Skip to main content

Advertisement

Table 2 Quality Appraisal Criteria and Outcome of Quality Assessment of the 19 included papers

From: Treatment non-adherence in pediatric long-term medical conditions: systematic review and synthesis of qualitative studies of caregivers’ views

Quality assessment criteria* Number meeting criteria in full† (%) Number meeting criteria in part (%) Number not clear (%)
1 Is this study qualitative research? 18 (95%) 1 (5%) 0
2 Are the research questions clearly stated? 16 (84%) 1 (5%) 2 (11%)
3 Is the qualitative approach clearly justified? 13 (68%) 4 (21%) 2 (11%)
4 Is the approach appropriate for the research question(s) asked? 16 (84%) 3 (16%) 0
5 Is the study context clearly described? 8 (42%) 9 (47%) 2 (11%)
6 Is the role of the researcher clearly described? 3 (16%) 10 (53%) 6 (32%)
7 Is there a clear connection to an existing body of knowledge/wider theoretical framework? 14 (74%) 3 (16%) 2 (11%)
8 Is the sampling method clearly described? 12 (63%) 5 (26%) 2 (11%)
9 Is the sampling strategy appropriate for the research question(s)? 11 (58%) 7 (37%) 1 (5%)
10 Is the method of data collection clearly described? 17 (89%) 2 (11%) 0
11 Is the data collection method appropriate to the research questions? 16 (84%) 3 (16%) 0
12 Is the method of data analysis clearly described? 14 (74%) 2 (11%) 3 (16%)
13 Is the data analysis method appropriate to the research question(s)? 6 (32%) 10 (53%) 3 (16%)
14 Are the claims made supported by sufficient evidence? 4 (21%) 13 (68%) 2 (11%)
  1. Notes:
  2. *Questions 1–14 incorporate the 13 criteria used by Atkins et al. [17] which is, in turn, adapted from the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP).
  3. †Quality was assessed based on what was written in the papers. The limited word count for journal publication may mean that authors of qualitative studies omit information, particularly on methods, so what is written in a paper may not reflect the quality of the research study.