↓ Skip to main content

Are we entering a new era for qualitative research? Using qualitative evidence to support guidance and guideline development by the World Health Organization

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal for Equity in Health, September 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#31 of 2,216)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (96th percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
142 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
54 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
155 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Are we entering a new era for qualitative research? Using qualitative evidence to support guidance and guideline development by the World Health Organization
Published in
International Journal for Equity in Health, September 2018
DOI 10.1186/s12939-018-0841-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Simon Lewin, Claire Glenton

Abstract

Qualitative approaches are one of several methodologies utilised within the social sciences. New developments within qualitative methods are widening the opportunities for using qualitative evidence to inform health policy and systems decisions. In this commentary, we discuss how, in our work with the World Health Organization (WHO), we have explored ways of broadening the types of evidence used to develop evidence-informed guidance for health systems.Health systems decisions are commonly informed by evidence on the effectiveness of health system interventions. However, decision makers and other stakeholders also typically have additional questions, including how different stakeholders value different outcomes, the acceptability and feasibility of different interventions and the impacts of these interventions on equity and human rights. Evidence from qualitative research can help address these questions, and a number of WHO guidelines are now using qualitative evidence in this way. This growing use of qualitative evidence to inform decision making has been facilitated by recent methodological developments, including robust methods for qualitative evidence syntheses and approaches for assessing how much confidence to place in findings from such syntheses. For research evidence to contribute optimally to improving and sustaining the performance of health systems, it needs to be transferred easily between different elements of what has been termed the 'evidence ecosystem'. This ecosystem includes primary and secondary evidence producers, guidance developers and those implementing and evaluating interventions to strengthen health systems. We argue that most of the elements of an ecosystem for qualitative evidence are now in place - an important milestone that suggests that we are entering a new era for qualitative research. However, a number of challenges and constraints remain. These include how to build stronger links between the communities involved in the different parts of the qualitative evidence ecosystem and the need to strengthen capacity, particularly in low and middle income countries, to produce and utilise qualitative evidence and decision products informed by such evidence. We invite others who want to support the wider use of qualitative evidence in decision processes to look for opportunities in their settings to put this into practice.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 142 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 155 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 155 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 28 18%
Researcher 25 16%
Student > Ph. D. Student 22 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 3%
Student > Bachelor 5 3%
Other 26 17%
Unknown 44 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 29 19%
Social Sciences 23 15%
Nursing and Health Professions 20 13%
Psychology 9 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Other 19 12%
Unknown 51 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 95. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 26 January 2023.
All research outputs
#444,808
of 25,392,205 outputs
Outputs from International Journal for Equity in Health
#31
of 2,216 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,471
of 347,946 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal for Equity in Health
#3
of 54 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,392,205 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,216 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 347,946 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 54 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.