Assessing the reporting quality of published qualitative evidence
syntheses in the Cochrane Library
Abstract
Background Over ten years since the first qualitative evidence synthesis
(QES) was published in the Cochrane Library, QES and mixed-methods
reviews (MMR) with a qualitative component have become increasingly
common and influential in healthcare research and policy development.
The quality of such reviews and the completeness with which they are
reported is therefore of paramount importance. Aim This review aimed to
assess the reporting quality of published QESs and MMRs with a
qualitative component in the Cochrane Library. Methods All published
QESs and MMRs were identified from the Cochrane Library. A bespoke
framework developed by key international experts based on the Effective
Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC), Enhancing Transparency in
Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research (ENTREQ) and
meta-ethnography reporting guidance (eMERGe) was used to code the
quality of reporting of QESs and MMRs. Results Thirty-one reviews were
identified, including 11 MMRs. The reporting quality of the QESs and
MMRs published by Cochrane varied considerably. Based on the criteria
within our framework, just over a quarter (8, 26%) of the reviews
achieved a score of at least 80%, 18 (58%) required fuller detail in
their reporting (scoring between 65%-79%) and 5 (16%) achieved a
score of less than 65%. Conclusion This assessment offers important
insights into the reporting practices prevalent in these review types
and underscores the need for ongoing surveillance. The variability in
reporting quality within QESs and MMRs reinforces the need to develop
Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses
(PRISMA) specifically for QES.