Affordable Access

Access to the full text

How to tackle the conundrum of quality appraisal in systematic reviews of normative literature/information? Analysing the problems of three possible strategies (translation of a German paper)

Authors
  • Mertz, Marcel1
  • 1 Hannover Medical School, Working Group Research/Public Health Ethics & Methodology, Institute for History, Ethics and Philosophy of Medicine, Carl-Neuberg-Str. 1, Hannover, D-30625, Germany , Hannover (Germany)
Type
Published Article
Journal
BMC Medical Ethics
Publisher
Springer (Biomed Central Ltd.)
Publication Date
Nov 14, 2019
Volume
20
Issue
1
Identifiers
DOI: 10.1186/s12910-019-0423-5
Source
Springer Nature
Keywords
License
Green

Abstract

BackgroundIn the last years, there has been an increase in publication of systematic reviews of normative (“argument-based”) literature or of normative information (such as ethical issues) in bioethics. The aim of a systematic review is to search, select, analyse and synthesise literature in a transparent and systematic way in order to provide a comprehensive and unbiased overview of the information sought, predominantly as a basis for informed decision-making in health care. Traditionally, one part of the procedure when conducting a systematic review is an appraisal of the quality of the literature that could be included.Main textHowever, while there are established methods and standards for appraising e.g. clinical studies or other empirical research, quality appraisal of normative literature (or normative information) in the context of a systematic review is still rather a conundrum – not only is it unclear how it could or should be done, but also the question whether it necessarily must be done is not settled yet. Based on a pragmatic definition of “normative literature” as well as on a typology of different types of systematic reviews of normative literature/information, this paper identifies and critically discusses three possible strategies of conducting quality appraisal.ConclusionsThe paper will argue that none of the three strategies is able to provide a general and satisfying solution to the problems associated with quality appraisal of normative literature/information. Still, the discussion of the three strategies allows outlining minimal conditions that elaborated strategies have to meet in future, and facilitates sketching a theoretically and practically promising strategy.

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times