The role of document analysis in health policy analysis studies in low and middle-income countries: Lessons for HPA researchers from a qualitative systematic review

IF 1.7 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Health Policy Open Pub Date : 2021-12-01 DOI:10.1016/j.hpopen.2020.100024
Naomi Karen Kayesa, Maylene Shung-King
{"title":"The role of document analysis in health policy analysis studies in low and middle-income countries: Lessons for HPA researchers from a qualitative systematic review","authors":"Naomi Karen Kayesa,&nbsp;Maylene Shung-King","doi":"10.1016/j.hpopen.2020.100024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>Document analysis is commonly used in health policy analysis (HPA) studies, but the purpose and rigour of application is unclear. This review explored the application and utility of document analysis in HPA studies conducted in low-and-middle income countries (LMICs), intending to derive lessons for strengthening this methodology.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Employing a qualitative systematic review approach, nine electronic databases were searched for LMIC HPA articles that employed document analysis. Articles were subjected to systematic retrieval, storage and quality-assessment. Thematic analysis was used in coding, extraction and analysis of data.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Only 28 studies had sufficiently detailed document analyses and met the inclusion criteria. Document analyses were mainly complimentary to primary data collection forms. The majority, barring four studies, lacked clear purpose and utility in answering the research questions, and rigour in methodology and the reporting thereof. The approach to document analyses bore no relationship to the policy phase investigated. Challenges in accessing documents contributed to methodological difficulties.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Well-executed document analysis has potential to strengthen HPA studies. Health Policy researcher skill in applying this methodology needs strengthening and could be improved by: purposive alignment of the method to research questions; rigorously applying and reporting on search strategy with rigour; source, organize and store documents systematically; apply robust data coding and analysis; and clearly linking document contribution to study findings and conclusions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34527,"journal":{"name":"Health Policy Open","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.hpopen.2020.100024","citationCount":"24","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Policy Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590229620300228","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 24

Abstract

Introduction

Document analysis is commonly used in health policy analysis (HPA) studies, but the purpose and rigour of application is unclear. This review explored the application and utility of document analysis in HPA studies conducted in low-and-middle income countries (LMICs), intending to derive lessons for strengthening this methodology.

Methods

Employing a qualitative systematic review approach, nine electronic databases were searched for LMIC HPA articles that employed document analysis. Articles were subjected to systematic retrieval, storage and quality-assessment. Thematic analysis was used in coding, extraction and analysis of data.

Results

Only 28 studies had sufficiently detailed document analyses and met the inclusion criteria. Document analyses were mainly complimentary to primary data collection forms. The majority, barring four studies, lacked clear purpose and utility in answering the research questions, and rigour in methodology and the reporting thereof. The approach to document analyses bore no relationship to the policy phase investigated. Challenges in accessing documents contributed to methodological difficulties.

Conclusion

Well-executed document analysis has potential to strengthen HPA studies. Health Policy researcher skill in applying this methodology needs strengthening and could be improved by: purposive alignment of the method to research questions; rigorously applying and reporting on search strategy with rigour; source, organize and store documents systematically; apply robust data coding and analysis; and clearly linking document contribution to study findings and conclusions.

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
文件分析在低收入和中等收入国家卫生政策分析研究中的作用:定性系统评价给卫生政策研究人员的教训
文献分析是卫生政策分析(HPA)研究中常用的方法,但其应用目的和严格程度尚不清楚。本综述探讨了在中低收入国家(LMICs)进行的HPA研究中文献分析的应用和效用,旨在从中得到加强这一方法的经验教训。方法采用定性系统评价方法,检索9个电子数据库中采用文献分析的LMIC HPA文献。文章进行了系统的检索、存储和质量评估。数据编码、提取和分析采用专题分析。结果只有28项研究有足够详细的文献分析,符合纳入标准。文件分析主要是对原始数据收集形式的补充。除了四项研究外,大多数研究在回答研究问题方面缺乏明确的目的和效用,在方法和报告方面也缺乏严谨性。文件分析的方法与所调查的政策阶段没有关系。获取文件方面的挑战造成了方法上的困难。结论良好的文献分析具有加强HPA研究的潜力。卫生政策研究人员应用这一方法的技能需要加强,可以通过以下方式加以改进:将方法与研究问题有目的地结合起来;严格执行和报告搜索策略;系统地搜集、整理和保存文件;应用稳健的数据编码和分析;并清楚地将文件贡献与研究结果和结论联系起来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Health Policy Open
Health Policy Open Medicine-Health Policy
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
21
审稿时长
40 weeks
期刊最新文献
Closing the equity gap: A call for policy and programmatic reforms to ensure inclusive and effective HIV prevention, treatment and care for persons with disabilities in Eastern and Southern Africa Patient’s willingness to pay for improved community health insurance in Tanzania Improving antibiotic prescribing – Recommendations for funding and pricing policies to enhance use of point-of-care tests From theory to practice: Harmonizing taxonomies of trustworthy AI How firearm legislation impacts firearm mortality internationally: A scoping review
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1