Informacja

Drogi użytkowniku, aplikacja do prawidłowego działania wymaga obsługi JavaScript. Proszę włącz obsługę JavaScript w Twojej przeglądarce.

Tytuł pozycji:

How methodological frameworks are being developed: evidence from a scoping review.

Tytuł:
How methodological frameworks are being developed: evidence from a scoping review.
Autorzy:
McMeekin N; Health Economics and Health Technology Assessment (HEHTA), Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8RZ, UK. .
Wu O; Health Economics and Health Technology Assessment (HEHTA), Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8RZ, UK.
Germeni E; Health Economics and Health Technology Assessment (HEHTA), Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8RZ, UK.
Briggs A; Health Economics and Health Technology Assessment (HEHTA), Institute of Health and Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, G12 8RZ, UK.
Źródło:
BMC medical research methodology [BMC Med Res Methodol] 2020 Jun 30; Vol. 20 (1), pp. 173. Date of Electronic Publication: 2020 Jun 30.
Typ publikacji:
Journal Article; Review
Język:
English
Imprint Name(s):
Original Publication: London : BioMed Central, [2001-
MeSH Terms:
MEDLINE*
Consensus ; Humans
References:
J Invest Dermatol. 2015 Jan;135(1):24-30. (PMID: 25186228)
Value Health. 2016 Jul-Aug;19(5):588-601. (PMID: 27565276)
J Hosp Med. 2019 Jun 19;14(7):416-418. (PMID: 31251164)
Value Health. 2012 Dec;15(8):1127-36. (PMID: 23244816)
BMC Syst Biol. 2014 May 20;8:59. (PMID: 24886522)
Ann Intern Med. 2018 Oct 2;169(7):467-473. (PMID: 30178033)
Aust J Rural Health. 2012 Apr;20(2):51-8. (PMID: 22435764)
J Environ Manage. 2013 Oct 15;128:345-62. (PMID: 23774752)
PLoS Med. 2017 Aug 9;14(8):e1002370. (PMID: 28792957)
J Clin Epidemiol. 2014 Dec;67(12):1291-4. (PMID: 25034198)
Health Policy. 2016 Jan;120(1):35-45. (PMID: 26723201)
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Nov 19;18(1):143. (PMID: 30453902)
Syst Rev. 2015 Oct 22;4:138. (PMID: 26494010)
J Adv Nurs. 2016 Dec;72(12):2954-2965. (PMID: 27221824)
Implement Sci. 2010 Sep 20;5:69. (PMID: 20854677)
Hematology. 2014 Oct;19(7):373-9. (PMID: 24165755)
Contributed Indexing:
Keywords: Framework; Methodological framework; Methodology; Scoping review
Entry Date(s):
Date Created: 20200702 Date Completed: 20210624 Latest Revision: 20210624
Update Code:
20240105
PubMed Central ID:
PMC7325096
DOI:
10.1186/s12874-020-01061-4
PMID:
32605535
Czasopismo naukowe
Background: Although the benefits of using methodological frameworks are increasingly recognised, to date, there is no formal definition of what constitutes a 'methodological framework', nor is there any published guidance on how to develop one. For the purposes of this study we have defined a methodological framework as a structured guide to completing a process or procedure. This study's aims are to: (a) map the existing landscape on the use of methodological frameworks; (b) identify approaches used for the development of methodological frameworks and terminology used; and (c) provide suggestions for developing future methodological frameworks. We took a broad view and did not limit our study to methodological frameworks in research and academia.
Methods: A scoping review was conducted, drawing on Arksey and O'Malley's methods and more recent guidance. We systematically searched two major electronic databases (MEDLINE and Web of Science), as well as grey literature sources and the reference lists and citations of all relevant papers. Study characteristics and approaches used for development of methodological frameworks were extracted from included studies. Descriptive analysis was conducted.
Results: We included a total of 30 studies, representing a wide range of subject areas. The most commonly reported approach for developing a methodological framework was 'Based on existing methods and guidelines' (66.7%), followed by 'Refined and validated' (33.3%), 'Experience and expertise' (30.0%), 'Literature review' (26.7%), 'Data synthesis and amalgamation' (23.3%), 'Data extraction' (10.0%), 'Iteratively developed' (6.7%) and 'Lab work results' (3.3%). There was no consistent use of terminology; diverse terms for methodological framework were used across and, interchangeably, within studies.
Conclusions: Although no formal guidance exists on how to develop a methodological framework, this scoping review found an overall consensus in approaches used, which can be broadly divided into three phases: (a) identifying data to inform the methodological framework; (b) developing the methodological framework; and (c) validating, testing and refining the methodological framework. Based on these phases, we provide suggestions to facilitate the development of future methodological frameworks.
Zaloguj się, aby uzyskać dostęp do pełnego tekstu.

Ta witryna wykorzystuje pliki cookies do przechowywania informacji na Twoim komputerze. Pliki cookies stosujemy w celu świadczenia usług na najwyższym poziomie, w tym w sposób dostosowany do indywidualnych potrzeb. Korzystanie z witryny bez zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies oznacza, że będą one zamieszczane w Twoim komputerze. W każdym momencie możesz dokonać zmiany ustawień dotyczących cookies