What Synthesis Methodology Should I Use? A Review and Analysis of Approaches to Research Synthesis

dc.contributor.authorSchick-Makaroff, Kara
dc.contributor.authorMacDonald, Marjorie
dc.contributor.authorPlummer, Marilyn
dc.contributor.authorBurgess, Judy
dc.contributor.authorNeander, Wendy
dc.date.accessioned2016-08-22T22:32:28Z
dc.date.available2016-08-22T22:32:28Z
dc.date.copyright2016en_US
dc.date.issued2016-03
dc.description.abstractBackground: When we began this process, we were doctoral students and a faculty member in a research methods course. As students, we were facing a review of the literature for our dissertations. We encountered several different ways of conducting a review but were unable to locate any resources that synthesized all of the various synthesis methodologies. Our purpose is to present a comprehensive overview and assessment of the main approaches to research synthesis. We use ‘research synthesis’ as a broad overarching term to describe various approaches to combining, integrating, and synthesizing research findings. Methods: We conducted an integrative review of the literature to explore the historical, contextual, and evolving nature of research synthesis. We searched five databases, reviewed websites of key organizations, hand-searched several journals, and examined relevant texts from the reference lists of the documents we had already obtained. Results: We identified four broad categories of research synthesis methodology including conventional, quantitative, qualitative, and emerging syntheses. Each of the broad categories was compared to the others on the following: key characteristics, purpose, method, product, context, underlying assumptions, unit of analysis, strengths and limitations, and when to use each approach. Conclusions: The current state of research synthesis reflects significant advancements in emerging synthesis studies that integrate diverse data types and sources. New approaches to research synthesis provide a much broader range of review alternatives available to health and social science students and researchers.en_US
dc.description.reviewstatusRevieweden_US
dc.description.scholarlevelFacultyen_US
dc.description.sponsorshipKSM is an assistant professor in the Faculty of Nursing at the University of Alberta. Her work on this article was largely conducted as a Postdoctoral Fellow, funded by KRESCENT (Kidney Research Scientist Core Education and National Training Program, reference #KRES110011R1) and the Faculty of Nursing at the University of Alberta. MM’s work on this study over the period of 2008-2014 was supported by a Canadian Institutes of Health Research Applied Public Health Research Chair Award (grant #92365). We thank Rachel Spanier who provided support with reference formatting.en_US
dc.identifier.citationSchick-Makaroff, K., MacDonald, M., Plummer, M., Burgess, J., & Neander, W. (2016). What Synthesis Methodology Should I Use? A Review and Analysis of Approaches to Research Synthesis. AIMS Public Health, 3(1), 172-215.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://dx.doi.org/10.3934/publichealth.2016.1.172
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/1828/7464
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherAIMS Public Healthen_US
dc.rightsAttribution 2.5 Canada*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/ca/*
dc.subjectresearch synthesisen_US
dc.subjectsystematic reviewen_US
dc.subjectknowledge synthesisen_US
dc.subjectmethodologyen_US
dc.titleWhat Synthesis Methodology Should I Use? A Review and Analysis of Approaches to Research Synthesisen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
SchickMakaroff_Kara_AIMSPublicHealth_2016.pdf
Size:
588 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
No Thumbnail Available
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.74 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description: