Publisher: Wiley Blackwell Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101543738 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1759-2887 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 17592879 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Res Synth Methods Subsets: MEDLINE

Publication: : Chichester : Wiley Blackwell
Original Publication: Malden, MA : John Wiley & Sons, 2010-

Comparative Effectiveness Research* ; Qualitative Research*; Behavior ; Fuzzy Logic ; Health Promotion ; Humans ; Internationality ; Obesity/prevention & control ; Obesity/therapy ; Patient Participation ; Regression Analysis ; Research Design ; Risk ; Sociology ; Systematic Reviews as Topic ; Weight Reduction Programs

Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) was originally developed as a tool for cross-national comparisons in macrosociology, but its use in evaluation and evidence synthesis of complex interventions is rapidly developing. QCA is theory-driven and relies on Boolean logic to identify pathways to an outcome (eg, is the intervention effective or not?). We use the example of two linked systematic reviews on weight management programs (WMPs) for adults-one focusing on user views (a "views synthesis") and one focusing on the effectiveness of WMPs incorporating dietary and physical activity-to demonstrate how a synthesis of user views can supply a working theory to structure a QCA. We discuss how a views synthesis is especially apt to supply this working theory because user views can (a) represent a "middle-range theory" of the intervention; (b) bring a participatory, democratic perspective; and (c) provide an idiographic understanding of how the intervention works that external taxonomies may not be able to furnish. We then discuss the practical role that the views synthesis played in our QCA examining pathways to effectiveness: (a) by suggesting specific intervention features and sharpening the focus on the most salient features to be examined, (b) by supporting interpretation of findings, and (c) by bounding data analysis to prevent data dredging.
(© 2019 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Rihoux B, Ragin C. Configurational Comparative Methods: Qualitative Comparative Analysis (QCA) and Related Techniques. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 2009.
Ragin CC. Redesigning Social Inquiry: Fuzzy Sets and Beyond. Chicago: University; 2008.
Thomas J, O'Mara-Eves A, Brunton G. Using qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) in systematic reviews of complex interventions: a worked example. Syst Rev. 2014;3(1):67. https://doi.org/10.1186/2046-4053-3-67.
Sager F, Andereggen C. Dealing with complex causality in realist synthesis: the promise of qualitative comparative analysis. Am J Eval. 2012;33(1):60-78. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214011411574.
Candy B, King M, Jones L, Oliver S. Using qualitative evidence on patients' views to help understand variation in effectiveness of complex interventions: a qualitative comparative analysis. Trials. 2013;14(1):179. https://doi.org/10.1186/1745-6215-14-179.
Brunton G, O'Mara-Eves A, Thomas J. The “active ingredients” for successful community engagement with disadvantaged expectant and new mothers: a qualitative comparative analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2014;70(12):2847-2860. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.12441.
Schaffer J. Causes as probability raisers of processes. J Philos. 2001;98(2):75-92. https://doi.org/10.2307/2678483.
Petticrew M, Rehfuess E, Noyes J, et al. Synthesizing evidence on complex interventions: how meta-analytical, qualitative, and mixed-method approaches can contribute. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66(11):1230-1243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2013.06.005.
Thomas J, Harden A, Oakley A, Oliver S, Sutcliffe K. Integrating qualitative research with trials in systematic reviews. BMJ. 2004;328:1010-1012. http://www.bmj.com/content/328/7446/1010.short. Accessed April 9, 2012.
Flemming K. The use of morphine to treat cancer-related pain: a synthesis of quantitative and qualitative research. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2010;39(1):139-154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2009.05.014.
Sutcliffe K, Melendez-Torres GJ, Burchett HED, Richardson M, Rees R, Thomas J. The importance of service-users' perspectives: a systematic review of qualitative evidence reveals overlooked critical features of weight management programmes. Health Expect. 2018; (Ahead of print);21(3):563-573.
Melendez-Torres GJ, Sutcliffe K, Burchett HED, Rees R, Richardson M, Thomas J. Weight management programmes: re-analysis of a systematic review to identify pathways to effectiveness. Health Expect. 2018;(Ahead of print);21(3):574-584.
Ng M, Fleming T, Robinson M, et al. Global, regional, and national prevalence of overweight and obesity in children and adults during 1980-2013: a systematic analysis for the global burden of disease study 2013. Lancet. 2014;384(9945):766-781. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60460-8.
Hartmann-Boyce J, Johns D, Aveyard P, et al. Managing Overweight and Obese Adults: Update Review. The Clinical Effectiveness of Long-Term Weight Management Schemes for Adults (Review 1a). Oxford, England: University of Oxford; 2013.
Hartmann-Boyce J, Johns D, Aveyard P, et al. How Components of Behavioural Weight Management Programmes Affect Weight Change: Review 1b. Oxford, England: University of Oxford; 2013.
Johns D, Hartmann-Boyce J, Aveyard P, et al. Managing Overweight and Obese Adults: Evidence Review. Review 2. Oxford, England: University of Oxford; 2013.
Thomas J, Harden A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8(1):45. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-8-45.
Prestwich A, Sniehotta FF, Whittington C, Dombrowski SU, Rogers L, Michie S. Health Psychology does theory influence the effectiveness of health behavior interventions? Meta-analysis does theory influence the effectiveness of health behavior interventions? Meta-analysis. Health Psychol. 2013;33(5):465-474. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0032853.
Dixon-Woods M, Cavers D, Agarwal S, et al. Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2006;6(1):35. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-6-35.
Barnett-Page E, Thomas J. Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009;9(1):59. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-9-59.
Noblit G, Hare WD. Meta-Ethnography: Synthesizing Qualitative Studies. Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications; 1988.
Finfgeld-Connett D. Metasynthesis findings: potential versus reality. Qual Health Res. 2014;24(11):1581-1591. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732314548878.
Davidoff F, Dixon-Woods M, Leviton L, Michie S. Demystifying theory and its use in improvement. BMJ Qual Saf. 2015;24(3):228-238. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2014-003627.
Gough D, Oliver S, Thomas J. An Introduction to Systematic Reviews. London: Sage; 2012.
Ragin CC. The limitations of net-effects thinking. In: Rihoux B, Grimm H, eds. Innovative Comparative Methods for Policy Analysis: Beyond the Quantitative-Qualitative Divide. New York: Springer; 2006:13-42.
Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1997.
Doyle E, Shaw D. Totally YouPLUS: A Web-Based Weight Reduction Intervention Study for Obese Individuals in West Oxfordshire. Uxbridge, UK: West Oxfordshire Locality Group and Bucks New University; 2012.

Department of Health and Social Care; Policy Research Programme; Development and Evaluation of Complex Interventions for Public Health Improvement; United Kingdom BHF_ British Heart Foundation; United Kingdom CRUK_ Cancer Research UK; Economic and Social Research Council; United Kingdom MRC_ Medical Research Council; Welsh Government and the Wellcome Trust; MR/KO232331/1 UK Clinical Research Collaboration; National Institute for Health Research; NHS

Keywords: intervention theory; qualitative comparative analysis; qualitative meta-synthesis; systematic review

Date Created: 20190209 Date Completed: 20200428 Latest Revision: 20200428

20221213

10.1002/jrsm.1341

30736101