Skip to main content

Table 1 Quality criteria used in the comparative analysis

From: Including mixed methods research in systematic reviews: Examples from qualitative syntheses in TB and malaria control

Domain Criteria explanation Indicative questions
Rigour in research conduct Judgement on how carefully the research is carried out; tends to be a judgement of reporting quality Is the research question clearly defined?
Rationale for the study design discussed?
Is a sampling strategy well defined and justified?
Is the method of data collection clearly described?
Study context A detailed description is needed to judge wider applicability of the findings; refers to transferability Detailed description of the context of the study to allow assessment of applicability to other settings?
Discussion of limits to wider inference?
Analysis procedure An important component of rigour and reliability Is the method of analysis clearly described?
Credibility Judgement on how well the findings are presented and how meaningful or believable they are How credible are the findings?
Are the claims made supported by sufficient evidence?
Depth, detail & richness of findings An indication of the quality of the analysis which underlies credibility claims E.g. “thick vs. thin description”?
Illumination of multiple perspectives/contribution of sample design?
Detection of underlying factors/influences or conceptual linkages?
Presentation of illuminating extracts/observations?
Contribution to knowledge Judgement on the relevance and potential utility of the findings in relation to policy, practice or theory Clear discussion of how the research findings contribute to:
Understanding of uptake of malaria preventive interventions by pregnant women?; theoretical conceptions of uptake of malaria preventive interventions in pregnancy?
New areas of investigation identified?