Skip to main content

Table 3 The methodology for qualitative research or evidence in the process of included guidelines development

From: An exploration of how developers use qualitative evidence: content analysis and critical appraisal of guidelines

No. The theory basis of qualitative research The quality assessment tool for qualitative research The quality level of primary study of qualitative research to formulate recommendations The quality level of qualitative evidence synthesis to formulate recommendations The level of qualitative research in the grade criteria of evidence and recommendation The grade of recommendations only supported by qualitative evidence The grade of recommendations supported by qualitative and quantitative evidence
1 Good
2 B
3
4 Good
5 Strong
6
7 Strong
8 D
9
10 B
11 Good
12 Good
13 D
14 D
15 CASP High: greater than, or equal to, a converted score of 82.4%
Moderate: a converted score of 62.5–82.3%
III, IV1)
16 III, IV1)
17 III, IV1)
18 CASP High: greater than, or equal to, a converted score of 82.4%
Moderate: a converted score of 62.5–82.3%
III, IV1)
19 III, IV1)
20 III, IV1)
21
22 III, IV1)
23
24 III, IV1)
25
26 NICE checklist
27 NICE checklist
28 NICE checklist
29 NICE checklist
30 NICE checklist
31 NICE checklist
32 NICE checklist
33 NICE checklist +: indicates that some of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled
-: indicates that few or no checklist criteria have been fulfilled
34 NICE checklist
35 Grounded theory, phenomenology NICE checklist ++: indicates that all or most of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled
+: indicates that some of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled
–: indicates that few or no checklist criteria have been fulfilled
36 NICE checklist ++: indicates that all or most of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled
+: indicates that some of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled
-: indicates that few or no checklist criteria have been fulfilled
37 NICE checklist ++: indicates that all or most of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled
+: indicates that some of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled
-: indicates that few or no checklist criteria have been fulfilled
38 NICE checklist
39 NICE checklist +: indicates that some of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled
−: indicates that few or no checklist criteria have been fulfilled
40 NICE checklist ++: indicates that all or most of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled
+: indicates that some of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled
-: indicates that few or no checklist criteria have been fulfilled
41 NICE checklist ++: indicates that all or most of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled
+: indicates that some of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled
42 NICE checklist ++: indicates that all or most of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled
+: indicates that some of the checklist criteria have been fulfilled
-: indicates that few or no checklist criteria have been fulfilled
43 CASP High: greater than, or equal to, a converted score of 82.4%
Moderate: a converted score of 62.5–82.3%
44 CASP High: greater than, or equal to, a converted score of 82.4%
Moderate: a converted score of 62.5–82.3%
45 CASP High: greater than, or equal to, a converted score of 82.4%
Moderate: a converted score of 62.5–82.3%
46 CASP High: greater than, or equal to, a converted score of 82.4%
Moderate: a converted score of 62.5–82.3%
47 CASP High: greater than, or equal to, a converted score of 82.4%
Moderate: a converted score of 62.5–82.3%
48 CASP High: greater than, or equal to, a converted score of 82.4%
Moderate: a converted score of 62.5–82.3%
49 CASP High: greater than, or equal to, a converted score of 82.4%
Moderate: a converted score of 62.5–82.3%
50 CASP High: greater than, or equal to, a converted score of 82.4%
Moderate: a converted score of 62.5–82.3%
51
52
53 Very low weak
54
55
56 Strong
57 I, IV2) B
58
59
60
61 IV2) B
62
63
64
  1. CASP: the Critical Appraisals Skills Programme; III: Synthesis of multiple studies primarily of qualitative research; IV1): Evidence obtained from well-designed non-experimental observational studies, such as analytical studies or descriptive studies, and/or qualitative studies; I: Evidence obtained from meta-analysis or systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials, and/or synthesis of multiple studies primarily of quantitative research; Evidence obtained from at least one randomized controlled trial; IV2): Evidence obtained from well-designed non-experimental observational studies, such as analytical studies or descriptive studies, and/or qualitative studies. Very low: the guideline development group have very little confidence in the effect estimate, the true effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect; Good: Recommended best practice based on the clinical experience of the guideline development group; B: a body of evidence including studies rated as 2++, directly applicable to the target population, and demonstrating overall consistency of results; or extrapolated evidence from studies rated as 1++ or 1+; D: evidence level 3 or 4, or extrapolated evidence from studies rated as 2+; Strong: the guideline development group is confident that for the vast majority people, the intervention (or the interventions) will do more good than harm or do more harm than good; Weak: the guideline development group is uncertain about the advantages and disadvantages or high or low quality evidence shows that the advantages and disadvantages are equivalent