Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2019

Open Access 01-12-2019 | Public Health | Protocol

Protocol for a systematic review of the use of qualitative comparative analysis for evaluative questions in public health research

Authors: Benjamin Hanckel, Mark Petticrew, James Thomas, Judith Green

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

There is an increasing recognition that health intervention research requires methods and approaches that can engage with the complexity of systems, interventions, and the relations between systems and interventions. One approach which shows promise to this end is qualitative comparative analysis (QCA), which examines casual complexity across a medium to large number of cases (between 10 and 60+), whilst also being able to generalise across those cases. Increasingly, QCA is being adopted in public health intervention research. However, there is a limited understanding of how it is being adopted. This systematic review will address this gap, examining how it is being used to understand complex causation; for what settings, populations and interventions; and with which datasets to describe cases.

Methods

We will include published and peer-reviewed studies of any public health intervention where the effects on population health, health equity, or intervention uptake are being evaluated. Electronic searches of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science (incorporating Social Sciences Citation Index and Arts & Humanities Citation Index), Microsoft Academic, and Google Scholar will be performed. This will be supplemented with reference citation tracking and personal contact with experts to identify any additional published studies. Search results will be single screened, with machine learning used to check these results, acting as a ‘second screener’. Any disagreement will be resolved through discussion. Data will be extracted from full texts of eligible studies, which will be assessed against inclusion criteria, and synthesised narratively, using thematic synthesis methods.

Discussion

This systematic review will provide an important map of the increasing use of QCA in public health intervention literature. This review will identify the current scope of research in this area, as well as assessing claims about the utility of the method for addressing complex causation in public health research. We will identify implications for better reporting of QCA methods in public health research and for reporting of case studies such that they can be used in future QCA studies.

Systematic review registration

PROSPERO, CRD42019131910
Literature
1.
go back to reference Greenhalgh T, Papoutsi C. Studying complexity in health services research: desperately seeking an overdue paradigm shift. BMC Med. 2018;16(1):95.CrossRef Greenhalgh T, Papoutsi C. Studying complexity in health services research: desperately seeking an overdue paradigm shift. BMC Med. 2018;16(1):95.CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2015;350:h1258.CrossRef Moore GF, Audrey S, Barker M, Bond L, Bonell C, Hardeman W, et al. Process evaluation of complex interventions: Medical Research Council guidance. BMJ. 2015;350:h1258.CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Cohn S, Clinch M, Bunn C, Stronge P. Entangled complexity: why complex interventions are just not complicated enough. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013;18(1):40–3.CrossRef Cohn S, Clinch M, Bunn C, Stronge P. Entangled complexity: why complex interventions are just not complicated enough. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2013;18(1):40–3.CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Kelly MP, Russo F. Causal narratives in public health: the difference between mechanisms of aetiology and mechanisms of prevention in non-communicable diseases. Sociol Health Illn. 2018;40(1):82–99.CrossRef Kelly MP, Russo F. Causal narratives in public health: the difference between mechanisms of aetiology and mechanisms of prevention in non-communicable diseases. Sociol Health Illn. 2018;40(1):82–99.CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Shiell A, Hawe P, Gold L. Complex interventions or complex systems? Implications for health economic evaluation. BMJ. 2008;336(7656):1281–3.CrossRef Shiell A, Hawe P, Gold L. Complex interventions or complex systems? Implications for health economic evaluation. BMJ. 2008;336(7656):1281–3.CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Rutter H, Savona N, Glonti K, Bibby J, Cummins S, Finegood DT, et al. The need for a complex systems model of evidence for public health. Lancet. 2017;390(10112):2602–4.CrossRef Rutter H, Savona N, Glonti K, Bibby J, Cummins S, Finegood DT, et al. The need for a complex systems model of evidence for public health. Lancet. 2017;390(10112):2602–4.CrossRef
7.
go back to reference Craig P, Ruggiero ED, Frohlich KL, Mykhalovskiy E, White M. Taking account of context in population health intervention research: guidance for producers, users and funders of research: Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) & National Institute for Health Research (NIHR); 2018. Available from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK498645/. Accessed Jan 2019. Craig P, Ruggiero ED, Frohlich KL, Mykhalovskiy E, White M. Taking account of context in population health intervention research: guidance for producers, users and funders of research: Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) & National Institute for Health Research (NIHR); 2018. Available from: https://​www.​ncbi.​nlm.​nih.​gov/​books/​NBK498645/​. Accessed Jan 2019.
8.
go back to reference Kane H, Hinnant L, Day K, Council M, Tzeng J, Soler R, et al. Pathways to program success: a qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) of communities putting prevention to work case study programs. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2017;23(2):104–11.CrossRef Kane H, Hinnant L, Day K, Council M, Tzeng J, Soler R, et al. Pathways to program success: a qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) of communities putting prevention to work case study programs. J Public Health Manag Pract. 2017;23(2):104–11.CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Hartmann-Boyce J, Bianchi F, Piernas C, Riches SP, Frie K, Nourse R, et al. Grocery store interventions to change food purchasing behaviors: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Am J Clin Nutr. 2018;107(6):1004–16.CrossRef Hartmann-Boyce J, Bianchi F, Piernas C, Riches SP, Frie K, Nourse R, et al. Grocery store interventions to change food purchasing behaviors: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Am J Clin Nutr. 2018;107(6):1004–16.CrossRef
10.
go back to reference Matheson A, Walton M, Gray R, Lindberg K, Shanthakumar M, Fyfe C, et al. Evaluating a community-based public health intervention using a complex systems approach. J Public Health. 2018;40(3):606–13.CrossRef Matheson A, Walton M, Gray R, Lindberg K, Shanthakumar M, Fyfe C, et al. Evaluating a community-based public health intervention using a complex systems approach. J Public Health. 2018;40(3):606–13.CrossRef
11.
go back to reference Roberts MC, Murphy T, Moss JL, Wheldon CW, Psek W. A qualitative comparative analysis of combined state health policies related to human papillomavirus vaccine uptake in the United States. Am J Public Health. 2018;108(4):493–9.CrossRef Roberts MC, Murphy T, Moss JL, Wheldon CW, Psek W. A qualitative comparative analysis of combined state health policies related to human papillomavirus vaccine uptake in the United States. Am J Public Health. 2018;108(4):493–9.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference van der Kleij RMJJ, Crone MR, Paulussen TGWM, van de Gaar VM, Reis R. A stitch in time saves nine? A repeated cross-sectional case study on the implementation of the intersectoral community approach Youth At a Healthy Weight. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:1032.CrossRef van der Kleij RMJJ, Crone MR, Paulussen TGWM, van de Gaar VM, Reis R. A stitch in time saves nine? A repeated cross-sectional case study on the implementation of the intersectoral community approach Youth At a Healthy Weight. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:1032.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Ragin CC. The comparative method: moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press; 2014. p. 218. Ragin CC. The comparative method: moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press; 2014. p. 218.
14.
go back to reference Ragin CC. Using qualitative comparative analysis to study causal complexity. Health Serv Res. 1999;34(5 Pt 2):1225–39.PubMedPubMedCentral Ragin CC. Using qualitative comparative analysis to study causal complexity. Health Serv Res. 1999;34(5 Pt 2):1225–39.PubMedPubMedCentral
15.
go back to reference Wagemann C, Schneider CQ. Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and fuzzy-sets: agenda for a research approach and a data analysis technique. Comp Sociol. 2010;9(3):376–96.CrossRef Wagemann C, Schneider CQ. Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) and fuzzy-sets: agenda for a research approach and a data analysis technique. Comp Sociol. 2010;9(3):376–96.CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Schneider CQ, Wagemann C. Set-theoretic methods for the social sciences: a guide to qualitative comparative analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012. Schneider CQ, Wagemann C. Set-theoretic methods for the social sciences: a guide to qualitative comparative analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012.
17.
go back to reference Ragin CC, Shulman D, Weinberg A, Gran B. Complexity, generality, and qualitative comparative analysis. Field Methods. 2003;15(4):323–40.CrossRef Ragin CC, Shulman D, Weinberg A, Gran B. Complexity, generality, and qualitative comparative analysis. Field Methods. 2003;15(4):323–40.CrossRef
18.
go back to reference Cooper B, Glaesser J. Exploring the robustness of set theoretic findings from a large n fsQCA: an illustration from the sociology of education. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2016;19(4):445–59.CrossRef Cooper B, Glaesser J. Exploring the robustness of set theoretic findings from a large n fsQCA: an illustration from the sociology of education. Int J Soc Res Methodol. 2016;19(4):445–59.CrossRef
19.
go back to reference Ragin CC. Redesigning social inquiry: fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 2008. Ragin CC. Redesigning social inquiry: fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press; 2008.
20.
go back to reference Warren J, Wistow J, Bambra C. Applying qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to evaluate a public health policy initiative in the north east of England. Polic Soc. 2013;32(4):289–301.CrossRef Warren J, Wistow J, Bambra C. Applying qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) to evaluate a public health policy initiative in the north east of England. Polic Soc. 2013;32(4):289–301.CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Kane H, Lewis MA, Williams PA, Kahwati LC. Using qualitative comparative analysis to understand and quantify translation and implementation. Transl Behav Med. 2014;4(2):201–8.CrossRef Kane H, Lewis MA, Williams PA, Kahwati LC. Using qualitative comparative analysis to understand and quantify translation and implementation. Transl Behav Med. 2014;4(2):201–8.CrossRef
22.
go back to reference Hanckel B, Ruta D, Scott G, Green J. The Daily Mile as a public health intervention: a rapid ethnographic assessment of uptake and implementation in South London, UK. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):1167. Hanckel B, Ruta D, Scott G, Green J. The Daily Mile as a public health intervention: a rapid ethnographic assessment of uptake and implementation in South London, UK. BMC Public Health. 2019;19(1):1167.
23.
go back to reference Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;349:g7647.CrossRef Shamseer L, Moher D, Clarke M, Ghersi D, Liberati A, Petticrew M, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic review and meta-analysis protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015: elaboration and explanation. BMJ. 2015;349:g7647.CrossRef
24.
go back to reference Rychetnik L, Frommer M, Hawe P, Shiell A. Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002;56(2):119–27.CrossRef Rychetnik L, Frommer M, Hawe P, Shiell A. Criteria for evaluating evidence on public health interventions. J Epidemiol Community Health. 2002;56(2):119–27.CrossRef
25.
go back to reference O’Mara-Eves A, Thomas J, McNaught J, Miwa M, Ananiadou S. Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: a systematic review of current approaches. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):5.CrossRef O’Mara-Eves A, Thomas J, McNaught J, Miwa M, Ananiadou S. Using text mining for study identification in systematic reviews: a systematic review of current approaches. Syst Rev. 2015;4(1):5.CrossRef
26.
go back to reference Thomas J, Harden A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8(1):45.CrossRef Thomas J, Harden A. Methods for the thematic synthesis of qualitative research in systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2008;8(1):45.CrossRef
27.
go back to reference Barnett-Page E, Thomas J. Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009;9(1):59.CrossRef Barnett-Page E, Thomas J. Methods for the synthesis of qualitative research: a critical review. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2009;9(1):59.CrossRef
28.
go back to reference Popay J, Roberts H, Sowden A, Petticrew M, Arai L, Rodgers M, et al. Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews. A Product from the ESRC Methods Programme. Lancaster: Institute of Health Research; 2006. Popay J, Roberts H, Sowden A, Petticrew M, Arai L, Rodgers M, et al. Guidance on the Conduct of Narrative Synthesis in Systematic Reviews. A Product from the ESRC Methods Programme. Lancaster: Institute of Health Research; 2006.
29.
go back to reference Tanner S. QCA is of questionable value for policy research. Polic Soc. 2014;33(3):287–98.CrossRef Tanner S. QCA is of questionable value for policy research. Polic Soc. 2014;33(3):287–98.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Protocol for a systematic review of the use of qualitative comparative analysis for evaluative questions in public health research
Authors
Benjamin Hanckel
Mark Petticrew
James Thomas
Judith Green
Publication date
01-12-2019
Publisher
BioMed Central
Keyword
Public Health
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2019
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-019-1159-5

Other articles of this Issue 1/2019

Systematic Reviews 1/2019 Go to the issue