Cargando…
Interpretive analysis of 85 systematic reviews suggests that narrative syntheses and meta‐analyses are incommensurate in argumentation
Using Toulmin's argumentation theory, we analysed the texts of systematic reviews in the area of workplace health promotion to explore differences in the modes of reasoning embedded in reports of narrative synthesis as compared with reports of meta‐analysis. We used framework synthesis, grounde...
Autores principales: | Melendez‐Torres, G. J., O'Mara‐Eves, A., Thomas, J., Brunton, G., Caird, J., Petticrew, M. |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5347877/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27860329 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jrsm.1231 |
Ejemplares similares
-
Just how plain are plain tobacco packs: re-analysis of a systematic review using multilevel meta-analysis suggests lessons about the comparative benefits of synthesis methods
por: Melendez-Torres, G J, et al.
Publicado: (2018) -
Narratives of community engagement: a systematic review-derived conceptual framework for public health interventions
por: Brunton, Ginny, et al.
Publicado: (2017) -
Les incommensurables
por: Houdart, Sophie
Publicado: (2015) -
Incommensurate crystallography
por: Van Smaalen, Sander
Publicado: (2007) -
Meta-analysis, complexity, and heterogeneity: a qualitative interview study of researchers’ methodological values and practices
por: Lorenc, Theo, et al.
Publicado: (2016)