I am doing a systematic review of research regarding a (relatively newly developed) psychological intervention for youth, but all of the current studies are at a pilot/feasibility stage. They do all report pre and post effects (the different studies vary wildly in their statistical methods, measurements, study design some case design studies, some open trial etc).
I am wondering if anyone has any experience or know about other systematic reviews of such emerging clinical intervention research, I am not sure how to present the studies in a clear and concise manner (as I said meta-analysis is not possible because of sample sizes and other issues).
I am particularly wondering how to present effect sizes, I feel it would be too chaotic to go through each study and explain each one (there are 9 studies). I would really like to have some way to easily present them, perhaps in a table or graphically, but the heterogeneity of the populations (in terms of the diagnosis) might make this problematic.
Any ideas would be appreciated.
https://integral-review.org/
Field, L, Forshaw, M., Poole, H. A Systematic Review of HeartMath© Interventions to Improve Psychological Outcomes in 480 Individuals with Psychiatric Conditions. Integral Review 2021, 17, 1, 69-89.
The above link to Integral Review may help. See example by Field et al.
Dear Elvind
Herewith further links re case study evaluation
Best wishes
Steve
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228621600_Qualitative_Case_Study_Methodology_Study_Design_and_Implementation_for_Novice_Researchers
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232267014_Qualitative_Research_Case_study_evaluation
https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/qualitative-evaluation-methods
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265682891_The_case_study_as_a_type_of_qualitative_research
The line between a case series, a pilot study and the actual study is difficult to define (the authors give different names to their articles) and for the systematic review you have to define the inclusion criteria yourself. If you decide to carry out a systematic review of the cases, treat each case from each report separately. If you are reviewing studies by other authors, start by compiling them in a table - this will help you find common domains for their synthesis. You will start with the fact that each study has a number of participants, some intervention, some results - try to specify these domains as much as possible. It may happen that the criteria of your review will be met by 3 studies and their results cannot be compared - such a review may also be valuable for science: it indicates poor quality of the research, the need for more, etc. This is not a failure of the review, that the researchers have not yet have published corresponding studies.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Psychology