Cargando…

Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups

BACKGROUND: Conventional systematic review techniques have limitations when the aim of a review is to construct a critical analysis of a complex body of literature. This article offers a reflexive account of an attempt to conduct an interpretive review of the literature on access to healthcare by vu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dixon-Woods, Mary, Cavers, Debbie, Agarwal, Shona, Annandale, Ellen, Arthur, Antony, Harvey, Janet, Hsu, Ron, Katbamna, Savita, Olsen, Richard, Smith, Lucy, Riley, Richard, Sutton, Alex J
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2006
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1559637/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16872487
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-6-35
_version_ 1782129441533591552
author Dixon-Woods, Mary
Cavers, Debbie
Agarwal, Shona
Annandale, Ellen
Arthur, Antony
Harvey, Janet
Hsu, Ron
Katbamna, Savita
Olsen, Richard
Smith, Lucy
Riley, Richard
Sutton, Alex J
author_facet Dixon-Woods, Mary
Cavers, Debbie
Agarwal, Shona
Annandale, Ellen
Arthur, Antony
Harvey, Janet
Hsu, Ron
Katbamna, Savita
Olsen, Richard
Smith, Lucy
Riley, Richard
Sutton, Alex J
author_sort Dixon-Woods, Mary
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Conventional systematic review techniques have limitations when the aim of a review is to construct a critical analysis of a complex body of literature. This article offers a reflexive account of an attempt to conduct an interpretive review of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups in the UK METHODS: This project involved the development and use of the method of Critical Interpretive Synthesis (CIS). This approach is sensitised to the processes of conventional systematic review methodology and draws on recent advances in methods for interpretive synthesis. RESULTS: Many analyses of equity of access have rested on measures of utilisation of health services, but these are problematic both methodologically and conceptually. A more useful means of understanding access is offered by the synthetic construct of candidacy. Candidacy describes how people's eligibility for healthcare is determined between themselves and health services. It is a continually negotiated property of individuals, subject to multiple influences arising both from people and their social contexts and from macro-level influences on allocation of resources and configuration of services. Health services are continually constituting and seeking to define the appropriate objects of medical attention and intervention, while at the same time people are engaged in constituting and defining what they understand to be the appropriate objects of medical attention and intervention. Access represents a dynamic interplay between these simultaneous, iterative and mutually reinforcing processes. By attending to how vulnerabilities arise in relation to candidacy, the phenomenon of access can be better understood, and more appropriate recommendations made for policy, practice and future research. DISCUSSION: By innovating with existing methods for interpretive synthesis, it was possible to produce not only new methods for conducting what we have termed critical interpretive synthesis, but also a new theoretical conceptualisation of access to healthcare. This theoretical account of access is distinct from models already extant in the literature, and is the result of combining diverse constructs and evidence into a coherent whole. Both the method and the model should be evaluated in other contexts.
format Text
id pubmed-1559637
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2006
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-15596372006-09-02 Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups Dixon-Woods, Mary Cavers, Debbie Agarwal, Shona Annandale, Ellen Arthur, Antony Harvey, Janet Hsu, Ron Katbamna, Savita Olsen, Richard Smith, Lucy Riley, Richard Sutton, Alex J BMC Med Res Methodol Technical Advance BACKGROUND: Conventional systematic review techniques have limitations when the aim of a review is to construct a critical analysis of a complex body of literature. This article offers a reflexive account of an attempt to conduct an interpretive review of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups in the UK METHODS: This project involved the development and use of the method of Critical Interpretive Synthesis (CIS). This approach is sensitised to the processes of conventional systematic review methodology and draws on recent advances in methods for interpretive synthesis. RESULTS: Many analyses of equity of access have rested on measures of utilisation of health services, but these are problematic both methodologically and conceptually. A more useful means of understanding access is offered by the synthetic construct of candidacy. Candidacy describes how people's eligibility for healthcare is determined between themselves and health services. It is a continually negotiated property of individuals, subject to multiple influences arising both from people and their social contexts and from macro-level influences on allocation of resources and configuration of services. Health services are continually constituting and seeking to define the appropriate objects of medical attention and intervention, while at the same time people are engaged in constituting and defining what they understand to be the appropriate objects of medical attention and intervention. Access represents a dynamic interplay between these simultaneous, iterative and mutually reinforcing processes. By attending to how vulnerabilities arise in relation to candidacy, the phenomenon of access can be better understood, and more appropriate recommendations made for policy, practice and future research. DISCUSSION: By innovating with existing methods for interpretive synthesis, it was possible to produce not only new methods for conducting what we have termed critical interpretive synthesis, but also a new theoretical conceptualisation of access to healthcare. This theoretical account of access is distinct from models already extant in the literature, and is the result of combining diverse constructs and evidence into a coherent whole. Both the method and the model should be evaluated in other contexts. BioMed Central 2006-07-26 /pmc/articles/PMC1559637/ /pubmed/16872487 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-6-35 Text en Copyright © 2006 Dixon-Woods et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0) ), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Technical Advance
Dixon-Woods, Mary
Cavers, Debbie
Agarwal, Shona
Annandale, Ellen
Arthur, Antony
Harvey, Janet
Hsu, Ron
Katbamna, Savita
Olsen, Richard
Smith, Lucy
Riley, Richard
Sutton, Alex J
Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups
title Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups
title_full Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups
title_fullStr Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups
title_full_unstemmed Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups
title_short Conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups
title_sort conducting a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature on access to healthcare by vulnerable groups
topic Technical Advance
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1559637/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16872487
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2288-6-35
work_keys_str_mv AT dixonwoodsmary conductingacriticalinterpretivesynthesisoftheliteratureonaccesstohealthcarebyvulnerablegroups
AT caversdebbie conductingacriticalinterpretivesynthesisoftheliteratureonaccesstohealthcarebyvulnerablegroups
AT agarwalshona conductingacriticalinterpretivesynthesisoftheliteratureonaccesstohealthcarebyvulnerablegroups
AT annandaleellen conductingacriticalinterpretivesynthesisoftheliteratureonaccesstohealthcarebyvulnerablegroups
AT arthurantony conductingacriticalinterpretivesynthesisoftheliteratureonaccesstohealthcarebyvulnerablegroups
AT harveyjanet conductingacriticalinterpretivesynthesisoftheliteratureonaccesstohealthcarebyvulnerablegroups
AT hsuron conductingacriticalinterpretivesynthesisoftheliteratureonaccesstohealthcarebyvulnerablegroups
AT katbamnasavita conductingacriticalinterpretivesynthesisoftheliteratureonaccesstohealthcarebyvulnerablegroups
AT olsenrichard conductingacriticalinterpretivesynthesisoftheliteratureonaccesstohealthcarebyvulnerablegroups
AT smithlucy conductingacriticalinterpretivesynthesisoftheliteratureonaccesstohealthcarebyvulnerablegroups
AT rileyrichard conductingacriticalinterpretivesynthesisoftheliteratureonaccesstohealthcarebyvulnerablegroups
AT suttonalexj conductingacriticalinterpretivesynthesisoftheliteratureonaccesstohealthcarebyvulnerablegroups