فرا ترکیب و فرا تحلیل درعمل همراه با کاربست R

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 استادیار گروه روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران.

2 دانش آموخته دکتری روانشناسی بالینی ، دانشگاه علم و فرهنگ، تهران، ایران.

3 دانشیار، گروه روان‌شناسی، دانشگاه تربیت مدرس، تهران، ایران.

4 استاد تمام گروه روان‌شناسی بالینی، دانشگاه شاهد، تهران، ایران.

5 استادیار گروه روانشناسی، دانشکده‌ی روانشناسی و علوم تربیتی، دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران.

چکیده

فرا تحلیل و فرا ترکیب فنون مدرنی هستند که در آن‌ها داده‌های ‌کمی و کیفی از پژوهش‌های ‌متعدد ترکیب و تحلیل می‌شوند. این ترکیب و تحلیل برای رسیدن به برآوردی پایا و جامع یا اندازة اثر میان متغیرها است. این روش‌ها ابزاری برای مرور نظام‌مند و ترکیب یافته‌های ‌حاصل از پژوهش‌های ‌کمی و کیفی برای نتیجه‌گیری‌هایی خدشه‌ناپذیرتر و جامع‌تر است. این دو روش با درآمیختن گستره‌ای ‌‌وسیع از اطلاعات در شناسایی الگوهای باثبات کمک رسانده‌اند. نیل به نتیجه‌ای ‌‌جامع و گویا در پژوهش‌های ‌کیفی هدف پژوهشی بسیار مهمی است تا از رهگذر نویابی و اکتشافی مفهومی بینشی جدیدتر خلق شود. ترکیب آماری یافته‌های ‌پژوهش‌های ‌کمی خود نیز هدفی بلند در بینش‌یابی نوین علمی است.
 در این روش، اندازه اثر کلی بر پایة پژوهش‌های ‌کمی پیشین مجزا در حوزه‌ای ‌‌خاص محاسبه می‌شود. یافتن این اندازه اثر کلی برای پژوهشگر علوم روان‌شناختی یا دیگر پژوهشگران خود، پژوهشی ژرف است. هدف از این مقاله، توضیح فرا ترکیب و فرا تحلیل در عمل است. فرا ترکیب کاملاً توضیح داده شده، مثالی برای آن آورده شده است و فرا تحلیل نیز با کاربست R.4.3.1 با مثالی عددی توضیح داده شده است.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Meta Synthesis and Meta Analysis in Action with R

نویسندگان [English]

  • Hojjatollah Farahani 1
  • Leila Movasagh 2
  • Abbasali Allahyari 3
  • Rasol Roshan Chesli 4
  • Fateme Dehghani Arani 5
1 Assistant Professor of Psychometrics, Department of Psychology, Tarbiat Modares University.
2 PhD in Clinical Psychology, Culture and Science University, Tehran, Iran.
3 Associate Professor of Psychometrics, Department of Psychology, Tarbiat Modares University.
4 Professor, Department of Clinical Psychology Shahed University, Tehran.
5 Assistant Professor of Psychology, Department of Psychology, Faculty of Psychology and Educational Sciences, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده [English]

Meta-analysis and meta-synthesis are sophisticated statistical techniques that combine and analyze data from multiple independent studies to obtain a more comprehensive and reliable estimate of the relationship or effect size between variables. Systematic reviews provide a method for thoroughly reviewing and synthesizing findings from individual quantitative and qualitative studies to derive more reliable conclusions and comprehensive results. By integrating and analyzing a wide range of information, meta-analysis and meta-synthesis help in identifying consistent patterns. Achieving a comprehensive and adequate understanding in qualitative research is a significant goal, as it allows for the discovery of new research insights through conceptual exploration. Combining the quantitative results is also a worthy goal in finding scientific insights. Meta-analysis provides an overall effect size based on individual quantitative research studies. This phenomenon represents a research gap for a psychological sciences researcher or other researchers. This paper aims to explain the practical application of meta-synthesis and meta-analysis. The meta-analysis was illustrated with a numerical example using R 4.3.1.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Meta Synthesis
  • Meta-Analysis
  • Quantitative and Qualitative Designs
  • Psychological Sciences
  • R
 
[1] Egan, S. Wade, T. Fitzallen, G. Brien, A, & Shafra, A, (2022). A meta-synthesis of qualitative studies of the link between anxiety, depression and perfectionism: implications for treatment. Behavioral and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 2022, 50,89–105.
[2] Beck, C. T. (2009). Meta synthesis: A goldmine for evidence- based practice. AORN Journal, 90, 701–710.
[3] Noblit, G. Hare, R.D. (1988). Meta-ethnography: Synthesizing Qualitative Studies. Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
[4] Conn, V. S. & Coon Sells, T. G. (2014). Is it time to write a review article? Western Journal of Nursing Research, 36, 435–439.
[5] Tong, A. Palmer,S. Craig, JC. Strippoli, GFM. (2016). A guide to reading and using systematic reviews of qualitative research. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 31(6):897–903.
[6] Ritzer, G. (1990). Metatheorizing in sociology. Sociological Forum, 5, 3–15.
[7] Zhao, S. (1991). Metatheory, metamethod, meta-data-analysis: What, why, and how? Sociological Perspective, 34, 377–390.
[8] Kastner, M. Tricco, A. C. Soobiah, C. Lillie, E. Perrier, L. Horsley, T. & Straus, S. E. (2012). What is the most appropriate knowledge synthesis method to conduct a review? Protocol for a scoping review. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 12, Article 114
[9] Ludvigsen, M. S. Meyer, G. Hall, E. Fegran, L. Aagaard, H. & Uhrenfeldt, L. (2013). Development of clinically meaningful complex interventions: The contribution of qualitative research. Pflege, 26, 207–214.
[10] Walsh, D. & Downe, S. (2006). Appraising the quality of qualitative research. Midwifery, 22, 108–119.
[11] Zimmer, L. (2006), “Qualitative meta-synthesis: a question of dialoguing with texts”. Journal of Advanced Nursing 53(3): 311-318.
[12]Erwin, E. J. Brotherson, M. J. & Summers, J. A. (2011). Understanding Qualitative Metasynthesis: Issues and Opportunities in Early Childhood Intervention Research. Journal of Early Intervention, 33(3), pp. 186- 200.
[13] Finfgeld-Connett, D. (2014). Metasynthesis findings: Potential versus reality. Qualitative Health Research, 24, 1581–1591.
 [14] Sandelowski, M. & Barroso, J. (2007). Handbook for Synthesizing Qualitative Research, New York: Springer.
 
 [۱۵] موثق، ل. مهدویان، ع. پناغی، ل. فراهانی، ح. (1402). تدوین ابزار آمادگی به خیانت زناشویی. رسالة دکتری. دانشکده علوم انسانی. دانشگاه علم و فرهنگ
 [16] Sim, J. & Mengshoel. A. (2023). meta synthesis: issues of empirical and theoretical context. Quality & Quantity. 57:3339–3361.
[17] Bearman, M. & Dawson, P. (2013). Qualitative synthesis and systematic review in health professions education. Medical Education, 47, 252–260.
[18] Bench, S. Day, T. (2010). The user experience of critical care discharges: a meta-synthesis of qualitative research”. International journal of nursing studies, 47(4): 487-499.
[19] Pound, P. Campbell, R. (2015). Exploring the feasibility of theory synthesis: a worked example in the field of health-related risk taking. Soc. Sci. Med. 124, 57–65.
[20] Hannes, K. & Macaitis, K. (2012). A move to more systematic and transparent approaches in qualitative evidence Synthesis: Update on a review of published papers. Qualitative Research, 12, 402–442.
[21] Sale, J. E. (2008). How to assess rigour or not in qualitaive papers. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 14, 912–913.
[22] Morgan, D.L. (2014). Pragmatism as a paradigm for social research. Qual. Inq. 20(8), 1045–1053
[23] Seidl, D. & Werle, F. (2018). Inter-organizational sensemaking in the face of strategic meta problems: Requisite variety and dynamics of participation. Strategic Management Journal. 39 (3). 830–858.
[24] LachaL, J. Revah-Levy, A. Orri,M & Moro. M. (2017). Meta synthesis: An Original Method to Synthesize Qualitative Literature in Psychiatry. Front. Psychiatry. 1-9.
[25] Borenstein M, Hedges LV, Higgins JPT, et al. Introduction to meta-analysis. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2009.
[26] Bax L, Yu L-M, Ikeda N, Moons KG. A systematic comparison of software dedicated to meta-analysis of causal studies. BMC Med Res Methodol
[27] Borenstein M, Hedges L. A basic introduction to fxed-efect and randomefects models for meta-analysis. Res Synth Methods. 2010; 1:97–111
[28] Santos EJF, Cunha M. Interpretação crítica dos resultados estatísticos de uma meta-análise: estratégias metodológicas. Millenium. 2013; (44):85-98.
[29] Lau J, Ioannidis JPA, Schmid CH. Summing up evidence: one answer is not always enough. Lancet. 1998;351(9096):123-7.
 
[30] Rodrigues CL, Ziegelmann PK. Metanálise: um guia prático. Rev HCPA & Fac Med Univ Fed Rio Gd do Sul. 2010;30(4):436-47.
[31] Higgins JP, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, li T, page MJ, et al. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 6.2 (updated February 2021). Wiley; 2021. Available from: https://www.train ing.cochrane.org/handbook. Accessed 30 Sept 2021
[32] Higgins JP, Thomas J, Chandler J, Cumpston M, li T, page MJ, et al. Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 6.2 (updated February 2021). Wiley; 2021. Available from: https://www.train ing.cochrane.org/handbook. Accessed 30 Sept 2021
[33] Boundas, T. Hall, E. O. C. (2007), “challenges in approaching meta synthesis research. qualitative health research, 17(1): 113-121.
[34] France, F. E. (2014). A methodological systematic review of what's wrong with meta‐ethnography reporting. BMC Medical Research Methodology. 14:119.
[35] Tang, X. (2009). Qualitative Meta-synthesis Techniques for Analysis of Public Opinions for in-depth Study. Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering. 2338- 2353.