 and in paper 2 in the series.…”

Section: <>mentioning

confidence: 99%

Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series—paper 2: methods for question formulation, searching, and protocol development for qualitative evidence synthesis

Harris

Booth

Cargo

et al. 2018

Journal of Clinical Epidemiology

134

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper updates previous Cochrane guidance on question formulation,searching and protocol development, reflecting recent developments in methods for conducting qualitative evidence syntheses to inform Cochrane intervention reviews. Examples are used to illustrate how decisions about boundaries for a review are formed via an iterative process of constructing lines of inquiry, and mapping the information available to ascertain whether evidence exists to answer questions related to effectiveness, implementation, feasibility, appropriateness, economic evidence, and equity. The process of question formulation allows reviewers to situate the topic in relation to how it informs and explains effectiveness, using the criterion of meaningfulness, appropriateness, feasibility and implementation. Questions related to complex questions and interventions can be structured by drawing on an increasingly wide range of question frameworks. Logic models and theoretical frameworks are useful tools for conceptually mapping the literature to illustrate the complexity of the phenomenon of interest. Further, protocol development may require iterative question formulation and searching. Consequently, the final protocol may function as a guide rather than a prescriptive route-map, particularly in qualitative reviews that ask more exploratory and open ended questions.Keywords: Systematic reviews, question formulation, Cochrane Collaboration, methods, qualitative evidence synthesis. This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. Word count: 4014 words excluding tables and references Key findings:Tools and methods are recommended to assist reviewers in developing protocols, which accommodate alternative approaches to question formulation and searching and protocol development for qualitative evidence synthesis. What this adds to what was known?Questions within qualitative and implementation systematic review protocols may be indicative, allowing more detailed questions to be formulated when more information is needed on specific aspects of the review. A broader range of question formats is presented, to reflect the need for reviews that explore and generate theory. What is the implication and what should change now?This guidance provides examples of protocols for qualitative evidence synthesis that are flexible, to allow the incorporation of open-ended and exploratory review questions and iterative searching methods. 'recontextualise' effectiveness. Recontextualising requires considering effectiveness research in relation to issues in society [4] to enable a decision-maker to make an informed decision about whether an intervention is likely to be useful and whether that intervention is applicable to their local population. Qualitative research produces contingent and experiential knowledge on why interventions work the way that they do (or fail to work) [5]. Further, implementation questions provide information on how the implementation process produces...

show abstract

Exercise interventions and patient beliefs for people with chronic hip and knee pain: a mixed methods review

Cited by 13 publications

References 32 publications

Current use was established and Cochrane guidance on selection of social theories for systematic reviews of complex interventions was developed

Current use was established and Cochrane guidance on selection of social theories for systematic reviews of complex interventions was developed

Celebrating methodological challenges and changes: reflecting on the emergence and importance of the role of qualitative evidence in Cochrane reviews

Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group guidance series—paper 2: methods for question formulation, searching, and protocol development for qualitative evidence synthesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About