The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

The importance of logic when choosing how to approach a systematic review: lessons from a meta-ethnography of how healthcare professionals and patients understand placebos and their effects in primary care

The importance of logic when choosing how to approach a systematic review: lessons from a meta-ethnography of how healthcare professionals and patients understand placebos and their effects in primary care
The importance of logic when choosing how to approach a systematic review: lessons from a meta-ethnography of how healthcare professionals and patients understand placebos and their effects in primary care
As part of a PhD exploring placebo effects in general practice, we conducted a systematic review of how healthcare professionals and patients understand placebos and their effects in primary care. However, there is significant ambiguity and disagreement in the literature on the nature, efficacy, and ethics of placebo treatment. This made it difficult to establish how to approach and design our review. Given such an uncertain environment, it was difficult for us to establish the orientation of our review and even more difficult to choose from the myriad possible methodologies for conducting it. In this case, we outline how by focussing on and refining a distinct logical mode of inquiry, we were able to better understand the different types of possible review and effectively evaluate and select a methodology. In a sense, this case is not about how to conduct a review, it is about how to get to the start line. We posit that having a coherent theoretical grasp of one's review orientation is as important as the procedural conduct of the review. We think that this initial phase could be better explained and that the implications of getting it wrong can resonate through the whole review process.
Sage Publications Ltd
Hardman, Douglas
bf7ba905-0d04-4d1f-9686-f9a3a3d642db
Bishop, Felicity
1f5429c5-325f-4ac4-aae3-6ba85d079928
Hardman, Douglas
bf7ba905-0d04-4d1f-9686-f9a3a3d642db
Bishop, Felicity
1f5429c5-325f-4ac4-aae3-6ba85d079928

Hardman, Douglas and Bishop, Felicity (2018) The importance of logic when choosing how to approach a systematic review: lessons from a meta-ethnography of how healthcare professionals and patients understand placebos and their effects in primary care , London Sage Publications Ltd (SAGE Research Methods Cases Part 2, (doi:10.4135/9781526445353) ).

Record type: Monograph (Project Report)

Abstract

As part of a PhD exploring placebo effects in general practice, we conducted a systematic review of how healthcare professionals and patients understand placebos and their effects in primary care. However, there is significant ambiguity and disagreement in the literature on the nature, efficacy, and ethics of placebo treatment. This made it difficult to establish how to approach and design our review. Given such an uncertain environment, it was difficult for us to establish the orientation of our review and even more difficult to choose from the myriad possible methodologies for conducting it. In this case, we outline how by focussing on and refining a distinct logical mode of inquiry, we were able to better understand the different types of possible review and effectively evaluate and select a methodology. In a sense, this case is not about how to conduct a review, it is about how to get to the start line. We posit that having a coherent theoretical grasp of one's review orientation is as important as the procedural conduct of the review. We think that this initial phase could be better explained and that the implications of getting it wrong can resonate through the whole review process.

Full text not available from this repository.

More information

Published date: January 2018

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 417642
URI: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/417642
PURE UUID: 6028d027-f953-4e3f-bb8b-7e3da99da89e
ORCID for Douglas Hardman: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0001-6717-2323
ORCID for Felicity Bishop: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-8737-6662

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 08 Feb 2018 17:30
Last modified: 15 Feb 2018 17:30

Export record

Altmetrics

Download statistics

Downloads from ePrints over the past year. Other digital versions may also be available to download e.g. from the publisher's website.

View more statistics

Library staff edit
Atom RSS 1.0 RSS 2.0

Contact ePrints Soton: eprints@soton.ac.uk

ePrints Soton supports OAI 2.0 with a base URL of https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/cgi/oai2

This repository has been built using EPrints software, developed at the University of Southampton, but available to everyone to use.

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we will assume that you are happy to receive cookies on the University of Southampton website.

×