Skip to main content

Table 2 Methodological quality of included qualitative studies

From: Effectiveness of secondary and tertiary prevention for violence against women in low and low-middle income countries: a systematic review

Key:
0 = low clarity and quality as assessed by the reviewer
1 = reasonable clarity and quality as assessed by the reviewer
2 = reflects a finding of high clarity and quality as assessed by the reviewer
NC = not clear or not available from the paper
Bernath 2013 [24] Bhate-Deosthali 2012 [44] Doucet 2012 [43] GHD Pty Ltd. 2015 [25] Human Rights Watch 2015 [26] Keesbury 2012 [27] Kohli 2013 [46] Manneschmidt 2009 [42] Morel-Seytoux 2010 [28] PHD Group 2012 [29] Wessel 1997 [45]
1) Worth or relevance
 1.1) Was this piece of work worth doing at all? 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
 1.2) Has it contributed usefully to knowledge? 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
2) Clarity of research question
 2.1) If not at the outset of the study, by the end of the research process, was the research question clear? 2 1 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1
3) Appropriateness of the design of the question
 3.1) Was an appropriate method used? 1 NC 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1
4) Context
 4.1) Is the context or setting adequately described so that the reader could relate the findings to other settings? 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
5) Sampling
 5.1) Did the sample include the full range of possible causes or settings? 0 NC 0 NC NC 1 1 NC NC NC 1
 5.2) If appropriate, were efforts made to obtain data that might contradict or modify the analysis extending or modifying the sample? 1 NC 0 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
6) Data collection and analysis
 6.1) Were the data collection and analysis procedures systematic? 1 NC 2 NC NC 1 2 1 0 0 1
 6.2) Was an ‘audit trail’ provided? 1 0 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0
 6.3) How well did the analysis succeed in incorporating all the observations? NC NC NC NC NC NC NC 2 2 NC NC
 6.4) Did the analysis develop concepts and categories capable of explaining key processes? 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 NC 2
 6.5) Was it possible to follow iteration between data and theory? 2 0 2 1 NC 2 2 2 1 0 2
 6.6) Did the researcher search for disconfirming cases? 0 NC 0 NC NC NC NC NC NC NC NC
7) Reflexivity of the account
 7.1) Did the researcher assess the likely impact of the methods used on the data obtained? 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0
 7.2) Were sufficient data included in the reports to provide sufficient evidence for readers to assess whether analytical criteria were met? 0 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 0 2