Cargando…

Extent, Awareness and Perception of Dissemination Bias in Qualitative Research: An Explorative Survey

BACKGROUND: Qualitative research findings are increasingly used to inform decision-making. Research has indicated that not all quantitative research on the effects of interventions is disseminated or published. The extent to which qualitative researchers also systematically underreport or fail to pu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Toews, Ingrid, Glenton, Claire, Lewin, Simon, Berg, Rigmor C., Noyes, Jane, Booth, Andrew, Marusic, Ana, Malicki, Mario, Munthe-Kaas, Heather M., Meerpohl, Joerg J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4972302/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27487090
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159290
_version_ 1782446223299444736
author Toews, Ingrid
Glenton, Claire
Lewin, Simon
Berg, Rigmor C.
Noyes, Jane
Booth, Andrew
Marusic, Ana
Malicki, Mario
Munthe-Kaas, Heather M.
Meerpohl, Joerg J.
author_facet Toews, Ingrid
Glenton, Claire
Lewin, Simon
Berg, Rigmor C.
Noyes, Jane
Booth, Andrew
Marusic, Ana
Malicki, Mario
Munthe-Kaas, Heather M.
Meerpohl, Joerg J.
author_sort Toews, Ingrid
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Qualitative research findings are increasingly used to inform decision-making. Research has indicated that not all quantitative research on the effects of interventions is disseminated or published. The extent to which qualitative researchers also systematically underreport or fail to publish certain types of research findings, and the impact this may have, has received little attention. METHODS: A survey was delivered online to gather data regarding non-dissemination and dissemination bias in qualitative research. We invited relevant stakeholders through our professional networks, authors of qualitative research identified through a systematic literature search, and further via snowball sampling. RESULTS: 1032 people took part in the survey of whom 859 participants identified as researchers, 133 as editors and 682 as peer reviewers. 68.1% of the researchers said that they had conducted at least one qualitative study that they had not published in a peer-reviewed journal. The main reasons for non-dissemination were that a publication was still intended (35.7%), resource constraints (35.4%), and that the authors gave up after the paper was rejected by one or more journals (32.5%). A majority of the editors and peer reviewers “(strongly) agreed” that the main reasons for rejecting a manuscript of a qualitative study were inadequate study quality (59.5%; 68.5%) and inadequate reporting quality (59.1%; 57.5%). Of 800 respondents, 83.1% “(strongly) agreed” that non-dissemination and possible resulting dissemination bias might undermine the willingness of funders to support qualitative research. 72.6% and 71.2%, respectively, “(strongly) agreed” that non-dissemination might lead to inappropriate health policy and health care. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of non-dissemination in qualitative research is substantial. Researchers, editors and peer reviewers play an important role in this. Non-dissemination and resulting dissemination bias may impact on health care research, practice and policy. More detailed investigations on patterns and causes of the non-dissemination of qualitative research are needed.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4972302
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49723022016-08-18 Extent, Awareness and Perception of Dissemination Bias in Qualitative Research: An Explorative Survey Toews, Ingrid Glenton, Claire Lewin, Simon Berg, Rigmor C. Noyes, Jane Booth, Andrew Marusic, Ana Malicki, Mario Munthe-Kaas, Heather M. Meerpohl, Joerg J. PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Qualitative research findings are increasingly used to inform decision-making. Research has indicated that not all quantitative research on the effects of interventions is disseminated or published. The extent to which qualitative researchers also systematically underreport or fail to publish certain types of research findings, and the impact this may have, has received little attention. METHODS: A survey was delivered online to gather data regarding non-dissemination and dissemination bias in qualitative research. We invited relevant stakeholders through our professional networks, authors of qualitative research identified through a systematic literature search, and further via snowball sampling. RESULTS: 1032 people took part in the survey of whom 859 participants identified as researchers, 133 as editors and 682 as peer reviewers. 68.1% of the researchers said that they had conducted at least one qualitative study that they had not published in a peer-reviewed journal. The main reasons for non-dissemination were that a publication was still intended (35.7%), resource constraints (35.4%), and that the authors gave up after the paper was rejected by one or more journals (32.5%). A majority of the editors and peer reviewers “(strongly) agreed” that the main reasons for rejecting a manuscript of a qualitative study were inadequate study quality (59.5%; 68.5%) and inadequate reporting quality (59.1%; 57.5%). Of 800 respondents, 83.1% “(strongly) agreed” that non-dissemination and possible resulting dissemination bias might undermine the willingness of funders to support qualitative research. 72.6% and 71.2%, respectively, “(strongly) agreed” that non-dissemination might lead to inappropriate health policy and health care. CONCLUSIONS: The proportion of non-dissemination in qualitative research is substantial. Researchers, editors and peer reviewers play an important role in this. Non-dissemination and resulting dissemination bias may impact on health care research, practice and policy. More detailed investigations on patterns and causes of the non-dissemination of qualitative research are needed. Public Library of Science 2016-08-03 /pmc/articles/PMC4972302/ /pubmed/27487090 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159290 Text en © 2016 Toews 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
Toews, Ingrid
Glenton, Claire
Lewin, Simon
Berg, Rigmor C.
Noyes, Jane
Booth, Andrew
Marusic, Ana
Malicki, Mario
Munthe-Kaas, Heather M.
Meerpohl, Joerg J.
Extent, Awareness and Perception of Dissemination Bias in Qualitative Research: An Explorative Survey
title Extent, Awareness and Perception of Dissemination Bias in Qualitative Research: An Explorative Survey
title_full Extent, Awareness and Perception of Dissemination Bias in Qualitative Research: An Explorative Survey
title_fullStr Extent, Awareness and Perception of Dissemination Bias in Qualitative Research: An Explorative Survey
title_full_unstemmed Extent, Awareness and Perception of Dissemination Bias in Qualitative Research: An Explorative Survey
title_short Extent, Awareness and Perception of Dissemination Bias in Qualitative Research: An Explorative Survey
title_sort extent, awareness and perception of dissemination bias in qualitative research: an explorative survey
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4972302/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27487090
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159290
work_keys_str_mv AT toewsingrid extentawarenessandperceptionofdisseminationbiasinqualitativeresearchanexplorativesurvey
AT glentonclaire extentawarenessandperceptionofdisseminationbiasinqualitativeresearchanexplorativesurvey
AT lewinsimon extentawarenessandperceptionofdisseminationbiasinqualitativeresearchanexplorativesurvey
AT bergrigmorc extentawarenessandperceptionofdisseminationbiasinqualitativeresearchanexplorativesurvey
AT noyesjane extentawarenessandperceptionofdisseminationbiasinqualitativeresearchanexplorativesurvey
AT boothandrew extentawarenessandperceptionofdisseminationbiasinqualitativeresearchanexplorativesurvey
AT marusicana extentawarenessandperceptionofdisseminationbiasinqualitativeresearchanexplorativesurvey
AT malickimario extentawarenessandperceptionofdisseminationbiasinqualitativeresearchanexplorativesurvey
AT munthekaasheatherm extentawarenessandperceptionofdisseminationbiasinqualitativeresearchanexplorativesurvey
AT meerpohljoergj extentawarenessandperceptionofdisseminationbiasinqualitativeresearchanexplorativesurvey