The University of Southampton
University of Southampton Institutional Repository

Improving reporting of meta-ethnography: The eMERGe reporting guidance

Improving reporting of meta-ethnography: The eMERGe reporting guidance
Improving reporting of meta-ethnography: The eMERGe reporting guidance
Aims
To provide guidance to improve the completeness and clarity of meta-ethnography reporting.

Background
Evidence-based policy and practice require robust evidence syntheses which can further understanding of people’s experiences and associated social processes. Meta-ethnography is a rigorous seven-phase qualitative evidence synthesis methodology, developed by Noblit and Hare. Meta-ethnography is used widely in health research but reporting is often poor quality, and this discourages trust in, and use of its findings. Meta-ethnography reporting guidance is needed to improve reporting quality.

DesignThe eMERGe study used a rigorous mixed-methods design and evidence-based methods to develop the novel reporting guidance and explanatory notes.

Methods
The study, conducted from 2015-2017, comprised of: (1) a methodological systematic review of guidance for meta-ethnography conduct and reporting; (2) a review and audit of published meta-ethnographies to identify good practice principles; (3) international, multi-disciplinary consensus-building processes to agree guidance content; (4) innovative development of the guidance and explanatory notes.

Findings
Recommendations and good practice for all seven phases of meta-ethnography conduct and reporting were newly identified leading to nineteen reporting criteria and accompanying detailed guidance.

Conclusion
The bespoke eMERGe Reporting Guidance, which incorporates new methodological developments and advances the methodology, can help researchers to report the important aspects of meta-ethnography. Use of the guidance should raise reporting quality. Better reporting could make assessments of confidence in the findings more robust and increase use of meta-ethnography outputs to improve practice, policy and service user outcomes in health and other fields. This is the first tailored reporting guideline for meta-ethnography.
guideline, meta-ethnography, nursing, publication standards, qualitative evidence synthesis, qualitative research, reporting, research design, systematic review
0309-2402
1-14
France, Emma F.
bec2378d-985a-4a30-a112-2e890f3beff7
Ring, Nicola
abd67795-cf5a-423d-ac3e-f82382ff5daf
Uny, Isabelle
e4d0af9b-9ba2-46cc-9bea-00e5618be07e
Duncan, Edward A.S.
fb1ca430-1a49-4822-9315-b3bef4f78d01
Jepson, Ruth G.
57533d21-8c07-4f68-964c-9de747dbb2bc
Maxwell, Margaret
794a3f8b-a042-491a-b5f1-75b22dcb1999
Roberts, Rachel J.
00128330-2392-4745-9b49-7c61330ff42a
Turley, Ruth L.
23be3426-92d0-4f01-9b8a-6e08b9c5b2f5
Noyes, Jane
be843342-19e2-4a6d-acb6-3d7c216f55af
Booth, Andrew
668d4fa1-456e-4ad2-8b0a-aebaf7a5b039
Britten, Nicky
68f95423-a4ec-4e8d-afe9-1ed72a5b11e1
Flemming, Kate
62c38d90-d74a-4185-ba09-c69e1bd95faf
Gallagher, Ian
2391fbe0-5f06-4552-80b5-3837ae112db6
Garside, Ruth
7178cdef-fe0c-4bba-92f8-8c23d1f50386
Hannes, Karin
6d5aa8e9-9039-4cda-ad35-721adb4fefca
Lewin, Simon
40b5f665-910e-4d78-96ff-576596f95edc
Noblit, George W.
2761585e-6597-48f1-b490-280d3a2ecf39
Pope, Catherine
21ae1290-0838-4245-adcf-6f901a0d4607
Thomas, James
30f475d6-a285-4d94-8d38-942932237dff
Vanstone, Meredith
f5436398-12e8-416b-b27e-082262a863fe
France, Emma F.
bec2378d-985a-4a30-a112-2e890f3beff7
Ring, Nicola
abd67795-cf5a-423d-ac3e-f82382ff5daf
Uny, Isabelle
e4d0af9b-9ba2-46cc-9bea-00e5618be07e
Duncan, Edward A.S.
fb1ca430-1a49-4822-9315-b3bef4f78d01
Jepson, Ruth G.
57533d21-8c07-4f68-964c-9de747dbb2bc
Maxwell, Margaret
794a3f8b-a042-491a-b5f1-75b22dcb1999
Roberts, Rachel J.
00128330-2392-4745-9b49-7c61330ff42a
Turley, Ruth L.
23be3426-92d0-4f01-9b8a-6e08b9c5b2f5
Noyes, Jane
be843342-19e2-4a6d-acb6-3d7c216f55af
Booth, Andrew
668d4fa1-456e-4ad2-8b0a-aebaf7a5b039
Britten, Nicky
68f95423-a4ec-4e8d-afe9-1ed72a5b11e1
Flemming, Kate
62c38d90-d74a-4185-ba09-c69e1bd95faf
Gallagher, Ian
2391fbe0-5f06-4552-80b5-3837ae112db6
Garside, Ruth
7178cdef-fe0c-4bba-92f8-8c23d1f50386
Hannes, Karin
6d5aa8e9-9039-4cda-ad35-721adb4fefca
Lewin, Simon
40b5f665-910e-4d78-96ff-576596f95edc
Noblit, George W.
2761585e-6597-48f1-b490-280d3a2ecf39
Pope, Catherine
21ae1290-0838-4245-adcf-6f901a0d4607
Thomas, James
30f475d6-a285-4d94-8d38-942932237dff
Vanstone, Meredith
f5436398-12e8-416b-b27e-082262a863fe

France, Emma F., Ring, Nicola, Uny, Isabelle, Duncan, Edward A.S., Jepson, Ruth G., Maxwell, Margaret, Roberts, Rachel J., Turley, Ruth L., Noyes, Jane, Booth, Andrew, Britten, Nicky, Flemming, Kate, Gallagher, Ian, Garside, Ruth, Hannes, Karin, Lewin, Simon, Noblit, George W., Pope, Catherine, Thomas, James and Vanstone, Meredith (2019) Improving reporting of meta-ethnography: The eMERGe reporting guidance. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 1-14. (doi:10.1002/pon.4915).

Record type: Article

Abstract

Aims
To provide guidance to improve the completeness and clarity of meta-ethnography reporting.

Background
Evidence-based policy and practice require robust evidence syntheses which can further understanding of people’s experiences and associated social processes. Meta-ethnography is a rigorous seven-phase qualitative evidence synthesis methodology, developed by Noblit and Hare. Meta-ethnography is used widely in health research but reporting is often poor quality, and this discourages trust in, and use of its findings. Meta-ethnography reporting guidance is needed to improve reporting quality.

DesignThe eMERGe study used a rigorous mixed-methods design and evidence-based methods to develop the novel reporting guidance and explanatory notes.

Methods
The study, conducted from 2015-2017, comprised of: (1) a methodological systematic review of guidance for meta-ethnography conduct and reporting; (2) a review and audit of published meta-ethnographies to identify good practice principles; (3) international, multi-disciplinary consensus-building processes to agree guidance content; (4) innovative development of the guidance and explanatory notes.

Findings
Recommendations and good practice for all seven phases of meta-ethnography conduct and reporting were newly identified leading to nineteen reporting criteria and accompanying detailed guidance.

Conclusion
The bespoke eMERGe Reporting Guidance, which incorporates new methodological developments and advances the methodology, can help researchers to report the important aspects of meta-ethnography. Use of the guidance should raise reporting quality. Better reporting could make assessments of confidence in the findings more robust and increase use of meta-ethnography outputs to improve practice, policy and service user outcomes in health and other fields. This is the first tailored reporting guideline for meta-ethnography.

Text
Improving reporting of Meta-Ethnography eMERGe Guidance 22June18 - Accepted Manuscript
Restricted to Repository staff only until 3 October 2019.
Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
Request a copy
Text
Improving reporting of Meta-Ethnography eMERGeGuidance22June18 - Accepted Manuscript
Restricted to Repository staff only
Request a copy
Text
France et al 2019 Psycho-Oncology - Version of Record
Download (499kB)
Text
France_et_al-2019-Journal_of_Advanced_Nursing - Version of Record
Download (237kB)

More information

Accepted/In Press date: 3 July 2018
e-pub ahead of print date: 15 January 2019
Additional Information: Running Head: eMERGe Reporting Guidance
Keywords: guideline, meta-ethnography, nursing, publication standards, qualitative evidence synthesis, qualitative research, reporting, research design, systematic review

Identifiers

Local EPrints ID: 425348
URI: https://eprints.soton.ac.uk/id/eprint/425348
ISSN: 0309-2402
PURE UUID: 96cfaaf6-4772-41bb-a431-cd88467b9e64
ORCID for Catherine Pope: ORCID iD orcid.org/0000-0002-8935-6702

Catalogue record

Date deposited: 15 Oct 2018 16:30
Last modified: 17 Sep 2019 00:52

Export record

Altmetrics

Contributors

Author: Emma F. France
Author: Nicola Ring
Author: Isabelle Uny
Author: Edward A.S. Duncan
Author: Ruth G. Jepson
Author: Margaret Maxwell
Author: Rachel J. Roberts
Author: Ruth L. Turley
Author: Jane Noyes
Author: Andrew Booth
Author: Nicky Britten
Author: Kate Flemming
Author: Ian Gallagher
Author: Ruth Garside
Author: Karin Hannes
Author: Simon Lewin
Author: George W. Noblit
Author: Catherine Pope ORCID iD
Author: James Thomas
Author: Meredith Vanstone

University divisions

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

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.

×