Cited by 261Qualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsMeta-analysis and systematic reviewsDelphi Technique in Research

Aggregating Qualitative Findings: An Approach to Theory Development

Estabrooks, Carole A., Field, Peggy Anne, Morse, Janice M.·1994·Qualitative Health Research

Abstract

The authors suggest that findings of independent, similar research articles may be aggregated into a cohesive study. Such a procedure greatly enhances the generalizability of the original studies and produces a relatively solid mid-range theory. In this article, the criteria for selecting studies, possible problems inherent in the aggregation approach, and potential areas for application are discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/104973239400400410

Cites

11 of 11 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Individual qualitative studies are often criticized for having relatively homogenous and small sample sizes, which mitigates generalizability.

    “That is, as Estabrooks and her colleagues noted, individual qualitative studies are often criticized for having relatively homogenous and small sample sizes, which mitigates generalizability.”
  • Models created by synthesizing individual qualitative studies provide more generalizability than would be possible from the original studies alone.

    “Furthermore, models created by synthesizing individual qualitative studies provide more generalizability than would be possible from the original studies alone (Estabrooks et al., 1994).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Estabrooks, C. A., Field, P. A., & Morse, J. M.
Affiliations
  • University of Alberta (CA)
  • Pennsylvania State University (US)
Venue
Qualitative Health Research
Published
1994-11
Volume
4
Issue
4
Pages
503-511
ISSN
  • 1049-7323 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-7557
OpenAlex
W2144367888
Cited by
261
References
11
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 14 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 10
FWCI
14.11
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Qualitative Health Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Delphi Technique in Research
Keywords
theory development, middle-range theory, generalizability, study selection criteria, qualitative evidence synthesis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review