To capture qualitative and mixed-methods studies. No time period was set.

To capture qualitative and mixed-methods studies. No time period was set. In addition, grey literature and secondary?2016 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Nursing Published by John Wiley Sons Ltd. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 25, 2083?H Mijovic et al.references were searched. Due to difficulties with conducting detailed content analysis in multiple languages, only English language studies were considered, which may have excluded studies from Francophone and Lusophone countries. The full literature search strategy is available in Appendix Table A1. The research was approved by the London School of Hygiene ethics committee. Inclusion criteria:search process is summarised in the PRISMA Flow chart in Fig. 1.Quality appraisalNumerous appraisal tools have been developed for qualitative studies (Thomas Harden 2008, Hannes 2011). We used the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) quality assessment tool (CASP UK 2013) with some modifications made to reflect the character of studies under review. Modified CASP criteria have been used frequently in qualitative reviews of health interventions, including a review of task delegation to lay health workers by the Cochrane Collaboration (Glenton et al. 2013), which we referred to in order to modify our checklist. Quality appraisal based on a modified CASP checklist is provided in Table 1. The amount of qualitative data available was limited by the fact that most studies were relatively brief and relied primarily on one-time interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs). Most of the studies did not employ additional qualitative methods such as serial indepth interviews, field observations or examining documents produced by health workers. Nevertheless, a number of studies provided rather diverse data, accounting not only for Crotaline cost MK-886.html”>MK-886MedChemExpress MK-886 commonly expressed views but also for contradictory perspectives and opinions conveyed by the informants. Although all the studies detailed their recruitment strategy, none of the studies fully accounted for informants who refused to participate or explored how informant selection influenced study findings. Many studies explicitly stated that the study research was conducted as part of a task-shifting programme evaluation, but most researchers did not reflect???Qualitative or mixed-methods studies conducted in subSaharan Africa. Formal and informal task-shifting interventions in healthcare involving delegation of tasks from one cadre of health workers to another cadre. Studies providing primary, qualitative data regarding experiences with task-shifting interventions by national policy makers, health managers, health workers and/or healthcare recipients. Exclusion criteria: Nonprimary data (i.e. policy briefs, opinions, progress reports, systematic reviews). Mixed-methods studies where the qualitative component was deemed insufficient to contribute to further analysis. Studies focusing on task shifting of a very specific intervention rather than a broader set of tasks (i.e. initiation of antiretroviral therapy only, rather than management of HIV patients).???Search outcomeFrom 230 studies identified, 13 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The literatureFigure 1 PRISMA flow chart.?2016 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Nursing Published by John Wiley Sons Ltd. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 25, 2083?Review Table 1 Quality appraisal checklist (CASP) Appraisal criteria 1 Is this study based on qualitative, narrative research?*Review: Task shifting i.To capture qualitative and mixed-methods studies. No time period was set. In addition, grey literature and secondary?2016 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Nursing Published by John Wiley Sons Ltd. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 25, 2083?H Mijovic et al.references were searched. Due to difficulties with conducting detailed content analysis in multiple languages, only English language studies were considered, which may have excluded studies from Francophone and Lusophone countries. The full literature search strategy is available in Appendix Table A1. The research was approved by the London School of Hygiene ethics committee. Inclusion criteria:search process is summarised in the PRISMA Flow chart in Fig. 1.Quality appraisalNumerous appraisal tools have been developed for qualitative studies (Thomas Harden 2008, Hannes 2011). We used the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP) quality assessment tool (CASP UK 2013) with some modifications made to reflect the character of studies under review. Modified CASP criteria have been used frequently in qualitative reviews of health interventions, including a review of task delegation to lay health workers by the Cochrane Collaboration (Glenton et al. 2013), which we referred to in order to modify our checklist. Quality appraisal based on a modified CASP checklist is provided in Table 1. The amount of qualitative data available was limited by the fact that most studies were relatively brief and relied primarily on one-time interviews and focus group discussions (FGDs). Most of the studies did not employ additional qualitative methods such as serial indepth interviews, field observations or examining documents produced by health workers. Nevertheless, a number of studies provided rather diverse data, accounting not only for commonly expressed views but also for contradictory perspectives and opinions conveyed by the informants. Although all the studies detailed their recruitment strategy, none of the studies fully accounted for informants who refused to participate or explored how informant selection influenced study findings. Many studies explicitly stated that the study research was conducted as part of a task-shifting programme evaluation, but most researchers did not reflect???Qualitative or mixed-methods studies conducted in subSaharan Africa. Formal and informal task-shifting interventions in healthcare involving delegation of tasks from one cadre of health workers to another cadre. Studies providing primary, qualitative data regarding experiences with task-shifting interventions by national policy makers, health managers, health workers and/or healthcare recipients. Exclusion criteria: Nonprimary data (i.e. policy briefs, opinions, progress reports, systematic reviews). Mixed-methods studies where the qualitative component was deemed insufficient to contribute to further analysis. Studies focusing on task shifting of a very specific intervention rather than a broader set of tasks (i.e. initiation of antiretroviral therapy only, rather than management of HIV patients).???Search outcomeFrom 230 studies identified, 13 studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The literatureFigure 1 PRISMA flow chart.?2016 The Authors. Journal of Clinical Nursing Published by John Wiley Sons Ltd. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 25, 2083?Review Table 1 Quality appraisal checklist (CASP) Appraisal criteria 1 Is this study based on qualitative, narrative research?*Review: Task shifting i.

Leave a Reply