Cargando…

Systematic Review of Methods in Low-Consensus Fields: Supporting Commensuration through `Construct-Centered Methods Aggregation’ in the Case of Climate Change Vulnerability Research

There is increasing interest in using systematic review to synthesize evidence on the social and environmental effects of and adaptations to climate change. Use of systematic review for evidence in this field is complicated by the heterogeneity of methods used and by uneven reporting. In order to fa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Delaney, Aogán, Tamás, Peter A., Crane, Todd A., Chesterman, Sabrina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4762661/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26901409
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149071
_version_ 1782417138650185728
author Delaney, Aogán
Tamás, Peter A.
Crane, Todd A.
Chesterman, Sabrina
author_facet Delaney, Aogán
Tamás, Peter A.
Crane, Todd A.
Chesterman, Sabrina
author_sort Delaney, Aogán
collection PubMed
description There is increasing interest in using systematic review to synthesize evidence on the social and environmental effects of and adaptations to climate change. Use of systematic review for evidence in this field is complicated by the heterogeneity of methods used and by uneven reporting. In order to facilitate synthesis of results and design of subsequent research a method, construct-centered methods aggregation, was designed to 1) provide a transparent, valid and reliable description of research methods, 2) support comparability of primary studies and 3) contribute to a shared empirical basis for improving research practice. Rather than taking research reports at face value, research designs are reviewed through inductive analysis. This involves bottom-up identification of constructs, definitions and operationalizations; assessment of concepts’ commensurability through comparison of definitions; identification of theoretical frameworks through patterns of construct use; and integration of transparently reported and valid operationalizations into ideal-type research frameworks. Through the integration of reliable bottom-up inductive coding from operationalizations and top-down coding driven from stated theory with expert interpretation, construct-centered methods aggregation enabled both resolution of heterogeneity within identically named constructs and merging of differently labeled but identical constructs. These two processes allowed transparent, rigorous and contextually sensitive synthesis of the research presented in an uneven set of reports undertaken in a heterogenous field. If adopted more broadly, construct-centered methods aggregation may contribute to the emergence of a valid, empirically-grounded description of methods used in primary research. These descriptions may function as a set of expectations that improves the transparency of reporting and as an evolving comprehensive framework that supports both interpretation of existing and design of future research.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4762661
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47626612016-03-07 Systematic Review of Methods in Low-Consensus Fields: Supporting Commensuration through `Construct-Centered Methods Aggregation’ in the Case of Climate Change Vulnerability Research Delaney, Aogán Tamás, Peter A. Crane, Todd A. Chesterman, Sabrina PLoS One Research Article There is increasing interest in using systematic review to synthesize evidence on the social and environmental effects of and adaptations to climate change. Use of systematic review for evidence in this field is complicated by the heterogeneity of methods used and by uneven reporting. In order to facilitate synthesis of results and design of subsequent research a method, construct-centered methods aggregation, was designed to 1) provide a transparent, valid and reliable description of research methods, 2) support comparability of primary studies and 3) contribute to a shared empirical basis for improving research practice. Rather than taking research reports at face value, research designs are reviewed through inductive analysis. This involves bottom-up identification of constructs, definitions and operationalizations; assessment of concepts’ commensurability through comparison of definitions; identification of theoretical frameworks through patterns of construct use; and integration of transparently reported and valid operationalizations into ideal-type research frameworks. Through the integration of reliable bottom-up inductive coding from operationalizations and top-down coding driven from stated theory with expert interpretation, construct-centered methods aggregation enabled both resolution of heterogeneity within identically named constructs and merging of differently labeled but identical constructs. These two processes allowed transparent, rigorous and contextually sensitive synthesis of the research presented in an uneven set of reports undertaken in a heterogenous field. If adopted more broadly, construct-centered methods aggregation may contribute to the emergence of a valid, empirically-grounded description of methods used in primary research. These descriptions may function as a set of expectations that improves the transparency of reporting and as an evolving comprehensive framework that supports both interpretation of existing and design of future research. Public Library of Science 2016-02-22 /pmc/articles/PMC4762661/ /pubmed/26901409 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149071 Text en © 2016 Delaney et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Delaney, Aogán
Tamás, Peter A.
Crane, Todd A.
Chesterman, Sabrina
Systematic Review of Methods in Low-Consensus Fields: Supporting Commensuration through `Construct-Centered Methods Aggregation’ in the Case of Climate Change Vulnerability Research
title Systematic Review of Methods in Low-Consensus Fields: Supporting Commensuration through `Construct-Centered Methods Aggregation’ in the Case of Climate Change Vulnerability Research
title_full Systematic Review of Methods in Low-Consensus Fields: Supporting Commensuration through `Construct-Centered Methods Aggregation’ in the Case of Climate Change Vulnerability Research
title_fullStr Systematic Review of Methods in Low-Consensus Fields: Supporting Commensuration through `Construct-Centered Methods Aggregation’ in the Case of Climate Change Vulnerability Research
title_full_unstemmed Systematic Review of Methods in Low-Consensus Fields: Supporting Commensuration through `Construct-Centered Methods Aggregation’ in the Case of Climate Change Vulnerability Research
title_short Systematic Review of Methods in Low-Consensus Fields: Supporting Commensuration through `Construct-Centered Methods Aggregation’ in the Case of Climate Change Vulnerability Research
title_sort systematic review of methods in low-consensus fields: supporting commensuration through `construct-centered methods aggregation’ in the case of climate change vulnerability research
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4762661/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26901409
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0149071
work_keys_str_mv AT delaneyaogan systematicreviewofmethodsinlowconsensusfieldssupportingcommensurationthroughconstructcenteredmethodsaggregationinthecaseofclimatechangevulnerabilityresearch
AT tamaspetera systematicreviewofmethodsinlowconsensusfieldssupportingcommensurationthroughconstructcenteredmethodsaggregationinthecaseofclimatechangevulnerabilityresearch
AT cranetodda systematicreviewofmethodsinlowconsensusfieldssupportingcommensurationthroughconstructcenteredmethodsaggregationinthecaseofclimatechangevulnerabilityresearch
AT chestermansabrina systematicreviewofmethodsinlowconsensusfieldssupportingcommensurationthroughconstructcenteredmethodsaggregationinthecaseofclimatechangevulnerabilityresearch