ub.xmlui.mirage2.page-structure.muninLogoub.xmlui.mirage2.page-structure.openResearchArchiveLogo
    • EnglishEnglish
    • norsknorsk
  • Velg spraaknorsk 
    • EnglishEnglish
    • norsknorsk
  • Administrasjon/UB
Vis innførsel 
  •   Hjem
  • Det helsevitenskapelige fakultet
  • Institutt for samfunnsmedisin
  • Artikler, rapporter og annet (samfunnsmedisin)
  • Vis innførsel
  •   Hjem
  • Det helsevitenskapelige fakultet
  • Institutt for samfunnsmedisin
  • Artikler, rapporter og annet (samfunnsmedisin)
  • Vis innførsel
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Extent, Awareness and Perception of Dissemination Bias in Qualitative Research: An Explorative Survey

Permanent lenke
https://hdl.handle.net/10037/9795
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159290
Thumbnail
Åpne
Toews_2016_Ext.PDF (211.2Kb)
Publisher's version (PDF)
Dato
2016-08-03
Type
Journal article
Tidsskriftartikkel
Peer reviewed

Forfatter
Toews, Ingrid; Glenton, Claire; Lewin, Simon; Berg, Rigmor C.; Noyes, Jane; Booth, Andrew; Marusic, Ana; Malicki, Mario; Munthe-Kaas, Heather M.; Meerpohl, Joerg J.
Sammendrag
Background
Qualitative research findings are increasingly used to inform decision-making. Research has indicated that not all quantitative research on the effects of interventions is disseminated or published. The extent to which qualitative researchers also systematically underreport or fail to publish certain types of research findings, and the impact this may have, has received little attention.
Methods
A survey was delivered online to gather data regarding non-dissemination and dissemination bias in qualitative research. We invited relevant stakeholders through our professional networks, authors of qualitative research identified through a systematic literature search, and further via snowball sampling.
Results
1032 people took part in the survey of whom 859 participants identified as researchers, 133 as editors and 682 as peer reviewers. 68.1% of the researchers said that they had conducted at least one qualitative study that they had not published in a peer-reviewed journal. The main reasons for non-dissemination were that a publication was still intended (35.7%), resource constraints (35.4%), and that the authors gave up after the paper was rejected by one or more journals (32.5%). A majority of the editors and peer reviewers “(strongly) agreed” that the main reasons for rejecting a manuscript of a qualitative study were inadequate study quality (59.5%; 68.5%) and inadequate reporting quality (59.1%; 57.5%). Of 800 respondents, 83.1% “(strongly) agreed” that non-dissemination and possible resulting dissemination bias might undermine the willingness of funders to support qualitative research. 72.6% and 71.2%, respectively, “(strongly) agreed” that non-dissemination might lead to inappropriate health policy and health care.
Conclusions
The proportion of non-dissemination in qualitative research is substantial. Researchers, editors and peer reviewers play an important role in this. Non-dissemination and resulting dissemination bias may impact on health care research, practice and policy. More detailed investigations on patterns and causes of the non-dissemination of qualitative research are needed.
Beskrivelse
Publisher's version, source: http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0159290.
Forlag
Public Library of Science
Sitering
PLoS ONE 2016, 11(8): e0159290
Metadata
Vis full innførsel
Samlinger
  • Artikler, rapporter og annet (samfunnsmedisin) [1516]

Bla

Bla i hele MuninEnheter og samlingerForfatterlisteTittelDatoBla i denne samlingenForfatterlisteTittelDato
Logg inn

Statistikk

Antall visninger
UiT

Munin bygger på DSpace

UiT Norges Arktiske Universitet
Universitetsbiblioteket
uit.no/ub - munin@ub.uit.no

Tilgjengelighetserklæring