质量评价工具用于产妇护理研究的定性证据综合：范围审查

IF 2.6 3区医学 Q1 NURSING

Midwifery Pub Date : 2025-06-03 DOI:10.1016/j.midw.2025.104479

Valerie Smith , Aoife Smith , Lorraine Carroll

{"title":"质量评价工具用于产妇护理研究的定性证据综合：范围审查","authors":"Valerie Smith , Aoife Smith , Lorraine Carroll","doi":"10.1016/j.midw.2025.104479","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Quality appraisal (QA) is an expected component when conducting qualitative evidence syntheses (QES). Multiple QA tools are available, however, rendering reviewers’ decision-making on choice of tool challenging.</div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>To identify and assess QA tools used in published QES of maternity care research.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews was used. Published QES were included if they reported on pregnant or postpartum women, their partners, or maternity care professionals, in any setting or geographical location. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, and Epistimonikos were searched from January 2000 to May 2024. Eligibility screening and data extraction were performed by pairs of reviewers independently. The findings were charted using narrative summaries, tables, and figures.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>One hundred and one QES were included. The QA tools most frequently used were the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) (<em>n</em> = 48) and the JBI Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument (JBI-QARI) (<em>n</em> = 22). In the remaining QES, 13 different tools were identified. Both CASP and JBI-QARI meet most of the Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group’s recommended criteria for a QA tool, although 24 QES that used these tools applied a scoring system.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>This scoping review found variation in choice and use of QA tools across 101 QES, although CASP and JBI-QARI were commonly used. It may be reasonable to recommend these tools for use in QES conduct, however, recent work on QA tool development for QES may alter the landscape of QA in future QES of maternity care research.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":18495,"journal":{"name":"Midwifery","volume":"148 ","pages":"Article 104479"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Quality appraisal tools used in qualitative evidence syntheses of maternity care research: A scoping review\",\"authors\":\"Valerie Smith , Aoife Smith , Lorraine Carroll\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.midw.2025.104479\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Quality appraisal (QA) is an expected component when conducting qualitative evidence syntheses (QES). Multiple QA tools are available, however, rendering reviewers’ decision-making on choice of tool challenging.</div></div><div><h3>Aim</h3><div>To identify and assess QA tools used in published QES of maternity care research.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews was used. Published QES were included if they reported on pregnant or postpartum women, their partners, or maternity care professionals, in any setting or geographical location. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, and Epistimonikos were searched from January 2000 to May 2024. Eligibility screening and data extraction were performed by pairs of reviewers independently. The findings were charted using narrative summaries, tables, and figures.</div></div><div><h3>Findings</h3><div>One hundred and one QES were included. The QA tools most frequently used were the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) (<em>n</em> = 48) and the JBI Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument (JBI-QARI) (<em>n</em> = 22). In the remaining QES, 13 different tools were identified. Both CASP and JBI-QARI meet most of the Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group’s recommended criteria for a QA tool, although 24 QES that used these tools applied a scoring system.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>This scoping review found variation in choice and use of QA tools across 101 QES, although CASP and JBI-QARI were commonly used. It may be reasonable to recommend these tools for use in QES conduct, however, recent work on QA tool development for QES may alter the landscape of QA in future QES of maternity care research.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":18495,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Midwifery\",\"volume\":\"148 \",\"pages\":\"Article 104479\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Midwifery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266613825001974\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Midwifery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266613825001974","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

背景：质量评价（QA）是进行定性证据综合（QES）时预期的组成部分。然而，有多种可用的QA工具，使得审阅者在选择工具方面的决策具有挑战性。目的识别和评估已发表的妇产保健研究QES中使用的质量保证工具。方法采用乔安娜布里格斯研究所（joanna Briggs Institute， JBI）的范围审查指南。已发表的QES如果报告了任何环境或地理位置的孕妇或产后妇女、其伴侣或产科护理专业人员。检索自2000年1月至2024年5月的MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL、PsycINFO、Cochrane Library和Epistimonikos。资格筛选和数据提取由两组独立的审稿人进行。研究结果用叙述性摘要、表格和数字绘制成图表。结果：共纳入1001个QES。最常使用的QA工具是关键评估技能计划（CASP）（n = 48）和JBI定性评估和审查工具（JBI- qari）（n = 22）。在剩余的QES中，确定了13种不同的工具。CASP和JBI-QARI都符合Cochrane定性和实施方法组推荐的QA工具标准，尽管使用这些工具的24个QES应用了评分系统。结论：本综述发现，尽管CASP和JBI-QARI是常用的QA工具，但在101个QES中，QA工具的选择和使用存在差异。推荐这些工具用于QES行为可能是合理的，然而，最近关于QES质量保证工具开发的工作可能会改变未来产科护理质量保证研究的质量保证前景。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Quality appraisal tools used in qualitative evidence syntheses of maternity care research: A scoping review

Background

Quality appraisal (QA) is an expected component when conducting qualitative evidence syntheses (QES). Multiple QA tools are available, however, rendering reviewers’ decision-making on choice of tool challenging.

Aim

To identify and assess QA tools used in published QES of maternity care research.

Methods

Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews was used. Published QES were included if they reported on pregnant or postpartum women, their partners, or maternity care professionals, in any setting or geographical location. MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library, and Epistimonikos were searched from January 2000 to May 2024. Eligibility screening and data extraction were performed by pairs of reviewers independently. The findings were charted using narrative summaries, tables, and figures.

Findings

One hundred and one QES were included. The QA tools most frequently used were the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) (n = 48) and the JBI Qualitative Assessment and Review Instrument (JBI-QARI) (n = 22). In the remaining QES, 13 different tools were identified. Both CASP and JBI-QARI meet most of the Cochrane Qualitative and Implementation Methods Group’s recommended criteria for a QA tool, although 24 QES that used these tools applied a scoring system.

Conclusion

This scoping review found variation in choice and use of QA tools across 101 QES, although CASP and JBI-QARI were commonly used. It may be reasonable to recommend these tools for use in QES conduct, however, recent work on QA tool development for QES may alter the landscape of QA in future QES of maternity care research.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Midwifery 医学-护理

CiteScore

4.50

自引率

7.40%

发文量

221

审稿时长

13.4 weeks

期刊介绍： Midwifery publishes the latest peer reviewed international research to inform the safety, quality, outcomes and experiences of pregnancy, birth and maternity care for childbearing women, their babies and families. The journal’s publications support midwives and maternity care providers to explore and develop their knowledge, skills and attitudes informed by best available evidence. Midwifery provides an international, interdisciplinary forum for the publication, dissemination and discussion of advances in evidence, controversies and current research, and promotes continuing education through publication of systematic and other scholarly reviews and updates. Midwifery articles cover the cultural, clinical, psycho-social, sociological, epidemiological, education, managerial, workforce, organizational and technological areas of practice in preconception, maternal and infant care. The journal welcomes the highest quality scholarly research that employs rigorous methodology. Midwifery is a leading international journal in midwifery and maternal health with a current impact factor of 1.861 (© Thomson Reuters Journal Citation Reports 2016) and employs a double-blind peer review process.