The critical interpretive synthesis: an assessment of reporting practices

Abstract

The importance of the critical interpretive synthesis (CIS) to review quantitative and qualitative research, and to critically develop new theory, is increasingly recognized and evidenced by the increase in published CIS reviews. However, the flexibility embedded in the method hampers its implementation and exacerbates concerns about trustworthiness. This paper seeks to determine the extent of transparent reporting and soundness of execution in published CIS reviews by developing assessment criteria based on CIS key features. We analyzed 77 CIS reviews published between 2006 and 2018 for their reporting practices. Findings indicate that reporting practices of CIS key features are suboptimal. We recommend that authors better document their CIS to increase the transparency of their study and suggest authors to rely on described guidelines to select and conduct their CIS. To this end, our reported evaluation criteria could assist authors, reviewers, and journal editors in their evaluation of the quality of CIS studies.

Conceptual Model of Hearing Health Inequalities (HHI Model): A Critical Interpretive Synthesis

“…Figure 3 shows the flow diagram of the study identification and selection process. The findings from the CIS are provided later in the form of synthesizing arguments, which are based on the following four themes, which are then linked and used for the development of a conceptual model ( Depraetere et al., 2020 ):…”

“…This article aims to integrate diverse forms of research evidence. To do so, the methodology of critical interpretive synthesis (CIS) is adopted ( Depraetere et al., 2020 ; Flemming, 2010 ). The CIS is a relatively new review type used for synthesizing multimethod research that has its origins in health equity research and is increasingly applied in the social sciences ( Depraetere et al., 2020 ).…”

“…To do so, the methodology of critical interpretive synthesis (CIS) is adopted ( Depraetere et al., 2020 ; Flemming, 2010 ). The CIS is a relatively new review type used for synthesizing multimethod research that has its origins in health equity research and is increasingly applied in the social sciences ( Depraetere et al., 2020 ). This review type is distinguished from other review types through its emphasis on theory development and flexibility, involving an iterative approach to searching and selecting evidence ( Depraetere et al., 2020 ).…”

“…This article relies on CIS reviews’ described guidelines to ensure that the reporting is transparent and coherent ( Depraetere et al., 2020 ). The following six activities represent the dynamic process of a CIS: Open research question : The CIS starts with the formulation of an open research question regarding the impact of socioeconomic inequality on hearing loss.…”

“…A synthesizing argument was then formulated, which also takes into consideration elements of theories on health inequalities. The themes were then synthesized in an inductive approach, and a coherent theoretical conceptual model was formulated, depicting the relationship between the network of the discussed constructs, which aims to contribute to the theoretical development of the synthesis topic ( Depraetere et al., 2020 ).…”