Sensitivity analysis in a scoping review on police accountability. Assessing the feasibility of reporting criteria in mixed studies reviews
Publication year
2017Publisher
KU Leuven NQRL
ISBN
9789067841979
In
Hannes, K.; Heylighen, A.; Dierckx de Casterlé, B. (ed.), ECQI 2017 proceedings. Quality and reflexivity in qualitative inquiry, pp. 114-126Conference location
Leuven
Related links
Annotation
European Congress of Qualitative Inquiry, 07 februari 2017
Publication type
Article in monograph or in proceedings
Display more detailsDisplay less details
Editor(s)
Hannes, K.
Heylighen, A.
Dierckx de Casterlé, B.
Truyen, F.
Declercq, A.
Organization
Straf- en strafprocesrecht
Languages used
English (eng)
Book title
Hannes, K.; Heylighen, A.; Dierckx de Casterlé, B. (ed.), ECQI 2017 proceedings. Quality and reflexivity in qualitative inquiry
Page start
p. 114
Page end
p. 126
Subject
RechtenAbstract
In this paper, we report on the findings of a sensitivity analysis that was carried out within a previously conducted scoping review, hoping to contribute to the ongoing debate about how to assess the quality of research in mixed methods reviews. Previous sensitivity analyses mainly concluded that the exclusion of inadequately reported or lower quality studies did not have a significant effect on the results of the synthesis. In this study, we conducted a sensitivity analysis on the basis of reporting criteria with the aims of analysing its impact on the synthesis results and assessing its feasibility. Contrary to some previous studies, our analysis showed that the exclusion of inadequately reported studies had an impact on the results of the thematic synthesis. Initially, we also sought to propose a refinement of reporting criteria based on the literature and our own experiences. In this way, we aimed to facilitate the assessment of reporting criteria and enhance its consistency. However, based on the results of our sensitivity analysis, we opted not to make such a refinement since many publications included in this analysis did not sufficiently report on the methodology. As such, a refinement would not be useful considering that researchers would be unable to assess these (sub-)criteria.
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
- Non RU Publications [16196]
Upload full text
Use your RU credentials (u/z-number and password) to log in with SURFconext to upload a file for processing by the repository team.