Table 1 Quality criteria used in the comparative analysis

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?