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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |