{"title":"元民族志的表现:在迷途丛林的边缘?","authors":"Terese Elisabet Bondas","doi":"10.1177/10497323251316841","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Since its origin in the ethnography of education by Noblit and Hare in 1988, meta-ethnography has been molded between its qualitative research heritage as an interpretative synthesizing method and an increasing influence from systematic reviews. The eMERGe reporting guidance was introduced in 2019 to help improve the reporting of meta-ethnographies; however, the impact of this is not yet fully known, and the trustworthiness of meta-ethnographies has been challenged. Therefore, the aim of this study is to illuminate representations of meta-ethnography in the method literature in relation to the original publication by Noblit and Hare in 1988 and overviews on qualitative synthesizing methods. This meta-method study is based on published methodological research that focuses on descriptions of meta-ethnography. Using an overarching metaphor of meta-ethnography being in limbo in the jungle of misguided paths, three representations are illuminated. Meta-ethnography seems to be removed from its qualitative interpretive original tradition due to the recent impact of systematic quantitative reviews. Researchers' uncritical use of references has created a terminological mismatch risking misunderstanding and distortion in descriptions and suggested implementation. To strengthen future research, an in-depth understanding of meta-ethnography, its assumptions, and its characteristics, an interpretive application is needed. In addition, maintaining a critical attitude to secondary method references that deviate from the original interpretative epistemology and implementation is also required.</p>","PeriodicalId":48437,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Health Research","volume":" ","pages":"10497323251316841"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Representations of Meta-Ethnography: In Limbo in the Jungle of Misguided Paths?\",\"authors\":\"Terese Elisabet Bondas\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/10497323251316841\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Since its origin in the ethnography of education by Noblit and Hare in 1988, meta-ethnography has been molded between its qualitative research heritage as an interpretative synthesizing method and an increasing influence from systematic reviews. The eMERGe reporting guidance was introduced in 2019 to help improve the reporting of meta-ethnographies; however, the impact of this is not yet fully known, and the trustworthiness of meta-ethnographies has been challenged. Therefore, the aim of this study is to illuminate representations of meta-ethnography in the method literature in relation to the original publication by Noblit and Hare in 1988 and overviews on qualitative synthesizing methods. This meta-method study is based on published methodological research that focuses on descriptions of meta-ethnography. Using an overarching metaphor of meta-ethnography being in limbo in the jungle of misguided paths, three representations are illuminated. Meta-ethnography seems to be removed from its qualitative interpretive original tradition due to the recent impact of systematic quantitative reviews. Researchers' uncritical use of references has created a terminological mismatch risking misunderstanding and distortion in descriptions and suggested implementation. To strengthen future research, an in-depth understanding of meta-ethnography, its assumptions, and its characteristics, an interpretive application is needed. In addition, maintaining a critical attitude to secondary method references that deviate from the original interpretative epistemology and implementation is also required.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48437,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Qualitative Health Research\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"10497323251316841\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Qualitative Health Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323251316841\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Health Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10497323251316841","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFORMATION SCIENCE & LIBRARY SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Representations of Meta-Ethnography: In Limbo in the Jungle of Misguided Paths?
Since its origin in the ethnography of education by Noblit and Hare in 1988, meta-ethnography has been molded between its qualitative research heritage as an interpretative synthesizing method and an increasing influence from systematic reviews. The eMERGe reporting guidance was introduced in 2019 to help improve the reporting of meta-ethnographies; however, the impact of this is not yet fully known, and the trustworthiness of meta-ethnographies has been challenged. Therefore, the aim of this study is to illuminate representations of meta-ethnography in the method literature in relation to the original publication by Noblit and Hare in 1988 and overviews on qualitative synthesizing methods. This meta-method study is based on published methodological research that focuses on descriptions of meta-ethnography. Using an overarching metaphor of meta-ethnography being in limbo in the jungle of misguided paths, three representations are illuminated. Meta-ethnography seems to be removed from its qualitative interpretive original tradition due to the recent impact of systematic quantitative reviews. Researchers' uncritical use of references has created a terminological mismatch risking misunderstanding and distortion in descriptions and suggested implementation. To strengthen future research, an in-depth understanding of meta-ethnography, its assumptions, and its characteristics, an interpretive application is needed. In addition, maintaining a critical attitude to secondary method references that deviate from the original interpretative epistemology and implementation is also required.
期刊介绍:
QUALITATIVE HEALTH RESEARCH is an international, interdisciplinary, refereed journal for the enhancement of health care and to further the development and understanding of qualitative research methods in health care settings. We welcome manuscripts in the following areas: the description and analysis of the illness experience, health and health-seeking behaviors, the experiences of caregivers, the sociocultural organization of health care, health care policy, and related topics. We also seek critical reviews and commentaries addressing conceptual, theoretical, methodological, and ethical issues pertaining to qualitative enquiry.