Cited by 92Health Policy Implementation ScienceQualitative Research Methods and ApplicationsClinical practice guidelines implementation

Are we entering a new era for qualitative research? Using qualitative evidence to support guidance and guideline development by the World Health Organization

Open access
Lewin, Simon, Glenton, Claire·2018·International Journal for Equity in Health

Abstract

Qualitative approaches are one of several methodologies utilised within the social sciences. New developments within qualitative methods are widening the opportunities for using qualitative evidence to inform health policy and systems decisions. In this commentary, we discuss how, in our work with the World Health Organization (WHO), we have explored ways of broadening the types of evidence used to develop evidence-informed guidance for health systems.Health systems decisions are commonly informed by evidence on the effectiveness of health system interventions. However, decision makers and other stakeholders also typically have additional questions, including how different stakeholders value different outcomes, the acceptability and feasibility of different interventions and the impacts of these interventions on equity and human rights. Evidence from qualitative research can help address these questions, and a number of WHO guidelines are now using qualitative evidence in this way. This growing use of qualitative evidence to inform decision making has been facilitated by recent methodological developments, including robust methods for qualitative evidence syntheses and approaches for assessing how much confidence to place in findings from such syntheses. For research evidence to contribute optimally to improving and sustaining the performance of health systems, it needs to be transferred easily between different elements of what has been termed the 'evidence ecosystem'. This ecosystem includes primary and secondary evidence producers, guidance developers and those implementing and evaluating interventions to strengthen health systems. We argue that most of the elements of an ecosystem for qualitative evidence are now in place - an important milestone that suggests that we are entering a new era for qualitative research. However, a number of challenges and constraints remain. These include how to build stronger links between the communities involved in the different parts of the qualitative evidence ecosystem and the need to strengthen capacity, particularly in low and middle income countries, to produce and utilise qualitative evidence and decision products informed by such evidence. We invite others who want to support the wider use of qualitative evidence in decision processes to look for opportunities in their settings to put this into practice.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12939-018-0841-x

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 5

  1. [8]Glenton C, Lewin S, Norris SL. Using evidence from qualitative research to develop WHO guidelines (Chapter 15). In: World Health Organization. Handbook for Guideline Development. 2nd ed. Geneva: WHO; 2016.
  2. [16]WHO WHO recommendations on antenatal care for a positive pregnancy experience 2016 Geneva World Health Organization 28079998
  3. [19]WHO Health worker roles in providing safe abortion care and post-abortion contraception 2015 Geneva World Health Organization 26401543
  4. [20]WHO WHO recommendations: intrapartum care for a positive childbirth experience 2018 Geneva World Health Organization 30070803
  5. [21]WHO Communicating risk in public health emergencies. A WHO guideline for emergency risk communication (ERC) policy and practice 2018 Geneva World Health Organization 31059213

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lewin, S., & Glenton, C.
Affiliations
  • South African Medical Research Council (ZA)
  • Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NO)
Corresponding author
Lewin, Simon
Venue
International Journal for Equity in Health
Published
2018-09-24
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
126-126
ISSN
1475-9276 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2888011912
Cited by
92
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 1
FWCI
12.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal for Equity in Health (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Social Sciences › Education › Qualitative Research Methods and Applications
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Clinical practice guidelines implementation
Keywords
qualitative evidence, WHO guidelines, evidence-informed decision-making, qualitative evidence synthesis, evidence ecosystem, health policy, stakeholder value, feasibility and acceptability, capacity building, low- and middle-income countries
MeSH terms
Delivery of Health Care, Health Policy, Humans, World Health Organization, Guidelines as Topic, Evidence-Based Medicine, Qualitative Research

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