Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Systematic Reviews 1/2016

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Methodology

Using qualitative comparative analysis in a systematic review of a complex intervention

Authors: Leila Kahwati, Sara Jacobs, Heather Kane, Megan Lewis, Meera Viswanathan, Carol E. Golin

Published in: Systematic Reviews | Issue 1/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Systematic reviews evaluating complex interventions often encounter substantial clinical heterogeneity in intervention components and implementation features making synthesis challenging. Qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) is a non-probabilistic method that uses mathematical set theory to study complex phenomena; it has been proposed as a potential method to complement traditional evidence synthesis in reviews of complex interventions to identify key intervention components or implementation features that might explain effectiveness or ineffectiveness. The objective of this study was to describe our approach in detail and examine the suitability of using QCA within the context of a systematic review.

Methods

We used data from a completed systematic review of behavioral interventions to improve medication adherence to conduct two substantive analyses using QCA. The first analysis sought to identify combinations of nine behavior change techniques/components (BCTs) found among effective interventions, and the second analysis sought to identify combinations of five implementation features (e.g., agent, target, mode, time span, exposure) found among effective interventions. For each substantive analysis, we reframed the review’s research questions to be designed for use with QCA, calibrated sets (i.e., transformed raw data into data used in analysis), and identified the necessary and/or sufficient combinations of BCTs and implementation features found in effective interventions.

Results

Our application of QCA for each substantive analysis is described in detail. We extended the original review findings by identifying seven combinations of BCTs and four combinations of implementation features that were sufficient for improving adherence. We found reasonable alignment between several systematic review steps and processes used in QCA except that typical approaches to study abstraction for some intervention components and features did not support a robust calibration for QCA.

Conclusions

QCA was suitable for use within a systematic review of medication adherence interventions and offered insights beyond the single dimension stratifications used in the original completed review. Future prospective use of QCA during a review is needed to determine the optimal way to efficiently integrate QCA into existing approaches to evidence synthesis of complex interventions.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Campbell M, Fitzpatrick R, Haines A, Kinmonth AL, Sandercock P, Spiegelhalter D, et al. Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. BMJ. 2000;321(7262):694–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Campbell M, Fitzpatrick R, Haines A, Kinmonth AL, Sandercock P, Spiegelhalter D, et al. Framework for design and evaluation of complex interventions to improve health. BMJ. 2000;321(7262):694–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
4.
go back to reference Rehfuess E, Akl E. Current experience with applying the GRADE approach to public health interventions: an empirical study. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(1):9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Rehfuess E, Akl E. Current experience with applying the GRADE approach to public health interventions: an empirical study. BMC Public Health. 2013;13(1):9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
7.
go back to reference Guise JM, Chang C, Viswanathan M, Glick S, Treadwell J, Umscheid CA, et al. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-based Practice Center methods for systematically reviewing complex multicomponent health care interventions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(11):1181–91. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2014.06.010.CrossRefPubMed Guise JM, Chang C, Viswanathan M, Glick S, Treadwell J, Umscheid CA, et al. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Evidence-based Practice Center methods for systematically reviewing complex multicomponent health care interventions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2014;67(11):1181–91. doi:10.​1016/​j.​jclinepi.​2014.​06.​010.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Ragin CC. The comparative method: moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1987. Ragin CC. The comparative method: moving beyond qualitative and quantitative strategies. Berkeley: University of California Press; 1987.
10.
go back to reference Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Jones D, Young B, Sutton A. Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10(1):45–53.CrossRefPubMed Dixon-Woods M, Agarwal S, Jones D, Young B, Sutton A. Synthesising qualitative and quantitative evidence: a review of possible methods. J Health Serv Res Policy. 2005;10(1):45–53.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Ragin CC. Redesigning social inquiry: fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2008.CrossRef Ragin CC. Redesigning social inquiry: fuzzy sets and beyond. Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2008.CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Schneider CQ, Wagemann C. Set-theoretic methods for the social sciences: a guide to qualitative comparative analysis. Strategies for social inquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012.CrossRef Schneider CQ, Wagemann C. Set-theoretic methods for the social sciences: a guide to qualitative comparative analysis. Strategies for social inquiry. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2012.CrossRef
13.
go back to reference Brunton G, O’Mara-Eves A, Thomas J. The ‘active ingredients’ for successful community engagement with disadvantaged expectant and new mothers: a qualitative comparative analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2014;70(12):2847–60. doi:10.1111/jan.12441.CrossRefPubMed Brunton G, O’Mara-Eves A, Thomas J. The ‘active ingredients’ for successful community engagement with disadvantaged expectant and new mothers: a qualitative comparative analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2014;70(12):2847–60. doi:10.​1111/​jan.​12441.CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Viswanathan M, Golin CE, Jones CD, Ashok M, Blalock S, Wines RCM, Coker-Schwimmer EJL, Grodensky CA, Rosen DL, Yuen A, Sista P, Lohr KN. Medication adherence interventions: comparative effectiveness. Closing the quality gap: revisiting the state of the science. Evidence Report No. 208. (Prepared by RTI International–University of North Carolina Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2007-10056-I.) AHRQ Publication No. 12-E010-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2012. www.effectivehealthcare.ahrq.gov/reports/final.cfm. Viswanathan M, Golin CE, Jones CD, Ashok M, Blalock S, Wines RCM, Coker-Schwimmer EJL, Grodensky CA, Rosen DL, Yuen A, Sista P, Lohr KN. Medication adherence interventions: comparative effectiveness. Closing the quality gap: revisiting the state of the science. Evidence Report No. 208. (Prepared by RTI International–University of North Carolina Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-2007-10056-I.) AHRQ Publication No. 12-E010-EF. Rockville, MD: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2012. www.​effectivehealthc​are.​ahrq.​gov/​reports/​final.​cfm.
19.
go back to reference Kahwati L, Viswanathan M, Golin CE, Kane H, Lewis M and Jacobs S. Identifying configurations of behavior change techniques in effective medication adherence interventions: a qualitative comparative analysis. Sys Rev, 2016, In press. Kahwati L, Viswanathan M, Golin CE, Kane H, Lewis M and Jacobs S. Identifying configurations of behavior change techniques in effective medication adherence interventions: a qualitative comparative analysis. Sys Rev, 2016, In press.
20.
21.
go back to reference Schneider CQ, Wagemann C. Standards of good practice in qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). Comp Sociol. 2010;9(3):397–418.CrossRef Schneider CQ, Wagemann C. Standards of good practice in qualitative comparative analysis (QCA). Comp Sociol. 2010;9(3):397–418.CrossRef
23.
go back to reference Kahwati LC, Lewis MA, Kane H, Williams PA, Nerz P, Jones KR, et al. Best practices in the Veterans Health Administration’s MOVE! Weight management program. Am J Prev Med. 2011;41(5):457–64. doi:10.1016/j.amepre.2011.06.047. Kahwati LC, Lewis MA, Kane H, Williams PA, Nerz P, Jones KR, et al. Best practices in the Veterans Health Administration’s MOVE! Weight management program. Am J Prev Med. 2011;41(5):457–64. doi:10.​1016/​j.​amepre.​2011.​06.​047.
24.
go back to reference de Bruin M, Viechtbauer W, Schaalma HP, Kok G, Abraham C, Hospers HJ. Standard care impact on effects of highly active antiretroviral therapy adherence interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170(3):240–50. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2009.536.CrossRefPubMed de Bruin M, Viechtbauer W, Schaalma HP, Kok G, Abraham C, Hospers HJ. Standard care impact on effects of highly active antiretroviral therapy adherence interventions: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Intern Med. 2010;170(3):240–50. doi:10.​1001/​archinternmed.​2009.​536.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Ragin CC, Drass KA, Davey S. Fuzzy-set/qualitative comparative analysis. 25th ed. Tucson: Department of Sociology, University of Arizona; 2006. Ragin CC, Drass KA, Davey S. Fuzzy-set/qualitative comparative analysis. 25th ed. Tucson: Department of Sociology, University of Arizona; 2006.
Metadata
Title
Using qualitative comparative analysis in a systematic review of a complex intervention
Authors
Leila Kahwati
Sara Jacobs
Heather Kane
Megan Lewis
Meera Viswanathan
Carol E. Golin
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
Systematic Reviews / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 2046-4053
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-016-0256-y

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Systematic Reviews 1/2016 Go to the issue