Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Mixed kinds of evidence: synthesis designs and critical appraisal for systematic mixed studies reviews including qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies
  1. Pierre Pluye
  1. Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
  1. Correspondence to : Professor Pierre Pluye
    Department of Family Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada H3S 1Z1; pierre.pluye{at}mcgill.ca

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

The present letter is to thank Drs Shaw, Larkin and Flowers for their enlightening article entitled ‘Expanding the evidence within evidence-based healthcare: thinking about the context, acceptability and feasibility of interventions’,1 and provide complementary information to your readership about synthesis designs and critical appraisal for systematic mixed studies reviews (ie, reviews that include qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods studies).

We recently published an overview of mixed methods, which describes four main types of rigorous synthesis designs for systematic mixed studies reviews (and related techniques): convergence qualitative (thematic synthesis, metanarrative synthesis, …

View Full Text

Linked Articles