skills/research/deep-research/meta-synthesis-guide/SKILL.md
Conduct qualitative meta-synthesis and evidence synthesis methods
npx skillsauth add wentorai/research-plugins meta-synthesis-guideInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
A skill for conducting qualitative meta-synthesis -- the systematic integration of findings across multiple qualitative studies. Covers meta-ethnography (Noblit & Hare), thematic synthesis (Thomas & Harden), framework synthesis, and quality appraisal of qualitative studies.
Meta-synthesis is to qualitative research what meta-analysis
is to quantitative research -- it systematically combines
findings from multiple studies to produce higher-order
interpretations.
Key differences from meta-analysis:
- Interpretive, not statistical aggregation
- Aims to generate new understanding, not average effect sizes
- Synthesizes themes, concepts, and metaphors across studies
- Product is a new interpretation, not a pooled statistic
Appropriate when:
- Multiple qualitative studies exist on a topic
- You want to build theory or deepen understanding
- Individual studies have limited scope but collectively cover a phenomenon
- Policy or practice needs an integrated evidence base from qualitative work
Not appropriate when:
- Studies are too heterogeneous in topic to meaningfully compare
- Fewer than 3 qualitative studies exist
- The goal is to measure effect sizes (use meta-analysis instead)
def meta_ethnography_steps() -> dict:
"""
The seven steps of meta-ethnography (Noblit & Hare, 1988).
"""
return {
"step_1_getting_started": {
"description": "Identify the research question and intellectual interest",
"output": "Clear synthesis question"
},
"step_2_deciding_what_is_relevant": {
"description": "Systematic search and selection of qualitative studies",
"output": "Final set of included studies",
"note": "Use PRISMA flow diagram to document selection"
},
"step_3_reading_the_studies": {
"description": (
"Read and re-read included studies carefully. "
"Identify key metaphors, themes, and concepts in each."
),
"output": "List of first-order (participant quotes) and "
"second-order (author interpretations) constructs"
},
"step_4_determining_how_studies_are_related": {
"description": (
"Create a grid mapping constructs across studies. "
"Determine if studies are reciprocal (about similar things), "
"refutational (contradictory), or form a line of argument."
),
"output": "Construct comparison table"
},
"step_5_translating_studies": {
"description": (
"Translate the concepts of one study into the terms of another. "
"This is the core analytical step -- finding common meaning "
"expressed in different language."
),
"output": "Translated constructs across all studies"
},
"step_6_synthesizing_translations": {
"description": (
"Develop third-order constructs -- new interpretations "
"that go beyond what any single study found."
),
"output": "Third-order constructs (the synthesis)"
},
"step_7_expressing_the_synthesis": {
"description": "Write up the synthesis in a form accessible to the audience",
"output": "Published meta-synthesis paper"
}
}
Reciprocal translation:
Studies are about similar things. Translate them into each other.
"Study A calls it 'navigating uncertainty'; Study B calls it
'managing ambiguity'; Study C calls it 'living with not knowing'.
The overarching construct is 'Tolerating the Unknown.'"
Refutational synthesis:
Studies contradict each other. Explore why.
"Study A found empowerment through peer support; Study B found
peer support increased anxiety. This refutation may be explained
by the stage of illness at which support was received."
Line of argument synthesis:
Studies address different aspects that together form a whole.
"Study A covers diagnosis, B covers treatment, C covers recovery.
Together they reveal a trajectory of 'Reconstructing Identity.'"
Stage 1: Free coding of findings
- Treat the findings sections of included studies as data
- Code them line by line, as in primary qualitative analysis
Stage 2: Organizing codes into descriptive themes
- Group codes into descriptive themes
- These are "close to" the original studies
Stage 3: Generating analytical themes
- Go beyond the content of the original studies
- Generate new interpretive constructs
- Answer the synthesis research question
Tools for appraising qualitative study quality:
CASP Qualitative Checklist (10 items):
- Was there a clear statement of aims?
- Is a qualitative methodology appropriate?
- Was the research design appropriate?
- Was the recruitment strategy appropriate?
- Was data collected in a way that addressed the research issue?
- Was the relationship between researcher and participants considered?
- Were ethical issues considered?
- Was data analysis sufficiently rigorous?
- Was there a clear statement of findings?
- How valuable is the research?
JBI Checklist for Qualitative Research (10 criteria)
Decision: Include all studies or exclude low-quality studies?
- Sensitivity analysis: Run the synthesis with and without
lower-quality studies to see if conclusions change.
Use the ENTREQ (Enhancing Transparency in Reporting the Synthesis of Qualitative Research) statement. Report: the synthesis methodology used, the search strategy and selection criteria, quality appraisal results, a table of included studies with their key constructs, the synthesis process with clear evidence trails, and how third-order constructs were derived from the primary studies.
documentation
Write Tsinghua University theses using the ThuThesis LaTeX template
development
Templates, formatting rules, and strategies for thesis and dissertation writing
documentation
Set up LaTeX templates for PhD and Master's thesis documents
documentation
Write SJTU theses using the SJTUThesis LaTeX template with full compliance